C18 YORKSHIRE PENULTIMATE

This omission of Pepper's was seized upon by Searchlight as a pretext for rubbishing the book in January 1996. The article's purpose was transparent - an errand run for the FBI to get them off the hook. Martin Luther King's family, the people with most interest in the matter, have supported Pepper's call to reopen the enquiry, as too has the Reverend Jesse Jackson - rather more credible figures than trash like Searchlight/the FBI [18]. Thankfully this request was recently granted by UA Attorney General Janet Reno (27/8/98), even if limited in scope. Searchlight concluded their hatchet-job with a revealing statement that "Pepper's analysis, focusing blame on the state rather than the nazis, serves only to let them off the hook for whatever role they may have played in this heinous crime" (p.6) If you substitute the word Searchlight for Pepper, and swap around the words nazis and state, a perfect summary of where they are coming from.

From the above, it is certainly possible Carthew's house was attacked for a transatlantic motive. US ruling circles have sought to place their own people in positions of power in the Labour party, as in the 'British American Project'[19]. Thus there is no reason why the FBI wouldn't contemplate dirty tricks in the UK on a street level. Attacking activists and producing dummy documents hand over fist was a feature of the FBI's own COINTELPRO initiative [20] never wound up, merely continued in a different form. So the attack on Carthew could have been inspired by some transatlantic agenda.

WHO ATTACKED CARTHEW?

There are four possible candidates for carrying out the firebomb attack. They are the FBI or their direct agents, Searchlight, local AFA activists and fascists themselves. Linked with the fire-bombing is a supposed communique issued by those responsible Northern Cunts, accompanied by a one page document entitled 'Paramilitary Red Commando'. Careful examination of both indicate they are poor forgeries, in no way the Leftist product they purport to be. Taking that as given for the moment, various possible perpetrators will be looked at in turn.

SEARCHLIGHT ARSONISTS?

The Searchlight organisation, or 'team' as they call themselves, have to be strong suspects, given the proven role of their public (magazine) face in a FBI propaganda campaign against Pepper. Their response to Northern Front alleging they had a hand in it was hardly robust, merely describing it as a "childish dirty tricks" and said if Carthew is Earl Ray's "best witness" the "right-wing murdering rat will end his days in jail" [21]. Are Searchlight capable of carrying out such an attack, or having dupes under their control carry out such an attack? Unquestionably. Their first star asset Dave Roberts (consort of the charming Daphne Liddle) was caught red-handed about to fire-bomb an Indian restaurant in Birmingham, and staff member Manny Carpel apprehended by police after an arson attack in Sussex. [22].

Searchlight's usual role, however is plausibly deniable incitement and facilitation. So is it likely Searchlight were involved in this particular case? On current evidence the answer has to be no. While it made sense for the FBI to use a disinformation conduit and media agenda- setting magazine like Searchlight to scorn Pepper's book - damage limitation - a physical attack is something else. There is no way the FBI would entrust an important operation like physical witness intimidation to low grade pimp/errand-boy like Gable. His notorious unreliability, and the marked leakiness of the organisation surrounding him makes this a non-starter. The bulletin claims the attack on Carthew was preceded by Ku Klux Klan stickers being plastered over the area, and KKK daubed on Carthew's house and surrounds. The now deceased English KKK seemed to have as few members in Yorkshire as elsewhere.

It is suggestive, certainly, that at that very moment Searchlight Special Branch and the Cook report were hyping the Klan from Land's End to John O'Groats, as featured in the last NFB. However, due to Griffin's resistance to being set up, the Cook Report screening was so eagerly awaited by various people on all sides, so isn't conclusive of anything. I don't think the FBI, however incompetent and in crisis they might be, would dream of using clowns like Searchlight for witness intimidation.

When it comes to dummy documents such as the 'Paramilitary Red Commando' Searchlight are experts editor Gable probably fell out of his cradle doing it [23]. There obviously has to be a possibility the Searchlight gang were involved in the fire-bombing and subsequent communique. However, despite powerful media and secret state contacts, Searchlight are not clever or reliable enough to undertake this type of operation. While they have a death-grip monopoly on most TV documentaries, and outposts of influence like Radio 4, there are less and less print-media stories (apart from free adverts in the Guardian and Independent.) They are increasingly a laughing-stock, a fact as noticeable to overseas observers like the FBI as people in the UK. I may be wrong about their non-involvement here, and welcome hard evidence ot the contrary. Searchlight not taking part wouldn't preclude a state operation - the White affair would hardly inspire the secret state to routinely inform Searchlight of such things.

WHAT ABOUT THE FBI THEMSELVES?

