Naomi Ullian outed as snitch in Asheville 11 case

This a public statement from some members of the “Asheville 11”. It is not written or intended to speak for a unanimous group as such a thing is figment at best.

Naomi Ullian is one of the people arrested on the night of May 1st 2010. Herself and the other 10 arrested make up the aforementioned “Asheville 11”. It is important to understand that there is no coherent organizing or strategy coming from all 11 people. The agreements amongst friends and comrades has been done based on affinity and want and not on the assumption that being arrested on the same night creates either of those things.

On December 6th, 2010, 6 months after our arrest and release Naomi Ullian decided to have a meeting with the District Attorney, Assistant District Attorney in charge of prosecuting our case and the lead Detective in the case. Her lawyer was present. What appeared in our discovery(evidence the prosecution has to disclose before trial) was a recounting of that meeting. It is not 'testimony', as in Naomi was not sworn in. And it is not a transcript, but a report form the prosecutors office. We were also given the handwritten notes of Detective Rollins.

We are disclosing this information now that the majority of the 11's cases have been closed. Naomi has been involved in radical organizing for many years. She had been considered by many a trusted member of the anarchist and radical communities throughout North Carolina. She has had more then enough experience to understand that communication with the police or prosecution is snitching. And that she would be seen by many as a snitch. Which is the stance the authors of this piece take.

In this statement we would like to carefully divulge some of the transgressions that were made in the conversation she took part in. But please note, that these are not reasons why this conversation was reprehensible. The moment she sat at the table across from the enemy was the moment she lost our trust forever. These are simply examples for those outside of this dialogue to understand the gravity of the situation.

In the report, Naomi states that she was in Asheville during the May Day event and that she participated in some aspects. She firmly maintains her innocence concerning the vandalism and depicts an alternate sequence of events for herself and one other arrestee. In this description of events she clearly describes her perceived movements of the “riot”- what streets they came down, where they turned, at what point damage started, etc. She also gives a very limited description of the person she said “led” her from one event to another. In being questioned by the prosecution and Detective she gives descriptions about what kind of clothing possible participants were wearing. She does not describe any participant in personal detail.

The investigation into the 11 people arrested that night, has as most expected it would, transcended those boundaries and became an investigation into other individuals and groups. We are not privy to the types of investigation methods used, or how ferocious the tactics used to gain information are. In her conversation Naomi not only made connections between other arrestees and political organizing groups but opened the investigation to new targets. She clearly associates both those arrested and not arrested with several groups such as Earth First! A Wildland FirstAid Training and Mountain Justice Summer Organizing. Included in the additional discovery was prelimanry research into Mountain Justice organizing. We will never know how far that “research” has gone or will go in the future

Besides organizations, Naomi was asked about several individuals. She answered the questioning with personal information about them such as where they were from, where they lived now and their connections to the aforementioned groups and to one another. This has obviously had definite impacts on the lives of those she snitched on.

Naomi has acted in her own self-interest and forgone the ideas of solidarity that others can clearly live by. We do not talk to the police, ever. To do so would mean to make a clear break with those we once called comrade. Naomi has decided that her decisions are forgivable and that she should be allowed to walk amongst us. We disagree. Those who choose to associate themselves with her have that “right”, but must understand what the association of a snitch will bring you.

Naomi has made it clear that her own future, her own freedom and reputation are more important than us; and more important than a basic concept of solidarity. We say let that choice stand and make it known that she is now on her own.



I think this is a good way to deal with this kind of collaboration. It gives the right amount of information, it's not full of posturing, it comes to a fair conclusion.

I hope there has also been a self-critique of springing riots on other people and doing things that are likely to get other people in trouble. If we are to overcome that kind of accusation in a situation where it is not valid--a massive protest with diverse participation, a part of which decides to riot-- we need to be able to address the criticism in a moment when it's actually valid.

Yeah, I agree with this.

Also, please, everybody, pay no attention to the anti-anarchist trolls below. It's just gross the depths they'll stoop to.

For the record, identifying clearly when people do collaborate in any way with the police is a form of solidarity with everyone else. Such solidarity is impossible without a baseline commitment to not betray or endanger each other.

I gotta say, as someone who weighed in a few times in favour of "compassion" and open-mindedness for a certain other accused female "snitch" recently, this was done really, really well. They didn't post a bunch of speculation, they waited until they had solid evidence and went public. This is exactly how such things should be handled, and frankly, I don't have much compassion in this case. This is snitching, she snitched, and is in fact, a snitch - it's pretty clear cut.

The trolling below is sub-par, even for @news. It's a sad imitation of past arguments attempting to stir up conflict, and it isn't done very well. Nobody's talking about attacking her, just letting everyone know what she did. This and other acts like it need to serve as a lesson to everyone getting involved in these activities that some actions are simply NOT tolerated for the sake of everyone's safety, much like motorsports, gun ranges and machine shops.

Pity the "anarchist" troll above.

Other people are adult enough to read and discuss contrary views.

I have been involved in anarchist and radical environmentalist communities for a decade now. i have also been friends with Naomi for a few years, and i live in the Asheville area now and lived here when the "riot" incident took place. I am actively involved in some of the organizations that she allegedly mentioned in her statement, and have other friends that got caught up in the Asheville 11 incident too.

I in no way think that she deserves the condemnation that this article throws at her. After reading these posts here are the points I see as valid:

1. The "riot" was an embarrassing, childish, misdirected act, and I really wish that the Anarchist community could be more focused and directed when they go out for these types of activities so we could have a better name as a community. The event just annoyed a lot of respectable anarchists in the Asheville area, and all kinds of good people in general.

2. Being personally involved in some of the groups she mentioned (MJ, etc...) I don't think she did or would say anything to endanger anyone and I do not feel threatened at all by her discussion with them. The cops have better methods, more acute observations and more competent strategies in dealing with groups like MJ, EF! and radical groups in the region than vague statements from yoga teachers in Asheville.

