(((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

Censorship and Denial: end of the Shoah

I’d like to come back briefly to a couple of points I made in my previous post. Thanks to everyone for reading and especially for all the comments:

Troll strangler banned from Twitter

Firstly, regards the legal request sent to Twitter by the CRIF (French Jewish lobby), part of the email reads:

“We are notifying you of this request about your account so that you may decide whether or how you will respond. Please let us know by replying to this email whether you will remove the reported content. Please note that we may be obligated to take action regarding the content identified in the complaint in the future.”

TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE CONTENT IDENTIFIED…

What action would Twitter take? The tweet is still up. My video is still up on YouTube – although YouTube won’t let me monetise my revisionist songs as they’re not advertiser friendly. Nearly six thousand views of (((Survivors))) – no adverts allowed.

That’s three times more views than my song about Nemo. Is my little ditty being targeted because it mentions the dreaded Robert Faurisson? Do French tax payers approve of their funds being used by the Jewish lobby to trawl the Internet looking for stuff they can claim to feel offended by? It’s fair to assume that the CRIF will not be inviting me along to its annual dinner for a rendering. At least not the musical kind.

*

In my last blog I also spoke of David Cole, David Irving, Mark Weber and the film, Denial. In a blog written for TakiMag last month, Cole slyly makes his case for semi-revisionism, still managing to smear Irving as an evil and wicked Jew hater for having had the audacity to try and sue Cole’s fellow Jew, Deborah Lipstadt.
Jew-Zionists still cling to their fairy tales and, more importantly, to the revenue generated by these fairy tales. Determined to guard their interests, they know that censorship is key, along with disinformation. Welcome to Democracy.

The Daily Mail will no doubt keep churning out Auschwitz monthly press releases, although in one recent report,  the “gas chambers” were strangely conspicuous by their absence. “Death camp” – yes, that is obligatory. But is the Auschwitz gas chamber now finally and forever relegated to the dustbins of history – even in the eyes of mainstream media?

Rather than being a box-office success, which seems unlikely, will the film Denial serve as an historic watershed ? Will the two Davids be invited on TV to gently break the news to audiences worldwide? All those school trips; endless Holocaust Memorial weeping pageants; Auschwitz, where everything is fake and even when something is real, they’ll try and tell you a fake story about what it was used for, e.g. women’s hair.

“Oh, but we’re not sure about the Ostland and the Aktion Reinhard camps. We *think* gassing took place there because, you see, that’s where the Holocaustᵀᴹ really happened. Everything’s ok. Keep the paycheck coming. No, I really don’t think it’s a good idea to publish those photos. Yes, Master, of course, Master, three bags full, Master.”

Coincidentally, I used to work with Taki at GstaadLife. We once met on the slopes of the Wasserngrat and shook hands. Soon after I left my job as editor, the English-speaking Swiss newspaper seemed to go somewhat downhill. Skiing down the Wasserngrat can also be a little bumpy at times – especially the top part of the black run – but it’s definitely much more fun than writing for a flagging brand. During my time there I did, however, learn a lot about blogging.

Back to Denial the film. First echoes from revisionists are positive. Despite his own revisionist ambiguity, David Irving is a wonderful military historian and a fine writer. The film reportedly pays robust tribute to these qualities. The verdict at the Lipstadt trial constitutes simply more evidence of the total power and control of the Jewish lobby over every organisation and institution out there. The only part of the verdict we hear is the one favourable to the lobby: Lipstadt did not defame David Irving by calling him a “Holocaust denier”. By this same verdict and indeed by his own reasoning and as the creator of a legendary video, David Cole is a “Holocaust denier” too. Cole agrees with Irving. The star of the Shoah we once all knew, Auschwitz, is well and truly over, passé, finished.

