Alison Chabloz is the latest in a long line of brave political dissidents whose only crime has been to speak truth to power.
ALISON CHABLOZ: GUILTY OF ‘HOLOCAUST DENIAL’?
‘The further a society drifts from the truth,
the more it will hate those who speak it.”
— George Orwell
Here is Alison Chabloz on her blog yesterday, as feisty and defiant as ever: “An article online published last Thursday by despicable Zionist rag, UK Jewish News, claims I am again under police investigation. The flurry of emails to my inbox from all over the world leads me to write a general update here rather than keep repeating myself in replies to those devoted to the Revisionist Cause.”
According to Alison, she has been reported to the Derbyshire Constabulary for breaching her suspended sentence order by three separate organizations. The first is allegedly the Probation Service. As Alison points out correctly, the Probation Service would hardly have complained to the police about her behaviour without first asking her why she had misbehaved. They had not done this, clearly proving that she had not misbehaved in any way.
The other two organizations that had tried to make mischief for Alison were both Jewish: The Jewish News and Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), the latter being led by the ultra-Zionist fanatic Gideon Falter (pictured here). Both these vindictive agitprop organizations have axes to grind against outspoken anti-Zionsts like Alison Chabloz, so their reports must be taken with a pinch of salt. Malice and mendacity, it is generally thought, are only to be expected from powerful bullies like these.
Here is what the scurrilous Jewish News has to say about Alison:
Jewish News alerts authorities to fresh material in which the artist says the Shoah is a “gargantuan accumulation of nonsense”. The hate singer (sic) convicted of posting “grossly offensive” material mocking the Holocaust is back under investigation, Jewish News understands.
Alison Chabloz from Derbyshire, who was given a two-year suspended sentence after being convicted of charges relating to three of her songs in May, was at it again earlier this month, in a blog post. The police investigation refers to comments she posted following the death of French Jewish film-maker Claude Lanzmann, whose seminal work, Shoah, is credited with helping a generation understand the horrors of the Holocaust.
In it, she appears to call the Holocaust a “gargantuan accumulation of nonsense, bound together by an endless string of gossip, relayed to us as gospel truth by our controlled media, our so-called democratic leaders and the brainwashed masses”.
I find the use of the word “appears” rather strange. Did Alison call the Holocaust “a gargantuan accumulation of nonsense” or did she only “appear” to call it that? Why the implied doubt? Did she insult the Holocaust or only appear to insult it?
The paper continues in a scatty vein:
She [Alison Chabloz] also says she was convicted “for offending the likes of Irene Zisblatt and Elie Wiesel” and refers to Holocaust-era shower heads as providing “Nazi atrocity porn exhibits”, a comment she then refers to as “crass humour”.
Jewish News understands that the article was referred to the police by the Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire and Rutland Community Rehabilitation Company, a private-sector supplier of probation and prison rehabilitation services.
Officers from Derbyshire Constabulary are understood to be investigating. (Italics added)
The repeated use of the verb “understand/understood” is highly suspicious. It introduces doubt and offers an escape clause, just like the verb “appears”. If you say something is “understood” to have taken place, you are wiggling out of saying that it actually did take place.
The Jewish News article continues:
While not commenting on individual cases, a Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “Suspended sentences include strict conditions which, if breached, can result in further punishment, including time behind bars.”
At her trial in May, brought by Campaign Against Antisemitism, Chabloz was convicted of two counts of sending an offensive, indecent or menacing message through a public communications network and a third charge relating to a song on YouTube. She was sentenced to 20 weeks’ imprisonment, suspended for two years, and banned from posting anything on social media for 12 months.
Stephen Silverman of Campaign Against Antisemitism: “Alison Chabloz is under investigation for alleged further offences after Campaign Against Antisemitism reported two blog posts to the police. We believe these posts may also constitute breaches of her suspended prison sentence.”
It’s all very vague and woolly, isn’t it? Is Alison Chabloz guilty of horrendous crimes or only of alleged horrendous crimes?
Why would anyone get so angry about alleged crimes?
Surely it’s best to wait and see if any crimes have actually been committed before you start throwing your toys out of the pram?