Assuming the FBI did not want to get Carthew sorted out, the actions described hardly seem wise. The FBI are no amateurs, having perpetrated a massacre at WACO, culminating in a horrific fire, in front of TV cameras and got away with it in 1993. The ineptitude of Carthew's assailants, merely throwing a petrol bomb at the wrong car (his daughter's) hardly seems up to FBI standards. Why bother sending a crew over and stop at such a half-hearted attack?

The Northern Front bulletin tries to make something of the police taking 30 minutes to arrive, hinting at possible collusion with the arsonists. Little should be read into this - I have personal experience [24] of recent shootings in separate cities where police took over two hours to arrive. Crime affecting ordinary working class people is, as those of us who live in working class areas know, something the police have no interest in. 30 minutes seems a good response time to me, especially as it was 2am (club chucking out time). Furthermore, it would be highly unusual for any state agency (British or foreign) to inform the local plod about any illegal act in advance. Need to know and all that.

ARE AFA PARAMILITARY RED COMMANDOS?

The Northern Front 'Special Bulletin' states the 'Paramilitary Red Commando' was Huddersfield AFA. They produce no real evidence for this, other than speculating the "bulletin claiming responsibility for the attack could have been produced in the Bradford anti-fascist resource centre" (p.1) Certainly it could have been - or anywhere else. This isn't evidence, merely assertion.

Before examining this in detail, what might be a hypothetical AFA motive? The fascist answer would be to provoke local fascists into launching a counter-strike against anti-fascists and other 'soft' targets, using information already gathered from the Bradford Resource Centre. This would parallel the Northern Star case, but with information printed locally rather than nationally. It might explain the fact that despite Searchlight being sold in the Centre, people featured in its pages (such as Appleyard) were not recognised early enough. However matching faces to photographs isn't something I would expect Resource Centre workers to spend time doing unless the persons concerned were behaving aggressively. Also, I have already disposed of the fascist claim they were given the information from inside sources at the Centre. Therefore in the absence of an overall game plan there was no strategy for

the firebombing and communique to fit into. In any case, the Northern Front was already in production, so the fascists can't credibly off-load blame like that.

Ironically, the item Northern Front states points most strongly to the involvement of Huddersfield AFA doesn't do any such thing. This is the Northern Cunts document sent to various PO Boxes in the North. It mentions the attack on Carthew's home, and is supposedly anti-fascist in origin. Yet there is no way it reads like a genuine anti-fascist production. The title 'cunts' is, in these politically correct times, not credible as something put out by such sources. Some language sounds anti-fascist - e.g. the reference to identifying Klan members by 'soiled bedsheets and hoods". Other phrases are unbelievable like a self-description of Huddersfield anti-fascists as "Brave Red Warriors". Classic fascist language, accompanied by a threat to local fascist Kevin Watmough that "we may have to shoot him just to silence his mad nazi rantings" [25]. Not AFA rhetoric - cracks about introducing fascists to the pavement certainly, but I have never seen a reference to shooting people in any AFA document. Another thing to make me doubt is the only two address details given are Sid Carthew's and Ian Wilson's (Dewsbury), older BNP members seen by some local Nazis as past it.

A further factor suggesting the document wasn't Leftist is the ludicrous self-description as the 'Paramilitary Red Commando'. A name virtually unthinkable for Leftists because of similarities with the Ulster Loyalist Red Hand Commando, a Loyalist paramilitary force founded in 1972 and later merged with the UVF, a cover-name still used for various actions from time to time. While the fascist image of all AFA members as Republican sympathisers is caricature, any AFA member would be aware of the similarity of the names - a non-starter then. Especially as the communique describes the 'Red Hand of Ulster' as neo-nazi propaganda. There is a magazine called the Red Hand widely distributed amongst fascist circles, but it hails from Airdrie, and is hard-line Loyalist not Nazi. Finally, the promise to "Execute Any Person Suspected Of Involvement In The Distribution Of Neo-Nazi Propaganda" is equally unlikely - not AFA policy, and silly to advertise even if it were. If those attacking Carthew were responsible for this communique, I hardly see how it would help the cause of dealing with him. Why would people who intend to 'Execute' Carthew warn "Sid has a large dog" - wouldn't they advise (themselves!) to use a silencer? Laughable.

The Northern Front alleges that accompanying the 'Paramilitary Red Commando' communique were "photos of shotguns, grenades and other weapons". One of the photos had been used before by Searchlight mole and police informer Tony White when he launched his "Revolutionary Action Force - RAF". If they are right that must mean they had seen them before, perhaps White distributed them? Or maybe they were taken from his home/dust-bin by the 'counter-intelligence unit' involved in gathering material for the 'White Lies' pamphlet? White certainly boasted about access to weapons - but would it really be wise for an AFA group (even if not Leeds) to use such photos traceable back to him?