3. It seems that anything that came from the DA or detective notes was vague enough that you could find that information out through google searches, video tapes, or common sense (jeez, the people smashing windows out were wearing black, covering their faces, had hoodies on, go figure). Bottom-line is I'd be very surprised if she told them anything that they didn't obviously already know, or that got anyone in any sort of trouble. People are acting like she took a plea deal and gave them specific names of people who then got in trouble, which is not the case.

4. I think that compassion is important. I would imagine she was very intimidated and to my knowledge she did not tell them one thing that did or would lead to someone else getting in trouble in order to get herself out of trouble. Talking to the cops is a bad idea, of course, but I believe in situational ethics and don't think that absolute moral principles are very useful. Her bigger mistake was wasting her time going downtown with a bunch of immature rebel kids that got her and several other people in trouble for their un-tactical silly actions.

5. I do think she should stay away from "radical" organizing and think she has for the most part, not because she should be excommunicated from the radical community, but because she still has had serious charges against her. I personally want to see good people stay out of prison, and take the necessary steps to do everything they can (except getting other people in trouble) to stay out of trouble.

I think people should really consider not publicly condemning her. She is a good person and I trust her as a community member. If people don't want her in their Direct Action affinity groups (not that she'd probably want to be in one), that makes sense, but there are plenty of ways to do activist work that in no way risks getting in trouble with the law.

So, Fuck the Police, not other activists for making vague statements that get no one in trouble when put in stressful and intimidating situations for no reason.

Ya'll are worse than jehovah's witnesses. it's really repulsive. Notice how often the targets are women.

i would never befriend ANY person in an anarchist group, or take part in 'anarchist activities' after all the internal witch hunt shit I've seen since occupy (really when I became aware of y'all). religious cults and military are horrible entities, and you've absorbed the worst of the two.

that's not to say i'm not an anarchist. it just yall aren't really worth it, especially since it's just a front for so many of you who are actually textbook fascists.

remember the jesus rape--that shit was HIGHlarious, as were all the comments below, I remember...remember all the 'ironic racism', remember the vile misogyny, the classism, the homophobia, the "ironic stalinism", never forget.


Some anonymous person said something fucked up on the internet, therefore its being a snitch is excusable.

You became aware of anarchists through occupy? I'm sorry, but that's really too bad. And as for textbook fascists, I'm assuming you are unable to define fascism properly so your argument is invalid.
Skepticism is not a cult.
Anarchist armed struggle is not a centralized violent power.
Get off the internet.

Most of the "anarchist" I am aware of work for The State. I have seen all these tactics used, in spades.

Then you are ignorant of most anarchists.

lol and the wikipedia link proves what? give specific examples not blanket statements.

fascism stole from both the futurists and and the anarchists, and since the anarchists I'm aware do not believe in racial purity, nationalism, borders, hierarchy, or unquestioned authority i don't see where you're going with this.

Goddam "occupy" anarchists gtfo.

What's actually repulsive is snitches and their apologists. Notice how folks of all gender identities (not just women) have been called out for snitching. Get a clue snitch lover.

it doesnt matter to me that some girl was intimidated by the police and said that someone with green hair might be in earthfirst. oh yes, burn her at the stake...yes, that's repulsive and shameful....let this be a lesson to her not to trust anyone in a cult. the police are a cult too.

It wouldn't bother you if someone within your circle gave information to the police which assisted them in their attempt to kidnap and imprison your friends? Disagreeing with police collaboration makes me a cultist?

Have any of your friends actually been arrested or kidnapped? I understand to some extent, of course, but the whole snitch outing because someone was fingered and intimidated by police and said something vague which "may" get someone arrested is a bit excessive, wouldn't you say?And then to post this person's name, and suggest everyone in your town (and, indeed, across america) "shun" them?? Really?

I would not recommend any woman, or truly independent thinker become involved in anarchist activities.

Actually I have had friends arrested and kidnapped by the state and currently have friends sitting in prison as we speak. Meeting with police and prosecutors behind closed doors then giving information about other individuals without their consent is snitching. Plain and simple. Your argument is pure snitch apologism and is a slap in the face to all the women serving time as a result of snitches and to all the women serving time for refusing to cooperate with police and prosecutors against others.

But I do agree that snitches and their enablers/apologists should not get involved in anarchists activities.

oh fuck off. if you want to put on a bonnet be my guest. i just have no respect for you as a human being, no big deal.

Don't feed the ^trolls^

that all changed after 9/11

Damn right you tell em'!

i also have friends, some of whom are women, in prison or facing time right now. ....Please explain why you think it is "excessive" to out someone as a snitch who, well, snitches.....???? And of course they posted her name - it s so people can know not to work with this person in the future. Thats the whole point of "calling out." Duh.

You wouldn't recommend any woman or independent thinker get involved with a movement that ousts snitches? Really? What about the IRA? The black panthers? The brown berets? How about Direct Action, the all lady feminist guerilla group? How about Mujeres Libres, from Spain? Cus you can bet your ass all those groups were WAY harder on snitches than contemporary North American anarchist circles....

For that matter, how DO you suggest a largely illegalist social movement, opposed to the existance of the state, deal with snitching? Any grand ideas, or are you just cruising the web on troll duty - break from your office job?

Sexism is a problem that is not going away and where groups like the black panthers actually increased the power of patriarchy, it's not as though not participating is going to make the problems go away. Ignoring a problem usually helps it progress. If someone see's sexism in a group that is anti-oppression and egalitarian then suggest less female involvement is the solution I would have to assume they are trolling or something far worse, they are pacified.

I am not pacified. I've given them every chance and come to the conclusion that these groups are rotten through and through. No point in trying to reform them, just lett them wither away in a rank puddle of their own poison.

I'm not sure why you link to Karenga to suggest that the Black Panthers strengthened patriarchy. United Slaves and the Black Panthers were bitter enemies. I hope it's not a case of you confusing black people.
And I really hope you're not suggesting that Karenga's method of dealing with accused snitches has anything in common with what anarchists do. You couldn't cite a single example to that effect, troll.

Please kill yourself, troll.

You have yet to articulate how outing people as snitches is misogynist or patriarchal. For the last few decades in context to North American anarchist/anti-authoritarian activities plenty of female-identified people have sat in jail refusing to cooperate with the police, while plenty of male-identified people have snitched right away.

