1) I am very rude - ask anybody.
2) I did not assume you had no intention of paying reparations. I concluded that you had no intention of paying reparations based on the evidence that was available.
3) I know you well enough to draw conclusions based on your past and present behavior to draw inferences about your motivations.
Let's break it down: Hereno, in response to concerns from his membership that your members have been unjustifiably raiding them, contacts your leader to seek redress. Your leader responds that the members who were raided were inactive, specifically noting that one of them had been inactive for 8 days, but says that if they message him, he'll have compensation paid directly to them.
This demonstrates a lack of willingness to pay reparations in two ways: First, alliance leaders who have any respect for alliance sovereignty should be conducting their negotiations through alliance leaders - expecting the individual nations to reach out to you is an indication that you don't respect the alliance with which you are dealing, which is an indication that you don't intend to treat them as a legitimate alliance (by paying reparations); second, demanding activity from a player the leader believes is inactive indicates that the leader is offering to take the action without an intention to do so - he believes the action will never need to be taken because he has imposed a condition precedent that he believes will never be met.
This conclusion lines up with the past behavior of your alliance. As a group, you have regularly demonstrated a complete lack of respect for political norms in Orbis. In addition, it lines up with your current defense of your alliance's behavior. You've said yourself that Pfeiffer is an !@#$. Is it so hard to believe that he may have been disingenuously offering reparations without the intention of following through?