Analysis of 'Northern Cunts' and the 'Paramilitary Red Commando' leads me to think there is no way AFA was involved. A counter-argument is the communique is so unbelievable it was meant to look like fascists trying to be anti-fascists. Why would anti-fascists produce such an implausible text? Far easier, surely, to fabriacate an apparently fascist document, to put opponents off the scent. After all, there's no shortage of fascist groups who have it in for each other.

FASCISTS THE MOST LIKELY CULPRITS

Another scenario could fit the known facts more easily - state assets among fascist ranks without help from the other side, implementing a proactive programme of escalating politcal violence. Or even fascists acting the same way for palpable political reasons. Either way, the attempt to falsely smear anti-fascists

as involved in this enterprise could be seen as a fairly clever attempt at an intoxicating smoke screen.

This seems closer the mark than blaming anti-fascists. Interestingly, especially given much information in Northern Front refers to students in Leeds, the University newspaper Leeds Student for 7/6/96 had a sensationalist article fingering Appleyard as somebody who "over the last two years has regularly been seen entering Leeds University Union in an attempt to collect names and phone numbers of left-wing students". The main source quoted in the article was Searchlight team member Nick Lowles, using his pseudonym of Peter Brighton, which makes the article suspect - but not necessarily untrue in every detail. Another local fascist, Arthur Bentley, an ex-Third Way member, is put forward by Searchlight as having possibly had a hand in the Northern Front. Unlikely, but not impossible: although such a scam seems rather too complicated for him.

HELPING POLICE WITH THEIR ENQUIRIES?

Having dismissed claims Bradford anti-fascists were involved in the theft of information from their own centre, or fire-bombing/subsequent communique, there is one final matter. Collaboration with local Special Branch/Inspector Keith Fixter. Rumours are flying around about this, at present only rumours. A reliable source has suggested that during the 1997 May Festival in Bradford there was some sort of low level police surveillance operation, to prevent the 1 in 12 Club being attacked by local fascists, with co-operation from those involved, at least to the extent of passing the police selected CCTV footage. Relaible as my source is in terms of integrity, their information is not based on direct personal experience, so cannot be taken as hard fact. That similar allegations have been repeated in the Northern Front bulletin means virtually nothing. It is in the fascist interest to divert attention from their own attacks on anarchists/anti-fascists.

I am not saying there was anti-fascist/Special Branch collaboration, merely seeking to ask questions publicly because attempts to get to the bottom of this matter have made little progress. Three different Festival-goers have told me they saw no hint of any working relationship with the police. Therefore, if the above was all there was to go on, it would probably not be worth putting in print, even as speculation. Although it must be remembered the gist of it has already been put in print by Searchlight, even if to deny it (see below). But a couple of other things make it worth exploring the matter. First is the undeniable fact that throughout the 1990s, as Red Action have pointed out, Searchlight have been very influential in Yorkshire, thoroughly compromising the independence and integrity of Leeds AFA. The AFA statement dissolving Leeds and Huddersfield branches branches divulged their representatives had"failed to carry out their responsibilities in the Northern Network and have refused to participate in the national AFA structures or abide by agreed decisions". [26]. Searchlight accounts of anti-fascist activity in Yorkshire they approve of (the only sort they report) contain constantr references to joint actions with police. In April 1994 they spoke of a "large scale plain clothes police operation" (p.3). This would inevitably involve Special Branch. Perhaps due to criticism of local supporters, recent references to Yorkshire, and particularly Bradford, are more coy. Their July 1997 issue had this to say of the thefts. "While some anti-fascist activists are taking very seriously indeed the nazis capture of personal details and their reproduction in local hate sheets, and have been trying to prevent a repeat, others have gone off at a tangent and started accusing a long-time anti-fascist in the area of being an agent of the state. One can only wonder who put that idea into their hands". (p.10) There are two relevant things here. First, the admission some Bradford anti-fascists fear collusion with local politcial police. Stalinist in method as well as orientation, Searchlight will only have mentioned this because anti-fascist discontent locally is substantial - otherwise they'd blame it on fascist malcontents posing as anti-fascists. Secondly, a favourable talk of those "trying to prevent a repeat" in the same sentence as, and therefore connected in some way, to the accusation of 'being an agent of the state'. Matters are not spelt out fully, but given Searchlight is an organ of disinformation rather than information, this isn't surprising.