— § —
Today, 5th August 2018, marks exactly a year since the death of Holocaust revisionist Ernst Zündel, one in a long line of scholarly dissidents who have been put behind bars for doubting the three obligatory “truths” of Holocaustianity: (1) that Hitler ordered the ‘Final Solution’ or mass extermination of the Jews; (2) that 6 million Jews died in WWII as a result of this genocidal program; and (3) that this mass murder of Jews took place in gas chambers.
Though there is no documentary evidence that Hitler gave any such order, though the 6 million figure has been proved to be false by several million, and though not a single gas chamber has yet to be found anywhere except fake ones, are three inconvenient facts that must on no account be mentioned. Doing so is a heinous crime in seventeen countries and is regarded as unmentionable, if not a sacrilege, even in countries where free speech is still nominally permissible on this sensitive topic.
ERNST ZUNDEL AND HIS WIFE INGRID IN HAPPIER DAYS
Ernst died exactly a year ago in Germany, a broken man. His beloved wife Ingrid, with whom I was on friendly terms during her last illness, survived Ernst by two months. Her final email to me entered my inbox only a few days before her unexpected death.
Allow me to quote extensively from a recent article on Zündel:
August 5, 2018 marks the one year anniversary of Ernst Zündel’s passing. He was essentially kidnapped from the US and forced to remain in Germany. His wife, Ingrid Rimland, was unable to leave the US to be with him. She risked jail time in Germany despite having no previous criminal convictions.
His crime? Ernst Zündel was deemed a “security threat.” Not because he was ever violent or ever incited violence, but because he created a legal precedent in which, for the first time ever, “Holocaust” survivors and “Holocaust” historians were closely and critically questioned under oath about their claims and views.
Ernst Zündel (1939-2017) was a German-born publisher, author and civil rights activist, who emigrated to Canada at the age of 19. He became a successful graphic artist, with his work appearing on the front cover of Canada’s national news magazine, Maclean’s. Setting aside his thriving career, he dedicated himself to the great task, as he saw it, of redeeming the sullied reputation of his fellow Germans.
For seven years he was held behind bars, first in Canada and then in Germany, solely for the peaceful expression of non-conformist views. For some time he was the most prominent political prisoner in the western world.
Zündel was an outgoing, good-humored man who was blessed with a rare combination of unflagging optimism and practical ability. He was perhaps best known as the defiant defendant in the much-publicized “Holocaust Trials” of 1985 and 1988. He was brought to court in Toronto on a charge of “publishing false news,” and specifically for publishing a reprint edition of a booklet entitled Did Six Million Really Die?
Zündel’s two lengthy trials were something close to full scale debates on the Holocaust issue. For the first time ever, “Holocaust” survivors and “Holocaust” historians were closely and critically questioned under oath about their claims and views. To wage the legal battle that was forced upon him, he brought together an impressive international team of researchers, legal specialists and scholars. From numerous libraries and archives in North America and Europe, this group assembled at the “Zündelhaus” in Toronto one of the most extensive collections of evidence anywhere on this chapter of history.
Among those who testified on Zündel’s behalf in the trials were Robert Faurisson, David Irving, Mark Weber, William Lindsey, Udo Walendy, and Bradley Smith. As a result of the two trials, an enormous quantity of evidence and testimony challenging the prevailing Holocaust narrative was presented to the court and thereby was made part of the permanent public record. Perhaps the most important evidence was the historic testimony of American gas chamber expert Fred Leuchter concerning his on-site forensic examination of the alleged extermination gas chambers in Poland.
Zündel was found guilty in the 1985 trial, but the verdict was set aside by the provincial appeals court. It ruled that the judge in that trial had, among other things, given improper instructions to the jury, and had improperly excluded defense evidence. At the conclusion of the second Zündel trial in May 1988, a jury declared him guilty. A few days later, he was sentenced to nine months imprisonment.
French scholar Robert Faurisson wrote at the time: “Zündel may once again go to prison for his research and beliefs or be threatened with deportation. All this is possible. Anything may happen when there is an intellectual crisis and a realignment of historical concepts of such a dimension. Revisionism is the great intellectual adventure of the end of this century. Whatever happens, Ernst Zündel is already the victor.”