*

Regarding my Twitter suspension, it’s going to take more than appeals to make Support robots wake up and listen. I fought both suspensions. Support told me I could choose which account I wanted to keep. Of course, I opted for my main account which has 3,500 followers. They wrote back and said that account was SUSPENDED FOR A VIOLENT THREAT AGAINST A NAUSEATING ANONYMOUS ZIOTROLL*- and that they wouldn’t be reinstating my back up account – 200 followers – either. Anonymous trolls rule Twitter! Hurrah for the trolls! Death to free speech!

One would think that the Jewish press would have a field day over my suspension. After all, there was a whole array of articles when one rather delicate Jewish lady took offence to my quenelle and reported me to police. That was literally the headline and substance of every story: “Jewish woman reports UK artist to police for being offended.” Perhaps the censorship angle of my Twitter ban doesn’t really do much to help the lobby’s image – hence the silence even from the avidly vexatious hacks at the Campaign Against Antisemitism – the UK Jewish lobby’s online Shomrim division.

*

Finally, a word about the first reactions to my blog. I received notification from WordPress that a comment from a certain “Alison Mental” was waiting to be moderated. The comment said simply “HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA You’ve been suspended HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.”

Well, some people can be rather careless. Perhaps many aren’t aware that WordPress always provides the IP address of comments? My blog stats show that this comment was posted from Spain by a BT customer.

No!! It couldn’t possibly be..? Could it?

* Thanks to one of my correspondents who reminds me to say here that ‘Sicaro’ is likely a corrupted version of the Italian ‘sicario’ meaning ‘hired killer’ – no “i”. Being scared of a few words on Twitter and immediately running to Twitter Support and, allegedly, to police indicates that our hit man is, in reality, just another delicate flower. Bless.

Troll strangler banned from Twitter

Following last month’s successful London Forum appearance at the Grosvenor Hotel, I am now the centre of attention as far as Twitter is concerned because I have once again been banned.

It’s getting to be a habit. In one way, I’m glad. I was spending too much time
on Twitter much to the detriment of other, more purposeful activities – like
writing. Proper writing.

I doubt there’ll be any press commentary, but at least the trolls seem happy, in
their own sweet way.

My suspension was the result of stating that I’d pay good money to see a rope
around Nemo’s neck. I indulged myself, it’s true and his reaction was, as usual,
predicatable and a source of great merriment.

http://www.panoramio.com/photo/99982815

They’re such sensitive little souls, aren’t they, poor maggots. They wouldn’t
dare harm a fly. Of course not!

Flies – and indeed maggots – can move easily from the UK to the continent or even farther afield, by plane or boat…

Last week, I received an email from a friend in Canada with a copy of a letter
from Twitter, informing him that the French CRIF Jew lobby was threatening
Twitter with legal action, because of one of his tweets hosting a link to my
song: “Nemo’s Antisemitic Universe“. Quelle coincidence!

A week earlier, I received a rather strange email from Eric Hunt who apparently
now falls into the Cole/Irving/Weber camp of semi-revisionism which adheres to the belief that that the Holocaustᵀᴹ happened, but just not at Auschwitz. Even Vanessa Fuery agrees, which – considering our tweet history – is quite a confession.

Certainly, the schnaps will be flowing this evening in Barnet ! Jubliation
and much gloating shall ensue till the early hours, all in the name of
censorship.

161022-hilary

Of course, I’m also angry and sad. Who wouldn’t be? But this is no time for
defeatism. There’s a fight ahead for those of us who treasure our national
interest and who want to protect our European culture and heritage from parasitical gangs and their money-printing overlords.

We must be strong and we must unite. Our bond with Europe must not be weakened by too much plaintive wallowing in the quagmire of Brexit and the EU. The next General Election will likely be fought on this very issue, despite Theresa May’s promises. Till then, groundwork is of the essence.

As an artist (my detractors can say what the f*ck they like, I don’t care)
it’s truly a great honour to be targeted in this way. Reaction to my work as well as repeated bannings suggest that my (((enemies))) know the true value of their “prize”. Maggots would much rather be abused than have scorn poured over them by means of satirical songs – especially performed by a strong female.

