REVISIONIST HEROINES: CES FEMMES CONTRE LE « NOUVEL EVANGILE » !

Ces femmes contre le « Nouvel Evangile » !

Ces femmes contre le « Nouvel Evangile » !
Accueil » Actualité » Actualité internationale » Ces femmes contre le « Nouvel Evangile » !

CES FEMMES CONTRE LE « NOUVEL EVANGILE » !

Ursula Haverbeck

Ursula Haverbeck, « la grande dame allemande », est, depuis avant-hier, incarcérée à la suite de sa condamnation à deux ans de prison ferme. Dans six mois, le 11 novembre 2018, elle aura 90 ans. Elle est arrière-grand-mère.

Elle était sous surveillance médicale. Son avocat avait sollicité un report de sa date d’incarcération. Mais de bonnes et belles personnes, notamment à l’étranger, avaient protesté et exigé une incarcération sans plus de délai.

Il faut dire que la coupable avait commis un crime affreux contre la plus vraie et la plus vivace des religions du monde, la Religion de l’Holocauste.

Michele Renouf

La Nazi-Oma (Grand-mère Nazie) avait proclamé qu’elle ne croyait pas à l’existence, durant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, des « chambres à gaz nazies ». Elie Wiesel non plus n’y croyait pas ; généralement tenu pour le témoin emblématique de « l’Holocauste » (ou « Shoah »), il ira même, dans ses mémoires, jusqu’à demander qu’on n’en parle plus ; cependant, au moins nous avait-il assuré auparavant dans La Nuit qu’à Auschwitz, si les Allemands tuaient systématiquement les juifs, c’était par le feu dans des fosses ardentes auxquelles, par miracle, il avait personnellement échappé à la dernière minute. D’autres respectables témoins ont attesté de ce que la même extermination se faisait soit par l’électricité, soit par la vapeur d’eau, soit par le gaz cyanhydrique, soit par la chaux vive, soit par le gaz d’échappement de moteurs de camions ou d’un tank et même une fois, à Auschwitz, par le biais d’un essai de bombe nucléaire. Quant au Père Patrick Desbois, dont on ne parle malheureusement plus guère, il croyait soit à « la Shoah par balles » de fusil, soit à « la Shoah par étouffement » « avec des édredons » ou « avec des coussins la nuit » (Porteur de mémoires, Editions Michel Lafon, 2007, p. 306-307).

Monika Schaefer

Ursula Haverbeck fait actuellement partie de tout un ensemble international de femmes qui s’insurgent contre le Nouvel Evangile. Depuis au moins 73 ans, la bonne parole holocaustique nous est enseignée. Dans ces dernières années, elle carillonne à toute volée le matin, à midi, l’après-midi, le soir et la nuit. Mais ces femmes font montre d’une résistance méritoire. Elles se nomment Michèle Renouf, Sylvia Stolz, Maria Poumier, Monika Schaefer, Alison Chabloz, Diane King, Carolyn Yeager ou encore « Didi ». Elles s’appelaient Madame Rassinier, Keltie Zubko ou Barbara Kulaszka. D’autres noms de femmes seraient encore à citer.

Voici trois réactions à l’affaire :

1) La police allemande interpelle une « mamie nazie » en fuite (site d’Europe 1, 7 mai 2018) ;

Alison Chabloz

2) « Sur le front de la répression » (Bocage-Info, diffusion privée par courriel, 8 mai 2018) :

Ursula Haverbeck a été arrêtée et placée en détention le 7 mai 2018 à 13h30. Ursula Haverbeck espérait fêter son 90e anniversaire au mois de novembre en compagnie de sa famille et de ses amis, mais les sicaires de la police de la pensée en ont décidé autrement.

L’arrière-grand-mère allemande a gagné le respect de ses compatriotes et l’estime des chercheurs indépendants du monde entier pour ses enquêtes opiniâtres sur la fraude liée à l’Holocauste. Le régime allemand, qui est fortement impliqué dans l’escroquerie, a condamné la courageuse investigatrice à deux ans de prison ferme pour avoir enquêté sur les procès-verbaux des Alliés sur les conditions dans les camps d’internement pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Ursula Haverbeck est surnommée la « grand-mère nazie » par les médias du Système.  William Colby, ancien directeur de la CIA, et le Dr Udo Ulfkotte, ancien rédacteur en chef de la Frankfurter Allgemeine, étaient impliqués dans ces recherches. Les deux hommes sont morts dans des circonstances mystérieuses. Condamnée une nouvelle fois l’année dernière, Frau Haverbeck avait eu le temps de se préparer car elle ne s’était pas présentée à la prison de Bielefeld mercredi 2 mai, où elle devait être détenue, probablement jusqu’à ce que mort s’ensuive.

Maria Poumier

Un membre du comité juif d’un prétendu groupe de survivants de l’Holocauste qui s’appelle le Comité international d’Auschwitz a déclaré : « Il faut faire pression pour que la police la retrouve ». Le journal local Westfalen-Blatt a rapporté que la maison de Vlotho dans le centre de l’Allemagne où résidait Ursula Haverbeck semblait vide ces derniers jours, le courrier s’empilant devant la porte. La chasse à l’homme (sic) déclenchée pour retrouver une femme âgée coupable de réfléchir risque de se retourner contre les profiteurs de l’industrie de l’Holocauste. Dans une enquête récente, les deux tiers des gens ont déclaré qu’ils étaient excédés par les revendications incessantes et déplacées des profiteurs de ce système pervers : Holohoax heroine on the run.

3) Une révisionniste allemande de 89 ans jetée en prison (vidéo réalisée par Vincent Reynouard, 9 mai 2018).

Has Zionist Shill Teresa May Announced the End of Free Speech In Britain?

Has Zionist Shill Teresa May Announced the End of Free Speech In Britain?

