Viscount Portman Latest Victim of Britain’s Soviet-era Anti-free Speech Laws
Soon after the “Russian” Revolution, criticism of Jews was made a capital offence in the Soviet Union.
Free speech challenged Britain just sentenced a British aristocrat Piers Portman, to 4 months in prison & 20,000-pound fine for calling a Jewish persecutor of satirical singer & free speech activist Alison Chabloz “Jewish scum” outside of court. Negative opinions about certain privileged groups are definitely not allowed in Not-so-Great Britain.
Sad News: England Seeks Deeper into A Zionist-Controlled Police State
Chanteuse and satirist Alison Chabloz was convicted for using telecommunications to transmit “grossly offensive” material — songs satirizing the extravagant claims on Jewish “holocaust” survivors. A gloating comment by Gideon Felter, spokesman for the well-connected and well-funded Campaign Against Anti-semitism made it quite clear that it’s ideas that are being outlawed: ” This verdict sends a strong message that in Britain Holocaust denial and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories will not be tolerated.”
Paul Fromm
Director
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION
YouTuber Alison Chabloz guilty over anti-Semitic songs
Image copyrightJONATHAN BRADY/ PAImage captionAlison Chabloz had claimed the prosecution was an attempt to limit her free speech
A blogger has been found guilty of broadcasting anti-Semitic songs on YouTube.
Alison Chabloz, 54, from Glossop, Derbyshire, wrote and performed three songs about Nazi persecution, including one about the young diarist Anne Frank.
Chabloz claimed the Holocaust was “a bunch of lies” and referred to Auschwitz as a “theme park”.
She was warned she may be jailed at her sentencing on 14 June. There was scuffle outside court.
Image copyrightPAImage captionThere were several heated arguments outside court
Chabloz was convicted of two counts of sending an offensive, indecent or menacing message through a public communications network.
She was further convicted of a third charge relating to a song on YouTube.
District Judge John Zani, sitting at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, said the offences were serious and “the custody threshold may well have been passed.”
When the verdict was given supporters of Chabloz shouted “shame” from the public gallery.
Chabloz was released on bail on the condition she was placed on a night curfew at her home and does not leave England and Wales.
When Chabloz left court there was a scuffle and heated arguments outside, before police arrived to keep the peace.
Image copyrightPAImage captionPolice arrived to keep the peace after a scuffle outside courtImage copyrightPA
The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism initially brought a private prosecution against Chabloz, before the Crown Prosecution Service took over.
Gideon Falter, the group’s chairman, said: “Alison Chabloz has dedicated herself over the course of years to inciting others to hate Jews, principally by claiming that the Holocaust was a hoax perpetrated by Jews to defraud the world.
“She is now a convicted criminal. This verdict sends a strong message that in Britain Holocaust denial and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories will not be tolerated.”
A CPS spokesman said it first became aware of the private prosecution in December 2016 when Alison Chabloz’s solicitors asked the CPS to take it over and stop it.
However, in 2017, the CPS determined the case should continue and Alison Chabloz was prosecuted.
Image copyrightYOUTUBEImage captionAlison Chabloz previously told the court she wanted put across her “political, artistic, creative point”
Chabloz, who describes herself as a Holocaust revisionist, said her music was “satire” and had previously told the court there was “no proof” gas chambers were used to kill Jewish people in World War Two.
However, prosecutors said three of Chabloz’s songs, including one which referred to the notorious Nazi death camp Auschwitz as a “theme park”, were criminally offensive.
Another song included a section set to the tune of a popular Jewish song Hava Nagila.
The defence had told Judge Zani his ruling would set a precedent on the exercise of free speech.
Chabloz had claimed many Jewish people found her songs funny and that no-one was forced to listen to them.
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.
Firstly, a huge thank you to the 25 brave souls who turned up at yesterday’s hearing in support. Thanks also to those of you who weren’t able to be there but sent messages and donations.