Death threat? Ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha! Nemo – what a legend !

Police know exactly where I am. In fact, I dropped off the latest anonymous
postal deliveries at Glossop police station this afternoon. Not sure there’s much point: if there’s no record of anyone’s fingerprints in the police data bank, it seems they can’t investigate further. Hmmm. Well, we’ll see what my MP has to say about that.

My barrister friend warned me to be careful after my rope tweet. One of my biggest
problems is disliking being told what to do. He was right, of course, but a change is long overdue. If Twitter doesn’t reinstate me, then Twitter can go f*ck itself. 50 or so accounts won’t have much to do with me gone, so it’s really not my loss – with the exception of my dear followers, of course. I’ve lost one platform, but I will find others and several alternatives have already been suggested.

For nationalists (non-kosher, if you please) and others who may be reading this
post, among the first people to offer their support were a Pakistani and a Black British gay Jew. Something to chew on:

A Mob of Ziotrolls & Feminazis Swarm On @AJCTMusic

It seems attacks on Gentiles are kosher, whereas if an anonymous Jew-Zionist
troll is attacked by a Gentile, then the Gentile will be suspended. Jew-Zionist trolls can literally get away with murder, even when a tweet also contains blatant racism:

Equality? Free speech? Or is it discrimination? At the very least it’s a clear
case of double standards.

During the first 22 days of October, Nemo aka Sicaro has incessantly stalked my
Twitter account. This has been the case daily since August 2015 after my #quenelle in Edinburgh. Nemo is a snooper. Nemo uses his own search terms to smear me publicly from the safe-space of his cloak of anonymity. Nemo is a parasitic maggot.

This suspension occurred in almost the exact same way as the one dating back to March 2015. Also a Friday evening – I remember I was at a gig. There was no breach of Twitter rules there either, simply another case of targeted and coordinated mass reporting. Twitter’s automated report system was swung into action. No amount of appeals were effective. I simply had to start again from scratch.

This time, I made sure I had a back-up account with locked tweets which I
sometimes updated with new followers but which had lain dormant since July 2015.
However, maggots soon performed their tribal duty and whoosh! this morning that account had gone too.

What can I do? Probably nothing. Twitter Support must know who I am – even the
CRIF wants my songs removed – again showing how effective humour and satire
can be when dealing with maggots. Repeated suspensions, the banning of my Edinburgh show and from Glossop Labour Club all merely go to prove yet again that the ‘antisemitism’ argument is being used as a political weapon to insure and protect Zionist control of, well, everything.

Free thinkers are the last thing our enemies want. Are you a sensible conformist
who goes along with the idea that the Jooz are under no circumstances to be
scrutinised, let alone criticised? Then you’ll fit it nicely.

If you want some advice from Twitter, then why not ask any user featured
below: there’s a short descriptive to help you decide who might be the most useful. They’ll tell you what to believe, whom you can hate and abuse with impunity (that’d be people like me) and they’ll also let you know what will happen if you stray from the kosher path they’ve decreed everyone else must live by – ((( theirs ))).