Is “tolerance” compatible with free speech. If you oppose certain barbaric cultural practices like say, female genital mutilation, and make bold to say so, you’re not being very “tolerant”. Is Teresa May, Britain’s bumbling Prime Minister saying that henceforth only “tolerant” speech will be allowed. May is an utter captive of the Zionist anti-free speech lobby. In 2015, when the Board of Jewish Deputies set up a howl after a wildly distorted press smear on a Mark Weber talk at the London Forum, she banned him from the U.K. — a ban he did not learn about until 2017. The past year has seen a flurry of criminal charges against free speech supporters, including satiric chanteuse Alison Chaloz and activist organizer Jez Turner.

Theresa May announces the end of free speech in UK: “We value free speech…we also value tolerance to others”

  BY ROBERT SPENCER128 COMMENTS

Onlinemagazin@OnlineMagazin

🆘‼🧐🔥 UK: At last someone asked Theresa May the right questions on freedom of speech in the British Parliament.

Challenged in Parliament about why criticism of Christianity is taken for granted while criticism of Islam embroils one in societal (and legal) difficulties, British Prime Minister Theresa May answered:

We value freedom of expression and freedom of speech in this country. That is absolutely essential in underpinning our democracy. But we also value tolerance to others. We also value tolerance in relation to religions. This is one of the issues that we’ve looked at in the counter-extremism strategy that the government has produced. I think we need to ensure that, yes, it is right that people can have that freedom of expression. But in doing so, that right has a responsibility, too. And that is a responsibility to recognize the importance of tolerance to others.

This heralds the end of the freedom of speech in Britain, for May’s statement is flatly self-contradictory. Who will decide whether one’s criticism of Islam has shaded over into becoming “intolerant”? Presumably the police or some governing authorities. But the freedom of speech is designed precisely to protect people from being prosecuted or persecuted by the governing authorities because their speech dissents from the accepted line. It was developed as a safeguard against tyranny.

By introducing this massive exception, May is turning the freedom of speech on its head and emptying it of all meaning. She is also implying that the British government will now be bringing the full force of the law against those who are deemed intolerant, and indeed, that has already begun.

 

British White Nationalist Leader Jez Turner Jailed for Criticizing Jewish Power

British White Nationalist Leader Jez Turner Jailed for Criticizing Jewish Power
Yesterday Jeremy Bedford-Turner  known as Jez Turner was convicted at Southwark Crown Court in London of inciting racial hatred during a speech he gave in 2015 outside Downing Street . In this speech  he attacked Jewish influence, most particularly, the  Met Police’s support for and enablement of  a  Jewish security organisation  known as the Shomrim .   He was sentenced to 12 months, six of which will be served in prison and the rest on licence. 
Did Jez have a chance of acquittal? Well, he had a jury trial so   that gave him some chance of an acquittal. Had it been a trial without a jury he would have had none. But even with a jury the odds were heavily against a not guilty verdict. In the minds of jurors must be the fear of being called a racist which has been so successfully inculcated in the general population that  it produces an automated reflex of panic and terror when faced with the possibility of the label being put on them. Any juror faced with a case such as this must have it in the back of their minds at least that to return a not guilty verdict would be to risk being called a racist. There is also the sheer shock factor of hearing politically incorrect views being unashamedly spoken. As it was the jury was out for less than two hours and returned a unanimous verdict of  guilty. 
 
The case was originally turned down by the Crown Prosecution Service  (CPS) as not meting their evidential standard for a prosecution.  The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism  threatened the CPS with a judicial review of their decision not to prosecute. Faced with that the CPS caved in and prosecuted. It is worth noting that running a judicial review is very expensive.  The fact that  the CAA managed to get the CPS  prosecute effectively creates two tiers of justice, that for the rich and that for the poor.
                      
I  shall be writing a fuller account of the trial later but I can say unequivocally that the judge showed his bias against Jezz from the word go in both his actions and manner.  He began by refusing a request by Jezz’s barrister to put  questions to prospective jurors to discover if any off them were members of the CAA or the  Community Security Trust,  a charity which has surprising support from the Met Police for a quasi-police group  known as the Shomrim  – see below.   During this passage of the hearing the judge said with great distaste that it was shocking that such an organisation as the CAA needed to exist but that was the way of the world. 
 
The judge also intervened on a number of occasions when Jezz was being cross-examined to dispute what Jezz was saying.This was not his job,  it was the job of the prosecutor to challenge what Jezz was saying. 
 
The  other thing to note was the way both judge and prosecuting counsel accepted opinion as fact and were seemingly oblivious to what they were doing which in short was enforcing the politically correct  view of the world. For example, prosecuting counsel thought nothing of quoting a senior judge that freedom of expression had to be compatible with the “standards of a just and fair multiracial society”. 
 
What has been made very clear in this trial (and that of the trial of Alison Chabloz) is that we have an elite  which is hell bent on squeezing the range of permitted opinion ever more tightly into a politically correct shape. 
 
The other striking thing about this trial is the paucity of media comment.  One might have thought the mainstream media would have jumped all over the matter  but the only mainstream press attending the trial was the Press Association. Why? Well, I suspect it was because although the politically correct wanted the prosecution and a guilty verdict they did not want the politically incorrect nature of much of the evidence to come before the public’s eyes. 
 
Where does all this leave us? Free expression is essential to democracy and political freedom. Take it away and oppression soon fills the void. It also has a general cultural value.  Its importance is examined in detail in my essay Freedom or permitted opinion below. . Beneath that  you will find a number of reports of Jez’ trial and a couple on the truly amazing powers granted to the Shomrim both here and abroad.  
 