It was a great boost to see familiar, friendly faces in the public gallery vastly outnumbering the opposition. Indeed, as proceedings began, we were informed of a request made by Crown key witnesses, CAA’s Gideon Falter and Stephen Silverman. Both men had originally intended to be present in the public gallery yet neither turned up. Instead, CAA minion, Anthony Orkin, was again in attendance with just a couple of others, including the man seen on the far left of the photo below:
Gideon Falter of the Campaign Against Antisemitism along with representatives of other Jewish organisations including Shomrim held a meeting last week in London with Labour’sHardyal Dhindsa, Derbyshire Police and Crime Commissioner, to discuss hate crime.
Perhaps the fact that Derbyshire Constabulary last week finally returned my laptop is one of the reasons why Falter and Silverman failed to turn up? Who knows? But in light of the CPS barrister’s announcement, both were highly conspicuous by their absence.
The Crown also requested that my barrister, Adrian Davies, be the first to present submissions in relation to the complex legal arguments surrounding my case. As already explained, the charges (now five) which I face concern sending or causing to be sent a grossly offensive message under the Communications Act. I won’t go into much detail here. Suffice it to say that I was brilliantly defended by Mr Davies.
After hearing both sets of submissions, Judge Zani informed the court that he would give a decision in writing after studying the points of law discussed. He also scheduled yet another preliminary hearing on November 20th when his decision will be made public. The judge also made it clear that, at this current stage of events, he would still be inclined to keep the January 10th trial date.
Judge Zani explained that the reason for still wishing a trial to go ahead would be to hear my case not only on points of law (whether sharing a URL constitutes an offence under the Act) but also on facts, namely, the content of my songs. I, for one, shall look forward to the Crown’s star witness coming to the defence of Irene Zisblatt, Elie Wiesel, Otto Frank and the already-debunked war propaganda lies of Jews being turned into bars of soap, etc., etc.
It is quite strange to consider that in the case of Judge Zani agreeing with the Defence submission and therefore ruling that I would not have committed any offence under the Act, I may nevertheless still be sent to trial. However, the judge’s decision in this matter, quite rightly, is meant to avoid further eventual hearings pending appeals. If the judge agrees with the Crown’s submission concerning points of law, then I can and will appeal.
Judge Zani then went on to discuss bail conditions. The Crown – no doubt under pressure from the usual suspects – unsuccessfully tried to impose tighter address restrictions. Mr Davies also announced our intent to sue for abuse of process following my arrest and detention earlier this month.
My arrest and subsequent charge for yet another of my songs was the result of a witness statement made by former Zionist Federation co-vice chair, Jonathan Hoffman, who – as we saw last July – has already attempted to prejudice my case on more than one occasion. As a result of Mr Hoffman’s interference, the Crown announced yesterday that he would not make a credible witness. Key evidence relating to the new charge is now solely confined to a similar statement made by Stephen Silverman aka Bedlam Jones. On this matter, I shall leave readers to make up their own minds.
For some real discussion of my case and seeing as the Mainstream is failing in its task to inform the British public of this highly newsworthy event, I shall again be a guest on tonight’s edition of Radio Aryan’s Daily Traditionalist with Matthew Heimbach and Florian Geyer. The show starts at 5 pm BST and, hopefully, the audio quality this time will enable listeners to better hear my story. Big thanks to Sven Longshanks for organising this.
YOU TUBE THOUGHT POLICE BLOCK AN ALISON CHABLOZ VIDEO
Apologies for the mass email once again, and apologies to those of you who took the time to respond to my previous updates and have yet to receive any personal reply. My bail terms and accompanying inconveniences limit my Internet usage to mobile-only, but I promise to try and sort through my messages and respond as time and data allowance permit.
Today and yesterday I received yet more email notifications from YouTube regards ‘action taken’ on my videos following ‘legal complaints’. Please see below YouTube’s updated list of countries where my videos are now blocked :
Like Amazon, YouTube is ignoring UK law, no doubt following pressure from the Israel Lobby. This now brings the total of potential viewers blocked from viewing my songs and other videos to well over 300 million.
