Alison Chabloz – Musician and British Nationalist – ITEL Radio

Heartfelt thanks to Dennis Fetcho and Inside The Eye – Live! for hosting me on last Saturday’s show. I’m back in the studio this coming Thursday to record four more songs from my upcoming CD ‘Tell Me More Lies’. You can hear the finished title track – with some slight, obligatory Internet radio distortion – during my interview by clicking the link below.

Alison Chabloz – Musician and British Nationalist – ITEL Radio, 11.12.16

Why do so many believe in the absurd Holocaustᵀᴹ myth?

Holocaust or Hoax by Jurgen Graf p.149-51

A question to which revisionists would like a convincing answer: What is the explanation for the irrational behaviour of an entire people which apparently believes in an absurd (Holocaust) legend (myth)?

The Holocaust – with its gas chambers which constantly change location; its millions of victims who disappear without a trace into blue vapour at Auschwitz, Majdanek and Treblinka, after being murdered by Hitler’s SS butchers, either with Zyklon B insecticide or Diesel exhaust, not to mention mass shootings Babi Yar-style (where the victims also disappear without a trace) – is, and remains, first and foremost a unique proof of the monumental stupidity of our age. In the early 1980s – when the major absurdities of the Holocaust swindle had already been exploded, with the exception of a few details – most revisionist researchers thought it inconceivable that the legend could persist more than a few more years. Since then, more than fifteen years have elapsed, and the Lie continues to drag out its existence, filthier and more luxuriant than ever! Cracks are appearing in the edifice of lies, doubts are appearing – here and there, in the press, in a few articles, in many private conversations – as to the truth of the Establishment version of the fate of the Jews under the Third Reich.

People mention the possibility of minor errors or exaggerations; but almost everyone continues to accept the story as basically correct. It is precisely this general acceptance which is the biggest puzzle to revisionists – and to any reasonable person with a minimum knowledge of history. Really, how can anyone of normal intelligence, for example, view the room which is shown to millions of tourists on the grounds of the former camp of Auschwitz as the “only Nazi gas chamber remaining in original condition”, without immediately realising that the physical capacity of the room – not to mention its immediate surroundings, for example, its proximity to the hospital located nearby – would make any mass execution using a highly dangerous poison gas impossible? The unspeakable atrocity stories spewed forth to visitors by officials of the Auschwitz Museum, deserve only ridicule. But the very opposite occurs: in these shrines dedicated to the Holocaust religion, people become intellectual cripples: awe-struck, their senses paralysed, they gape at everything as if it were plausible, and solemnly swallow nonsensical fairy tales! Even the generation of Germans which lived through the war – i.e., the “generation of criminals”, those who supported the National Socialist system which is now slandered all over the world, who remained true to that system and fought for it to the bitter end, with unprecedented self-sacrifice and devotion of spirit – that generation no longer knows what to believe after half a century of filth and lies.

They confuse their personal firsthand experience, that which they saw and experienced themselves, with that which they think they should have seen or experienced (according to the official version of history). Faced with the accusations and ignorance of succeeding generations, the generation of the war years joins in with the chorus of self-incrimination or takes refuge in resigned silence. And yet, – if the gas chambers were technically impossible and the whole story is therefore a lie; – if no material evidence of the crime remains, since the Nazis “destroyed all traces of their crimes at the last moment”; – if millions of bodies simply disappeared into blue vapour, so that not a single body of a single gassing victim has ever been found; – if the official version of history is based on nothing but contradictory “eyewitness testimonies” of witnesses who were never subjected to cross-examination, and confessions extorted from “criminals”; – if a forensic report, including a reconstruction as is ordinary practice in an ordinary murder case, has never even been attempted; – if expert reports on the technical feasibility of the mass gassings are never performed by the courts, but only on behalf of private parties, and if no technical refutation of these reports can be produced. Then how is it then possible for the world to believe this series of grotesque hallucinations?

