Having said all this, let us take a slightly closer look at the circumstances of Gable’s prospective employer, the Daily Sketch. He was, he says, fifteen years old when he went for this interview. As Gable was born in January 1937 that would have meant he was job-hunting in 1952, by his own account he left school at Easter 1952. According to the Encyclopedia Of The British Press, the Daily Sketch was absorbed by the Daily Graphic in 1946. In 1953 it was sold to Viscount Rothermere II, and renamed the Daily Sketch, it disappeared for good when it merged with the Daily Mail in 1971. (36) The British Library Newspaper Library Catalogue lists the Daily Graphic and Daily Sketch July 1, 1946-January 3, 1953; the Daily Sketch and Daily Graphic January 5, 1953-September 17, 1954; and the Daily Sketch, September 18, 1954-May 11, 1971.

So, if Gable really did go for this interview in 1952, it would have been more accurate to say that he had been interviewed by the Daily Graphic. The paper’s previous owner was Viscount Kemsley (of the Berry family); its new owner was Esmond Cecil Harmsworth, Viscount Rothermere, (1898-1978). In the 1930s, the first Viscount Rothermere (1868-1940), owner of the Daily Express, had been well known as a Mosley supporter. Until the Blackshirts turned anti-Semitic in response to the hate campaigns of Organised Jewry and the organised communist movement which included many Jews. The suggestion that the Rothermere family was in any way anti-Jewish or would have given instructions to its personnel officers not to recruit Jews - and to be so blatant about it - is not quite tenable. As far as anti-Semitism did (and does) exist amongst the upper classes it is of a far more genteel kind and has nothing to do with hating Jews and everything to do with making sure that Jews (and everybody else) do not get ideas above their station. (This applies equally to the Berry family). This does not of course rule out the possibility that Gable was indeed abused by an anti-Semitic - or just plain ignorant - personnel officer. But if this were indeed the case, one would have expected him to have related this canard to the Jewish Chronicle in his October 1987 interview. This article though contains no mention of any such abuse; it says simply that he started work as a trainee journalist on the Daily Worker (now the Morning Star) at the age of fifteen.

Gable’s claim that he frequented many black house parties during the fifties may or may not be true; I am inclined to doubt it. In any case it is patently obvious that he doesn’t really give a damn about blacks or any other non-whites, or anyone else besides his own race, as his subsequent employment of Ray Hill proves, that and his total failure to even mention much less condemn Zionist atrocities. He says that at about this time - the fifties - Jews were slipping down the scale of the enemy for the fascists. He neglects to mention though that he and his friends in the 43 Group and a decade later the 62 Group, did their best to make sure that Jews never fell that far down the ladder.

He may well have read a lot of fascist literature in 1960-2 as he claims here, but if he argued and discussed ideology with fascists as he also claims, then he contradicted one of his own principles. (37) “Since the earliest days of fighting fascism in the twenties and thirties, it has been a fundamental principle that nobody ever sits on a platform or joins in debate with nazis and fascists.” (38)

Gable says he got together with Ludmer in the 60s; this is true, as is the claim that when Ludmer died they were working on “something to do with Nazis and guns in the Midlands”. What he doesn’t mention here though is that this so-called gun-running conspiracy was ignored by Leicester police, as was the mythical Notting Hill bomb plot, which was another Searchlight scheme that was hatched at about the same time. (39) The claim that Ludmer dropped dead in the middle of a call to a senior Special Branch officer is highly debatable, and if “the guy was crying” as Gable said, well, perhaps the police really are as stupid as he tries to make them out to be. The claim that hundreds turned out for the funeral is, unfortunately, true, but if they sang The Internationale at the funeral as Gable claims here, the mourners are each and every one of them revealed in their true colours.

