Reflections on the Chabloz Case

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 Vashem Holocaust 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 Act reveal 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.

37 replies
  1. Robert Henderson
    Robert Henderson says:

    It is objectively impossible to distinguish between lesser and greater degrees of insult. Then there is the function of criticism in a democracy. The idea that there can be limits to insult in a democracy is chilling. Moreover, there is a long tradition in England of the most devastating political insults most notably in the cartoons of the likes of Gilray and Rowlandson. Take away the freedom to be as insulting as you like and British politics would become a constricted fearful business. Indeed, this is already happening for political correctness generally is being imposed through a mixture of the criminalising of opinions which oppose the dictates of political correctness and the non-legal penalties such as being driven out of a job.
    It is also a fact that laws relating to “hate crimes” are rarely if ever applied to the politically correct. Indeed, the claim by the prosecution that ‘ by the standards of an open and multi-racial society, they [the songs] are grossly offensive’” is an unequivocal statement of politically correctness . It assumes that the standards of political correctness on the subject of race are shared by the vast majority of the UK population for unless they are shared by the vast majority they cannot be the standards by which UK society operates.
    There is strong objective evidence that the standards of an open and multi-racial society are not the standards which the large majority of the UK population shares. Polls on immigration consistently show a solid majority of those polled concerned about immigration and its effects. This concern played a strong role in achieving the Brexit vote. Research by the think tank British Future published in 2014 found a strong majority for ending mass immigration and 25% of those questioned wanted the removal of all immigrants already in the UK.

    Truths are often “grossly insulting”. The implication of the Prosecution’s case is that truths could be illegal.
    The accusations in Miss Chabloz’s songs of falsehood and misrepresentation by the likes of Holocaust survivor Irene Zysblat, the Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel, and the teenage diarist Anne have substance as Adrian Davies showed during his efficient cross examination.

    I found both the CAA’s witnesses unconvincing . Falter was simply feeble. Not only was he unfamiliar with texts which one would have thought he would have known, he gave signs of working from a prepared script, always a fatal thing for someone under cross examination because all the cross examiner has got to do it keep pressing buttons until the inevitable happens and the prepared script fails to provide meaningful answers.

    Silverman was more assured and collected but his performance when being questioned by prosecuting counsel was giving evidence by numbers. He gave explanations for various words and phrases but they were for the most part obvious to any non-Jew. He didn’t add much to the evidence available simply by reading or listening to the song lyrics. His explanation of the word “goy” (plural goyim) was of interest because he falsely said it was a non-offensive word for non-Jews.

    Miss Chabloz performances of her songs is accomplished . These are not easy songs to deliver not least because of the complexity and sophistication of her lyrics. Her enunciation is first class. That she executes the songs well and they are very lively and engaging musically may help her case. It is one thing to express sentiments in a speech, quite another in a song. When it is done in song

  2. Pierre le Blanc
    Pierre le Blanc says:

    Unlike some people who find themselves in this situation, she is staying put and not bowing down to {{{them}}}, no retraction, no excuses. Way to go Girl, you are a brave soul, a hero, everyone needs to look up to and emulate. If a hundred people like her stood up to {{{them}}} at the same time, we could whip {{{them}}} in a jiffy. This has to stop, so many people know by now, it is funny.

  3. Sophie Johnson
    Sophie Johnson says:

    Your authoritative voice is always very welcome, Dr Kollestrom, but especially so now. Your opinion: ‘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’ provoked my cheer, as I’m sure it did that of all friends and well-wishers of Alison Chabloz.