@sicaro72 < professional troll, works for (((lobby)))
@TimGStevens < morbidly dull psychiatrist
@JCAinfo < screeching loon
@dubdanu < Antifa’s answer to Katie Hopkins, but uglier and chronically foul-
mouthed.
@liberalisland < Virtuous Twitter (((troll))), formely cheap Holocaust sales
woman – now a semi-Revisionist
@WomenDefyUKIP < sock account belonging to @liberalisland
@BedlamJones < On bail, reportedly.
@nick070473 < Silly sausage
@Dora_Chance < Self-loving hasbarista
@Caroline101061 < Professional troll
@SLATfascists < Moron
@RTingBot < Professional troll to the power of six million. Sock account of Andrea Urban Fox (see below)
@_AndreaUrbanFox < Butthurt in Shoreditch.
@cominskeynathan < Seething parasitic supremacist, hosted by unlucky Edinburgh.
Pelts those he dislikes with out-of-copyright Anne Frank Diaries.
@bored_rose < LOL
@JasnaBadzak < convicted fraudster.
@GB0nd < kosher nationalist
@mendelpol < delicate flower
@GarySpedding < Shabbos Goy or Israeli agent
@isupportisrael_ < name is self explanatory
@eonantisemitism < semi-literate fanatic extremist (Middle East Monitor)
@JRocker44 < some bloke from Bury
@Chirpys_Agent < (((idiot)))
@GemmaSheridan2 < (((foulmouthed idiot and JDL member)))
@nottsyossarian < irrelevant
@Never_Again_UK_ < Cheap Holocaust salesperson
@suzanneshine < professional victim, shill
@new_bluehand < comedy Zio “anti-hate” org
@BMouthPR < idiot
@mghots < thug
@ozzyalan < aussie thug
@Opensout < professional troll
@GillianLazarus < yiddische mama with large chip on her shoulder
@ShimonLevit < avid Zionist
@DrGabsEvans < cheap Holocaust saleswoman
@ravki12344 < supremacist
@engrugger < failed human being
@Just1Luca < parasite
@markoah < whiny delicate flower
@israellycool < idiot
@neshika_ < idiot
@realbobknot < some idiot bloke
@frankiescar < Zionist who’s always drunk
@ArfurZTowcrate < Zionist abuser
@simbarnett < Jew
@benmyers19 < Jew
@HilaryK777 < Jew
@BeaumontBee < Jew
@MomentumGod2 < professional troll
@gallowayexposed < professional troll
@corbynsnap < professional troll
@BHTech_Support < idiot
@Lifeonacanal < lame duck
@kravitzjonny < idiot
@muscledito < professional troll
@CommonSPaine < irrelevant
@denisbolton2 < irrelevant idiot
@thehugheslady < idiot
@inthesoupagain < spends its time promoting the very accounts it purports to
want to ban. Seems rather incoherent to me – it must want people to read VT, etc. No
surprise there then, seeing as the CEO of Veterans Today is a Zionist shill,
allegedly. Is Soup’s function to stir up hatred of Jews in the name of Zionism?

If anyone has any suggestions for further additions to the above list do drop me a line in the comments below.

Love and blessings to all. Free Palestine. Xx

Faurisson risks jail for 60-word summary of his research during Tehran conference

A brief resumé of the hearing held last week in Paris, by Alison Chabloz.

In contrast to the Court of Appeal hearing given last March, this latest bout of Ziocon persecution of revisionist, Robert Faurisson, was held in the 17° Chambre Correctionelle of the High Court at the Palais de Justice in Paris, ensuring that numerous members of the public who’d gathered there to support the professor were able to witness the proceedings from the court room’s spacious gallery.

Starting an hour late owing to the morning session having overrun the allocated time-slot, magistrates initially dealt with several other cases, lasting for almost another hour, before it was the turn of the world’s foremost ‘Holocaust’ revisionist to defend himself against three separate charges. There was no apology forthcoming from the court for this delay which of course had the negative effect of reducing valuable debating time as well as causing magistrates to rush the proceedings.

Two charges for contesting a crime against humanity (one of which brought by former Justice Minister, Pascal Clément) and a third for racial defamation brought by the LICRA – Ligue contre le racisme et l’antisémitisme.

All three complaints targeted a speech made by the professor in 2006 at a conference on the ‘Holocaust’ in Tehran, Iran. A star witness in the person of Lady Michele Renouf who had travelled from London for the hearing would testify after the initial debates. For once, the number of lawyers on the accused benches seemed to outnumber those of the prosecution by five to two (five to three, if we include the state prosecutor). In reality, however, Robert Faurisson’s defence was assured by Maître Damien Viguier alone. Three immense dossiers were produced and placed on the judge’s desk almost completely hiding the magistrate himself. Cue: hushed, slightly amused tittering from the public benches.