Robert Henderson



Free expression or permitted opinion: that is the choice – UKIP Daily | UKIP News | UKIP Debate

Free expression or permitted opinion: that is the choice

Posted by Robert Henderson | Nov 20, 2015 | Views & Letters |  |     
Free expression or permitted opinion: that is the choice
   
Free expression or permitted opinion: that is the choice

Filleted, grilled, emotionally battered, but still undefeated

180309 adrian alisonReasons for the enemy wanting ever stricter bail conditions became clearer last Wednesday. First imposed December 2016 by Friend of Israel DJ Emma Arbuthnot (recused), I have now been on bail for 15 months. Last autumn’s Freedom of Informationrequest provides ample confirmation of Crown witness and CAA EnforcerSteve Silverman‘s determined efforts to have me locked up for breach of bail, thus obtaining a police interview which could be used against me in court. Much of the questioning in fact centred on my answers to Sgt Jon Lloyd regards my song Too Extreme For The BNP for which no charges have been brought. I think on the whole press coverage was pretty fair: selective in parts, for sure, but Jenni Frazer actually manages to call me a performer – a giant step forward. Hurrah!


Left: Barrister Adrian Davies and Alison Chabloz leaving court. Photo Colin Bex.

The BBC’s Martin Bashir takes a similar angle. Note the use of ‘Jewish people’ in the title. Have the Beeb’s headline writers been issued with an order not to use ‘Jews’? Do other BBC headlines speak of Muslim or Christian or atheist ‘people’?

The prize for the most misleading headline goes unsurprisingly to the Mail which still hasn’t corrected the header following my Racism Trail [sic] on January 10th – and which inspired the following rhyme:

The racism trail
Begins in Israel
Where stone-throwing kids
Are flung in jail
And migrants
Not of Khazar descent
May be neutered
Then home to Africa sent

Last but not least, the Blackpool Gazette used the PA‘s report. Would the fact that my IP address is now blocked by the Gazette have anything to do with my previous satirical blogpost which features the seaside town? Was someone offended?

Other articles have been released in the alternative media. As many of these link to my videos and several have reproduced my song lyrics, I am unable to share for fear of hurting someone’s feelings and once again finding myself behind bars. Ditto regards my appearances on three alternative radio podcasts, The Daily Nationalist, Down The Rabbit Hole and The Graham Hart Show. For those with time and inclination to listen, any search engine is your friend.

Many thanks to all those supporters who turned up last Wednesday. Apologies to those of you who sent messages and who have not yet received any reply. After being filleted and grilled by the opposition in a public court, my energy levels are somewhat depleted: in the days leading up to this latest court appearance, media hounding of my immediate family as well as criticism within revisionist ranks from ‘supporters’, resulted in an emotional battering from which I am only just recovering. For the record, Dr Fredrick Töben has published a full account in the latest edition of his Adelaide Institute newsletter. Again, a search engine will do the necessary for those interested.

Special gratitude to three genuine supporters who made notes from the public gallery last Wednesday. Below, you will find Robert Henderson’s review. Once I have managed to collect my thoughts more fully and deal with the tsunami of mail in my inbox, I shall write more, specifically on the use of musical satire as way to lighten our load and deliver the revisionist message in a way that is accessible, entertaining and informative. As one friend noted after listening to Monday night’s Graham Hart Show:

“Alison, you make many good points, in particular: blatantly anti-Christian songs are completely allowed, while you are merely trying to help people realize how we’ve been lied to about a historical event involving this powerful sect who has basically controlled the narrative.

“Also, the revisionists who think it’s unwise to use music to help people understand what really happened maybe don’t want people to really know. Maybe it’s just a hobby for them, instead of really caring that people find out how we’ve been lied to all of our lives.”

Finally, a HUGE thank you to JQ Rowling on Gab who has created the most wonderful meme. As with alternative media articles and podcasts, I am unable to share here on my blog. Only those receiving this missive via email may rejoice in its fabulousness!

Kindest regards to all,

Alison. xx

 

The trial of Alison Chabloz day 2 – March 7 2018

By Robert Henderson

Presiding: District Judge John Zani sitting without a jury

Karen Robinson – Prosecuting counsel
Adrian Davies – Defence counsel

Witnesses for the defence – Alison Chabloz

Background to the prosecution

Ms Chabloz denies three charges of sending obscene material by public communication networks and two alternative charges of causing obscene material to be sent. The case involves three songs which the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) claim are anti-Semitic: Survivors, Nemo’s Anti-Semitic Universe and I Like The Story As It Is.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) refused to prosecute the case originally but after the CAA started a private prosecution and threatened a judicial review of the CPS’ refusal to prosecute, the CPS agreed to reverse their original decision and take over the private prosecution.

The events of the day

Despite having a whole day for the case we are not yet not at the end of the defence case. Ms Chabloz gave evidence but the second witness for the defence Peter Rushton never entered the witness box.

Ms Chabloz did well in the witness box. Being under cross examination is very tiring because apart from the natural nervous tension – everyone is nervous when they first experience being in the witness box – and the need to concentrate intensely is draining. Moreover, Ms Chabloz was in the witness box for the better part of two hours. Not only did she not wilt, towards the end of her testimony she had prosecuting counsel a little rattled. (Karen Robinson made the mistake of getting into a verbal cul-d-sac when she kept repeating the same question over and over instead of trying to get at the answer she wanted by asking the question in different ways.)

Ms Robinson began her cross examination by concentrating on the songs which are the subject of the charges Ms Chabloz faces. Then she swerved into raising questions about a song which was not part of the charges and tried to make a case for Ms Chabloz being a racist generally.

Ms Chabloz picked up very quickly on the fact that Robinson had gone off piste and protested that the questioning was irrelevant, but Robinson was allowed to proceed with the line of questioning. Eventually defence counsel Adrian Davies objected that the line of questioning was not relevant to the charges but Zani still allowed Robinson to pursue the line of questioning.