    But, alongside Alison’s many supporters, there are also vicious detractors bent on her destruction. They are not only the CAA people, but also some quite unlikely others. Notably, there is Archbishop Justin Welby. He referenced Alison’s trial at a speech he delivered at the Foreign Office in which he equated her position with ‘antisemitism’, and called for collective action against her/antisemitism: (

    Does Welby have any idea that Alison was brought to court by an extraordinary route, and despite the DPP’s previous decision not to prosecute her? Does that make him wonder whether her prosecution might be unjust? Does he know of the nasty harassment (including six arrests, handcuffings and lockings up for days and long hours by police, at least once, for six hours, in an unheated police van not equipped even with seating, on pretext of breach of bail conditions) to which Alison has been subjected? Or is he just happy to lend his weight to the CAA for reason alone that it is a Jewish organisation, and thus to cock a snook at justice? I suspect the latter. But will he be allowed to get away with this? It is, surely, contempt of court, for he has attempted to direct the outcome of a court hearing.

    • Jörgen
      Jörgen says:

      I may be wrong, but isn’t Justin Welby, by definition, what used to be referred to as a “crypto jew” or a “converso” as in Spain’s troubled history (i. e. a first generation “christian” convert of Jewish origin)? if so, of course his loyalties will lie in that direction. (I recall reading an article at the time of his “ordination” that this was the first time, in its long history, that the CofE has been led by a person of such recent Jewish origin)
      Of course, I may be wrong and if so – I sincerely apologise for any offence caused to Mr Welby and his kind 😉

      • Nigel
        Nigel says:

        His father, Gavin Welby, was the son of German-Jewish immigrant Bernard Weiler, who changed his name to Welby shortly after the outbreak of World War One. However, Justin is actually a bastard. His mother had a short relationship with Churchill’s private secretary Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who was outed as Justin Welby’s real father in 2016.

    • Arlene Johnson
      Arlene Johnson says:

      Not only is Justin Welby a Jew, but he is also a member of The Pilgrims Society. See under Archbishop of Canterbury, not under W for Welby. Therefore it’s despicable that he is doing this to Alison Chabloz who is an Englishwoman. If he thinks that by getting her convicted that none of us who know the truth about the so called holocaust, he has got a fight on his hands, because my role in life is to expose the lies that people state regardless what their religious affiliation is.


      Arlene Johnson
      To access the rest of my work, which is internationally acclaimed, click on the icon that says Magazine.

  4. John Clark
    John Clark says:

    Interesting is”nt it, when a “performer”, in the context of a comedy dialog, can get away with such an insulting Hate-Filled comment as “I hope the Jews did kill Jesus, I”d do it again in a second”.
    Where is outrage from the leader of COE Welby.
    AH I get it, the performer is Jewish.
    Never heard any brave comedian, freedom of speech/expression lovers, utter similar insults about MOH……. better not, Google”s new 30,000 Watchers for internet trigger words proles may call.

  5. Vajkard
    Vajkard says:

    The British allegedly possess a great sense of humour, which seems to me to be just a convenient excuse to avoid dead serious questions and to suppress actions. There is nothing responsible or noble in a cynic and a coward.

    Now they won’t be even allowed to crack jokes anymore. And this is what I find genuinely funny.

  6. Antony
    Antony says:

    What an absurd prosecution, UK law has been tightened up to prevent “stereotyping” of Jews, aside from the fact that stereotypes have a large basis in reality, some classical works such as the figure of Shylock in Shakespeare’s “Merchant Of Venice” could be considered stereotypes – why don’t they mount a prosecution on this ?! ; similarly, the world renowned Sex Pistols brought out the “edgy” song “Belsen Was A Gas”, purchased and enjoyed by millions the world over – there was also a version with the train robber Ronnie Biggs doing the vocals, for all the music afficionados out there ;

    • Ritual
      Ritual says:

      I think the Sex Pistols were pioneers in extreme White implicitness since they violated ‘cool’ and that’s what made them such a unique phenomena in the late 1970’s.

      I think the whole ‘cool’ thing is a psychological device to force conformity to a non-White agenda.

      • Ned McLoser
        Ned McLoser says:

        Agree. Johnny Rotten also made fun of Clash leader Joe Strummer. The Clash derived their lyrics from Mao’s Little Red Book and were the most fashionable punk band. Graham Parker was not quite punk — a little before that — but he was pro-life which is pretty amazing for the music business. But I don’t think the Belsen song was ever intended to be critical or disrespectful of Jews.