One thing is certain - Appleyard is facing various charges over violent attacks on local anti-fascists, including an assault with a hammer and an alleged stabbing threat. He seems to be on so many charges, so often, that it is diffcult to keep tack of them. One, still pending, is for writing/distributing an issue of the Northern Front: the same issue naming Inspector Fixter as the contact for two local anti-fascists. The charge in this case is one of witness intimidation, both by the Northern Front and directly. The search warrant for Appleyard's premises in August 1997 was signed by Fixter. This isn't in itself proof of collusion between Fixter and those named in the bulletin. It does show Fixter takes an operational interest in politically motivated crimes in the West Yorkshire area, and local anti-fascists have used the courts. Which raises an issue that will have occurred pages ago to liberal readers - what does it matter if the courts are used? Some readers will not see it as untoward if local anti-fascists have co-operated with the police. I do.

BACK TO BASICS

This is not a merely academic matter. It isn't for me, and I have no doubt anti-fascists in Bradford, like Leeds before them, have been subjected to a vicious unprovoked and totally unjustifiable campaign of violence, threats and intimidation from fascist thugs, over a long period. It is not even a temptation for liberals like the Anti-Nazi League to run to the police for politcal protection, they do it naturally. Inasmuch as some of those involved in the Bradford affair were AFA members, a higher set of rules applies.

To recall historical precedent first - in the two years before the Nazis took power in Germany, they were banned in various parts of Germany 30 times: yet this had no harmful effect on their seizure of power. If there is a ground swell of support for a fascist group, then a high percentage of their supporters have traditionally come from within the state apparatus. On the rare occasions fascists projected themselves as being 'outside and gainst the state' as with Codreanou's Iron Guard in Rumania, they got crushed. This point hasn't been lost on most UK fascists, who while spouting extravagent anti-state rhetoric from time to time, have usually, when the chips are down, made their peace with the state, from Mosley on. Nobody seriously doubts John Tyndall has frequent meetings with Special Branch, and I understand Special Branch in Yorkshire make regular (even if not always scheduled) trips to see local BNP Organisers. This doesn't mean the BNP either nationally or locally is 'run by' Special Branch, merely that there is a working relationship between them: whether it has helped or hindered the BNP isn't quite the point. That such visits to 'key players' on the far right happen is confirmed by a recent article in the BNP's Spearhead. It chronicled the arrival of two local SB officers at the home of a key National Democratic Party member (Steve Edwards) about to defect to the BNP. That they attempted to pressure him isn't surprising - I find it more significant that he actually let them into his home to discuss politcs. [27].

The political police are thus very interested in establishing working relationships with both fascists and anti-fascists in any given area, Yorkshire included. What they need is a pretext, a lever to enable them to make inroads: and politcal violence is one of those ways in. The first AFA Organiser's Handbook had these words to say on such matters, as wise now as they were then (1986). "On no account allow yourself to be drawn into any sort of 'consultative' relationship directly with the local police. Any apparent short-term gains from too close a relationship with the police will ALWAYS backfire... The police will always abuse any apparently friendly relationship you develop by using it top gain information on Left activists" (p.3) The Handbook went on to say "When appro-priate where information is available about, say a serious firebombing, then there is nothing wrong in passing it to the police. Be very careful not to be drawn into acting as police grasses when doing this. The chances are that local fascists are also passing information about you to the Special Branch. In most cases a campaign by AFA with the local community is nearly always the best way of dealing with racist attacks rather than expecting the police to act" (p.4)

Special Branch/police are not neutral forces, there to help in the event of violence. Help will be available - but at a price. Any information passed to the local Special Branch it must be assumed is in principle available to MI5. Both Special Branch and MI5 have their own agendas in any given situation, which might well dictate the escalation of politcal violence.

This is where Searchlight are of great use to SB/MI5 and the other agencies they pimp for, acting as a conduit/interface between anti-fascists and the political police. They make no secret of their dedication in principle to collboration with the police. Not only was editor Gable formerly employed giving lectures to police cadets at Hendon before they found him to be too much of a joke, their 'Community Handbook' has a whole section on the subject. It states the Searchlight gang's strong belief in "multi-agency projects...one positive sign has been the amount of Searchlight's material that is found in the training materials sent out by the Home Office for police recruits" (Section 9:6) for example. This subject I have dealt with elsewhere, suffice to say any anti-fascist groups who work withSearchlight are collaborating with the state - exactly why AFA nationally proscribed them, as a direct result of their malign influence in Yorkshire.

Inasmuch as the Bradford Centre receives council funds, any attacks on the premises have to be reported to the police, for legal/insurance reasons. It will also have made sense to install security cameras, the existance of which is confirmed by Searchlight. {28} Would police be interested in footage/personal details of all visitors to the Centre? Certainly. Whether they have got information on anti-fascists, in the guise of looking for fascists is the big question. An answer may well come out in