Snitching means that you are cooperating with the state in their further kidnapping and prosecuting of others, often ones own friends/comrades. Since we don't want ourselves or our friends to be harmed by the state, we cut ties with people who snitch. This also has the effect of demonstrating to all of us on the outside that if we snitch, we will be cut off from our communities.

So besides, as a poster above articulated, confusing black people and organizations (who in no way are anarchists so it's irrelevant anyways), as well as linking us to a critique of anarchist men coming from the left's last outreach to remain relevant in the world (through identity politics), you have yet to demonstrate your point. I'm curious. Explain yourself.

How does ceasing collaboration with people who cooperate with the extreme anti-social violence of the state in order to save their own backs have anything to do with anarchists being patriarchal or misogynist.

If anything, by suggesting that it's something inherently 'female' about this person and Leah that led them to snitch, YOU are the one being patriarchal.

Now hold on just a goddamned minute! This post is far too reasonable for @news! Are you sure you're on the right website?

reasonable = agreeing with you

you seem to be talking about groups that are based in communities that are way more real than american 'anarchist communities' are though. if you think that the only way anarchist ideals can progress is by the threat of terrorizing their members i think you seriously need to rethink your ideas about politics. in the long run all it produces is more martyrs.

Anything one says can be used against them.
That is fact.
The fuck do you mean by anarchist activities anyway?
Not to stumble into ident politics, but as a queer women of color and a critical thinker I urge you to fuck off.

Squealing while under intimidation is still not fucking cool. However, the following sentence from the article says she went out of her way 6 months later to talk to the pigs and the DA while out of custody, meaning she didn't have to. That's the result of cooperation, not intimidation.

"Naomi Ullian decided to have a meeting with the District Attorney, Assistant District Attorney in charge of prosecuting our case and the lead Detective in the case"

um. 6 months later the case was going on and intimidation still hanging over her head. so i dont really see what your point is here.

the point is that

1. she was chillin at home and took the advice of her lawyer to proactively enter an interrogation room.
2. this is irrelevant....sure, she was intimidated. we all are when we re under the bright lights, dont know when or if we ll see our familiy again, etc. But so what? If snitching becomes excusable if its under intimidation, then it is ALWAYS excusable. What kind of shitty politic is that? Not very functional sounding to me.

We need movements AND individuals to be strong enough to support people who dont rat, and to in turn not rat because they know they ll be supported, IN THE FACE OF INTIMIDATION, because it will ALWAYS be in the face of intimidation. We can always critique the movement culture as a whole for not doing a good enough job supporting prisoners and defendants - certainly we ve improve, but could improve more. But it is equally the job of the "movement" to out people when they choose to turn, to help others involved be able to protect themselves and isolate that person to prevent them doing more harm. It would continue the violation of trust to not do so.

uh, you do know the state has more to bring to bear than just 'bright lights', right? i'm not interested in excusing anything or in keeping facts from coming to light. in fact i'm not interested in morality at all which is more than some people can say who seem to think that standards of personal behavior should be enough to hold the movement together when this obviously isn't the case. it's not about excusing it's about being realistic. ok, the movement 'should' support and do this and that. but does it? is it really pursuing a realistic strategy just to demand to people to be 'truer' when the support isn't there and all this shit has happened before and no one seems to have learned anything? what is it called when you do the same thing over and over and expect a different result..?

snitch apologist is apologizing for snitches.

I can explain the difference, but not only would it be a waste of breath but in the end the answer remains the same. You just don't snitch. Never!
If you can't handle that, then don't do anything illegal or hangout with people that do.

To those reading these comments, keep your distance from people who foster such ideas/sympathies. They're not fighting to win or fighting simply because they are a glutton for tragedy. What they are "fighting" for is memories of once being a radical, all so that they have something to share with their suburbanite children and liberal colleagues. This particular anti-the-anarchy-cult troll already sounds well on their way. Thus throwing someone else's ass under the bus to save their own is a no brainer. at least to them that is.

there is nothing radical about this group other than their stupidity and evil.

Oh, your mama! Why would you say this without any argumentation, unless you were a cop cop cop cop cop cop cop cop....

you're an idiot.

Again, your mama.

Your categorical dismissal of anarchists as evil is far more idiotic than even my stupidest goofs.

nope, evil is afoot here. nothing stupid about recognizing it.

have fun at


Why haven't you embraced nihilism yet?

know who else was being intimidated? her co-defendants who she told on. And as a result of her betrayal, several other people were put under similar intimidation.

Blame the people who are doing the intimidating, not the people who are being stalked and harassed by pigs for months, sometimes years on end. In what way did you show your support and solidarity with her?

not only did she tell on her co-defendants, she went on to actually tell on the people who were doing support work for her, (in great detail).

Uh, if you're who I think you are, you really need to quit telling lies...Are you still trying to pass this delusion off?

Your objectification, exploitation, sexual harassment, and stalking of me--all so you you get the D twice a year, or whatever the fuck you are doing, at *any* cost--is *not* support work. It just means you're completely insane, and have internalized misogyny to the nth degree.

You don't have to be in a cult to be blind.
All social organizations are cults in some sense.
The things she said do matter.
Her words will be used to lock people in cages.
She's not locking them up mind you.
But she needs some accountability since not saying anything was an option.

If someone thinks they'd turn into a snitch. They shouldn't take part in actions.

Excellent point.

but they will continue to.

Yeah because snitch men never face any criticism or attack, only snitch women do. Oh wait, that's completely false in every possible way, which means that snitch men and women are treated equally, as pieces of shit. I guess that means your comment is completely worthless and you are also a piece of shit for trying to ascribe misogyny to the legitimate hate of those who seek to put comrades behind bars for their own cowardly benefit. You take all seriousness away from misogyny and cooperation with the government is one fell swoop. Interesting how the "allies" are usually responsible for more hatred toward their beloved identity group than the so called "enemies" are.