If Gideon Falter of the Campaign Against Antisemitism had not brought a private criminal prosecution against me for (((Survivors))) at the end of 2016, it’s reasonable to think that my video would still be floundering around the 6,000 view mark. Instead, the grand total is now over 30k. As plenty of other users have noticed, YouTube also regularly culls the number of views. For this particular video – the total is now frozen at 30,666 !
To celebrate, I have uploaded two songs to Vimeo which are available with a password. One is an old number of mine ‘Social Media Queen’ updated for 2017 – I’m now banned from so many online platforms, would the enemy be trying to force an early abdication? 😉
The second is one of my most recent rants ‘Too extreme for the BNP’. Clearly, I AM too extreme for Twitter and YouTube, but for the BNP as well ? (*rolls eyes).
Mark my words, they’ll be going after my PayPal account next..
Zionist-connected Judge Recuses Herself, Crown Takes Over Prosecution & Singer Alison Chabloz Case Adjourns Until June
LONDON. Satirical chanteuse and song-writer Alison Chabloz’ case seems to be a test as radical Zionist censors seek to create a precedent in Britain for gagging critics on the Internet. She is charged under a hazy law the Communications Act of 2003, which was meant to regulate commercial broadcasting, for You Tubes of satirical songs about the holocaust. She was charged for improper use of the public communications network for having broadcast “grossly offensive” material in such songs as (((Survivors))) with lyrics such as, “‘Now Auschwitz, holy temple, is a theme park just for fools, the gassing zone a proven hoax, indoctrination rules.”
Initially, Jewish complaints were dismissed by the Crown Prosecution Services (CPS) as non-actionable. Then, the well-funded “charity” the Campaign Against Anti-semitism initiated a rarely-used private prosecution complete with pricey Jewish lawyers. In December, Alison Chabloz was gagged by way of bail conditions that forbad her posting any racist or anti-semitic or “grossly offensive” material on the Internet or naming her tormenter complainers, Gideon Falter of the Campaign Against Anti-semitism. [Canadian political prisoner Arthur Topham was similarly prohibited from mentioning the names of those who complained and dragged him into court and inflicted tens of thousands of dollars of costs on this intrepid Internet warrior. The court-coddled complainers were Victoria B’nai Brith operative Harry Abrams and chronic complaint filer Richard Warman.]
Miss Chabloz’s legal team then raised the issue of “reasonable apprehension of bias” on the part of the judge, Baroness Emma Arbuthnot. She had been part of a paid trip to Israel along with her husband, a former Tory MP, who headed Conservative Friends of Israel (a cheering team for another country). The day before the trial, Baroness Arbuthnot quietly withdrew and was replaced by an experienced jurist Judge Zani.
On March 7, after prolonged Zionist lobbying, the CPS took over the prosecution. Now, a whole new team of lawyers was seized of the file. Almost predictably, despite having had the Chabloz file for months, the CPS sought an adjournment on the eve of the trial, needing more preparation time. The adjournment was granted on March 22 — two days before the trial was to commence.
On June 23, there will be purely legal arguments. One key argument deals with jurisdiction. The impugned posting was made in Switzerland. Do U.K. courts even have jurisdiction?
Should rulings on June 23 go against the defence, Alison Chaloz’s trial will proceed on July 17.
Free Thinker & Israeli Born Gilad Atzmon Defends Jez Turner, Latest Victim of the U.K.’s Zionist Thought Police
The Jews have earned the right to control much of the Western world, and do they control much of Western Europe and North America , but anyone critical of this control must be silenced!
Gilad Atzmon highlights the hypocrisy and double standards flagged up by the persecution of Jez Turner.