The defence’s principle argument rested on the fact that Faurisson’s speech in Tehran had been delivered in English and had lasted only ten minutes. As his speech had been given outside French territory, French law would not apply. In this case, however, it was the professor’s written essay The Victories of Revisionism, published in Tehran then distributed on the Internet, that had led to the three charges. The article details the major successes of Robert Faurisson’s revisionist career and, in particular, confessions of his adversaries which substantiate the professor’s outright technical and moral victory over his detractors. It is this same article which Maître Viguier uses consistently in defence of his client during the many trials brought by a judicial system which is plainly rotten to the core.

The judge, a man in his forties with curly, dark ginger hair and a beard, began by reading Faurisson’s article (see Part 1 and Part 2). The longer the reading went on, the more the judge seemed to be taking in Faurisson’s words. Towards the end, the judge’s face had completely disappeared behind the hand-held, stapled bundle of A4 sheets.

Faurisson’s counsel, Maître Vigiuer, asked that the two complaints for contesting crimes against humanity be nullified because of legal non-compliance. After a short break for deliberation, the court reserved its ruling in relation to this matter until September 27. Thus, only the third charge of ‘racial defamation’ would be deliberated on this humid afternoon in the centre of the French capital.

The charge of defamation brought by LICRA concerned the following passages of Faurisson’s article:

“President Ahmadinejad (then head of the Islamic Republic of Iran) used the right word when he said that the alleged Holocaust of the Jews is a myth: that is to say, a belief maintained by credulity or ignorance.

“The alleged Hitlerite gas chambers and the alleged genocide of Jews form one and the same historical lie, which allowed a gigantic political and financial swindle whose main beneficiaries are the state of Israel and international Zionism and whose main victims are the German people – but not their leaders – and the Palestinian people in their entirety.”

The accusation’s charge of defamation lay solely on the ‘argument’ that, by these statements, Faurisson was clearly targeting the Jewish community. The judge asked Faurisson to explain.

Faurisson’s retorts were confident and unrelenting: citing Israel and international Zionism is not the same as citing “the Jews”. The public as well as the officers of the court present were then treated to an hour and a half’s exposé by the man himself. Unlike orthodox historians who merely repeat the given narrative, he would actually go out on the job, tape measure in hand. The 60-word phrase, he explained, is the summary of his lifetime’s work in the field of revisionism. As he advised his students, the key to success when researching any subject is the ability to resume this work in a phrase of approximately 60 words. The enormous body of work he carried out began in the 1960s when he first asked:

“Show me a photo, an architect’s plan or even a drawing of a gas chamber.”

Faurisson continued his testimony with an explanation of Rudolf Höss’ witness statement at the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal, gained via torture, in particular sleep deprivation. Then, a brief lesson on the explosive quality of Zyklon-B with analysis of actual execution chambers which employ this same gas (no longer used) in the USA. In the 187 pages of court transcripts from Nuremberg concerning Auschwitz, practically nothing is dedicated to the subject of gassing.

The professor went on to expose the lies of Elie Wiesel in his book Night as well as other fabrications concerning execution by boiling water at Treblinka which also feature in the Nuremberg transcript. So many false witnesses: only last week we learned of yet another in the news.

The judge, at this point, interjects with “You’ve therefore not modified your proposals after all this time..?” The female magistrate present appears to have fallen asleep! Such is the contempt for Faurisson’s indisputable strength of character, as apparent and all the more humbling here and now, at the grand old age of 87, as when he started his research more than six decades ago. Faurisson’s conclusions are based on fact, documented evidence, repeatable scientific experiment and, above all, are the fruit of a lifetime’s study and research. What reason other than insanity would make him change his proposals “after all this time”?