You should know that Naomi's actions affected women and queer friends, too.


chronpaul 42012

Whether you believe that this individual's actions were excusable or not, is there any room for compassion? Even if you feel that you must shun her from your organizing, must you deem her and anyone who associates with her as something akin to an untouchable for as long as we all may live?

Let me go ahead and position myself on the wrong side of the self-appointed anarchist standard bearers here and say that I do not think it is always inappropriate to talk to the police. I certainly do think it is inappropriate to give them information that helps them get to other folks, but to draw the line at simply talking to them - I'm just not there. In the past year I have been questioned by law enforcement detectives regarding a demonstration I took part in. I did not give them any information that helped them in any way, but I was cordial and pleasant with the investigator. Why? Because he was a human being. What good would it have done me or any cause for me to be a jerk? None that I can see. What good did it do for me to be nice to the guy? It disarmed him. It de-esculated tensions for both of us. It made him feel better about concluding the interrogation and releasing me.

I would encourage everyone on every side of this conversation to practice a little restraint with regards to vilifying those who disagree with you. Disagree, by all means. Stand on principle, for sure. Do as you must. Exclude certain people from activities which require that certain information be kept secure. I get all that. But I think it would be of benefit to radical communities if we could remember that just because someone may disagree with us, or even when someone may act in a way counter to our efforts, this does not mean they are evil. The precise sort of "othering" that y'all are doing to this individual you call a snitch is at the very heart of racism, sexism, xenophobia and all systemic violence.

It is also very hard for me to determine if this individual did indeed snitch as you all are being vague with the details and absolute with the indictment.

this is the shit they always pull around here;

call out,
more information,
more information,
self indulgent response (from the person or their friends),
moral animocity,
fuck snitches...

same shit every time.

i agree, be cordial with cops when necessary but as far as im concerned most of the time unless engaged first, i refuse conversation or even acknowledgement of pigs.

...not sure if shes a snitch.

who cares?

we all get it.

don't snitch, fuck cops.

um, its not just the anarchist standard bearers who say dont talk to the police, its every lawyer ive ever ever ever talked to with regards to know your rights trainings, the NLG, etc.

Certainly common sense can be allowed to enter the picture - you dont have to necesarily pretend to be mute when you get pulled over for a missing brake light. But that s irrelevant to the question at hand, which is snitching in a highly politicized, media saturated case where the DA and the detectives are openly fishing for info on anarchist activity in the region.

the main point is that YOU dont get to decide what is useful info to the pigs. THEY do. And that is how the entire interrogation process is generally structured. Which is why entire armies of lawyers will tell you to shut the hell up under interrogation. No offencse, but im taking their word, not yours.

"othering" that y'all are doing to this individual you call a snitch is at the very heart of racism, sexism, xenophobia and all systemic violence."

So um yeah, are you trying to say that we should huh... you know be friendly with cops and that what we are doing is wrong because it is snitchism?

"The precise sort of "othering" that y'all are doing to this individual you call a snitch is at the very heart of racism, sexism, xenophobia and all systemic violence."

So apparently cooperating with the pigs is anti-racist, anti-sexist, and furthering the destruction of borders.
How much did you pay for your professor to teach you that?

Probably at least 50 grand.

god damn LOL

"Whether you believe that this individual's actions were excusable or not, is there any room for compassion?"

No....moving on....

like :)

how do we know that this is all true? because of what the cops and DA said about her, or because she admitted this? i'm just asking, because i don't have any first-hand info either. i think it's clear though that any kind of intra-milieu denunciations shouldn't ever be taken at face value considering what we know about 'badjacketing/snitchjacketing' as an element of counterinsurgency strategy, and the fact that frankly a lot of people in the scene are very susceptible to participating in gossip about people/topics they know little or nothing about.

also i want to point out that people cave in to various kinds of pressure sometimes not because they just dont give a fuck but because the state can seriously fuck up your life, and the kind of 'support' that radical 'communities' tend to offer embattled members, while well-intentioned, often is just really nowhere near up to the task and expecting people to stand up to that kind of pressure indefinitely by themselves, while practically on their own, is just not (always) realistic.

finally, if we actually do know what she said to them its possible to have an idea of how much harm was actually caused. possibly, not much. for instance the route of the demo was almost certainly known, and in general, activist milieus are already a lot more exposed to and known through surveillance than most who participate in them would care to admit. people think sending email on riseup is safe, it isnt. people think they can publicly announce/attend radical events without getting photographed and recorded, and its a lot less likely than people seem to think it is. etc.

and before anyone characterizes this as 'snitch apologism' i'm just saying there is more to be analyzed out of these types of events then just being all 'FUCK THIS PERSON LET'S KILL EM'. there are lessons to be learned and projecting all the milieu's problems and weaknesses onto perceived 'traitors/bad seeds/internal enemies/etc' is only going to keep it moving in the same circles and the same things will keep happening. hell, i'm sure they will anyway...

"Naomi has decided that her decisions are forgivable and that she should be allowed to walk amongst us" if this statement from the article is correct, then one can assume that they admitted that they did this and that they some how think that they are still trustworthy.

For all those who are like "maybe this is true, but...".....NO. It IS true. The shit is in the discovery. its verifiable. this is not snitchjacketing. its not a rumor. its based on detectives notes and information the prosecutor was legally obliged to turn over.

Naomi herself does NOT deny that she went to the DA, or that she gave this information. If you are a friend or an acquantance, by all means ask her exactly what she told them. She will tell you what she did.

This is not a witchhunt. Every time someone calls out a snitch, or a rapist, somebody seems to bring that word out; every time someone among us does something seriously wrong, some folks love to use this word to try to discredit our milieu's (admittedly stumbling) efforts to deal with the problem.

But here it is completely inappropriate. Not only is this (overdue!) calling out backed by notarized, legally documented material, Naomi herself completely admits to exactly what she did. She's not even apologetic for it, at least she hasn't been when confronted up til now. She has betrayed the solidarity of friends and comrades, turned her back on our most trusted principles, and apparently seems to think she can still be involved in radical politics. It's not a question of "punishment" to shun her from communities of struggle, though to think in such terms of actions having consequences is not inappropriate--its a question of self-protection and trust. Why would someone want to work with her now, on ANYTHING? And what does working with a known, unapologetic snitch say about someone?