I suspect that Adrian Davies allowed Robinson to continue without objection by him for as long as she did to provide the basis for Mr Rushton’s evidence to be accepted. However, it is worth noting that Ms Robinson’s attempt to broaden the argument against Ms Chabloz to a general charge of racism is of a different nature to Mr Rushton’s research which is, as far as it could be judged by what was said in court, simply concerned with validating Ms Chabloz’s claims.

At the end of Ms Chabloz’s cross-examination Adrian Davies’ second witness Peter Rushton was expected to testify. Mr Rushton has been down at the British Library ferreting out evidence which objectively supported the claims made in Ms Chabloz’s songs. However, his evidence was deemed to be of a nature which did not require him to go into the witness box provided the prosecution accepted that his research could be entered as evidence. This Ms Robinson agreed to and obviated the need for Mr Rushton to go into the witness box.

The court then turned to the question of whether written not oral arguments speaking to Mr Rushton’s research should be made The prosecution wanted only written arguments . (I suspect that the prosecution were nervous about having seriously non-pc statements read out in court in whole or part). Adrian Davies wanted to make oral arguments. judge Zani ruled that oral arguments could be made as well as the written ones and booked another hearing which he thought should last for around an hour.

This is unsatisfactory because it means that the prosecution’s attempt to present to present Ms Chabloz as a general racist was made in open court, while Mr Rushton’s evidence supporting Ms Chabloz will not, at least in its entirety, be presented in open court. (Some of Mr Rushton’s evidence will presumably become clear during the oral submissions on his evidence).

The upshot of all this activity is:

1. Written arguments on Mr Rushton’s evidence must be submitted by Friday 16th March

2. Oral arguments will be made on Monday 14th May

3. Judge Zani will reserve his judgement.

4. A further hearing will be held on 25th May at which Zani will give his verdict and the reasons for it.

There were around 20 supporters of Ms Chabloz. There were a number of interruptions from the public gallery in support of Ms Chabloz . These annoyed the judge enough to make him threaten to clear the public gallery.

Compared with the first day’s hearing on 10 January there was little media interest, although Martin Bashir sat in the press section. During one of several adjournments he engaged in an extended conversation with prosecuting counsel Karen Robinson.

https://alisonchabloz.wordpress.com/2018/03/14/filleted-grilled-emotionally-battered-but-still-undefeated/

A revisionist heroine does a great job defending the truth in court – Carolyn Yaeger’s Report on Free Speech Trial of Alison Chabloz

A revisionist heroine does a great job defending the truth in court

Published by carolyn on Thu, 2018-03-08 19:33

Singer-Songwriter Alison Chabloz arrives at court carrying flowers given to her by her admirers who followed her into the courtroom and sat in the public gallery. (Daily Mail Online)


ALISON CHABLOZ ARRIVED AT WESTMINSTER COURT YESTERDAY,  March 7, for the second leg of her trial for expressing views that are called “grossly offensive” because they mock revered Jewish figures like Elie Wiesel and Anne Frank. These views are embedded in songs she wrote and sang, that were uploaded onto the Internet.

Miss Chabloz made several excellent statements under questioning by Prosecutor Karen Robinson. When asked by Robinson whether she denied the holocaust, Chabloz said:

‘Deny the holocaust? I am sorry I do not understand this term. Who can deny the holocaust? It is a term that is meaningless in itself.’

Ms Robinson said: ‘In your police interview you made a distinction between holocaust denial and revisionism.’

Chabloz said: ‘You can call it holocaust denial but I prefer holocaust revisionism.

‘I think there should be an official scientific and forensic investigation. I doubt very much that a murder case would be brought to these courts without forensic investigation.

‘It is impossible to assess that the gas chambers actually existed to kill human beings without evidence. it is impossible to affirm that the supposed murder took place.

‘As the war years continued and got harder for everybody and we see the allied bombing of the German infrastructure – why would they not bomb the concentration camps?

‘A disproportionate amount of blame was put on the Germans by the victors. The victors got to write history.

It’s about furthering the globalist agenda

‘I would say that the so-called holocaust has been used to sustain the criminal state of Israel – it is used as a foundation myth.

‘By sending school children on trips to Auschwitz and inculcating them into believing in the gas chambers, the so-called holocaust is used as a weapon to prevent nationalistic feeling amongst European people.

‘It’s about furthering the globalist agenda.

‘It is certainly a topic worthy of investigation and of intelligent debate and discussion.’

Prosecutor Robinson questioned Chabloz on her police interview where she said, ‘My grandfather certainly didn’t fight for our towns and cities to be taken over by non-whites and non-Christians.’

Chabloz told her, ‘It’s my right to express those views.’

Ms Robinson said: ‘This is not an unqualified right – one cannot send material or matter on the internet which is grossly offensive.’

Chabloz retorted, ‘But it depends for whom doesn’t it, because there are plenty of parodies of Christian music that say Jesus was gay or that he must have been born by a donkey.

‘It is concerning that where I live, my people I love, my race, that we will become an ethnic minority.’

Ms Robinson told her, ‘The views you have expressed are anti-Semitic and racist. You said of the white race, “It breaks my heart to see that disappearing.” That is nothing more than racism.’

Really?! A UK representative of the Court and the legal system says it is racist (wrong) to not want your race to disappear!! Things are worse than I thought.

Loud booing at this remark

At this point there was loud booing from the public gallery and Chabloz’s barrister, Adrian Davies, rose to speak.

‘Now the witness is being treated much as a heretic during the inquisition, she is entitled to any political view that she wishes,’ Mr Davies said.

He believes that the statute is poorly set out (worded). The charges centre on whether embedding the hyperlink to the footage constitutes as sending, and if her songs were grossly offensive.

Chabloz was given bail again until the final submissions on 14 May and a verdict will be given on 25 May. 

