taking turns

This is a story about someone i once met on a very special occasion.

Usually I wouldn't relinguish in the memory of this rather straight discourse. It was on an anarchist meeting and i was meeting people i like and whose ideas i love.

However this person is shot and carries a name: Louis Seveke. I didn't really know him, not if i even ever met him before. Somehow our meeting seemed uncoincedentual. I realised i was meeting "someone" and he appeared to realise that our meeting another was special. Of wich we talked. After we reached out, him more friendly then me. I saying rather fairly i hardly ever met people willing to counter a lot of political consequence. We actually conversed on the possibility that someone in netherlands would be eliminated by secret services. I think my opinion was the fear was somewhat legitimate, perhaps he mentioned a few examples, and that he thought the fear was realist. Wich I do but he seemed to be more serious about it. So i said, well they never shot me, and i am rili vocal in nearly all my opinions. Although we sortta excluded others from our experiences on that point he asked me wether i didn't think they would actually pick someone more active within the society. Someone with a more official position or such. I told him maybe, but that i thought not , because exactly when you are active within the limits of officiality , you are usually very limited in your options and scopes.

We talked on a bit about general strategic subjects. I liked him, there was a plenary, he liked me. That wasn't so hard, we tended to agree on intentions.
The last thing we had been talking about was something nijmegen, it got rather specific. I hoped we'd meet again. It was pleasant to meet someone who had thought over so many things in a proper way, and so close to actuality.


Only when he was shot i learned his name. That had indeed appeared in papers in such a way to make a great impression on me about the workings of his person.

The wicked thing is i had been feeling bad for like 3 or 4 days, as if something was planning to shoot me, or perhaps someone else. It's a pitty i hadn't hardly seen anyone in a couple of days, i might have told. Anyway when it happened and i got to hear it, i think one day late, I read everything i could find, read it twice sometimes, starting with everything that mentioned anything the police had said. My impression of that at that time was not favourable; starting with a statement of a policewoman in the paper that suggested a somewhat provincial , what if we say we do everything, you will never get to the bottom of it attitude, there was also a soundtape of a policespokesperson (perhaps the same woman) but that made not so much of an impression. The newsstory was rather full of improbabilitys, for example he would be shot with similar gun and the pictured model was an antiquated weapon.
A picture appeared, that resembled.. me, a bit. The news had been suggested that everything bad could be behind and gossip did the rest. The streets were thoroughly scrobbed and after that a search was started. I myself could think of only one obscure possibility, to fit it into a deed of organised fascism outside the services,
he was not a high profile person, it needed to be something sneaky. These had no to do.

Whatever sprung out is that he was killed on the birthday of the presenation of (&his) book on secret services. A period that had left him with some bitter enemys that at times advocated their hate in media. The police also immediatly seized his every computer including recent projects he was working on. They were not returned (if ever) before a long time.

There was so much written about and around him that i started wondering of between all the mess something would turn up after a while and i put on a newsfeed. As a result I witnessed,when the accused was caught how the original spanish article disappeared and only a dutch (i doubt it was the same) could be found after. The spanish article was rather clear he was wanted for armed and violent robbery in and outside netherlands.

All in all it set me to think. The supposed killer left us with a pile of material, none of wich can be checked on authenticity really. Not by me, and in my eyes it is suspect. Once his lawyer published in the papers, she didn't actually believe him,
that his account of the events was contrary to that of the police.

Anyhow they are proceeding very seriously into the case.. with a big fuzz as all the time. The man was regarded psychologically. He didn't want to get 'the' mark of irresponsability , the usual easy dutch way out with great problems of this kind.

So they are charging him lifelong sentence. I think Louis might turn in his grave if he knew. And as a result i saw the few words of his in he papers. Honestly, he is not completely sane i think. I know i could prove it from the 12 or 14 lines of text i read from him. Although an another article on the same managed nothing of the kind.

I see that a lot in this case. Pulling and steering it into directions. "Costly investigations". "Lefty's shoot another" outrage in the right wing "popular" (or yet fake?) voice. "Dirty squatter"...

Some of the articles contain these lines, permit them, purposedly construct associations. Debilitate the thoughts proces on social change.

Today the family decided to ask a complete view of the AIVD dossier on him. The secret services one. The article (not of the goodwilling kind so much) announces it that its probably not goig to happen. I don't think the secret service would show all that dossier really.

In the proces activists, or otherways socially engaged people, have been pressured in questionings. Both in and outside view the case has been used as a way to get a whole lot of information on the Nijmegen, the town where he lived, and beyonds, humanists.

Closer to him even more disturbing storys have been suggested. I do wonder if anyone has really seen him after death. So in fact when the police says something happened like such and such... and someone declares something completely different, yet to have done it only in the interest of investigation also means nobody knows if the scapegoat is a guilty one or an instant story.

Then again the guy appear to swear its his books and his plans, his maps and his every so suitable belonging that the police found, in a way the supposedly his books should proof something. i rather asked it people that know him.

The extra problem is that the period in wich happened what inspired the story's narrator was actually one in wich the relation between activism and police and not in the least undercover police, was really sharp. Activists had discovered that their most each and every move could and was covered with more straightforward dirty methods of blackmail, reward, and humiliation of the informers then commonly expected from an instrument of justice.

A bitter memory actually for most of us. Family members and all sorts of people had been aproached in greater numbers and more bigotted ways then we ever knew.

Often it showed the informer had been manipulated into most every action and daily lives. I never planned to become any sort of informer, but if anything left a bad taste about what one has to allow ones personality to be that way it is the superficiousness of the informer.

The people that manipulate other people so much and severely, can be expected to cook up more then that. A 16k bankrobber (note: before bigger amounts have been mentioned) with a weirdo story not being the last thing, exactly less when it so perfectly fits their intentions. The message being, if you mess with informers and secret services we will kill you either way. I wonder if an unreal informer would lend himself to that.


(This post might make they don't want to wait with the "Wilders(to boring to make a film?) film . So sit back and relax)