In Britain, the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) , a ultra Zionist body, is crudely interfering with elementary human rights. It seems as if the campaign …
Can a song be a Crime? The persecution of British singer and satirist Alison Chabloz for some of her holocaust-skeptical songs makes a mockery of British free speech rights. The private prosecution, launched by Gideon Falter of the well-heeled anti-free speech group, the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism, took an alarming turn on Friday. On one day’s notice, Alison was summoned for a hearing to restrict her activities whilst on bail. “
” The judge told her she is not allowed to tweet or blog about her prosecutor Gideon Falter. That was unfair, her lawyer objected, because he had been tweeting about her – overruled. Nor – here was the punch line – was she allowed to do anything ‘racist’ or ‘anti-semitic’ or ‘grossly offensive:’ if she does she will be locked up until her trial, next March. These are incredibly vague and undefined terms. But, I suspect Mr Falter is not going to find this trial the pushover which he has expected.”
It is appalling that merely offending privileged group’s feelings can land a singer in court. As in Canada, with victims like Brad Love and Terry Tremaine, the vile system uses bail or parole conditions to gag a dissident even BEFORE a trial. Here the talented Miss Chabloz faces months in jail is she does anything “racist” or “anti-semitic” or “grossly offensive.” The message is clear: Shut up! What is “racist”? If you express pride in being a homosexual or being a Negro, that’s fine; if you are proud of your European heritage, you’re a “racist” And what is “grossly offensive”? It’s all in the yes of the beholder and minorities, especially Jews, have become adept at being easily offended. Another similarity with Canada is that Miss Chabloz is not permitted to tweet or blog about her tormenter Gideon Falter. Apparently, he can agress against people but the victims cannot comment or mention him. Exactly, the same thing happened to Canadian free speech victim Arthur Topham who is not allowed to mention Richard Warman or Harry Abrams who sought to shut him down and filed complaints which led to the Sec. 319 (“hate law” charges) against him. Oh, yes, neither bothered to show up at Mr. Topham’s trial to see the mischief they had caused. Paul FrommDirectorCANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION
Alison Chablez has been suddenly called back from Manchester with only one days notice, because the Prosecution wishes to redefine the terms of her bail. A week earlier, she had turned up, for a rather strange indeed unheard-of type of prosecution. A Campaign Against Anti-Semitism had decided a song of hers violated Section 127 of the 2003 Communications Act, and was ‘grossly offensive.’
In Britain today, can you be prosecuted because someone reckons your behavior is offensive?* No-one seemed to be providing evidence of anyone having been offended – we merely had the word of Jonathan Goldberg QC, prosecution barrister (who had three attorneys sitting behind him for some sort of moral backup). Mr Gideon Falter, chair of CAAS evidently reckons so. Normally it is the business of the CPS the Crown Prosecution Service to bring such charges, but Mr Falter reckoned they were being rather dilatory in prosecuting anti-semitism and he is speeding up the process by taking out this private prosecution.
The distinguished British philosopher and tenor sax player Gilad Atzman turned up to give Ms Chablez some moral support, and I felt his presence was quite significant. Let’s hope he blogs about it. The best feature of this hearing was Ms Chablez’ marvellous lawyer Adrian Davies, let’s hope he is still defending her in March.
Can a song be a crime? The dire charges – anti-semitism, racism Holo-denial – have effectively ended her career as a folk musician. Tell me about it. The doors do clang shut once Gods’s Chosen People reckon you don’t believe in their Holo-narrative. You thereby come to understand, like never before, who controls our world.
Thursday December 15, I shall be appearing in court for the first time in my life charged with causing gross offence after posting my song (((Survivors))) on YouTube. What makes this case special is the fact that I am not being prosecuted by the Crown; it is a private prosecution taken on by chairman of the wealthy Zionist ‘charity’, Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), Gideon Falter, who – in order to persuade the judge that publishing my song merits a heavy fine – will have to prove that my song is grossly offensive.
I should here confess: after her inspiring performance at a packed London Forum, ’Songs of the Shoah’ she did allude to my book. She has been described as ‘the pin-up girl of Stormfront.’