Faurisson elaborates on the magical six million number. In August, 1944, Wilhelm Hötll, friend of Eichman, gave a witness statement purporting that the sensational sum could be reached by adding the four million in Auschwitz ‘extermination camp’ to another two million slain Soviets. This was the first time the phrase extermination camp was used in place of concentration camp. However, Hötll was never called to testify at Nuremberg.

The prosecution declines the opportunity to grill Faurisson; Maître Vigiuer invites the professor to talk about the conference in Iran.

Contrary to media reports, the 2006 conference was inclusive of all opinions concerning the ‘Holocaust’. The professor remembers one adversary challenging him to go to the National Archives in Washington where he would see the evidence that his findings were erroneous. The poor fellow hadn’t bargained on the professor already having been to these very same archives where, amongst other clues, he uncovered documents relating to the 32 RAF sorties over Auschwitz, none of which had succeeded in showing smoke billowing out from the crematoria chimneys.

Maître Viguier questions the professor further on the origin of all these lies surrounding the “Holocaust”. Faurisson replies that it’s impossible to say; the rumour runs and runs. The CICR had also heard rumours of gas chambers at Auschwitz, yet their investigation team was unable to find anyone confirming these rumours. Even Eric Conan in French weekly, L’Express, said of the gas chamber exhibit at Auschwitz “Tout y est faux” – everything is false. 1.7 million people visit Auschwitz annually.

At this point, the judge decides to call Lady Renouf to hear her witness statement. As this will be in English, the court has arranged for an accredited translator to be present. After giving her name and details, Lady Renouf first congratulates Maître Viguier for his bravery in accepting to defend the professor. Her witness statement follows in short phrases which are immediately translated for the benefit of the court. We hear confirmation that Faurisson’s speech was an impromptu affair which lasted only ten minutes and Lady Renouf makes reference to the professor’s English-spoken heritage, owed to his mother being a Scot. She repeats Faurisson’s anecdote, often used to introduce himself to an English-speaking audience, that his French ear should not listen to his Scottish ear because, whereas Scottish law permits inquiry and research into the “Holocaust”, French law does not.

Linguistic confusion arises when Lady Renouf speaks of guidelines (in French, “les consignes”) on how the “Holocaust” should be taught in schools, published in Stockholm in 2000. The translator is unable to translate the word for guidelines, using “guides” instead. Whether or not the greffière recorded a corrected version is uncertain; perhaps the court thought that Lady Renouf was talking about “tour guides”, at Auschwitz or elsewhere?

The Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust where the ‘Holocaust’ education guidelines were first announced was also the site of two physical attacks on Faurisson by Jewish terrorist organisation LDJ (Ligue de Défence Juive or Jewish Defence League). These guidelines instruct all public and private schools worldwide not to give a platform to revisionists. Lady Renouf summarises, stating that historical debate and rational argument do not seem to be part of educational guidelines on this subject. There are no questions from the court.

Maître Viguier promptly urges the professor to talk about a case dating back to 1983 when he was accused of “falsifying history”. Faurisson explains that this was the catalyst which led to creation of the 1990 Fabius-Gayssot Act. He also recalls the work of British historian and semi-revisionist David Irving, along with the fact that neither Churchill nor de Gaulle ever mention any gas chambers. In fact, during WW1 already, UK national the Daily Express had written about enemy gas chambers as early as 1914. An investigation after the war ended in 1918 proved that the story was a propaganda lie. Again, in 1943, the same story about gas chambers appears in the Daily Express. This time, however, there was no similar post-war investigation. Another piece of vital evidence is the documented case of Marinka in Russia where the local mayor was shot dead by the German army for killing a Jewish woman. Many such examples exist yet are suppressed from public knowledge.