Category

 

DAILY MAIL REPORT ON ALISON CHABLOZ’S FREE SPEECH TRIAL

DAILY MAIL REPORT ON ALISON CHABLOZ’S FREE SPEECH TRIAL

 

 

Anti-Semitic songwriter, 53, who ‘mocked Anne Frank’ tells court the Holocaust is ‘meaningless’ and insists she’s a ‘revisionist’ not a ‘denier’

  • Alison Chabloz, 53, labelled the Holocaust as the ‘Holohoax’ in one song
  • The blogger arrived at court with fans who supported her from the gallery 
  • She mocks prominent Jewish figures, including Elie Wiesel and Anne Frank
  • Chabloz, from Derbyshire, faces five charges relating at Westminster court 

Alison Chabloz, 53, arrived at court holding flowers and was supported from the public gallery by her followers

Alison Chabloz, 53, arrived at court holding flowers and was supported from the public gallery by her followers

An anti-Semitic song writer told a court today that the holocaust is ‘meaningless’ and the Germans were unfairly blamed for the Second World War.

Alison Chabloz, 53, laughed as she was read lyrics to her songs mocked Jews being fashioned into lampshades, having their heads shrunk and being turned into bars of soap.

The songs, ‘(((Survivors)))’, ‘Nemo’s Anti-Semetic Universe’ and ‘I Like It How It Is’ are said to go beyond the right to free speech in that they caused gross offence.

Some were performed live at the London Forum, while others were played for the camera, but all were uploaded to the internet.

In one number she mocks prominent Jewish figures including Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel and Anne and Otto Frank to the tune of a traditional Jewish song.

Chabloz was asked by prosecutor, Karen Robinson, whether she denied the holocaust.

‘Deny the holocaust? I am sorry I do not understand this term.

‘Who can deny the holocaust? It is a term that is meaningless in itself.’

Chabloz, seen arriving at court, describes herself as a Holocaust 'revisionist' and raises questions about the validity of the Holocaust

Chabloz, seen arriving at court, describes herself as a Holocaust ‘revisionist’ and raises questions about the validity of the Holocaust

Ms Robinson said: ‘In your police interview you made a distinction between holocaust denial and revisionism.’

Chabloz said: ‘You can call it holocaust denial but I prefer holocaust revisionism.

‘I think there should be an official scientific and forensic investigation.

‘I doubt very much that a murder case would be brought to these courts without forensic investigation.

‘It is very unlikely to have been more than a million killed – that is my understanding of having researched the information available.

‘Certainly a million – perhaps more – but until there is an official forensics investigation…

‘It is impossible to assess that the gas chambers actually existed to kill human beings without evidence it is impossible to affirm that the supposed murder took place.

‘There is absolutely no doubt that those taken to concentration camps suffered great tragedy, taken away from family and home.

‘As the war years continued and got harder for everybody and we see the allied bombing of the German infrastructure – why would they not bomb the concentration camps?

‘A disproportionate amount of blame was put on the Germans by the victors. The victors got to write history. It was a war – everybody suffered.

She arrived at court holding onto flowers and was followed into court by some of her supporters

She arrived at court holding onto flowers and was followed into court by some of her supporters

‘I would say that the so-called holocaust has been used to sustain the criminal state of Israel – it is used as a foundation myth.

‘By sending school children on trips to Auschwitz and inculcating them into believing in the gas chambers, the so-called holocaust is used as a weapon to prevent nationalistic feeling amongst European people.

‘It’s about furthering the globalist agenda.

‘It is certainly a topic worthy of investigation and of intelligent debate and discussion.’

Much of the questioning revolved around historical rather than legal argument as Ms Robinson tried to pin down Chabloz on her anti-semitism.

In one of her songs Chabloz jokes that if six million Jews had been killed that would not have been a bad thing.

Ms Robinson questioned Chabloz on her police interview where she said, ‘My grandfather certainly didn’t fight for our towns and cities to be taken over by non-whites and non-Christians.’

Chabloz told her, ‘It’s my right to express those views.’

Ms Robinson said: ‘This is not an unqualified right – one cannot send material or matter on the internet which is grossly offensive.’

Chabloz retorted, ‘But it depends for whom doesn’t it, because there are plenty of parodies of Christian music that say Jesus was gay or that he must have been born by a donkey.

‘It is concerning that where I live, my people I love, my race, that we will become an ethnic minority.’

Ms Robinson told her, ‘The views you have expressed are anti-Semitic and racist.

‘You said of the white race, “It breaks my heart to see that disappearing.”

‘That is nothing more than racism.’

At which point there was loud booing from the public gallery and Chabloz’s barrister, Adrian Davies, rose to speak.

‘Now the witness is being treated much as a heretic during the inquisition, she is entitled to any political view that she wishes,’ Mr Davies said.

‘The example of the well known case of the street preachers who preach in the street that homosexuality is wrong – they are perfectly entitled to express that view so long as they are not being grossly offensive.

Chabloz, seen arriving at court today, denied the charges in October, claiming she was being silenced by the 'UK Jewish lobby'

Chabloz, seen arriving at court today, denied the charges in October, claiming she was being silenced by the 'UK Jewish lobby'

Chabloz, seen arriving at court today, denied the charges in October, claiming she was being silenced by the ‘UK Jewish lobby’

‘It is not a crime in England to say that no Jews died at the hands of the Germans – it is a perfectly lawful position – it is therefore, not relevant to interrogate the witness about her opinions.’

The Crown must prove that Chabloz has caused ‘gross’ offence, Mr Davies believes that the statute is poorly set out.

Chabloz says that her songs provoke a ‘range of reactions’ and although some are ‘close to the bone,’ it is no fault of hers if someone chooses to be offended.


She cited a recent music video on YouTube by the black rapper Xxxtencion where he is seen to lynch a white child and the disparity in public outrage.

Chabloz is represented by Adrian Davies, who defended infamous historian and holocaust denier David Irving in 2001 at the Court of Appeal following his failed libel case against Deborah Lipstadt.

