Beating the Fascists: The authorised history of Anti-Fascist Action
- Thread starter cogg
- Start date
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
The RA attitude to Searchlight was an entirely pragmatic one. Nothing was taken at face value. Everything was sifted. And as GG came to realise in about 1993, much to his chagrin that the information had indeed been all one way - just not in his direction. But not all were so discerning. Hence the call for the proscription in the mid 1990's. Eventually this led to the suspension of Leeds and Huddersfield in 1997.
As for Dave Hann, he might have been more than happy to discuss the mugging charge after the event. However he was not so insouciant before he went to trial.
Indeed it was just weeks before the trial that the national leadership was informed of the charges he had been under for approx 18 months. It was only when he thought he might be going to jail that he felt he had nothing to lose politically coming clean to an associate in Manchester. He had nothing to lose politically because his failure to declare his arrest and subsequent charges -was as he already knew, a sackable offence - for obvious reasons. In other words his legal guilt of innocence was actually irrelevant in that regard. As the people that mattered already knew what had really happened.
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
I'll introduce you to a mate of mines who's nickname-well know by people he'd rather not know-was bandied about in the book doing things you might not want repeated..... He'd be happy to repeat a simple point there was NO need for the names.
Deareg
Well-Known Member
he was
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
Tilzey used intelligence to mislead anti-fascists - which is why he was persona non grata in Manchester long before Hann moved there. Indeed it was Hann who brought him back into AFA circles behind the backs of people who had bounced him - the same people who had previously worked with him in the Manchester Squad incidentally.
Deareg
Well-Known Member
joe, i remember back in the eighties you among others saying that gable was giving info on antifa activists to special branch, what the fuck is pragmatic about having such a cunt anywhere near you? how in any way could the benefits outweigh the obvious dangers? who are you or anyone else in red action or afa to put activists liberty at stake?
i spoke to dave about the mugging charge and have absolutely no doubt that he was innocent, if he with-held the fact that he had been charged from red action that is a diferent matter
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
You seem to be sort of implying you spoke to DH about the mugging charges before the trial...this I doubt as he had very good reasons why he kept the fact secret. His concealment was in fact grounds for immedaite expulsion from AFA. So he kept the facts secret from AFA and RA right up until the last moment for one simple reason: he knew his story would unravel.
Deareg
Well-Known Member
no,it was after his aquittal we spoke, i asked him outright if he had done it, he replied no and told me what happened, i believed him then and still believe his version of events, was he under any obligation to inform red action? i mean rules of membership? code of conduct? i recall plenty of other red action members being arrested for non political crimes including violence some on more than one occasion and one even grassing on his co accused, i don't remember any of them being dismissed or villified in the way dave was
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
the former indicates the latter: your refusal to concede this shows where you are coming from.
I reckon it will be a book well worth reading trev. Like a lot of people i have some criticisms of afa in the 90s. But whatever is said AFA did some great things. And its really good that this book is coming out despite all the negative comments on indymedia etc.
I do expect it to be biased towards the people who ran ra,since er god must have been about 1988! but why not in a way. Whilst not exactly being JRs biggest fan, he was a key figure whatever way you look at it,in damaging the fascists in the uk.
And there we have the O'Hara Research Method in a nutshell: association is proof; association by association is proof...
I was once seen in a bar with Ian Paisley. Therefore I must, according to the O'HRM, be guilty of Bloody Sunday...
I totally agree with you that assuming guilt by association is wrong.
However, it is your writing that proclaims you a twat.
Deareg
Well-Known Member
alright then sherlock, where am i coming from?
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
It had been made a rule of AFA membership. Had he been wrongly charged he would have had no reason to conceal it from RA. Indeed it would have been in his direct interest not to conceal it.
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
Actually working for Searchlight, as an operative, is rather more than association--but of course you know that already, you are just trying to muddy the waters, as usual.
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
you are somebody who is willing to allow your friendly relations with somebody count for more than who you admit they worked for--thus, your judgement is clouded.
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
35 years? That would include the Gable Meorandum of 1977 I think, where, if I remember correctly, the old crook wrote (and has never denied it)
"I have given the names I have acquired to be checked out by the British and French security services"
How much more association do you want? The question is rhetorical of course, because reasoned discussion is the last thing on your mind.
Deareg
Well-Known Member
can't say that i ever read the afa rulebook, so i will take your word for it, when was this rule brought in? and why did it not affect other red action members up on criminal charges?
Deareg
Well-Known Member
no larry, i am someone who keeps an open mind, and expects people who make claims like the one made about tilzley or dave hann, or gary o shea for that matter to back up the claims with at the very least intelligent reasoning
No more association, thanks.
Something about the specific question: did he pass information? Please?
past caring
The Cathars were right
There was no written rule book, for obvious reasons - but the expectation that anything but passing contact with the forces of the state was to be reported to AFA branch officers was made clear to everyone when they joined. It was to me - and that expectation was reinforced periodically to everyone in branch meetings. Again, the reasons for this ought to be obvious.
I don't know about other RA members up on criminal charges (and I wouldn't discuss specifics on here, even if I knew about them) but the nature of the charges themselves would surely be one factor. A person being convicted of, say, ABH after drunken argy-bargy in a boozer descended into fisticuffs is a whole different kettle of fish to someone being convicted of mugging (whilst seeking out gays as a target due to a perception of their being a soft touch). Again, the reason why AFA and RA might deal with the two scenarios differently ought to be obvious.
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
If you mean Gable, as well as being deliberately obstructive, can you not read?
If you mean the Searchlight operative, if they were not passing information to Searchlight, what do you think they might have been doing?
Both rhetorical questions in your case, because of course genuine discussion is the last thing you want, or are capable of.
Deareg
Well-Known Member
you really are a cunt aren't you? dave was fucking aquitted, tried and aquitted, FOUND NOT GUILTY,he did not go looking for soft targets gay or otherwise, he did not mug anyone, afew red action members were arrested on various charges, some involving violence, at least one developed a bit of a habit of grassing on his partners who had managed to avoid arrest, he was never expelled from either red action or afa,
i was still involved with both afa and red action right up until shortly before dave was arrested and i do not ever recall anyone ever broaching the subject of reporting being arrested to their local branch, either you got involved years later, in which case you are talking shite about people that you have never even met, or you are just a fucking liar
past caring
The Cathars were right
Read the post properly, you tool.
Once someone is charged and the case goes to court, there's the possibility they'll be convicted. The post was about why an organisation like AFA might view the prospect of a member being convicted of one type of offence differently to being convicted of another type of offence.
Am I lying about the charges?
Once someone is charged and the case goes to court, there's the possibility they'll be convicted. The post was about why an organisation like AFA might view the prospect of a member being convicted of one type of offence differently to being convicted of another type of offence.
Am I lying about the charges?
Deareg
Well-Known Member
read your own fucking post again you dishonest cunt, you said being convicted for mugging while searching out gays as soft targets, he did neither, what part of he was aquitted do you not understand diplock?
did you even know him? i asked that before and you never answered
Nice one
Well-Known Member
like no retreat but starting from the very beginning and going to the very end.
past caring
The Cathars were right
More dissembling bollocks.
No. I didn't know OJ Simpson, either. I come to a view on the available evidence.
Deareg
Well-Known Member
malicious gossip
you fucking spiteful cunt, you are on here talking shite and blackening the name of a dedicated anti-fascist that you now admit you have never even met,Similar threads