The professor then relates his victories over Raul Hilberg and Jean-Claude Pressac; cites Valerie Igounet’s book of smears Histoire du négationnisme en France and tells us that Ariane Chemin didn’t know who Hilberg was when she interviewed the professor in Vichy for Le Monde newspaper. Faurisson also names the director of Yad Vashem 1953-1959, Ben-Zion Dinur, who resigned after coming to the realisation there were far too many false witnesses.

Change of tone as Mâitre Christian Charrière-Bournazel representing LICRA comes to the bar. He’s clearly unhappy about having been forced to listen to Faurisson for two hours (in reality Faurisson had only spoken for an hour and a half), although it’s doubtful Charrière-Bournazel will be complaining quite so much when he receives his fat fee. The only accusation is restricted to the same, tired refrain: when Faurisson mentions the state of Israel and international Zionism, Faurisson means Jews. Faurisson is a racist. Faurisson has already been prosecuted and convicted , etc., etc.

The state prosecutor raises even more eyebrows as she tries to stabilise her microphone (no working mic and a dodgy translator suggest the French judiciary can’t afford to run their courts properly?). Diabolical smears regards Faurisson’s personality as well as the obligatory jibe about using the court room as a platform from which, according to Madame la Procureure, Faurisson would take immense gratification. Perhaps the most telling phrase amongst all the outright lies and smears (paid for by the French tax payer, of course) is when the prosecutor states Faurisson should no longer be given the possibility of further court appearances.

Maître Viguier once again stands to contest the accusation’s claims. That the professor’s words in Tehran constitute ‘defamation’ is a fraudulent lie. The professor’s work is that of an historian. Viguier protests his colleague’s conflation of Israel and Jews, defiantly and correctly stating that conflict in the Middle East could be seen as one direct result of the lies of the Shoah. Faurisson’s work, he insists, will last as long as does this mensonge (“lie”). Viguier deplores the moral order inflicted upon revisionists in the name of war and war crimes, and which effectively prevents revisionists from doing their job.

The judge invites Faurisson to have the last word. Faurisson is finally able to respond to Charrière-Bournazel’s earlier attacks by comparing the lawyer’s attitude and manner to that of an enflure (in the sense of over-exaggerated, self-important, turgid). This warrants an admonishment of Faurisson by the judge, who then fails to chastise Charrière-Bournazel for leaving the court in a show of brazen pomposity whilst Faurisson is still speaking.

Faurisson finishes with another couple of examples of dubious witness statements and mistranslations which have been used by propagandists to bolster the case for a presumed genocide of countless Jews. We’re told of the wildly varying death toll estimates and asked why those who revised the official Auschwitz death toll – down from four to one-and-a-half million – were not punished in the same atrocious manner which Faurisson has been subjected to throughout his career.

The prosecution is demanding a month’s prison sentence and a 3,000 euro fine in the event of a guilty verdict. We shall now have to wait to September 27 to hear the court’s ruling.

Further reading:

The revisionists’ total victory on the historical and scientific level

Force the Lie: the Earth is Flat !

When we lose the power to think for ourselves, we lose our humanity. The year 2015 began with #JeSuisCharlie, saw Jeremy Corbyn elected as Leader of the Opposition in the UK and ended with a vote to bomb Syria after another shooting in Paris.

As for myself I played somewhere in the region of 150 paid gigs in 15 different countries– including my own music at the Edinburgh Fringe – plus another 50 or so pub sessions. The Irish folk gigs provided Christmas spirit with, again, a wealth of new material and we’re already booked in for two more gigs in the New Year, complete with plenty of wassailing.

Nürnberg & Flat Earth

Imperceptibly, the lengthening days point towards rebirth. Revisionism is a rocky road, but its path is brightly lit. In one of Vincent Reynouard’s recent videos, I noticed a shot of the official emblem used by the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal: The Scales of Justice superimposed over a Gleason’s 1892 map of Flat Earth – similar to the map on the UN logo (which, incidentally, was approved in 1946) – without the 33 circular segments.

