Beating the Fascists: The authorised history of Anti-Fascist Action

[bignose1]

You constantly play the victim here Steve, it's always about you and what the bad boys from Red Action are alleged to have done to you and Dave, but please go right ahead and continue to say whatever you like mate. IMHO you are only embarrassing yourself when you resort to insults, lies and smears rather than rational debate, it's exactly the same tactic that you continually accuse Red Action members of using. It's not about policing the discussion, but if you can't take a bit of friendly and well meant advice when you go off on one, so be it. Carry on regardless.



Keegan didn't emerge from that episode with any particular honour though, did he? As I said, I don't recall the discussion on the old RA forum as being any sharper, or any more personalised than the debate here. In fact, the RA forum was more strictly moderated than Urban and I'd say that it was actually less vitriolic and abusive than some of the stuff that I've read on here and before that on Indymedia.




Can you cite any other threads or articles from the old RA forum, or even the new Red Action site - aside from anything about No Retreat - that would back up your contention that, "The RA forum circa 2003 was a shitty dirty little smear sheet that would put even Goebells to shame..or Strasser(sic) for that matter." ? I can assure you that you're not the only one looking for 'manna from heaven' from the old RA forum. I have been trying everything I know technically to recover the database of the RA forum, or at least a cache of it, because I believe that your various allegations would be disproven were it to be recovered.




Again, I would ask you to provide evidence rather than personal opinion to back up the above allegations.




More assumptions. No, I didn't know that you parted company with Searchlight in 1994, but as you've said it enough times on this thread I certainly know now. It's something else that we'll have to take your word on... It's not necessary to provide personal letters imho, but some general pointers as to your reasons for the disassociation might be helpful. Like others, I always assumed that you were rock solid with Searchlight, so what precisely was it that led to your disaffection?




If you use an open forum as a 'right of reply' then it's fairly inevitable that your version of events will continue to be challenged... and so it goes on. As I said before, there's no end to it, but you seem quite happy with the arrangement. In fact, you appear to thrive on it. That's why I used the 'you've lost mate' phrase, because from what I can see you have locked yourself into a 'game' here that is unwinnable without the necessary evidence to back it up.



Joe, stop being a pathological baiter please. There, done it.

Piss poor Stevie...try harder...

 

[The39thStep]

what a weekend , snow , freezing winds, no Premier league football and this thread!

 

[Joe Reilly]

Yes indeed, you have expressed your disagreement with IWCA politic's or rather what you yourself singularly decided were iWCA politics - without - needless to say without ever quoting the IWCA on any IWCA policies.

But be that as it may, your chief groan, oft repeated is that the IWCA is 'non-socialist'.

Your lazy and concieted assumption being that the IWCA critique of the extant socialist Left/society must necessarily come from the right. Which many not least Labour Lib Dem oppoenents on the ground would regard with astonishment. In fact, when looked at objectively the IWCA take on on society and your much beloved milk and water socialism is from a communist perspective.

Not communism with a 'big C', or even a small one, not communism through the prism of the 20th century or bolshevism, but the communist method of work as outlined by M&E adapted to circumstance.

*It is only necessary to look at Eastleigh to see the thinking behind it. At one end UKIP and the other Tusc.The former having clearly been nudged, away from being a largely dormant single issue party (with many less cllrs that the BNP, and indeed less than the IWCA not too many years ago) outside of European elections are now hungrily filling the vacuum. In places like Rotherham, Middlesbro, Barnsley, it indicates as some research does seem to show, they are reaching out to and gobbling up what might previously considered the BNP demographic.

In interviews on Newsnight voters flagged 'immigration' as the main reason why they were voting UKIP. Very visibly it is they rather than the BNP who now represent far-right aspirations electorally.

Of course one problem with 'borrowing' the 'BNP vote', is that you must continue to constantly nurture it, or having both grown and normalised the asset, risk at some critical stage, as a result of you being 'out-radicalised' seeing it return to base.

So that's one side of Eastlieigh.

The other was represented by Ken Loach on Question Time. He rightly pointed out that UKIP represented 'a protest vehicle for the right' and stated what was needed was for it to be balanced by one on the Left. However he clearly believed that this required no more than a sufficiently loud rallying call - without - the necessity of ever addressing how precisely it would present itself 'on the landings' to what is very clearly now the Left's former constituency.

62 votes all too accurately reflects the consequences of not making strategy a consideration and where socialism now stands as a result of failing, over a minimum of 20 years to come to terms with what is really happening up and down the country.

To put this in some perspective; 62 votes is also roughly a tenth of what one IWCA candidate took in a council ward election in Islington in 2006. The IWCA also came within around a 100 votes of a seat in a neighbouring ward. But for the activists on the ground the 3,000 ticks against the IWCA across just two wards was nevertheless regarded with deep disappointment.