You might want to check out here Alison’s rather sensible views on the obscure Havaara agreement, and how Red Ken’s politicial career was suddenly over because of his comments upon the matter.
Coming back to the bail trial, the judge told her she is not allowed to tweet or blog about her prosecutor Gideon Falter. That was unfair, her lawyer objected, because he had been tweeting about her – overruled. Nor – here was the punch line – was she allowed to do anything ‘racist’ or ‘anti-semitic’ or ‘grossly offensive:’ if she does she will be locked up until her trial, next March. These are incredibly vague and undefined terms. But, I suspect Mr Falter is not going to find this trial the pushover which he has expected.
I had been hoping to sell my book together with her new CD. My publisher had agreed, but now she reckons she might just be locked up if she did anything like that.
It is clear that the Communications Act of 2003 was designed to regulate commercial broadcasting, in relation to the OFCOM inspectorate – not for private individuals.
It is vital that the great British tradition of satire – from Hogarth to Private Eye – is defended. One is permitted to scoff at people, especially rich, influential people – it is not a crime.
There is a lot at stake here. While talking to a former member of the British punk-rock band ‘Crass,’ he played me a bit of the ghastly racket they used to make, and I heard the dire lyrics. The Crown tried to prosecute them under the Blasphemy Act – but gave up. That is an important precedent. It’s called freedom of expression. I personally object to Jews insisting that everyone else has to believe their fictional, fabricated, fake narrative about what did not happen in the German labor camps of WW2; and salute Alison Chabloz for pointing out, in humorous songs – that IT DIDN’T HAPPEN.
NO Mr Falter, it’s a fictional story. And, by the way Mr Falter, you have no drop of semitic blood in you. But, your country is exterminating the semites, and stealing their land. It’s called genocide.
* “ This is what happens, when this group are upset by something. They assume they have the right not to be offended, as they obviously so easily are. It’s almost impossible to be part of their mind-virus unless you have been programmed into it…” Mark windows.
Singer Alison Chabloz — Latest Victim of Zionist Persecution & Career Assault
In our minority occupied states, the price of principled dissent is public vilification and career ruination if the Zionist thought control freaks have anything to say about it.
This is the latest in the Alison Chabloz case from Britain.
Thursday December 15, I shall be appearing in court for the first time in my life charged with causing gross offence after posting my song (((Survivors))) on YouTube. What makes this case special is the fact that I am not being prosecuted by the Crown; it is a private prosecution taken on by chairman of the wealthy Zionist ‘charity’, Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), Gideon Falter, who – in order to persuade the judge that publishing my song merits a heavy fine – will have to prove that my song is grossly offensive.
It is quite possible that the CPS is unaware of the case at this stage. As well, in order to prove my song grossly offensive, Falter will have to provide the court with an expert’s report. Falter himself, despite his close association with CAA, is not an expert. The summons reads as follows:
On or about 08/06/2016 at within jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court caused to be sent by means of a public electronic network communications network, namely, a YouTube video under the title “(((Survivors)))”, that was grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character. Contrary to section 127(1)(b) and (3) of the Communications Act 2003.
At this point, I think it is important to stress that out of the three women who reported me to police for alleged harassment and inciting racial hatred, only one is Jewish. During my interrogation which lasted about an hour and half (I was detained in police custody for six hours in total, including more than two hours locked in a cell), the policeman didn’t even mention the Jewish woman, nor did he read her statement – no doubt supplied on the orders of ‘Amanda from Finchley‘.
Ironically, I was arrested by the same police force which, two years ago, had worded a cease and desist letter, sent by recorded-delivery and signed for by the very same ‘Amanda’, who – along with my other non-Jewish accuser – takes equal first prize in the 2016 Professional Victimisation Championships.