Next, office manager Tony Robson adding his two shekels’ worth of hate, refers to the carnage which is allegedly taking place in certain inner city areas. This is yet another attempt to exploit personal tragedy - in some cases, murders - in order to further a political agenda. Whatever the scale of racially motivated violence in certain inner city areas, it is minuscule in comparison with other violent crime. (40)

We needn’t discuss here some of the highly speculative and undoubtedly imaginary statistics for racially motivated violence; we will simply point out that for many reasons we live in an increasingly violent society. This violence is something which no ethnic, racial or other social group has a monopoly of. And it is no secret that a large number of political activists - right, left and centre - believe that violence, like lies, is often justified, in a good cause

A couple of other people were dragged onto the programme who were obviously not members of the Searchlight team. Both had Welsh accents. The woman claimed that she and a companion had been attacked by skinheads and commented naively that she didn’t phone the police after the attack, but Searchlight! Poor woman. The man who spoke, gave his name as Peter Kendrick. I do not question his sincerity, but do question the wisdom of his giving out his address over the radio; as in the same programme Mr Gable claimed to be wary about giving out his own address, one would have thought he would have advised his informants to be a shade careful about giving out theirs. Unless of course he wants Mr Kendrick to be attacked?

In the programme Gable says he was given a lesson by someone who’d lived in Germany. This person told him many years ago that he first and foremost in the war against “fascism” what was required was good intelligence. There can be no doubt whatsoever that Gable is fighting a war, although he is most certainly not on the side of light, and fighting the darkness. As every political activist knows, or should know, whatever the first requirement, the first casualty of war is always truth. Gable has always lived up to that maxim to the full. (41)

The most intelligent comment in this programme came from a British National Party candidate, David King. Mr King’s accent sounded (to the current writer) of an uncultured East End type, but just as one should never judge a book by its cover or a man by the colour of his skin, so one should exercise extreme care when dealing with accents; Mr King may need an elocution lesson, but his education, logic and clarity leave little to be desired.

After mentioning the desecration of Jewish graves, etc, he commented: “What would the British National Party gain from that? The only people that would gain from an act like that are left wing groups, because obviously it will go against the British National Party. Most of the information and this so-called evidence comes from Gerry Gable...He’s so far against us, he will say and do anything to portray us in a bad light. But he hasn’t got one shred of evidence. If he had any evidence at all, we would be arrested for it.”

Spot on, Mr King, if he had any evidence, you would be arrested for it. No more need be said, except of course to add that because Mr Gable hasn’t got such evidence, and has indeed never had such evidence, his moles have done their best over the years to manufacture it. Time and space do not permit a meaningful discussion of this here, but the interested reader is referred to the publications listed in the next footnote for further information on the crimes that Searchlight’s moles (ie agents provocateurs) have incited over the years. (42)

Next, Gable reports that a hoax anti-Semitic leaflet that is currently going around reiterates the so-called blood libel. This leaflet has been sent to nurseries all over Britain, he says. He adds further that someone who didn’t know the historic background to this piece of nonsense could be disturbed by it. He should read up on the historic background himself, because although it goes back perhaps to the Second Century A.D., the blood libel was directed originally against Christians, and was first used against the Jews only in 1144, (the case of William of Norwich).

Next comes a few comments from arch-liar Ray Hill: “I don’t want to sound arrogant, but it wouldn’t be the story of Searchlight if you left Ray Hill out.” It certainly wouldn’t, Ray. According to Hill, he and Gable played games with the far right for about four years. Hill says further that he doesn’t claim to be very clever, that he didn’t devise their campaign of subversion, and that he only carried it out. He is far too modest. I have documented Hill’s myriad lies elsewhere, (43) so will not discuss here his activities in the British Movement in 1968-9, or on his return to Britain, nor of the intervening period when he played a double game in South Africa, inciting hatred and violence against blacks and non-whites while taking backhanders from wealthy Zionist Jews.

In the radio programme, Hill says that in his BNP days he was in a car with three other people, (he was doing the driving) when one of them - the man sitting next to him - shouted to him to stop the car. The three of them jumped out and battered an Asian man. Hill says that he shouted “Coppers!” and the three jumped back into the car. Then he drove them home and arrived home about one in the morning.