That was because they believed in the project (inseperable from a political belief in the working class itself) and were working to a precise plan, and thus set about their work with a purpose. Essentially they wanted to be in a position to compete.

Again could the contrast with Eastleigh be any greater?

Either way what must surely be obvious by now is that if progressive opinion is ever to seriously get it's act together 'taking note of the IWCA' as a Red Pepper article once put it, 'will be as a good a place to start as any'.

After the Eastleigh humiliation we might ever so tentatively substitute the 'if' with a 'when'.

A poster remarked a couple of years back that the 'IWCA was twenty years too late'. Today, with evidence of the drift to the right beyond dispute, (it's easy to forget that the BNP was still a full 7 years away from it's ist elected cllr in 1995) it might be more convincingly argued the launch was twenty years too early.

Ultimately the choice is straightforward: either you make the necessary adjustments to allow you compete (the 'streets' or 'landings' being one and the same thing) or you fail to do so, and capitulate.

*Interesting result from the Gooshay's ward in Havering. UKIP took the seat. Further evidence that UKIP is now capitalising on the spade work done by the BNP who were elected there in the mid-2000's.

Their combined vote was just less than 50%.

One consequjence of the UKIP surge is that shifting the entire centre to the right with immigration again centre stage nationally.

The ploy of presenting UKIP as the 'good Nazi' dosen't look so clever now does it?

Ps in 2002 an IWCA pilot scheme took 800 votes in the same ward. It does suggest that the working class are hungry for change - any change - as long as it appears credible and sympathetic which of course rules the likes of Tusc out - on both counts.

 

[malatesta32]

think its time for a UKIP thread. people need to be aware of this latest turn. have we had one yet?

 

[shifting gears]

think its time for a UKIP thread. people need to be aware of this latest turn. have we had one yet?

Would this fit the bill?
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/ukip-why-are-they-gaining-support.302167/

 

[bignose1]

Ive just been re-reading some of my posts. Why am I defending myself...or offering to show evidence...? None of them worry me in any way..madness...stop it. They doom themselves.

ps Off to Spain later today...just a quick trip...dont fret Joe.

 

[The39thStep]

Ive just been re-reading some of my posts. Why am I defending myself...or offering to show evidence...? None of them worry me in any way..madness...stop it. They doom themselves.

ps Off to Spain later today...just a quick trip...dont fret Joe.

went two weeks ago. It was sleet and snow and I was halfway between Barca and Valencia on the coast. The sunshine was the day after Madrid knocked out man Utd!

 

[bignose1]

went two weeks ago. It was sleet and snow and I was halfway between Barca and Valencia on the coast. The sunshine was the day after Madrid knocked out man Utd!

Ha ha.....mind you Ive got a feeling were on course for City in the semis....and on course to win the league by 20 plus points....you have your fun now Ill save mine for later.

 

[bignose1]

went two weeks ago. It was sleet and snow and I was ''halfway between Barca and Valencia on the coast''. The sunshine was the day after Madrid knocked out man Utd!

Thats Sitges isnt it...........

 

[malatesta32]

excellent, have a great time!

 

[malatesta32]

Would this fit the bill?
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/ukip-why-are-they-gaining-support.302167/

ah, yes that may just be ticketyboo!

 

[The39thStep]

Ha ha.....mind you Ive got a feeling were on course for City in the semis....and on course to win the league by 20 plus points....you have your fun now Ill save mine for later.

David DeGea's stud saved you at OT , you won't be as lucky this time. Not Sitges , Vinaros.

 

[bignose1]

David DeGea's stud saved you at OT , you won't be as lucky this time. Not Sitges , Vinaros.

Should have been done and dusted at Old T well before that save.....

....Its just got a double for us all over so as to rub it into the bitters......that NO last year wasn't the beginning of an 'era' for you.

 

[Joe Reilly]

HOPE not hate takes a position on UKIP

 

[The39thStep]

Looks like our tactic of calling for a vote for UKIP to keep out the BNP is under threat!

 

[Joe Reilly]

Looks like our tactic of calling for a vote for UKIP to keep out the BNP is under threat!

 

[framed]

Piss poor Stevie...try harder...

I'll repeat this part, maybe you can offer an answer rather than give it marks out of ten?

It's not necessary to provide personal letters imho, but some general pointers as to your reasons for the disassociation might be helpful. Like others, I always assumed that you were rock solid with Searchlight, so what precisely was it that led to your disaffection?

 

[TopCat]

Hell will freeze before a straightforward and honest answer is provided to that one.

 

[TopCat]

Ive just been re-reading some of my posts. Why am I defending myself...or offering to show evidence...? None of them worry me in any way..madness...stop it. They doom themselves.

ps Off to Spain later today...just a quick trip...dont fret Joe.

Because even you must realise that a simple re reading of this thread shows you to be a disingenuous Searchlight asset.

