During the years I spent teaching in Swiss secondary schools, in-training days were often orientated towards how to motivate a class of musically mixed-ability teenagers to sing together tunefully and with conviction. One of these training days I remember in particular, given by a male colleague who, during a football World Cup championship, had filmed all the participating teams singing their respective national anthems. The lesson was clear: more often than not, teams who sang with passion and heartfelt conviction went on to gain satisfactory results.
International sporting events have long been one of the subtle ways by which Globalists have been able to implement their agenda of mass non-white immigration into European countries. Most noticeable in football, cricket and athletics, multiracial “national” teams have in recent decades become increasingly present on track, field and pitch. Can a cricketer, for example of Pakistani origin born in England, truly harbour the same patriotism for his adoptive country than an Englishman born and bred in England whose northern European genetic makeup is an integral part of his origin and identity?
Sporting professionals who happen to be British citizens born of foreign parents have the choice whether they compete for Britain or for the country from which their parents originated. Is this fair? Does this not raise questions of possible conspiracy? Would this be one reason why English national teams in so many disciplines tend to produce disappointing results?
By Robert Faurisson.
On January 16 of this year Henry Herskovitz spoke out against the persecution by Jewish organisations of the Briton Alison Chabloz and the Canadian Monika Schaefer (the latter has now been imprisoned in Germany for nearly 200 days). Both women had expressed, particularly in videos posted on the internet, their revisionist convictions.
H. Herskovitz is a retired engineer living in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He was a friend of the late Ernst Zündel. He is Jewish, a revisionist and has long been active against both the policies of the State of Israel and international Zionism; he defends the Palestinian cause.
Six months ago he was able to read aloud the text of his statement in support of the two brave female revisionists before Ann Arbor city council (see the video above running 3 m. 47 s.).
Today the names of the Englishwoman Michèle Renouf, the grand German lady Ursula Haverbeck, the Frenchwoman Maria Poumier and several other representatives of the allegedly “weaker” sex are associated with theirs.
Click here to view original article which includes video footage of Mr Herskovitz’ speech.
First off, thank you for all the wonderful messages of support and for the donations. My apologies for not yet having replied individually to everyone – I have spent the past week answering emails and have still not managed to clear my inbox. If I may ask those waiting for a reply to exercise a little patience, I will do my best to respond as soon as time permits.
Two nights ago, I watched a BBC Newsnight report on an exhibition about censorship of music in Stalin’s Soviet Union, currently doing the rounds in Tel Aviv(!) before coming to London. Stalin banned all genres of music which he found ‘un-Soviet like’ – not just rock ‘n’ roll, but also traditional Russian folk tunes. Dissidents found a way to record songs on x-ray film: the exhibition features these medical scans of human bones, engraved with ‘Rock Around the Clock’ and other classics. But for me the most interesting part of the BBC report concerned a Haifa-based Palestinian Arab musician, Jowan Safadi, arrested and charged for incitement because of a song performed at a music festival in 2010.
By Karl Radl, first published by Semitic Controversies. Reproduced with kind permission.
Alison Chabloz – the heroic lady who poked fun at the great shibboleth of modern times aka the so-called ‘Holocaust’ – was convicted of uploading ‘three grossly offensive’ songs on YouTube by a Magistrates Court presided over by Judge John Zani. (1) Zani is himself the descendant of Italian immigrants to the UK. (2)
Despite the assorted hype being used by jewish publications like Jewish News – the Times of Israel’s UK subsidiary – claiming that Zani’s verdict was damning. (3) The fact of the matter is that ‘Chabloz was convicted under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 after District Judge John Zani found the material to be “grossly offensive”. There is no law specifically against Holocaust denial in the UK.’ (4)
While the Jewish Chronicle buried the following important observation at the very end of their article: ‘Because District Judge Zani’s ruling was at a magistrates’ court, it does not set a binding precedent.’ (5)
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.
Today, I watched Vincent Lapierre’s EetR report on last week’s hearing at the court of appeal in Paris where patriot and author, Hervé Ryssen, stated his case against a 17-month prison sentence demanded by the state procurator and usual anti-racist [sic] busybody organisations (LICRA, SOS Racisme, Jewish Students Union, etc.)
In just nine days’ time, I will once again be in court, on this occasion for my long-awaited trial. Of course, there is no guarantee that proceedings will be over there and then: the enemies of freedom and justice have a nasty habit of trying to drag things out for as long as possible, in the hope of extracting a guilty plea from those they take sadistic pleasure in persecuting. As my father would say: they can whistle!
On the Campaign Against Antisemitism’s website, there is a fairly recent article written in typically gloating fashion concerning my prosecution (for singing songs) which states that Alison Chabloz is not ‘an important person’. Those at the CAA helm, on the other hand, clearly do consider themselves to be important, a fact outlined in numerous articles brimming with over-inflated rhetoric and self-praise. No holds barred when it comes to CAA’s own admissions to meddling with the authorities, producing yet more anti-white ‘Holocaust’ propaganda, currying favour with high-ranking government officials via social invitations and meetings during which the obvious aim is to influence chief constables, police and crime commissioners, judges and anyone else they can manipulate.