Liars really ought to have better memories; here is what Hill said in his lie-ridden, fictionalised autobiography: “With me, travelling home in a car, were BM members Bill Bentley and Bill Hawes, both in high spirits after the meeting, and fuelled by the several drinks they consumed when it was concluded.” (44) All good and fine so far, but then: “Suddenly, one of them yelled to the driver to stop...” (45) Yelled to the driver, not me, (ie Hill). “Bentley and Hawes were out of the car and walking towards an elderly Asian coming down the street. Holding up a cigarette, Hawes asked him for a light. As the man fumbled in his pockets, Hawes produced a police truncheon from beneath his jacket...” The two men then set about the unfortunate (elderly) Asian man. (46)

Again, in the radio version, though there are still four men in the car, it is clearly three men who attack the Asian, for Hill is the driver. Also in the book, Hill returned to the scene of the crime, but the Asian had gone; in the radio programme there is no mention of this. It is worth pointing out that if the man had been assaulted in the way Hill claims he had been in the book, it is most unlikely that he would have walked away, and very likely that the crime scene would have been well attended when Hill returned.

In both the book and the radio programme the perpetrators were subsequently arrested. However, there is an alternative version of Hill’s attitude toward Asians, and in this version, the very last thing he is concerned with is their well-being. Here is what Keith Thompson had to say about Ray Hill: “I went to speak at one of his meetings in Leicester. As soon as we were in the car he started talking about how he’d smashed Paki’s off their bicycles...how he’d done it, how he loved doing it, and how we all ought to do it. This was about the mid-eighties. I’ve never done anything like that, never heard of that sort of thing before. I thought ‘What’s this guy’s bloody game?’ The meeting was fairly ordinary, the branch was made up of nice enough guys.” (47) Except for Hill, of course.

Returning to Gable, he claims that in 1963 he was beaten to a pulp and hospitalised by plainclothes police officers, and that the police did this because they wanted to set an example to certain militant anti-fascists. The claim that police officers beat up people wouldn’t have gone down too well with most respectable people in 1963. As recently as January 1980, dismissing an action in the Birmingham Six case, Lord Denning said that “If the six men win, it will mean that the police were guilty of perjury...This is such an appalling vista that every sensible person in the land would say: It cannot be right that these actions should go any further...” (48)

It seems incredible in 1995 that one of our most distinguished judges could have said such a thing as recently as 1980. However, if Gable were really given such a going over as he claims it is not unlikely that it would have been reported at the time, either in the Jewish Chronicle or elsewhere. Certainly he is not the sort of person to keep silent over such brutal treatment - when directed at himself or his cronies, that is. I must confess that I haven’t had the time to scour the Jewish or Hackney local press for 1963 in any depth, nevertheless, it should be borne in mind that Gable himself stood trial at the end of 1963. His arrest for burglary artifice at the home of David Irving and subsequent court appeareances were reported in the Evening Standard of November 28 and December 18 that year, and the trial was covered by the Islington Gazette, January 17, 1964. None of these reports mentions that Gable had ever been assaulted by the police, and it is not unlikely that this alleged assault would have been raised by his defence team, not necessarily to smear the police but as proof of his commitment to opposing anti-Semitism (as he calls it).

Incidentally, it is totally untrue that even in that day and age that the British police could do anything they wanted to anybody, especially if their victims weren’t white. In a story entitled Coloured Men Win Assault Appeal, on page 11, the Birmingham Post & Birmingham Gazette for Wednesday, July 18, 1962 reported that two “coloured men” convicted of assaulting a police sergeant in the execution of his duty had had their convictions quashed; while on page 7 of the same paper, it was reported that a Jamaican had been acquitted of a charge of wounding. This was a year before Gerry Gable was allegedly assaulted by these fascistic police officers, and a mere sixteen days after Ray Hill took part in a vicious assault on a police officer in the execution of his duty. On July 28, 1962, it was reported in the Birmingham Mail that the twenty-two year old Hill was gaoled for two years.

In the February 1992 issue of Labour Briefing, (49) Searchlight’s European editor Graeme Atkinson wrote that “In the 1960s, Gerry Gable was so badly beaten by police officers that he still today suffers from the internal injuries he received.” (50)

A freelance photographer who has had some contact with Gable told the current writer that, having seen him bouncing around on demos - whipping up the gullible goyim into a frenzy against the wicked “Nazis” - he finds it difficult to believe that Gable suffers from any sort of health problems. Physical ones, that is.