 

[framed]

HOPE not hate takes a position on UKIP

"HOPE not hate operates on a platform of zero tolerance towards political and cultural extremism..."

 

[Joe Reilly]

"HOPE not hate operates on a platform of zero tolerance towards political and cultural extremism..."

from left or right

 

[framed]

from left or right

Searchlight Mk2 ?

 

[bignose1]

I'll repeat this part, maybe you can offer an answer rather than give it marks out of ten?

It's not necessary to provide personal letters imho, but some general pointers as to your reasons for the disassociation might be helpful. Like others, I always assumed that you were rock solid with Searchlight, so what precisely was it that led to your disaffection?

When you do an A-Z of why people have found issue with you ....then Ill attend your online kangaroo court. My ego apart who do YOU think you are.....I fucking laff at this situation sometimes......that its even got this far.

 

[bignose1]

Youve given enough wank material to the fash already,,,you started it in 2003.....why should I uneccessariily give them any more. If as you suggest Im bonkers then just believe that and then fuck off and do something useful. The O'Shea fan club is going to be dissapointed.

 

[bignose1]

Hell will freeze before a straightforward and honest answer is provided to that one.

You are a fuckwit...have you ever contributed anything useful on this thread apart from all this Searclight bollox......no.......another embarrassing O'Shea cronie...perhaps the worst type as you just follow the others like a lappy dog. Just look back at your posts on this thread. Excruciatingly piss poor.

 

[bignose1]

Because even you must realise that a simple re reading of this thread shows you to be a disingenuous Searchlight asset.

Look at what your posting....again its fucking wanky big words mixed the same old shite...asset...operative.....agent...thing is you know the lingo so well youre probably at it yerself.

 

[TopCat]

You can't defend yourself at all as it's (for you) embarrassingly clear what your motives are for being on this thread and indeed being involved with militant anti fascism in the past. Your Gables' boy.

 

[bignose1]

You can't defend yourself at all as it's (for you) embarrassingly clear what your motives are for being on this thread and indeed being involved with militant anti fascism in the past. Your Gables' boy.

Your the fucking embarrassment..someone who is obviously on the loony side of politics with nothing absolutely nothing to add to any debate apart from lies and deceit....and this bizarre juvenile stalking. Its so pathetic and unfortunately for everyone on here, likely to continue. Garys boy.

 

[bignose1]

You can't defend yourself at all as it's (for you) embarrassingly clear what your motives are for being on this thread and indeed being involved with militant anti fascism in the past. Your Gables' boy.

My motives in the past...my oh my you are a fucking prick.

 

[Joe Reilly]

You can't defend yourself at all as it's (for you) embarrassingly clear what your motives are for being on this thread and indeed being involved with militant anti fascism in the past. Your Gables' boy.

When you think about it, taking into account the campaign started with the thread on Indymedia (May 2010) which means that Tilzey has now been at it for the best part of 3 years.

In all that time the only original political contribution he has made is to accuse the IWCA of being Strasserite.

Of the many, many, hundreds of posts since, it is safe to say that the overwhelming majority revolved around personal slander or individual anti-fascists (who he delighted in naming).

He routinely claims he is on here to 'defend himself' but in actual fact was it not for the need to occassionally rebut some ridiculous invention or other, his name would likely never come up at all.
Which given his vaunting self-regard, may of course be a problem in itself, who knows.

But as things stand, the greatest damage to his reputation, such as it is, is self-inflicted, as a result of his being repeatedly caught out in his habitual lying.

The truth is despite his addiction to his status as 'celebrity anti-fascist' he was never more than a minor figure within Searchlight and utterly peripheral in terms of militant anti-fascism.
Yet in spite of this limited role he somehow managed to get himself expelled from Manchester AFA - twice. Not all that hard to imagine though now is it?
It was Hann that recruited him, expelled him, and again recruited him on the q.t.

As for Hann, was it not for their spoiler of a book, the mugging incident would likely never have been mentioned in BTF at all - and as it was the whole tawdry affair was dealt with in a couple of pages anyway.

Some argue that there is a definite OCD element in the "Your Mum! ..." style heckling and that 'Steve Tilzey half man - half lie!' is more mad than bad, and thus more to be pitied than scolded.

'Nuttier than squirrel shit' it has to be admitted also has it's less sympathetic supporters.

But against this is the pivotal role he played in the well orchestrated campaign to intimidate FP into dropping BTF - which remember was just a single vote from succeeding - so on balance the motivation for his unceasing disparaging of militant anti-fascists and by extension militant anti-fascism itself, cannot, it must be concluded, be anything other than political.

Given that Nick Lowles is on the record in describing him as 'a good friend' says more about what H not H ('zero policy toward political extremism') is actually about, than any intricately researched Larry O' Hara essay (heartily recommended btw) ever could. O@Har