Season’s greetings to all. Here is a brief review of 2019 that, in the end, turned out to be not so brief. The new year is fraught with the prospect of yet another upcoming spell behind bars, for singing songs. More on that later…
Over the past week we have learned from a study carried out by an Israeli think tank that Zionist leaders lie most of the time. Surely not?! Some would go even further, stating that Zionists in general lie most of the time. Despite Zionism’s original tenet of emancipation from religious Judaism by way of creating a homeland for Jews (Zionism = Jewish nationalism), the ideology of Zionism now relies heavily on the secular religious dogma of the ‘Holocaust’.
As well as being the principle reason behind the foundation of the state of Israel, the ‘Holocaust’ is now also the main identifier of Jewish-ness and, as most Jews are Zionists by default and seeing as our institutions are dominated by Zionists, Holocaustianity has become the main religion not only of Israel but of the western world in general. Zionists therefore have a quasi religious duty to lie, even to themselves.
Also over the past week or two, I have received numerous emails from The Jewish Chronicle (JC), partly explained in my recent posts. 90% of these emails are from editor, Stephen Pollard, whose role apparently also includes that of Data Protection Officer(!). In short, Mr Pollard refuses to comply with my Subject Access Request on the grounds that he is entitled to demand verified identification, in this case a ‘certified’ copy of my passport. More on this in my next post.
Other recent emails from the JC include one from the Head of News as well as several from reporter Ben Weich who has been following my case since earlier this year. Tuesday, Mr Weich asked for a statement explaining why I laid a wreath in honour of the 784 British soldiers killed during the Palestine Campaign at the Remembrance Day Parade organised by the National Front (NF). I duly complied and my statement is properly mentioned in an article in the online edition. Before publication late on Wednesday afternoon, Mr Weich asked if I would also like to respond to two comments made by the Community Security Trust (CST) and Hope Not Hate’s Jemma Levene. To paraphrase the angle taken by both organisations: Chabloz’ appearance alongside the ‘neo-fascist’ NF to lay a wreath in honour of British soldiers who served in Palestine must mean she’s an anti-Semite.
Better suited to my own website, here is my response…
By Robert Henderson.
The convictions in 2018 of Jeremy “Jez” Bedford-Turner and Alison Chabloz for simply saying things our politically correct elite do not want to hear set a new benchmark for the imposition on England of the totalitarian creed which is political correctness. It is a totalitarian creed because (1) it touches on all aspects of life through the application of the non-discrimination or equality principle and (2) its followers insist that there is only one permissible view, the politically correct one.
Mr Bedford-Turner has been found guilty of inciting racial hatred in a speech he made outside of Downing Street and sentenced to 12 months imprisonment, of which half will be served on licence. The main thrust of the speech was his concern about the close relationship between the Metropolitan Police and a charity Shomrim which acts as a private Jewish security force.
Ms Chabloz, a singer and musician, has been convicted of three offences relating to the use of a public electronic service. These arise from three songs she had written which were placed on social media and deemed to be grossly insulting to Jews.
Ms Chabloz was sentenced to 20 weeks imprisonment suspended for two years, given 180 hours of community service plus a fine, victim’s surcharge and costs. She is also banned from using social media for a year. Moreover, the conviction will continue to hinder her both socially and professionally after the two years are spent because it will make it difficult or impossible for her to enter countries, especially places such as the USA and Canada.
[Note from Alison: Thanks very much to Robert Henderson for his excellent article. Please read Robert’s full account via the link provided above.
Comments and sharing buttons on this website are disabled until further notice. Thanks to all for your continued support. I will update shortly with more information about my situation.]
The song that made me famous – or infamous depending on how you look at it – (((Survivors))) is two years old today.
A song so effective against the Globalist agenda that I’ve now been convicted in an English court of causing ‘gross offence’ – for sharing my own work on social media.
Thanks for your message, Sergeant.
Here is my statement:
Following previous treatment of me by Derbyshire Constabulary, including six arrests, unwarranted detention and seizure of my property whilst seemingly being reluctant to carry out any proper investigation into harassment of which I am the victim, this statement will be published in full on my blog alisonchabloz.wordpress.com as well as forwarded to my solicitor, my barrister, and to Ms Jane Grenfell of the UK Charity Commission.
