Turning Point: The Trial of Alison Chabloz

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)

Continue reading

Happy Birthday!

180608 survivors 1

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.

Continue reading

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 Information request provides ample confirmation of Crown witness and CAA Enforcer Steve 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!


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

Continue reading

Implication of the Prosecution’s case is that Truths could be illegal

By Robert Henderson

[AC: Many thanks to Robert for this account of last week’s Trial Part 1. Robert is no stranger to the negative effects of the UK’s speech laws. For more information, check out his blogs in the links below.]

The trial of Alison Chabloz day 1 – 10 1 2018

Presiding: District Judge John Zani sitting without a jury
Karen Robinson – Prosecuting counsel
Adrian Davies – Defence counsel
Witnesses for the Prosecution
Gideon Falter, chairman of the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA)
Stephen Silverman Director of Investigations and Enforcement CAA

Continue reading

Response to Matt Broomfield in The Independent

Broomfield did not have the courage to publish my comment below his article which appeared late last Sunday. Suspecting this might be the case, I made a copy. Firstly, here’s Broomfield’s section about me:

170507 alison independent

My unpublished comment:

As Matt Broomfield would appear to have sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people, it seems rather strange that he omits to mention references I made about Palestine in my songs and in my talk.

In fact, no doubt relying on memory, Broomfield also manages to misquote, misinterpret and mislead in regard to what I actually said that day. My performance was scripted and was filmed – although not uploaded to YouTube for reasons of jurisprudence.

I most certainly did not say I was in trouble “just for writing a few songs offensive to Jews”, nor did I add any “Come on!” following my remark about Professor Faurisson’s 88th birthday in Vichy.

Most perplexing of all is that this meeting took place three months ago in February, which perhaps partly explains Broomfield’s misquotes and omissions. The judge mentioned recused herself over a month ago and although I am certainly still on bail, this is not the same as being ‘out’ on bail.

Rather than play Kosher Brother, perhaps Broomfield could have investigated why British police closed their investigation into the online harassment and death threats I’ve received since 2015 – investigation closed just two weeks before I was arrested by the same police force for writing a couple of songs? Now that would have been some proper journalism – rather than the poisonous garbage he chooses to spread here.

Then again, Broomfield perhaps believes my grandfather, great-grandfather and countless others who died fighting for this country were fighting so that Brits would face prosecution in their own land for writing satirical songs which upset Jews? Would the author also argue that these men fought and died in order to give queer men the right to marry and adopt children?

And for all those on this thread rambling on and on about the ‘Holocaust’, why not show some proof – or at least accept an honourable debate – rather than trying to criminalise opinions.

***

Update: will Tommy ‘none of my friends and family are white’ Robinson be turning up at Broomfield’s house with a video camera? 

170509 robinson whine

Shoahism, Censorship and the Liberal Left

Yesterday, I received 50 legal request takedown notices from YouTube, informing me that my entire library of uploads spanning the past ten years has been removed in Austria, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Germany, France, French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Israel, Italy, Martinique, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, Poland, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, Reunion, French Southern Territories, Wallis and Futuna, Mayotte.

That’s approximately 260 million potential viewers who, if they’re not computer-savvy, are now deliberately deprived of my audio-visual output, whether it’s a subtitled translation of news from other revisionists, almost forgotten songs or short gardening tips. Account managers at the legal firm which issued the requests will be no doubt be satisfied, along with (((whoever))) ordered them to do the dirty on my entire channel. Or perhaps YouTube simply became fed up receiving multiple requests from whining lobbyists and just banned the whole lot in one go?

It’s hard to feel pleased about losing so many potential viewers in this way. At least, it can be said that this new dose of mass censorship of my work once again shows I must be doing something right.

Perhaps the legal action came about following my recent ban from Facebook during which I uploaded several videos on the plight of German revisionist and hero of our times, Horst Mahler. Sentenced to ten years and two months in prison, Mahler was freed under caution in 2015 after an untreated wound on his left foot became infected, meaning he had to undergo amputation below the knee. Always the rebel, Mahler gave a speech last January which is truly inspiring. You can find the subtitled version here and my shorter uploads on the same subject here. My first upload is now approaching 12,000 views in just 12 days which won’t have pleased lobbying organisations. Alfred Schaefer’s voiceover version of the same video was shared on platforms such as Renegade Tribune, further helping to raise awareness of Mahler’s situation and the utter hypocrisy of draconian thought crime laws which exist in so-called free, democratic nations. It just goes to show how desperate our traditional enemies are when the wheels of justice are set in motion in order to silence an 81-year old amputee: in these same countries, rapists and murders get off with far lighter sentences.

Censorship of this kind – initiated as ever by the same traditional enemy – is only to be expected and should be taken as a shining badge of honour. It costs them both time and money. Regards Mahler’s message, the banning of my videos also came too late as Mahler has managed to flee Germany and is now in a safe place from where he intends to seek political asylum.