Chabloz, of Moss Croft, Town Lane, Glossop, Derbyshire, denies five counts of sending obscene material by public communication networks at Westminster Magistrates’ Court.

The charges centre on whether embedding the hyperlink to the footage constitutes as sending, and if her songs were grossly offensive.

She was bailed ahead of final submissions on 14 May and a verdict will be given on 25 May.

Today is DAY 58 of Monika Schaefer’s loss of freedom: Updates on Monika Schaefer & Alison Chabloz

 
Today is DAY 58 of Monika Schaefer’s loss of freedom: Updates on Monika Schaefer & Alison Chabloz
LET US CONSPIRE TO GAIN HER RELEASE
 
Write to Monika at the following NEW address:
 
Monika Schaefer
Stadelheim Prison
Stadelheimer Straße
81549 Munich
Germany

 

 
Dear Reader & Supporter of Free Speech,
 
Alison Chabloz, musician, singer and song writer, is fighting for her freedom and the freedom of all Truth Revealers who are being hunted and harassed by the Jewish juggernaut out to enslave us all. She needs our support, both morally and financially, as she battles these psychopaths. Do what you can to help her out.
 
Mehr Licht!
 
Arthur Topham
Publisher & Editor
The Radical Press
“Digging to the issues since 1998”
______________________________

How I managed to recruit the enemy and claim victory

March 2, 2018
By Alison Chabloz

My YouTube channel is now no longer available in the UK –  presumably the same applies in other European ‘free, democratic’ states. I’m told that a well-meaning message appears when trying to access my videos: ‘This channel is no longer available, you can unsubscribe here’.

Ah well. I guess I should consider myself lucky that my channel does at least still exist everywhere else – unlike Richie Allen’s.

My critics are certainly spending vast amounts of time, energy and money trying to silence me.

But not all of them!

180302 tower

I am reliably informed that one of my most tenacious and dedicated detractors, fishwife Ambrosine aka Amanda from Finchley, has been promoting my work on Twitter and is even considering a trip next month to Blackpool (renamed Schwarzbad for the occasion) to hear me sing accompanied by one of her überjüdin pals. Well, hardly überjüdin – more like halbwenigejüdin. It seems both their mothers were Roman Catholics. Zwei Halbwenigerjüden fahren nach Schwarzbad. For book/movie rights please contact DizzyHazbara in East Finchley.

Questions arise as to whether Ambro will turn up wearing a hijab. Probably unwise, considering the political nationalist leaning of the Schwarzbad event. Ambro’s halbwenigejüdin pal is aptly named ‘Never Again’. Here, further questions arise as to whether their respective mothers similarly regretted les liaisons judeuses juteuses from which sprang forth des métisses malheureuses? Never again without a condom? In Schwarzbad, both luscious lasses might want to join ranks with the lone activist from Preston Antifa who, last time, managed to post one sticker on the wall outside the venue? Nick Lowles would appreciate any help he can get.

Schwarzbad’s very own beefy northern lads security team will make sure there’s no bullshit. But if Ambro and her fellow métisse halbwenigejüdin pal fancy some real northern hospitality, served up with fish, chips, onion rings, a Tower burger and lashings of vodka – all at prices that instantly make Londoners cry out in pain (the Shoah was NOTHING in comparison to the suffering inflicted by London prices) – then they are most welcome.

Not wishing to blow my own trumpet – although on second thoughts why not? – it’s quite a feat to have managed to recruit one’s worst enemy. Much to her chagrin and despite her urge to see me play live, Ambro reckons my Schwarzbad gigs are proof I shall not be ‘going down’. No doubt more to come on this rather fabulous development in future blogs.

Speaking of which, next Wednesday March 7th I am once again back in court – for singing satirical songs which must be censored at all costs – except when tweeted by Ambro.

‘Chabloz mouthed the words to her songs from inside the dock,’ lied the press in unison. The press now labels me a ‘self-proclaimed revisionist’! The list goes on: ‘Holocaust denier’ (hark the squelching of (((editors))) and other (((lobbyists))) pleasuring themselves in anticipation of being able to add ‘convicted’ as an adjective before the improper noun); the labelling of yours truly continues – ‘anti-Semite’, ‘blogger’, – ANYTHING GOES!  Except of course ‘musician’ or ‘artist’.

Describing me by my actual profession as confirmed by a HEM (Haute Ecole de Musique) diploma from Lausanne Conservatoire (2004), 12 years secondary music teaching, countless years in local rep, ditto as a solo performer, member of various bands and three cruise ship seasons would be far too truthful a term for journos trained in the art of lies and dissimulation. The only mainstream article to ever describe me as an ‘artist’ was published by The Times of Israel in 2015!  This fact alone, in my opinion, tells us everything we need to know about the (((British press))).

So, how should alleged gross offence caused by my songs be judged in comparison to, say, Progressive Christmas Carols by the ‘group’ Paint ? Jesus was gay..? If I am found guilty on Wednesday, then grossly offended Christians surely would be equally entitled to cite Section 127 of the UK Communications Act? I see it all now: Archbishop Welby using his unelected position in the House of Lords to vociferously condemn the denigration of true, Christian values…? Oh no wait. Instead, Welby speaks at a ‘Holocaust’ memorial event, urging his peers to condemn my songs for heresy.

‘But she uses Jewish tunes in her songs!’ they wail. And Paint use Christian tunes. My accusers have lost all grip on reality with this prosecution. Rather than pulling the plug on my music, they’ve helped to create an ever wider audience. Hence, the draconian censorship of my songs and YouTube channel over the past few months.

Locking me in a cell made no difference. Now, they must use unlawful, fraudulent methods to reverse a process which they themselves instigated the day I published (((Survivors))) – June 8 2016. ‘Though I say it myself, it is a brilliant song. Just three weeks after publication on YouTube (now over 40k views!), Elie Wiesel dropped dead. OK, he already had one foot in the grave. Nevertheless, my song is the accomplishment of a lifetime. Few others could boast as much.