Twitter Support has now come up with a THIRD different reason for my suspension.
Firstly, they claimed I was guilty of posting a ‘violent threat’.
Secondly, they claimed I was guilty of creating multiple accounts with overlapping purposes.
Now, they claim my account was suspended for ‘multiple breaches of Twitter rules’.
None of these reasons has any validity, clearly confirmed by the fact that Support has now given three, separate reasons for a suspension which was originally the result of malicious, mass reporting by users who are themselves in breach of Twitter rules!
I shall keep appealing.
Regulars here on my blog will remember my suspension from Twitter last October, followed by Derbsyhire police closing their investigation into the harassment and malicious communications of which I am victim, and then my arrest by the same police force two weeks later.
I would say Twitter Support played an important part of responsibility in this farce. Just as a reminder, here’s the tweet which sparked my suspension:
As you can see, there are two police forces tagged into my offending tweet. Previously, during the targeting of my gigs, venues, my Edinburgh Fringe show and the general trolling and harassment of me by this same troll and others, @Sicaro72’s tweets had been sent to police on their request. Back then, although I knew of Sicaro’s other identities, including those mentioned in my above reply AND the infamous @NemoNemo50 – still no official charges! – I still had no idea who he was in real life.
My offending tweet can hardly be described as a violent threat. I’ve received far worse on Twitter myself yet Support hasn’t suspended these accounts:
Maybe because the threat was separated over two tweets (the order is reversed in the image above) Twitter doesn’t consider it a threat? And what about CAA (Campaign Against Antisemitism) associate Mark Lewis’ replies to me?
Whereas I tweeted once only about wanting to see a rope around an anonymous serial troll’s neck, foul Lewis is able to get away with tweet-murder, and his only sentence is to remove his crass outbursts. How does Twitter Support reconcile such blatant double standards?
As for the poor, strangled troll, Sicaro aka Nemo, I made an Excel spreadsheet of the 540 tweets he’d sent me over a period of six months and sent this to Twitter Support who, after this grand effort on my part, finally suspended him. Why my prior, endless reports didn’t have the same effect is a mystery. Regards Sicaro’s 540 tweets, my own suspension and Lewis’ non-suspension, I appealed to Support again and, suddenly, rather than citing a ‘violent threat’, the reason given for my suspension was now the ‘creation of multiple accounts with overlapping purposes’.
To no avail… The new excuse lasted a couple of appeals and then reverted back to the ‘violent threat’ yarn. I tried opening a new account @ajchabloz last week and was not able to send one single tweet before being suspended for ‘multiple breaches of Twitter rules’.
It’s so absurd, that it’s laughable. Banned for a ‘violent threat’ – simply words in a tweet – whereas my abusers are given free reign to troll, harass, threaten and stalk with impunity, mostly using anonymous accounts. Twitter clearly uses one set of rules for a certain section of the Twitter community – those associated with ‘anti-racism’ [sic] organisations – and another for the rest of us.
Sicaro aka Sicko aka Nemo is back up to his usual tricks as mark00427586, tweeting about George Galloway and grassing up anyone he dislikes to CST and CAA: ‘I don’t work for any charities’, come the habitual, Talmudic lies. He can’t be too vocal, though, and he knows why.
It was only after my first court appearance on December 15 that I came to the realisation that the two men – CAA Chairman and Director of Enforcement – sitting next the prosecution lawyers were none other than my two most prolific trolls, Nemo and Bedlam. There was no need for any confirmation from me: their solicitor managed this, dragging my barrister and I back across the UK a week later when Goldberg QC lied in order to have me gagged by fellow Friend of Israel, the now-recused Chief Magistrate, Emma Baroness Arbuthnot.
There are enough screenshots of the two CAA director-trolls hosted on this very blog and included in attachments to police emails without it being necessary to recover the library of screenshots on my computer – the same computer held for five months without a charger and which has still not been returned to me, despite all police charges being dropped. The only two or three charges left are for my songs, and I’ve not yet been served with those either.