However, should censorship – and indeed self-censorship – coming from those on the Liberal Left be taken equally seriously? I’ve tweeted (when I still had a Twitter), written and sung about Ken Livingstone and the Haavara Agreement. I also supported, among others, Jackie Walker when she became a target of the Israel lobby for pointing out the major role played by Jews in the Transatlantic slave trade as well as asking why the Holocaustᵀᴹ was privileged in comparison to other [verifiable] genocides. However, my sympathy for the Left stops short when, in return for my words of support, I am treated with even more contempt by these Liberal Leftists than I am by our traditional enemy lobbyists.

Hailing from mid-Wales, Mike Sivier is a Labour candidate in next week’s local elections. He also writes a blog Vox Political. Sivier is the latest victim of the Campaign Against Antisemitism’s all-out dastardly scheme to silence anyone they dislike. Alongside the lesser sins of criticising Israel and Zionism as well as voicing support for Livingstone, Sivier had had the gall to quote Gilad Atzmon. Worse still: yesterday in response to a typical CAA smear op, Sivier posted a blog in which he was misguided to the point of including a quote from yours truly.  As if citing far right Holocaust denier Atzmon wasn’t bad enough, Sivier now collaborates with a genuine Nazi!

170427 genuine Nazi

To be fair, Sivier did have the guts to publish my comment and he even replied. However, to all intents and purposes, Sivier must have quickly begun to reflect on what was more important: truth or his own fledgling political career. His final answer to my second comment says it all: Sivier is a Shoahist who believes Jews should be treated differently from the rest of us. My further replies are still awaiting moderation

170427 sivier blog

As Canadian free speech advocate Paul Fromm recently said: if you can’t name the problem, then the problem can’t be solved. The enemies of free speech grow evermore desperate to suppress the truth and the more they try, the deeper the hole they dig for themselves. Revisionism and the truth about what really happened during World War Two can no longer be suppressed. In terms of advertising and marketing, society will soon reach tipping point and the true, verifiable version of history will be adopted by the masses.

Using smear tactics to silence political enemies and the law to replace the concept of true or false with the concept of what is acceptable or unacceptable to Jews – Shoahism or antisemitism – has had the opposite effect to the one originally intended. Sooner rather than later, more people will start to seek the truth and speak out. As always, our traditional enemy could have avoided all this happening. Alas, they never learn.

(((The People))) Attempting to Stab British Voters in the Back

By Dr. Andrew Joyce.

Much ink has recently been spilled on the efforts of the Mischon de Reya law firm to “derail” Brexit. Considerably less attention has been paid to its very Jewish origins and ethos. The firm was founded by the son of a rabbi in 1937 and has made a habit of finding its way into influential cases dealing with facets of cultural marxism including, but not limited to, the redefinition of marriage, ‘racial discrimination,’ and ‘race relations.’ The Daily Mail (link below) reports that the firm, which has been accused of “treason,” “would not name any clients linked to its Brexit action – and would not confirm if it had worked for free.” However, it also reports that one of the most influential figures in the current effort is Jewish property speculator Alex Chesterman.

The Jewish Chronicle reported back in June that one of Mischon de Reya’s directors, Lord Pannick QC, who is also Jewish, complained to the Royal Courts of Justice that his staff had been subjected to “anti-Semitic abuse” for their actions against Brexit (the majority of de Reya partners being London or New York Jews). It is truly a sign of the times that Pannick’s panic was, sadly and predictably, heard by the equally Jewish Sir Brian Leveson. Pannick asked Leveson whether the names of claimants should be redacted, given the abuse, saying: “People have been deterred from [making legal claims].” By this, Lord Pannick must surely have inferred that Jews have been hindered in the attempts to co-ordinate an influential assault on Brexit. The Jewish Leveson of course acceded to the request of the Jewish Pannick, with the result that the anti-Brexit backstabbers are now operating behind a legally imposed veil.

What is Mischon de Reya hiding? Who comprises their client list? Who is stabbing the British in the back?

Of course, one of the more infamous of Mischon de Reya’s current crop of lawyers is Anthony Julius. While studying English literature at Cambridge University between 1974 and 1977, Julius placed himself “among those Jews who have sought out anti-Semitism.” He admits to becoming part of a “radical faction” which emerged in the humanities at that time, and that he was heavily influenced by his reading of “Freud … and the line of Western Marxist thinking that can be traced from the Austro-Marxists through to Antonio Gramsci and the Frankfurt School.” After graduating Julius went to law school and, when he finished there, he started his career as an ethnic activist by becoming chief lawyer to the British Board of Deputies of British Jews, an organization comprising elements of both the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League. In 1983 he successfully defended the Board of Deputies when it was sued by a Conservative Party candidate. The Board of Deputies had conducted a propaganda campaign, distributing flyers in the candidate’s constituency during a General Election detailing his previous involvement with the National Front, an association the Board of Deputies claimed was evidence of the man’s anti-Semitism. In 1992, after he was expelled from Canada, David Irving applied for access to the documents which provoked his expulsion under Canada’s Access to Information Law. Among these documents “Irving claimed, was a dossier on his activities compiled by the Board of Deputies of British Jews and sent to the Canadian authorities. Irving wanted to sue for libel, but Julius, who acted for the Board, said that Irving was ‘sadly too late’ in filing the proper papers.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3901568/Top-City-law-firm-led-High-Court-bid-stop-PM-triggering-Brexit-won-t-reveal-fat-cats-working-for.html