Révolution internationale 354, February 2005, relates in its own way its last public meeting in Paris in January 22nd 2005 with the following title : Death Threats Against ICC Militants. We had no intention to come back on the conditions of our intervention at this public meeting. But the accusation, very serious in itself - even though it appears to be particularly crazy today - obliges us to do so : our fraction would have threatened to murder a militant of the ICC by cutting his throat with a knife !

When our first militant arrived to the ICC public meeting place, about twenty militants coming from all France were waiting him, not as before some ten meters before the room, but on the street, outside the place, and blocking the entrance to anyone who wanted... to go to pray at the church behind which are the meeting rooms. Really impressive. Let's pass over the mockeries and insults of some militants we nevertheless had found very discrete and very timid during the last Paris January 20th street demonstration. It's true they were less numerous on that last occasion. Let's pass too over the political stupidities uttered as arguments directed against us while we were trying, despite all, to engage a political "debate". Even though they aren't less revealing of the political disarray of the militants. Let's precise this is far to delight us. It's sad. Very sad.

Despite this "anti-snitches picket" (as says RI) which was particularly firm and determined - chests sticked out, firm and manly voices, energic and determined faces, thus all the outfit of the classical "service of order" which won't be impressed by "lumpens and hooligans hordes" we are supposed to be -, our first militant arrived simply tried to distribute through the railings of the place a leaflet criticizing the present ICC intervention at the Opel strike in Germany (see our previous bulletin). And this despite some small physical provocations. He also took the opportunity to question the militants about their behaviour opposed to the communists' practicies.

What did happen once our second militant arrived ? Have the two members of our fraction - as cowards and as traitors they are supposed to be -, once the relation of physical forces was completly reversed (since they had become massively... two), tried not only to surround one more time the public meeting and the twenty members of the picket, but also to pass by force for, blinded by their "clanish hatred", destroying the meeting and attacking too the other ICC militants who were in the room ? And, by the way, for murdering one of them ? Knifing him ?

Up until now, it's not our fraction which uttered in a written way, in its articles, physical threats. But the present ICC when it threatened, even still recently, "of recovering in one way or another the money [supposedly] stolen by the IFICC" (International Review 120, Theft and slander are no methods for the working class!, December 7th 2004 , only on ICC internet site) and to turn up by force at our homes (1). Is there any need to quote the differents articles ? Up until now, it isn't our fraction which physically attack communits militants. But well and truly the liquidationist in chief Peter against our comrade Jonas (see our bulletin 9), a militant from the french city of Toulouse against a militant of the ["bordiguist"] ICP-Le Prolétaire (see our bulletin 13 and Le Prolétaire 463), the ICC Mexican militants against ourselves...

The RI article accuses us, beside being murderers, of being the counter-revolutionary irregular forces of the future. Actually, it prepares "theoretically and politically" to the physical attack against our militant in Mexico and in Paris. This one comes within the present dynamic of the ICC in front of any political oponent who refuses to give up its political intervention towards it. A proof ? Just look at the "written" violence against the Argentinian militant of the former NCI who broke with it. Just look at its "physical" sabotaging behaviour at the IBRP public meeting in Paris last October 2nd.

But the ignominy, ignominy at the political and militant levels, isn't in the new ridiculous accusation. The ignominy lies in the particularly disgusting attack made against our comrade, called Pédoncule in the article. A load of innuendos, of gossips and lies are insinuated or affirmed against him. Who is he ? He has been militant of the ICC for more than 15 years and left it in 1995. One of the factors which then drove him to quit the ICC, was the accusations more or less open according to which he was police agent. When we take back the story and path of those accusations running in the corridors and on which we can't extend here, we always end up... to the militant Louise. Still and always...

In January 1998, comrade P. asked the organisation for a Jury of Honor. The ICC sent him a delegation (March 1998) who definitively cleared him and who told him it was not any need for such a Jury since they were no doubt about his integrity.

The lack of doubt and questionning the ICC had towards the comrade was such that our organization, liquidationists included, didn't hesitate, after his departure, to confide to his companion important responsabilities of first importance "for its security" within the ICC.

This question seemed settled. Up until Louise begun to put it back in Spring 2001 in a footnote of a text just with a small innuendo (2). Then when the crisis broke out in broad daylight after the 14th congress of May 2001, the insinuations came back suddenly and violently. Was it by coincidence while P. had remained silent during all these years and hadn't expressed any criticism not develop any activity against the ICC ? And while he was in the most complete ignorance of the crisis which had just broken out ?

For the ICC of the liquidationists, no holds barred. Above all the most ignoble (3). One more time, it aims at tarnishing the honor of an other communist militant. For this, it goes up to borrow to the most reactionary bourgeoisie its villainous propaganda which represented the bolsheviks militants a knife between their teeths (4).

So, it reveals its own dishonour.

February 2nd, 2005

We thank all the comrades who directed us messages of sympathy on occasion of the new attack of the ICC against our comrade P. and against our fraction (see article above).

We want to inform all those whom we couldn't immediatly answer to, that we read them and that we appreciate their support and encouragements.

The Internal Fraction of the ICC.


1. Amongst the various stupidities expressed during this "encounter", the present militants who couldn't deny in our presence we had actually given back the important amounts of the ICC money we're responsible for, accused us of being thiefs because we didn't carry on paying a "special" due, called "contribution J", once excluded ! It means we should have for eternity carry on paying a due to an organization which exclued us in violation of any organization rule, against its own statutes, which call us nazis, thiefs, hooligans, cops, and now murderers. Are they in the real world ?

2. International Internal Bulletin of the ICC n°283, Response to comrade Juan...

3. But sometime ignominy (unintentionally) achieves comedy . For instance, in the RI article we mention, it is written that P.'s integration to the ICC in the midst of the years 1970 wouldn't have taken place in the ICC such as it's today. The liquidationists, after having "excluded" our comrade Jonas once he had resigned from the ICC some months before, goes even further in the re-writing of history by practicing the "retrospective no-integration". We can wonder when they're going to exclude Trotsky or Bordiga of the CP of Italy... retrospectively and in relation to... the today ICC !

4 . In the 1920's and 1930's, for instance in France, the Right and extreme Right political parties represented the bolsheviks with a knife between their teeths calling for attacking and killing them.

Communist Bulletin Nš 30 - Internal Fraction of ICC