151225 Nuremberg Flat Earth

According to some observers, 2016 will be the year when Flat Earth Theory explodes – online, at least. The figures are quite extraordinary and confirm my observation that #FlatEarth would be the most spectacular online conspiracy phenomenon I’ve seen so far…

Do I believe in a Flat Earth? I don’t know. The evidence suggesting that’s the case is nevertheless quite convincing. Even more convincing is that Nuremberg was merely a continuation of war propaganda, and that neither an order to exterminate the Jews nor homicidal gas chambers ever existed: all easily verified fact.

Will France be obliged to add ‘Oblate Spheroid Denial’ to the Gayssot law, I wonder?

An absurd law

Vincent Reynourd had to flee France because of the Gayssot law and now is settled in Greater London. He lost both his teaching posts as well as his family, also spending time in prison for his beliefs. His videos are clear and precise and all the evidence he presents can be referenced in libraries and documentation centres.

Presently, Reynouard is again in the news after his lawyer succeeded in obtaining a hearing of the French Constitutional Board on the Gayssot law. Reynouard’s lawyer explained in a previous clip that because the Gayssot law resides on the outcome of another trial – in this case, Nuremberg – its legality is questionable under the French constitution, especially with regard to equality.

For example, there is currently no law which prohibits the ‘denial’ of other genocides or crimes against humanity. Moreover, in order for the Nuremberg trial to be revised, the London Agreement signed by France, UK, US and Russia in 1945 would have to be nullified.

Like their comrades at the ECHR in Strasbourg and at the UN, Zio-con lawmakers do not seem to have the interests of their own countries’ citizens at heart. According to Reynouard and backed up by the official transcription of the hearing, in order to give new powers to the Gayssot law, members of the Constitutional Board would be claiming that Hitler’s supposed order to exterminate the Jews was in fact inspired by the Armenian genocide.

Blow me down! The French Constitutional Board tells porkies! There is no proof to back up the claim Hitler gave any such order – as already confirmed in court during the cases of Zündel, Irving and others. Yet here we have some of the most highly-placed notables in France once again making a mockery of liberté, égalité, fraternité.

At 87 years young, Robert Faurisson is still being hounded by the usual suspects aka The Authorities with another six pending court cases. Do the same world leaders who marched down the Champs Elysées in support of freedom of expression last January also support punishment via the courts of such men – as well as the incarceration of Vincent Reynouard?

Broadcasters of mainstream ideas are the same people who create fictional entertainment. Think about it: our fake monetary system; endless wars which create debt in our so-called secular liberal western democracies; aeroplanes which disappear from radar in the southern hemisphere; ever taller sky-scrapers with no floors posed as radio masts? Can governments be trusted to tell us the truth about anything?

Force the line and end the lie

A couple of days ago, I tweeted my first Twitter poll: amusing and perhaps somewhat frivolous… Nevertheless, almost a third of answers came from people who said the Earth was flat or who said they didn’t know.

The results show that two-thirds believe Copernicus’ spinning ball theory. Only seven percent chose ‘don’t know’ and I repeat – that’s my position. Ok, so maybe I’m sitting on the fence here (above a horizon which stretches all the way to the Irish sea over a curvature of 20cm per square kilometre!), but I hope this year will see the predicted massive increase in interest in Flat Earth theory as well as a simple-to-execute scientific experiment such as Brian Mullin’s Force The Line.

Who knows? NASA doesn’t seem to… The more I delve, the more fascinating it becomes and the more evidence is unearthed. I’d love it to be true just to see the expression on Richard Dawkins’ and Brian Cox’ faces. Trolls and shills can laugh and spout ad hominem all they like – anonymously, of course. Their little dance is easy to spot. Bless.

Dear readers, here’s wishing you all a serene and enlightened 2016. A special thank you to my family and friends, to my supporters within the Revisionist movement and, last but not least, to my trolls who, in their own inimitable way, have unwittingly helped to share truth with an ever wider audience.

Happy New Year!