No wonder the CPS asked for an adjournment and no wonder CAA have stopped mentioning my name – the first time in what was a daily occurrence for over 18 months. The CAA is, however, still targeting others. One latest victim is Welsh Labour hopeful Mike Sivier, rightfully angry after he suffered defeat at last week’s local elections following a typically rampant CAA smear campaign. Unable to crucify Sivier properly on their own blog, CAA paid a useful hasbara and one of Sivier’s Tory rivals to seal his fate by associating him with yours truly. I shall write more on this in another blog post.
Suffice it to say that we ethnic Brits are being silenced, as well as professionally and socially demonised in our own country. Not all the culprits are of foreign heritage, some are as British as Sivier and I – and they’re the worst traitors of all, along with our corrupt political leaders who have enabled this and allowed it to happen beneath their very eyes. This isn’t what our fathers and forefathers fought for. Time to wake up!
Yes, regarding the CAA and my other accusers I will be making a counter-claim and, depending on the result, I will also be making a claim against Twitter. In light of the above evidence, it’s difficult to see how they would have a twig a tweet on. I will publish a copy of Twitter’s response to my appeal below.
Although no fan of Katie Hopkins, I do have sympathy with some of her views for the simple reason that she happens to be correct, sometimes. Take the latest scandal surrounding one of Hopkins’ provocative tweets which she was forced to delete following a typical onslaught by the usual virtue-signalling do-gooders’ failure to understand that ‘anti-racism’ is a code word for ‘anti-white’ :
(For the sake of argument, here I’m referring to Hopkins’ own words and not the TV series Dear White People).
Lebanese-born Dom Joly is a comedian which perhaps partly explains his outrage. Maybe he was just trying to be funny? Sadly, no. Joly believes that in Britain blacks suffer far more discrimination than whites. His outburst would appear to suggest that whites – and in this particular case, Hopkins – are more racist than any other race simply because of the colour of their skin. In which case, doesn’t that make Joly just as ‘racist’ as Hopkins?
Moreover, despite the implied meaning of Hopkins’ tweet being wholly justified, Joly provides no counter evidence whatsoever, preferring instead to slate Hopkins as an evil racist who has no right to exist, in full glare of his 220k Twitter followers. If Hopkins said Joly had no right to exist, she’d be accused of hate speech.
Is Joly in some twisted way really suggesting that indisputable statistics relating to black on black violent crime would somehow be further proof of whites discriminating against blacks?
Poor black people have suffered sooooo terribly and have been sooooo oppressed by evil, colonising whites that we must never blame blacks for continually beating and killing each other – it’s not their fault. Whites are the guilty ones! Just look at history!
Cue the Leftist Liberal segment of British society shrivelling yet again under the huge weight of white guilt imposed, this time, by a non-white stand-up comic. These virtue signallers then sing the praises of the latter whilst patting themselves on the back as Hopkins is forced to pull her opinion from public view.
As Hopkins’ deletion shows, speaking the truth is now a potential hate crime. Likewise and without exception, the main ‘anti-racist’ organisations in the UK are doing all they can to set legal precedents which will ensure that, in future, ethnic white Brits will be harshly punished for thinking aloud and stating verifiable fact.
Who are the people behind these ‘anti-racism’ organisations? I’ve already written about Fiyaz Mughal – former director of Islamophobia monitoring organisation Tell Mama – here. Suffice it to say that as well as trying to screw ordinary Brits, Tell Mama also does its best to mess with members of the very same community it claims to represent. With former CST Chairman Richard Benson as president, the fact that so many British Muslims have such little faith in Tell Mama is no real surprise.
Leaving aside Jewish lobbying group CST and militant wing CAA for the moment, I would like to concentrate on another ‘anti-racist’ organisation, Nick Lowles’ Hope Not Hate.
As well as functioning as a registered charity which receives government funding, Hope Not Hate is also a company whose directors include snivelling ex-Bicom Labour MP, Ruth Smeeth. Lowles and Smeeth are both perfect examples of the utter hypocrisy of such organisations which exalt the ideologies of multiculturalism and equality whilst keeping their professional interests strictly within their own kosher network.
Last month, the entire website archives of Hope Not Hate were wiped and, despite search results still appearing on Google, all past links now lead to 404s. Where, oh where have all Matt Collins‘ smear blogs gone?! Down the pan, along with Hope Not Hate’s ‘charitable’ status?