And i think people can go ahead and drop the BS pseudo-feminist "its always women who face this witchhunt shit" - outside of this and the incident with leah in the PNW, we all know that the vast majority of snitches who have been called out are MEN. There's plenty of useful and enlightening and badass gender analsyes about why this is, about why sexists and misogynists tend to make great informants and rats. So drop the line about how this is a bunch of men looking to scapegoat a woman.

Ultimately, ratting on people you used to love or care about is a violation of the deepest kind. It is a transgression of the most sacred promises we make to each other around the desires we share, the mutual respect and love we build, and around the bonds we make as we seek to destroy this miserable world.

It is indeed worthwhile to be intelligent and nuanced, to avoid macho posturing and sweeping generalizations in our efforts to share information about snitches, as some commenters have pointed out - but this call-out does NONE of those things. It is intelligent, reasoned, as direct as possible, sincere, and backed up by FACT, as are the people who wrote it. Those who care about the maintenance of real bonds of struggle, particularly in the Southeast, should read it, absorb it, and pass the information on. Naomi should not be working on ANY political projects connected to radical struggle, whatsoever, and people who remain in shared circles with her should have full knowledge of what she did and should feel comfortable to confront her about her decisions at will.

I write this as someone who used to be a close friend of hers, who shared deep moments of trust and honesty with her, who worked on political projects with her. But she fucked up - and beyond this, sheis unwilling to admit it, and has for all intensive purposes turned her back on both her would be comrades and, even more importantly, her principles.

Love for the A-11 - thank you for posting this.

you're the lowest filth on earth.


^male chauvinist

It's clear to me, based on the tone of these two statements, which one to take seriously.


^male chauvinist

This is what these people really are.

They have NO ACTUAL ANARCHIST PRINCIPLES. None, beginning with the word anarch. ZIP ZERO. These are authoritarian assholes using anarchist jargon to gain social power and preserve the cultural hegemony of other authoritarian assholes.

YES this and most other "shunning" cases I have seen in the last two years are extraordinarily racist, classist, and misogynist. Why don't you just make her wear a scarlet letter? The delusion runs deep. I'm not just going to blame it on anarchists, as the entire internet is rife with fascism and witch huntery right now, often under a leftist guise.

Like I said, I would have nothing to do with anyone in an anarchist group, or any other group that advocates "shunning" people for minor moral offenses.

that all changed after 9/11 gone so far as don't even

Embrace nihilism or go back to InfoWars, dipshit.

wot? i'm too busy stooping to new lows in anti-anarchist thought

For people who wish to pontificate about a touchy subject most of them know absolutely NOTHING about, why not take an hour out of your busy moralistic lives and watch this invaluable presentation?
"Be cordial"? There's nothing cordial about the police. As these very experienced dudes show, there's no such thing as innocent information to the police.

Good thing her yoga career wasn't ruined.

oh shit. that was good.


I think it should be acceptable to publicly call people out for being yoga teachers.

And you guys are surprised she did something stupid?

wow. k. I'm scared to say who I am here because I don't want to be the target of this villification, but i will say i've been active in radical and anarchist organizing in this region for quite a while. I'm not some naive newbie. I've dealt with cops. I've dealt with direct action. I've organized. I've come at this stuff from a bunch of angles. I've been in the "movement" or "scene" or whatever you want to call it for about eight years now.

so dismiss my earlier calls for compassion, kindness and a suspension of judgment pending more information if you will, but that's frankly pretty immature and not a very healthy or productive attitude to carry into political organizing, any sort of community building or ones dealings with their own self.

so i say again, here's to security culture! here's to excluding folks who need to be excluded, not out of spite or self-righteousness but out of necessity. and moreover, here's to treating the people around us with respect, dignity and compassion.

i dont think anyone actually involved would necesarily disagree with your call for compassion...And i dont think that people are dismissing your call to "suspend judgement pending more information," because we have that information. Its in the discovery, and has also been directly admitted by Naomi upon conversation. Its not a rumor, and she doesnt deny doing it. Im not sure how people can make this any more clear; if folks who wish to not trust an internet post by members of the eleven, they should proactively try to get in touch with her and ask her. But she wont deny it - its in a shared discovery that all defendants have seen.

love to the A 11. thanks for posting this.



PLEASE, don't feed the fucking TROLLS. Just STOP! If someone has a reasoned argument, feel free to respond. There aren't very many reasoned arguments in these comments and yet there are a whole lot of responses. Trolls getting all fat and full off this shit

yeah, "snitching" on abusers is okay.

Perfect example. The appropriate response to this would either be "IGTT 1/10" or silence, NOT a five paragraph essay response.

All the snitch-apologists on here are disgusting.

<3 @ <3 @ <3 @
All of the love to
the eleven!!

Naomi Ullian's Youtube account:

Why do people keep typing positive things about the Asheville 11 ?
Isn't is the Asheville 10 now ?

Or were too many t-shirts and merchandise made with the Asheville 11 as the logo ?

wow ... I know nothing about this but I'm pretty sure that was the worst aerial dance routine ever uploaded to youtube...

It's really the Asheville 9 if you want to get down to it


there are two snitches?!
there are two egoist newspapers?!

they're dancing to John Fahey c:

This post is really moralistic.

Whatever, there are worse things it could be besides needlessly attached to some imaginary objective morality.

Ugh your knee-jerk anti-moralist stance isn't as cool as you might think it is.