    • Ned McLoser
      Ned McLoser says:

      The ADL tried to ban Merchant of Venice but after all it’s Shakespeare and several centuries old. The Sex Pistols were never intentionally anti-Semitic. The only such song I can think of is Frank Zappa’s Jewish Princess, which is not a very serious song. Also, Randy Newman’s song ‘Rednecks’ begins with an anti-Semitic monologue but since Newman is an LA Jew known for playing devil’s advocate and trolling his audience, he more or less got away with it. Sarah Silverman’s comment could be taken as tongue-in-cheek. She is another person whose act is built around provocation. One of her lyrics goes “I love you more than bears like honey, I love you more than Jews like money …” I admit that she seems to savor the possibility that she might really mean it, and some of the audience hesitantly applauded the line “I’d do it again” in the video clip I saw. But all these cases are more ambiguous and involve artists with a history of provocative speech on numerous subjects.

  7. Peter
    Peter says:

    Thank you Dr. Kollerstrom. For over four decades myself and millions of other Germans have felt one of these emotions on a daily basis, unable to pick up the days newspaper or turn on the TV without feeling one of these emotions, “‘offend, shock or disturb the state or any sector of the population’, due to Jewish racial hatred and billions of their dupes around the world. I still recall when my Jewish teacher assured me Germans made Jews into soap and lampshades in the early 1970’s when I objected to his claim. When I brought this and other wisdom from the Jew home to my parents, my upset German father almost threw a chair through the kitchen window before my mother stopped him. I hope Ms. Chabloz is only the beginning. I want the Jews to be mentally tortured until they commit suicide, just as they have done to the Germans.

    Former Wehrmacht soldier commits suicide by self immolation in front of the Feldherrenhalle in Munich, 1995. His farewell letter says “Fifty years of unrelenting smear campaigns and demonization of an entire people are enough…”.

    • Lucy
      Lucy says:

      Dear Peter!
      Even though I’m of Polish descent, which according to the (((patriotic))) propaganda that reigns supreme in Poland, I find smearing and demonization of the highly civilized German people a disgrace and an insult to my intelligence, to say the least. Such a shame that most White people have lost their ability to think for themselves, as they rely on the narrative the (((geniuses))) – and their with shekel besotted admirers – have showered the world with, despite that we nowadays have access to sources that refute (((their))) version.

      • Peter
        Peter says:

        Thank you Lucy. It’s nice what you wrote. Maybe the tide is turning. More people are speaking their minds. Thank you to Ned and Sophie too.

    • Ned McLoser
      Ned McLoser says:

      I don’t understand why nobody ever fights back. I’m told that Europe has no tradition of free speech. Maybe not but it has a tradition of nationalism. Are there no high IQ, dedicated nationalist dissidents? It seems like they are very rare birds and that most Germans and other Europeans are content with the “New World Order.”

    • Sophie Johnson
      Sophie Johnson says:

      This is a very, very sad, Peter, bot for your own experience and the tragic death of the old soldier. I do hope that Germand have had enough, and the tide it is turning. God bless you all.

    • Sophie Johnson
      Sophie Johnson says:

      This is a very, very sad history, Peter. I hope and pray that Germans are at last ceasing to be victims of Jewish lies and blood libel. God bless you all.

  8. Grauhund
    Grauhund says:

    One thing Jews hate above all else is not being taken seriously. One hears Jews often use the adjective “serious” when describing a right-thinking Jewish intelectual. The use of humor against thier ridiculous claims will be thier undoing. GOD HIMSELF WILL LAUGH AS THE WISE ARE MADE FOOLS.

  9. Rob Bottom
    Rob Bottom says:

    The CAA operatives should be on trial for sending death threats. It ought to be an open and shut case, with them admitting their identities under oath. Surely something must be done about it? You have patriots being rounded up for posting their opinions on the migrant crisis via social media, why are these Jewish losers above the law?