As for the Jewish woman, I have hardly interacted with her at all. Only once to offer her my phone number or a chat via Messenger, which she refused, preferring to troll me on a daily basis rather than have a face-to-face discussion between adults. Indeed, the poor victim is still actively doing everything she can to please her pay-mistress, despite my account being suspended from Twitter.
In scenes worthy of a farce, the pack of Zionists out for my blood is now split into two camps : there are those who want to demonstrate next week outside Westminster Magistrates Court and those who do not…
Months of hard graft?
Oh dear, oh dear…
As well, my critics will be no doubt be unhappy about an email of support from a Russian-French philosopher, Anatoly Livry – also of Jewish heritage. Dr. Livry has given me permission to reproduce his kind words on this blog, translated into English.
Dear Madame Chabloz,
I would like to send you a word of support: indeed, although being of Jewish origin I do not feel ‘assaulted’ by your songs in English, which I find both funny and witty.
On the other hand, as a philosopher, I feel that the ever-increasing ‘shoah hysteria’ is ignoble – a weapon used by my former Jewish co-religionists to annihilate the Indo-European peoples of the West.
I agree wholeheartedly with Dr. Livry regards this ‘shoah hysteria’. After Charlie Hebdo, trying to remove my right to artistic freedom of expression is far more offensive that any satirical song.
If you are in London next Thursday, I would greatly appreciate your support. The hearing begins at 10am.
To say that UK police handling of online abuse is inconsistent is something of an understatement. In particular, these inconsistencies are highlighted in the case of British musician, Alison Chabloz, who shot to fame after performing a “quenelle” salute at the Edinburgh Fringe festival in 2015. Chabloz was again in the news during this year’s Fringe after her show was pulled for being “too political”.
Alison Chabloz
Victim of targeted harassment and abuse from vicious, pro-Israel “advocates” as well as from a host of anonymous Hasbara “Ziotrolls” and assorted Leftist, liberal “social justice warriors”, Chabloz was recently informed by her local police force in Derbyshire that their investigation for malicious communications and harassment regarding this online abuse against Chabloz had been closed. The investigation began earlier this year after Chabloz had received several unwanted postal deliveries, including anonymous birthday and Christmas cards as well as several sales catalogues (e.g. for reinforced doors and blinds) addressed to her in a derogatory manner.
Ten days after receiving news of the now closed case, Chabloz was arrested by local police in an investigation involving two other forces. She was questioned and detained for six hours – more than two hours spent locked in a cell – learning on her release at midnight that during this time police had raided her domicile and seized her laptop.
Chabloz’ hate crime, allegedly, concerns both her 15-month old ” quenelle” as well as songs performed at London’s Grosvenor Hotel last September during a meeting of The London Forum.
Asides the allegation of incitement, Chabloz was also arrested and questioned on suspicion of online harassment of two of her critics.
Chabloz’ solicitor said no evidence of any such harassment was presented during the interview.
In fact, as early as 2014, Chabloz had been advised by the Musicians’ Union to report to police after being fired by Carnival Group for a satirical tweet posted six months before she began working for the company.
Both in the above case along with several other subsequent incidents of online harassment, including death threats and further attempts to prevent Chabloz from performing, Derbyshire police failed to take appropriate action against the perpetrators.
With her laptop now in police hands, Chabloz’ gigs are on hold because the device contains all her sheet music, backing tracks and software vital for her performances. Chabloz’ solicitor has submitted a legal request to try and recuperate the device and a mobile phone also seized.
Chabloz has been bailed till January 12 pending a decision by the Crown Prosecution Service.
As well, November 19, Chabloz received a court summons to appear in front of Westminster Magistrates Court in a private prosecution brought against her by Gideon Falter, director of UK registered “charity” Campaign Against Antisemitism. Falter accuses Chabloz of using social media to cause offense in breach of the 2003 Communications Act after Chabloz posted a video of her song (((Survivors))) on YouTube. The song has gained over six million – sorry, six thousand views views so far.
The hearing will take place at 10am on December 15