So, it was really premature to publish this thing since only 3 of the 11 have had their cases totally cleared, it would seem that one would choose to wait to publish such a controversial thing until after everyone's court stuff had been wrapped up, which is not the case currently.

this should have been posted when it happened. how is it premature to out a snitch? how does this negatively impact anyone but her?

it sounds like court has been wrapped up. people were sentenced to community service. after the cs is completed charges will be dropped.

i keep getting older, these kids just stay the same age...

so yeah im old and really not 'in the scene' anymore, and i'm aware that because of that no one probably wants to listen to me but i figured it's worth a shot. that kind of tunnel vision is exactly what i want to talk about. the anarchist milieu was a dominant part of my life for a long time and it keeps getting weirder and weirder to see how little it develops, when so many of the people involved in it at any given time seem to be fueled by an intoxicating idea that 'things are really moving ahead, we are really learning and making a difference and everything is gonna change' etc. but it just seems like every few years there's almost an entirely new crop of people. there's 'red flag' #1. and they try really hard to make a sustainable whatever, but 'in spite of' or dare i say it, because of such a preoccupation, it always ends in crying and the same mistaken shit happens over and over and over.

it's hard for me to formulate exactly why this is, but i think it has to do with the form of what we think we're trying to create and preserve. we don't 'swim in the sea', we make our own little islands of misfit toys, we tie together punk scenes and activist networks and oh hey some new cool hipster thing or whatever but essentially it's the same old thing that always gets bogged down in the same traps, the same social dynamics and the same closed-off, binary political antagonisms everyone is already steeped in. and we have shit like this, people go out to pick fights with the state without being in any sense prepared for it. there are totally delusional ideas about what this 'movement' is and what it is realistically capable of and i think people have really mixed up motivations for being in it and a serious problem with taking an objective look at their own scene. case in point, i really wonder how many of the chest-thumping snitch-haters on here have ever been interrogated, or even arrested. the shit that passes for 'support' is generally pretty pathetic, and then people act all shocked but can you really imagine being picked on by the state and seeing your whole little activist world falling to shit around you? all the people you thought 'had your back' can't do anything and/or don't even want to try? and then of course, people discover very quickly that they can pick on each other much easier than they can pick on The Man. and then everyone's running around looking for The Man in their own 'community' and not even realizing that this process is exactly what is making them all The Man.

the bottom line i guess is that what people do depends on what situation they're in. these ideas about durable identities, or these fictional ideas of 'community' are doing as much to keep us tied to the old world as anything else. i mean the whole idea of the word is ridiculous, there are no communities in capitalism, no identities worth clinging to you, and no one but yourself to blame if you didn't see it coming. if there's ever going to be a movement or community worth being part of it is not going to look anything like what y'all are used to. if you absolutely need to roll with no one but a clique of like minded hardcore motherfuckers, it's very likely that it's not going to work out. the historical record is just not with you here. so what is there really to gain by projecting such ideas and trotting out such disgusting moralistic fanatical attitudes instead of trying to fucking learn anything that might point you out side of your little subcultural anarcho-scene comfort zone?

and you know what you have no fucking reason to listen to me. you know why? because years ago i ran around with people who were saying a lot of the same shit. granted that was towards the end and before that there were a whole bunch of other faddish fanatical things we were all involved in and we wondered why there weren't more older folks around, why the ones who were were either totally nuts or seemed kind of scared of our energy. anwyay it doesn't matter what you're saying if youre still running in the same circles. the people who thought they were such hard core badasses, including myself, were all circulating within a format that was shaped more by all the embarrassing leftist/liberal/activist/subculturalist/etc shit we all didn't want to admit having come up through, and everything that was built on. but i truly believe the left is the worst cancer afflicting humanity because its the most avant garde capture apparatus that keeps harnessing people into the same old semiotic order.

ok this cranky old fuck has to go to bed. im not gonna lie though, that aerial dance shit was hilarious. just try to be nice to each other and try not to start any fights you can't win. take it from me (and sun tzu), life is too short. dont let politics become work or something that defines, regulates or controls your activity in that way because that is exactly the opposite point of what it's supposedly all about. otherwise it's just like in metropolis, walking up the steps to get eaten by the machine every day.

Naomi had this conversation December 6, 2010. I assume you got a discovery sooner than a week ago. How many years were you sitting on this information? I appreciate you finally coming out with it, but it's hard to stomach lines like "acted in her own self-interest and forgone the ideas of solidarity that others can clearly live by," and not help but wonder why information about this (potential) dangerous person wasn't more forthcoming and how those lines don't apply to you as well.

Shut up, pipsqueak. im sure erybody knew who needed to know.

Funny. A while ago I talked to some of them and insisted they tell people when they found out. They had reasons not to that I disagreed with. In the time between, I've had to break the news to five people. I'm sure there were others out of the loop as well.

anarchist subculture

this 'snitches get stitches' mentality that people refer to every time something like this happens is a complete fucking joke and here are two reasons why:

1) snitches don't get stitches in the anarchist scene, only alleged rapists do, and
2) even if your method of discouraging snitchery is terror, and your opponent is the state, and you think you can out-terrorize the state, you are fucking high.

Y'all need to get over urselves. Who knew divide n conquer worked so well? Ur no more important than anyone else. Stop directing ur anger at people to try and feel like ur cause really matters. Ur stuck in a fucked up mind state of self importance. What ur doing to this person...posting videos, pictures, etc is a perfect reflection of urselves replication the system u suppossedly despise.
Get a real reason to wake up in the morning besides ur arrogance.

Its so much easier to do a half assed outing on an individual than ask why such a poorly planned, poorly executed stupid action which pissed off most of Asheville ever took place. The condemnation of this action which appeared to be basically spoiled children running amok breaking stuff at random was pretty much universal in Asheville. No one could figure out any political point to it--and it pissed off other anarchist to even have the word "anarchy" associated with it. It was a pointless smashing of random peoples cars, spray painting at random--and turned off even those who support anti capitalist direct actions. Read the comments at the bottom of even the semi progressive papers and its clear that no one understood this action, and the condemnation in a progressive mountain town was universal--it was petty vandalism with no point.

But its sooooo much easier to point the figure at one woman who is a long term activist and blame her than to do the dirty internal work of digging into why the "action" ever happened in the first place and how something which alienated so many who are sympathetic to the ideals of anarchy ever took place.

And "outing" someone like this nationally rather than dealing with this in the community reeks of small minded pettiness reflected in the absolute refusal to question the basic assumptions which led to this whole fiasco.