If a precedent is set in my case, then it will be a free-for-all. It will be enough for snowflakes to simply stamp their feet and summon the sirens. Handcuffs obligent along with prolonged custodial detention for alleged do re mi terrorism offences (- so do mi in the case of ‘Lord’ Janner’s associates)

Happily, for now, areas of the Internet still provide welcome relief from Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, etc. One such safe space is Jan Lamprecht’s HistoryReviewed.Com. Some may argue that Jan is an ‘extremist’. Having listened to Jan more than I’ve listened to any other YouTuber (now banned like Richie), I can say that he’s no more of an extremist than Jeremy Clarkson, although to my knowledge, Clarkson is the only one of the two who’s actually thrown punches.

A couple of weeks ago, Jan and I had a marathon two-hour Skype conversation which he’s now uploaded to HistoryReviewed.com as a three-part video series. The same evening, I was a guest on the Daily Kenn livestream which you can find on YouTube. My bail conditions prevent me from sharing the actual links. You’ll have to use a search engine.

This coming Saturday i.e. tomorrow, I will again be a guest on Dennis ‘the Fetch’ Fetcho’s Inside The Eye Live! from 4 pm UK time. The last time Dennis and I spoke was in November 2016, the day before I was arrested when my legal troubles began.

Next Monday 5.30 pm UK time, you’ll be able to hear all about the upcoming second day of my trial during my chat with Sven Longshanks on Radio Aryan’s The Daily Nationalist.

See you Wednesday if not before. Same time and place as usual: Westminster Magistrates Court, Marylebone Road, London, 9.30 am. Nearest tube/train Edgware Road / Marylebone. If you’re unable to make it but would like to leave a small donation, you can find links on the right hand side bar to my PayPal account and BitCoin wallet.

Thanks to all have donated and helped me over the past year and a half. Onwards to victory!

——-

https://alisonchabloz.wordpress.com/2018/03/02/how-i-managed-to-recruit-the-enemy-and-claim-victory/

ALISON CHABLOZ: HEAR THE SONG THAT GOT HER ARRESTED IN ENGLAND

ALISON CHABLOZ: HEAR THE SONG THAT GOT HER ARRESTED IN ENGLAND

Alison Chabloz, English singer & satirist on trial for her songs, interviewed on THE DAILY KENN by Charles Edwards, Paul Fromm, David Gaharry & Kenn Gividen.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRi8mEmokyA

 

.

Image may contain: 2 people, child
English singer,  Alison Chabloz,  on trial for satirizing holocaust survivors
tales greeted by supporters  outside London Court, January 10, 2018

Reflections on the Chabloz Case

Reflections on the Chabloz Case

Nick Kollerstrom PhD

 

I’ll sing my way to court in high heels and a frock
Give the press a winning smile from inside the dock…
      Alison Chabloz song, Find me guilty

Mr Gideon Falter, 34, who runs the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAAS) was the chief witness for the Crown Prosecution service’s (CPS) against the British minstrel Alison Chabloz. On January 10th at Marylebone Magistrate’s Court we heard him swear the oath, to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. He then proceeded to give the court various hearsay conjectures, about what effect Ms Chabloz’ songs might be exerting, upon unspecified persons.

He averred for example that they were ‘spreading anti-semitic hatred’ and were ‘inciting to racial hatred.’ The Court was not given evidence for this,[1]nor advised where or in whom these emotions were being generated. Should he not have called witnesses to testify in support of these conjectures, or better still a psychologist to affirm that they were or had been generated?

The Court was advised of one offensive performance by Ms Chabloz, where she sang her songs ‘(((Survivors))) and ‘Nemo’s anti-Semitic Universe’ namely the London Forum in   2016 (September 24th). A problem here could be the signs of mirth and riotous applause in response to the songs: did this really show what Mr Falter had been alleging, or if not, what did?

She was recently introduced as ‘The brilliant comedienne and singer/songwriter Alison Chabloz,’ by Richie Allen, on his popular radio show (18 January).

The point of satire, is that it makes people laugh. Britain has a long tradition of satire from William Hogarth in the 18th century to Private Eye in the present time. Its future is surely at stake in this trial.

In October of 2017 she was arrested and jailed (or, ‘held in custody’) for 48 hours, for posting a video of herself singing a song. This had allegedly broken her ‘bail conditions’. As Ms Chabloz observed, “As far as I am aware, I am the only artist in modern British history to have been jailed for the heinous crime of composing and singing satirical songs which I uploaded to the Internet.”

We live in a society where just about any sacred belief is liable to be satirised for entertainment value, and those being satirised have not generally sought recourse to legal action. When punk-rock bands savagely mocked the Royal family for example, no-one prosecuted them.

The present case was being brought under the Communications Act of 2003. A degree of public support is said to exist for its controversial section 127,[2]by people fed up with online bullying. For example, a racially motivated tweet relating to a footballer was prosecuted under it. But many have objected to its catch-all character,[3] and the DPP has stated in 2102, that its section 127 ‘should not be seen as a carte blanche for prosecuting content which, however upsetting to some, would normally fall within guarantees of freedom of expression in a democratic society,’ and that freedom of expression should include the right to say things that ‘offend, shock or disturb the state or any sector of the population.’

Last year, at least nine people a day were being arrested in the UK on such dubious grounds. Annoying someone or causing distress has never been viewed as a crime — until now. The Communications Act was basically designed for the media.[4] In contrast, songs posted up on the Web are only heard by persons who choose to listen. One exercises that choice by clicking the ‘play’ button. Ms Chabloz has not ‘communicated’ anything in the sense defined by that Act.