But, even if Gable’s account of his beating by police is substantially true, it is difficult for any honest person to feel a gramme of sympathy for him. In his own words, a group of formidable looking apparent fascists turned up at Ridley Road, and “...when the meeting finished they moved round the corner, and a group of us moved round the corner after them...”

In other words, these people, if they existed, had just left a meeting, and Gable and his “group”, went in pursuit of them. Gable was at this time a member of the 62 Group. The activities of these thugs caused more than a little concern for the Anglo-Jewish establishment, just as had the activities of the 43 Group a decade and more earlier. American researcher George Thayer described the 62 Group in the following unflattering terms: “The primary aim of the 62 Group, indeed its only aim of any importance, is physically to crush the Fascists in Britain...Every member of the Group, whether he be one of its leaders or one of the rank-and-file Jewish toughs, lives for the day when he can personally crack the skull of a neo-Nazi or Fascist. They do not believe simply in striking back in self-defence; in most cases, when their blood is up they go looking for a fight”. (51)

Turning to his love life, albeit with the slightly shop-soiled Sweet Sonia, when his eldest son first met her and she asked him what his dad was like, his son replied “He was a bastard.” And he still is.

According to the account given in this programme, Gable seems to spend a lot of his time following people, looking up their names and addresses in electoral registers, etc. He certainly knows where British National Party press officer Mike Newland lives; and where former National Front member Mark Cotterill lives. And where both myself and Mark Taha, my fellow researcher live, and where independent researcher Larry O’Hara lives. The fact that all of us have been featured in Searchlight and the fact that three of us have been attacked quite viciously in our own homes, (52) while the other two have been, apparently, intended victims of similar attacks, is of course nothing but an extraordinary series of coincidences. And of course, Gable’s seeking out people’s addresses has absolutely nothing to do with the hit lists of leftists’ and other people’s addresses mentioned earlier in the programme. In any case, he wouldn’t have to resort to his gumshoe methods to find out the addresses of such people, since many of them subscribe to Searchlight. And he certainly wouldn’t pass on his mailing list to Combat 18, M.I.5. or anyone else.

Gable comments that “If you allow these twin evils to take root like a cancer in a healthy body, in a democratic body, after a few years you’ve got a diseased country, and it will start falling to pieces. And we’ve got to stop that.”

No, he isn’t referring to the twin evils of Zionism and communism, the former philosophy which preaches that a million Arabs (or a million of any goyim) are not worth a Jewish fingernail; the latter philosophy which so despises racism that it murders workers en masse regardless of race, creed or religion. Gable is referring to the non-existent fascist menace which he and his friends in the Socialist International have created in order to promote their poisons - collectivism and forced race-mixing - as the saviour of mankind. And to something call racism, a word which is defined in such sweeping terms, or more often than not, is not defined at all, as to be virtually devoid of meaning. In Gable’s case though one suspects that it means any manifestation of race consciousness by the wicked Aryan goyim whom he holds responsible for the historical persecution of his race.

After having become a father again at the tender age of fifty-eight - further proof of his robust good health - Gable says he’d like his obituary to read “I’ve been a fighting Jew.” He certainly has been, although for the past twenty odd years he has concentrated more on inciting the goyim to fight each other, rather than fighting himself. He says also he’d like the same obituary for his son. Well, Gerry, I’ve got a big surprise for you. Your son is not a Jew! Shortly after the programme I contacted a Rabbi and asked him if he’d be so kind as to give me an Halakhical pronouncement. Gable is himself Halakhically a Jew, I said, no question about that. His wife’s father used to be a Jew, and her mother was a Gentile. Is their offspring a Jew? Easy, said the Rabbi. NO!

The programme ends with a “racial greetings” from Combat 18 which was left on Gerry’s office answerphone; it was a rather articulate voice, I thought. I must ask him to teach me how to do those impressions sometime.