Does this wiping of years’ worth of archives have something to do with Lowles’ announcement also last month of his intention to sue Nigel Farage for a comment made on LBC radio last December? In response to a tweet by Brendan Cox (widower of murdered MP Jo Cox) describing Farage as an ‘extremist’, Farage said that Cox would know all about extremism because of his links with Hope Not Hate, an organisation which uses undemocratic tactics against its political enemies.
At the time, Lowles used his influence to persuade The Guardian to publish a whole swathe of articles condemning Farage from the likes of Owen Jones and, err, himself. Lowles’ piece trumpets ‘a huge response’ to his plea for donations required to serve justice on the despicable and hateful Farage. Five months on: Lowles re-launches Hope Hot Hate’s website, re-launches his intention to sue Farage and re-launches an appeal asking for £100,000 – also via The Guardian. On the original donation page from last December, a disclaimer reads that, in the eventuality of any settlement outside court, donated funds will be put to further good use battling hatred. If there was already a huge response last December, where’s the money now and why the need to set up a new fund?
And what about Brendan Cox’s role in all this? The last time I checked, the Jo Cox Fund had already overreached its target by almost £500,000 and the money is still flooding in. As Hope Not Hate is one of the fund’s main beneficiaries, why can’t Lowles dip into his part of the surplus – let alone into his part of the official target sum of £1.5m? Are Lowles and Cox taking the good-natured British public for a ride?
Perhaps afraid of pending legal consequences relating to his own organisation’s despicable record on targeting political enemies, Lowles should heed a similar case brought by Mughal against The Telegraph after columnist Andrew Gilligan also used the word ‘extremist’ in one of his articles to describe the then director of Tell Mama. Mughal lost his case, no doubt resulting in impending financial disaster for Tell Mama, thereafter heroically saved by the ensuing knight-in-shining-shekels arrival on the scene of Richard Benson.
Hope Not Hate’s dubious methods of trying to shame their political opponents into silence is common knowledge. Furthermore, Nigel Farage was criticising an organisation, not an individual.
Last night Hope Not Hate together with London Antifa managed to shut down a meeting of the Keep Talking Group which was due to host British author and historian Nick Kollerstrom speaking on the recent Westminster terror attack. Keep Talking is a non-politically aligned group which entertains speakers from a wide-ranging socio-political spectrum, including climate change skeptic, Piers Corbyn, and Danish false flag expert, Ole Dammergaard.
Hope Not Hate’s blog post, written by senior researcher Joe Mulhall (like Mughal, also a trustee at the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust) describes Kollerstrom as one of Britain’s ‘leading Holocaust deniers‘. In what way is last night’s attack – where an 80-year old attendee was injured – linked to last February’s similar assault at a London Forum meeting in Kensington? Is there any significance to the fact that the wiping of Hope Not Hate’s archives seems to coincide with Lowles now specifically targeting those associated with British nationalist intelligentsia and Jez Turner‘s London Forum? If so, then last night’s call out to Antifa gang thugs was surely a step too far?
‘Anti-hate’ groups which purport to uphold democratic values whilst behaving in direct opposition to such claims should be investigated – especially those masquerading as registered charities. These organisations’ main target is of course nationalism, which must not, at any cost, be allowed to flourish. ‘As we all know‘, pontificate Lowles, Cox, Mughal, Joly and an army of virtue-signalling leftist liberals, ‘Nationalism leads to death by insecticide poisoning on an industrial scale in gas chambers. Nationalism is the devil incarnate and those who partake must be burned at the stake – or at least executed socially and professionally. We will shut you down and burn all your books in the name of, err, anti-fascism.’
Don’t back the wrong horse and please don’t give your hard-earned money to traitorous scum who’ve grown rich and fat playing victim whilst tendering a begging bowl. True patriotic nationalism transcends any traditional concept of Left-Right political ideology. The primary aim of organisations such as Hope Not Hate, aided and abetted by the corrupt creeps currently in power at Westminster, is to banish any nationalistic notion from the public psyche in the name of multicultural diversity, globalism and the status quo.
Rather than continuing to subscribe to failed dogma, it would be far more productive to write letters of complaint to the Charity Commission and to your MP. Even better, check out local nationalist groups and see what’s happening in your area. And if you really want to annoy the likes of Lowles and his Soros-funded Antifa thug cronies, come along to the next meeting of the London Forum.