Let me get this straight. An anonymous individual is posting this, and says its not for the 11 as apparently they all do not agree to it. From what we can read it based on the individual(s) mad at this woman because she did not walk lockstep with their ideas of what occurred. The woman in question feels (apparently) that she did nothing wrong, and is acting as such. A woman who is a long term activist.

The poster feels that outing an activist nationally is important because of an OFFICERS notes and a report from the DA--who both can be presumed to have written to incriminate.

The "action" was a complete clusterf*ck which pissed off the Asheville community, it appeared to have no point, no direction and no one got the politics behind it--it alienated many who otherwise support anti-capitalist direct actions.

And there is zero discussion on how such a misorganized misguided politically lost abortion of a protest which pissed off almost an entire town took place.

And to make matters more interesting--the information alleged to have been "revealed" is the same that a google search would turn up, or the video tape which was available at almost every stage of the random smashing of cars and spray painting.

So based on an anonymous poster who does not have the support of the affinity group its appropriate to participate in the humiliation of a long term activist.

You people participating in this have the reasoning skills of your average 1st grader. You participating in ripping apart someones life on a national level based on anonymous information based on parts of police reports which you have not seen.

While avoiding the question of how such a stupid "action" took place, which you cannot even list a single tactical objective it achieved--but the list of cost to the community of organizers is easy to list.

Your completely blind as to why the action took place, but rush to judgement based on an anonymous posters half assed character assassination.

You might want to reflect upon that.

As I understand it, anarchy is all about personal responsibility and accountability. And yet, here we are reading a serious, potentially dangerous or even deadly, hit piece on a named individual from person or persons who are too chickenshit to attach their name or names to their accusations. Anyone who accepts the word of such cowards as "truth" is a fool. For all we know, it could have been written by police provocateurs or a dumped lover.

You wanna tar someone like this, fine, but grow a spine, put your name to it, and take the consequent praise or condemnation like an adult.

For all we know, this very posting could also have been written by a police provocateur.

True, but I'm not the one asserting facts anonymously. Instead, I have merely offered my opinion on the unquestioned fact of this thread-starting anonymous smear job.

Can you really not see the difference . . . and can you see that you've unintentionally made my point? Thanks.

For all we know, this very posting could also have been written by a police provocateur.

I first found about this when I was sent a link to it on the Denver Anarchist Black Cross forum:

So, I posted my comment from above there, also. It was deleted. Then, I re-posted (minus the sole vulgarity) along with Truth in advertising's post from above. Deleted again. Apparently some free speech is not welcome on that “anarchist” site and gets its handle/email address blocked. Maybe we should talk about authoritarian “anarchist” censorship, instead.

Oh well, the joke is on the Denver Anarchist Black Cross. Their thread links to this one and they've now been outed.

For those that are interested I found yet another discussion:

Ashvegas: Some members of anarchist ‘Asheville 11′ disavow one of their own for snitching

Some decent comments there, I have not posted to it.

Chapel Hill's Internationalist Prison Books Collective has also posted the anonymous smear letter:

I posted to their comments section and got an email. Here's my attempt to re-post:

So, I tried to post a comment and got this reply from Internationalist Prison Books Collective:

"Mon, January 21, 2013 1:08:34 PM

Dear Anonymous Individual (ironic, given the topic),

The Mayday whatever is certainly worth critiquing and has been in many circles. However Naomi is a snitch and the article presents accurate information. Your comment is apologizing for her behavior and so it will not be published on our blog. I don't know why you would write about the pressure the Mayday protest would have on a community of organizers since you support snitching and snitches in the same piece of writing.

Ricky Flowers"

2 problems with that:

1) The things being referred to were not my words. Rather, as I CLEARLY wrote, they were the words of someone else posted to the comments section of the Anarchist News article linked above.

2) But, the bigger problem, way bigger, is that a "Books" Collective would censor any post, even if it disagreed with the contents. Only the weak ban words rather than disputing them openly. George Orwell would have loved the irony. It seems that IPBC has a lot in common with jailers.

So, here are my own words without the additional quoted post from someone else. Note that they do not refer to Naomi's "behavior", "snitching" or to the "Mayday whatever".

>>> As I understand it, anarchy is all about personal responsibility and accountability. And yet, here we are reading a serious, potentially dangerous or even deadly, hit piece on a named individual from person or persons who are too chicken to attach their name or names to their accusations. Anyone (iPBC) who accepts the word of such cowards as "truth" is a fool. For all we know, it could have been written by police provocateurs or a dumped lover.

You wanna tar someone like this, fine, but grow a spine, put your name to it, and take the consequent praise or condemnation like an adult. <<<

That's it, reference solely to the anonymous, non-unanimous actions of "some members of the Asheville 11 in writing this letter, and of the IPBC for reprinting it.

My guess: Some new reason will be discovered that these words are too "dangerous" for the IPBC readership, too.

I appreciate that the Anarchist News moderators, unlike those at Denver Anarchist Black Cross and Chapel Hill's Internationalist Prison Books Collective, believe in open debate and are not terrified censors of reasoned disagreement.

reasoned disagreement? you're a fucking crazy person! HAHAAHAHAHAHAHA ROTFL!

Are you able to articulate reasoning for that opinion or is name-calling, childish vulgarity and maniacal laughter all you got?

poop. poop. poop. poop

As predicted.

Here's my third attempt to post to Chapel Hill's Internationalist Prison Books Collective reprint of the smear letter:

I have twice tried to post a comment here. After the first one I received an email from Ricky Flowers where he utterly confused words that were CLEARLY a quote from the comments section of the above link with my own separate words and rejected it on that basis - ironic for a literary group of any sort.

The second one was rejected because:

"Tue, January 22, 2013 10:19:17 AM

It's not that your ideas are too dangerous. We simply don't give a platform to a diverse range of groups, among them are snitches and snitch apologists (as well as nazis, prison guards, politicians and a whole host of other types.)

The communities of people who would work with Naomi should be warned that she is not to be trusted and that is why the article was republished. I'm sorry this is so upsetting for you. However the actions of Naomi are far more upsetting for the people she informed on. Naomi has been around for long enough to know that she would be publicly outed for her disgusting behavior. We have yet to find out the full repercussions of Naomi's actions and this should disturb you more than a blog post or your inability to make snarky rude comments on it.