  10. Ricky
    Ricky says:

    The Germans probably made a miscalculation be arresting Monika Schaefer for her videos, and putting her in a maximum security jail. Having said that, Schaefer was an idiot for uploading the videos while in Germany. She should have done it in Canada where she lived, and where it is legal. It’s frustrating when people make such obvious mistakes.

  11. sean
    sean says:

    I suggest that Alison be cloned a thousand times so (((they))) get confused, which of the Shablozes is singing and which is having a vacation in Hawaii ?.
    I am denied access to darkmoon’s web site, can any one tell me if it is still running? Thanks in advance.

  12. annoyeur
    annoyeur says:

    The people who are primarily responsible for this mess – criminalisation for “offensive” and “annoying” electronic communications – are the MPs who passed this degenerate, repressive legislation in the first place.

    I hope Mrs Chabloz’s counsel strenuously resisted yet another adjournment. What happened to justice not only being done and being seen to be done, but being done expeditiously? These proceedings – at the lowest rung of the judicial hierarchy – have been going on for well over a year – or is it now two?

    “we heard him swear the oath, to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”

    Did counsel enquire whether Mr Falter had intoned the Jewish Prayer of Kol Nidre (annulment of all oaths, undertakings etc) this last Jewish New Year or ever? This is not some WN fantasy, it is documented and for ease of reference you may hear the late Benjamin Freedman discuss it briefly in his 1961 Washington DC speech (the 2h+ long unexpurgated version, that is). The only prayer for which the congregation stands.
    Or does etiquette of the Bar preclude such intrusions?
    How many religious Jew judges have intoned Kol Nidre before being sworn on their appointment?

    Meantime is it still “silence is golden” regarding
    i) “Ex Zionist Fed boss tries to buy District Judge’s favour”

    ii) Bahar “Kill All White Men” Mustafa – CPS non-prosecution review, last report seen November 2015.

    Welby is still a mamzer, just a different one from that which we originally thought (Montague should generally be (((Montague))) – no?

    • Sophie Johnson
      Sophie Johnson says:

      Everything you say, annoyeur, is perfect good sense, as we all know. But we know also that no court or legislature will recognise what you say, let alone live by it. Yet we go about our business, not bothering the status quo one bit. Why? When shall we say ‘enough!’? Or shall we always just sit back, leaving the work to the shining stars of human decency like Alison Chabloz, Monika Schaefer, Silvia Stolz, Ursula Haverbeck, Jez Turner, Fredrick Toben, Nick Kollestrom and a few others? Oh, that someone would rally us (since we are not self-starters) and goad us into action!

  13. Sean Craughwellw
    Sean Craughwellw says:

    Yes about time this Hugmungous Deceitful lie of Gas Chambers gassing on Industrial scale was forever put to rest fck they can’t even talk about this Lie of all Lies Time it was Properly exposed for the sham it is David Cole Jewish exposes the Lie Spot on & the swimming Pool the alleged chambers ie nonsense scientifically Impossible to have occurred Scientifically Impossible not enough Zyklon B in the brick work that’s not debatable now but what is Is the Lies The Bogus 6Million Lie The World Germans in Particular have had enough of this Shenanigans & the lifetime Pensions Compensation Germany Pays Needs To Stop & Stop Now Scutinize Everything look at it again The People Know The Lie Lies

    • annoyeur
      annoyeur says:

      @Sean Craughwellw

      Plainly you are under a misapprehension, as is the url link source quoted below.

      On Sunday 28 January 2018, during BBC 4 Radio News, at approximately 8:07AM (reporting on the news of Poles rejecting national responsibility for Nazi work camps in Polish territory in WW2), BBC Correspondent (London, estuarial accent) Daniel Mann was heard to state without pausing, that SIX AND A HALF MILLION Jews were killed by the Nazis.

      So there.
      “Red Cross Exposes ‘Judaic’ Holocaust Hoax: International Red Cross (IRC) Document Confirms 271 Thousand Not 6 Million Died In Concentration Camps”

Comments are closed.