On appeal, Canada’s Supreme Court threw out the 1988 conviction, declaring on August 27, 1992, that the archaic “false news” law under which Zündel had been tried and convicted was a violation of the country’s Charter of Rights. This was more than a personal vindication by Canada’s highest court; Ernst Zündel secured an important victory for the rights of all Canadians.
His next great legal battle was fought before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in Toronto. The charges, instigated by Jewish groups, accused Zündel of promoting “hatred or contempt” against Jews through the “Zündelsite” website operated by Ingrid Rimland from the United States. In this legal action, as the Tribunal’s presiding Commissioner declared, the truth or validity of the supposedly “hateful” items was not a consideration. (Ultimately the Tribunal declared the “Zündelsite” to be unlawful, but because it is based in the U.S., the ruling has been unenforceable).
During the 42 years he lived in Canada (1958-2000), Ernst Zündel was never convicted of a crime. He was, however, repeatedly a victim of violence and hate. He survived three assassination attempts, including by arson and pipe bomb. Even Irv Rubin, the American Jewish Defence League leader was caught breaking into Zündel’s home with a member of the “Jewish Armed Resistance Movement” who had previously claimed responsibility for one of the arson attacks. He also endured years of legal harassment and repeated imprisonment.
After more than four decades in Canada, including a failed effort to acquire Canadian citizenship, Zündel moved to the United States. On February 5, 2003, Ernst Zündel was arrested at home in the mountain region of eastern Tennessee. After being held for two weeks, he was deported to Canada. For two years, he was held in solitary confinement in the Toronto West Detention Centre as a supposed threat to national security.
His arrest and detention generated wide media attention. A few Canadian newspapers and several independent analysts acknowledged the injustice of his incarceration. The country’s most prestigious daily, the Toronto Globe and Mail, affirmed in an editorial (“Zündel doesn’t warrant a security certificate,” March 6, 2004) that he posed no risk to people or property, and that he was being held unjustly on a bogus “guilt by association” pretext. “He has never been charged with a violent crime and does not urge others to commit violence,” the editorial noted. “The real danger to Canadians,” it concluded, comes not from individuals like Zündel, “but from a government that casually discards their most precious rights.”
On March 1, 2005, Zündel was deported to Germany, just as Jewish groups had been demanding. Upon his arrival at Frankfurt airport, he was immediately arrested and taken to Mannheim prison to await trial for the “thought crime” of “denying the Holocaust.” A few months later the public prosecutor in Mannheim formally charged Zündel with inciting “hatred” by having written or distributed texts that “approve, deny or play down” genocidal actions carried out by Germany’s wartime regime, and which “denigrate the memory of the Jewish dead.”
Jewish groups quickly, and predictably, expressed approval of the verdict.
Zündel was released from prison on March 1, 2010 — five years after his deportation to Germany, and three years after his conviction by a court in Mannheim. Banned from returning to either Canada or the US, he went to his family home in Germany’s Black Forest region, where he resided until his death. Unable to leave the US. and be with him, his wife Ingrid Rimland died two months later.
And so the persecution of Holocaust revisionists continues. Ursula Haverbeck was jailed recently in Germany at the age of 89. Canadian Monika Schaefer has been held in a German prison for six months without receiving a proper trial. “She and her brother Alfred,” we are told, “are now engaged in a trial so bizarre she had to be escorted from the court room in handcuffs because Alfred defied the judge and took a sip of water…”
Alison Chabloz (left), Ursula Haverbeck (centre), Monika Schaefer (right)
“I for one refuse to bow to pressure. We must do what the journalistic hack and tenured academic will not: speak truth to power.” — Dr Matthew Raphael Johnson
Alison Chabloz is now in the Jewish cross-hairs. Her friend Jez Turner (pictured), another patriotic Brit who wouldn’t harm a fly, has just been put behind bars for ruffling Jewish feathers. The persecution of political dissidents who have fallen foul of the Jews increases exponentially by the day. Personally, I don’t think locking up all these intelligent researchers for daring to stand up to Jewish power is going to make the Jewish problem go away.
If this is how the Jews hope to win friends and influence people, by locking up people who refuse to accept their official definition of anti-Semitism, or who dare to criticize Israel and cast doubts on the Holocaust, they are barking up the wrong tree.
They might as well start building prisons on every street corner.