The problem with that is that I DID NOT apologize for Naomi's alleged actions or for snitching in any way. So, the IPBC strategy for dealing with opinions it doesn't like is to lie about them and make "Godwin's Law" associations. This makes IPBC all too similar to the "nazis, prison guards, politicians and a whole host of other types" it claims to dislike.

Rather, ALL I DID was write that serious accusations like the letter reprinted here need to be made by people with the personal responsibility, accountability, maturity and spine to attach their names to their charges, not by chickens. Obviously, IPBC and "some members of the Asheville 11" (both now snitches in their own right) are hoping to reach people that are not as skeptical, fair minded or intellectually curious as I am. Sadly, IPBC obviously believes that its audience really is that gullible. J. Edgar Hoover did, too, as does Karl Rove.

The only "evidence" that's been presented for supposed "disgusting behavior" is a secondhand account of, in their own words, "a report form (sic) the prosecutors (sic) office. We were also given the handwritten notes of Detective Rollins." In my world prosecutors and cops lie, but I guess some "anarchists" and prisoner "supporters" are more trusting of them than I am.

This is not some rhetorical gripe. When people take responsibility for their actions, one can either approve or disapprove about them in particular. Instead I, a radical activist for 37 years now, am now wondering what's up with the entire dysfunctional Asheville movement that this behavior is tolerated. I'll bet I'm not the only one. If I was a police provocateur I would be hard pressed to come up with a better strategy for destroying the movement than mass-distributed and parroted, anonymous accusations.

Clearly, given IPBC's confusion and inability to own up for it, its lies, its apologizing for cowards, its faith in the word of prosecutors and cops, and its self-described mission to be a "platform" for anonymous smears but not for any questioning of those smears, this post will be banned, too. Such have always been the ways of censors frightened by mere ideas and incapable of disputing them honestly and openly.

Round 4, I wonder if IPBC will realize that they are already linking to these words that they are so far censoring:

IPBC, Tue, January 22, 2013 12:51:39 PM: "Tell you what, send us all of your information including full name, telephone number, home address and a list of 3 references and then we'll publish all of your comments."

I'll think about that (I was already), even though it's ironic that you don't hold "some members of the Asheville 11” to the same standard. First, given your dishonest description of my words and subsequent attacks, I'd want to see posted to this (IPBC) thread a promise that my name and personal details won't be published here or shared with others. There be crazy people out there, and I'm not the one anonymously attacking or parroting the attack on a named individual by asserting as yet unsupported "facts".

Of course, if you just publish the names of the cowardly accusers, there's no need to post my comments at all. What's good for the goose . . .

2 full days and that sound you hear is . . . crickets. Could it be that IPBC had some other intent than verifying my real personhood and credentials in order to post my comments? Hmmm . . .

or they're telling you to fuck off through sarcasm.

Could be. I kind of spoiled it for them by calling their bluff then.

The states standard for convicting someone is beyond a reasonable doubt. As anarchist it would seems that our standards should at least rise to the states, some would argue surpass.

What is the standard for standard for destroying someone reputation?

It appears an anonymous post from someone who does not enjoy the support of their affinity group rises to it it?

Really? Is the standard that low? Lower than the states?

If not at what point should "anarchist" sites be posting anonymous outings like this? What should be the standard? Since we are talking about destroying peoples lives and reputations some discussion as to what rises to the standard where such an action is appropriate would be...appropriate.

Apparently, the only "evidence" needed for "some members of the Asheville 11" and their followers here is, in their own words, "a report form (sic) the prosecutors (sic) office. We were also given the handwritten notes of Detective Rollins. "

In my world prosecutors and cops lie, but I guess some "anarchists" are more trusting of them than I am.

Not that I know, but it'd sure be interesting to see what informed, neutral, and radical-sympathetic persons deemed was really more damaging to our community and goals - the May Day "action", her interview, or her castigation. Should we ostracize the vandals and/or anonymous accusers, too? What's good for the goose . . . ?

snitches are the worst. Duh...

Without trying to answer my question in this particular case, I'd argue that stupid "actions" are the worst in general. They damage an entire group, campaign or movement whereas snitches and anonymous accusers damage individuals.

snitches destroy our faith in each other. Stupid actions develop experience to act better in the future. Snitches are the enemy, stupid actions are people getting their feet wet. What is your hard-on for this comment thread?

We'll have to disagree. In 37 years of doing this I've never had a snitch destroy my faith in other activists or our goals. However, I have seen poorly designed or implemented actions and campaigns wreck what we are working for. Plus, stupid actions don't just "develop experience", they also chase people away forever and jam up activists for long periods, in this case 2 years, thus distracting them from more effective work.

As for your question:

1) This site is the origin for the anonymous smear letter.
2) The two parroting sites I found are too chicken to post contrary opinions. But, they are linking here. :)
3) I'd love to see the authors cowboy-up and take responsibility for their accusations, but don't have much hope that they will.
4) I think the theory (often not the real world practice) of our justice system requiring the opportunity to face one's accusers in open court is a good thing. "some members of the Asheville 11" and their cheerleaders have put forth a worse model.
5) I have hopes that questioning how this was handled (I'm not the only one by any means, see above) will lead to wiser choices in the future. None of this has made me feel better about out WNC movement whereas a snitch just makes me feel worse about the snitch.

Oops, typo. Last sentence should have been: "None of this has made me feel better about our WNC movement whereas a snitch just makes me feel worse about the snitch."

Probably doesn't matter, "Anonymous" is incapable of mature, intelligent discussion and disagreement.

In 37 years of jerking yourself off you've never lost faith in your right hand.

You now join "some members of the Asheville 11", Denver Anarchist Black Cross, and Chapel Hill's Internationalist Prison Books Collective in your childishness. Seems like you're the one masturbating rather than trying to build an effective movement.

Also, I'm a "leftist".

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Subscribe to Comments for "Naomi Ullian outed as snitch in Asheville 11 case"