Normally, if a Youtube video is found to be disturbing, a complaint is put through to Youtube, rather than the person who has uploaded it. Now Ms Chabloz’ songs have either been deleted or given protective warnings by Youtube, which further complicates the question, of how and to whom she is supposed to be causing offence.

The Defence lawyer Adrian Davies had suggested at an earlier hearing that his client’s songs might be ‘offensive’ but not ‘grossly offensive,’ and that remark was reiterated by the judge in the present hearing. That is surely so: it’s not as if they were snuff movies, or featured depraved or perverted acts, or personally defamed anyone living — except for one person, Irene Zisblatt who claims that she swallowed diamonds while she was at Auschwitz. The court discussed her case, with Mr Davies pointing out that the official Yad VashemHolocaust centre in Israel had cast doubt upon the veracity of Ms Zisblatt’s story in her book The Fifth Diamond. It features of course ze evil Nazis ripping babies in half, making lampshades out of human skin, etc. Was this not a legitimate target for satire, Mr Davis asked the Court?

Some have commented that British politics would hardly be able to function if a distinction was liable to be made between ‘offensive’ and ‘grossly offensive.’ How is the law supposed to discern such a thing?

Others have wondered if it is really appropriate for the CAAS to be registered as a charity, i.e., a tax-exempt NGO, which goes around suing people. The CPS had not wanted to take this case, but was pressured by the CAAS to do so. That applies both to the pending case of British ‘nationalist’ Jez Turner as well as Ms Chabloz: in both cases the CPS had no inclination to prosecute, but arm-twisting by the CAA made them do it. In fact, the CAA works for a foreign power: its first action upon being founded in 2014 was to intimidate the Trycicle Theatre in Cricklewood so they gave up their BDS policy on Israeli goods. Why should a group specialising in legal intimidation be awarded tax-exempt charity status?

The second witness after Mr Faulter was Stephen Silverman, the CAA’s ‘Director of Investigations and Enforcement.’ Under examination he confirmed that the online character ‘Nemo’ who had been persistently trolling Ms Chabloz, was none other than Stephen Applebaum, the CAAS’s ‘senior volunteer.’ For the last two years she had received some quite intense twitter threats and curses from this character — thus on her website ‘Nemo’ declared: ‘Even if you are acquitted, we will still go after you.’ Earlier, in the first court hearing of this case in December 2016, Mr Silverman admitted that he had been tweeting as ‘Bedlam Jones’ who had likewise been making quite intimidating comments.

So, this is a case that could work a lot better the other way round, with Alison as the innocent injured party and CAA personnel as guilty of harassment and victimisation. Clearly, the CAA needs to be stripped of its charity status.  As a general comment, one can either post envenomed tweets against someone or sue them, but it may be inadvisable to try both.

The case is adjourned until March 7th.


[1] As her lawyer A.D advised the Court, the ‘personal emotional reaction’ of Mr Gideon Falter was ‘entirely irrelevant’ to the case

[2] Section 137: A person is guilty of an offence if he— (a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network,  message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character;

[3] Figures obtained by The Times through the Freedom of Information Actreveal that 3,395 people across 29 forces were arrested last year under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003, which makes it illegal to intentionally “cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another”, in 2016′

[4] It aimed ‘to make provision about the regulation of the provision of electronic communications networks and services … to make provision about the regulation of broadcasting and of the provision of television and radio services, etc.

Jewish Free Speech Activist Brings Plight of Alison Chablox & Monika Schaefer to Meeting of Ann Arbor City Council

Jewish Free Speech Activist Brings Plight of Alison Chablox & Monika Schaefer to Meeting of Ann Arbor City Council

Henry Herskovitz is an active Jewish supporter of free speech. Here he addresses the Ann Arbor City Council about free speech martyrs Alison Chabloz and Monika Schaefer.

City Council Meeting from 1/16/18
A2CTN.VIEBIT.COM

and fast forward to 00:10:40 to catch the beginning of my talk.g,

I bring to Council’s attention the names of two women, whose stories do not appear in the Ann Arbor News, the New York Times or the Washington Post. They are Alison Chabloz and Monika Schaefer. Alison hails from Great Britain, and Monika is a Canadian citizen. They are united in the fact that both are musicians and both sing satirical verses challenging the truthfulness of Holocaust narratives. Their followings are small, but vociferous and engaged.

Monika Schaefer lives in Jasper, Alberta, and was attending the trial of lawyer Sylvia Stolz in Germany. Stolz is on trial for what the German government falsely labels “Holocaust denial”. During a recess, Monika was apprehended by German authorities and has been held in administrative detention since January 10. The Jewish advocacy group, B’Nai Brith Canada, had filed complaints against Monika with the German government, and appears to be taking credit for her detention there.

Alison Chabloz lives in Derbyshire County, England, and according to the UK Daily mail is accused of calling the gas chambers a ‘hoax’ and has been taken to court “…in what is believed to be the first private prosecution in the UK for anti-Jewish racism.” The private party refers to the Committee Against Anti-Semitism.

Ms. Chabloz hopes to turn the tables: She writes, ” Following previous treatment of me by Derbyshire Constabulary, including six arrests, unwarranted detention and seizure of my property [they are] seemingly … reluctant to carry out any proper investigation into harassment of which I am the victim”.

In regards to knowledge about the Holocaust, Americas appear to lag well behind other western nations. We are not informed about Alison or Monika, nor were we told much during Ernst Zundel’s two trials in Toronto during the 1980’s. We can only speculate as to the reasons for this apparent blackout, but with Council’s permission, I’d like to paraphrase Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller :

First, they came for America’s white nationalists, and I did not speak out – Because I was not a white nationalist.

Then they came for the anti-Israel activists, and I did not speak out – Because I supported Jewish Supremacism in Palestine.

Then they came for they came for the Revisionists, and I did not speak out – Because I was ignorant of Revisionism.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Thank you