If you ask these questions, most people are either surprised or shocked. But some people, particularly, young people – who often react spontaneously and emotionally – immediately and spontaneously declare their conviction that the Holocaust is absurd. One hears remarks like the following: “How could I have believed such nonsense for all those years?” The revisionist may perhaps be pleased in the belief that he has won a new adherent. But in most cases, this is a great mistake. When the shock wears off – the shock which sets in following the discovery of a new truth – the new convert returns to his old environment, where it is almost impossible to find any information on the subject other than all-pervading Holocaust propaganda. The average person lacks the courage to deviate from his environment; the mass media, of course, are all around us. Upon the slightest expression of doubts, the inevitable reply will be that he has spoken with a horrid, lying Nazi, that he has heard a load of lies, and that he had better forget everything he heard. This is particularly true, unless the convert is a hero willing to jeopardise his social and professional position for historical truth. Since even the crudest lie can be obfuscated and explained away, the heretic falls away from his new belief and returns to the shrine of the incredible. Credo quia absurdum est. What at first seemed absurd – in comparison to reasonable information about the absurdity of the Holocaust religion – once again seems convincing. In a society in which propagandists control the media, those who stray from the fold are quick to permit themselves to be persuaded once again that the unanimous opinion (Vox Populi, Vox Dei) which confirmed the reality of the mass extermination of the Jews for over a half a century, bears incomparably more weight than the statements of a single “Nazi”.

This abandonment of the elementary duty to seek the truth can, however, have unexpectedly unpleasant results. Today, even re-educated Germans – despite their anti-fascist fanaticism – are regarded with mistrust, even hostility, by many people in all parts of the world.

The Zionists and their stooges are skilful at ensuring the perpetuation of this hostility, for example, through hundreds of films, largely produced by Jews, which depict German soldiers either as simple fools or sadistic beasts.

The passivity and cowardice of the majority of the German people today is their decisive contribution to the perpetuation endless hatred. All of German contemporary history has been turned into a sort of crime sheet by the Allied victors. The Germans swallow everything in complete passivity.

A person who refuses to defend himself, ought not to wonder if he is found guilty. He deserves no respect, and should expect none. Germans compete with each other in vomiting upon their own people and themselves at the same time. Do they really expect to gain any sympathy abroad in this way?

Let us nevertheless attempt to understand the reasons for this apparently illogical behaviour on the part of the German people.

Perhaps the main reason for it is the knowledge, or instinctive sense, that any critical discussion of the so-called Holocaust is dangerous; it can cost the victim his job, his position in society, and even destroy his family. In addition, many people don’t want to know much about the Holocaust, which is the principal accusation against the German people, since they intuitively feel that many things about it simply cannot be true. They are afraid to know whether the Holocaust is a pack of lies, or just a lie or two; anyone doubting the details of the official version of history runs the risk of being compelled to question the story as a whole.

And that is just what our contemporaries, set on their peace and quiet and comfort at any price, do not want. On the other hand, it is not easy to live with a lie which one should long ago have recognised as such, and, at the same time, to act as if it were no lie at all. For example, how should the mother of a family, who knows to a certainty that the gas chamber yarn is a lie, answer a child who asks, eyes wide-open with wonder: “Mama, teacher told us that German soldiers gassed the Jews. Did Grandpa gas the Jews, too?” The best way to evade a question like that, which is complex and painful, is simply to know nothing. So the mother simply tells the over-curious child, “I don’t know, ask your teacher.”

An English Revisionist in Paris

March 18 2016

Yesterday, March 17, I was present at the Court of Appeal in Paris for what was announced as The Trial of the Century. The trial was centred around a 2011 documentary film by Paul-Eric Blanrue, Un homme, based on the life and work of the world’s foremost “Holocaust” revisionist, Professor Robert Faurisson. The original case against both men was instigated after yet another contrived complaint by French Jewish ‘anti-racism’ association, LICRA (Ligue contre le racisme et l’antisémitisme). Following the discovery of a judicial error by the men’s legal team, the original ‘guilty’ verdict was thrown out, hence this appeal brought by the French state prosecution.

Well over 100 fans of Professor Faurisson were in attendance to support this most honourable man. Despite the importance of the case with regards to freedom of expression and brutal censorship brought about by the promulgation of the 1990 Fabius-Gayssot Act ‘anti-denial’ law, the Parquet de Paris made sure that the audience was held in the tiniest room of the Palais de Justice with just 15 public seats which were given to independent journalists.

The proceedings lasted over two hours. Spontaneous applause broke out several times as the professor and his lawyer, Damien Viguier, entered and left the minuscule chambre 7. Afterwards, in the more spacious corridor outside the chambre, the 87-year old professor gave another lesson in humility and determination and I was able to present myself and sit next to him whilst he signed copies of his books in the most elegant handwriting.

The day before, I had been lucky enough to travel to Zürich to meet Gerard Menuhin, son of famous musician Yehudi and grandson of Moshe (who spent his youth in Palestine in the early 1900s). More about that in another blog; just to say that meeting two of the world’s most respected and important revisionists meant that this has been quite a week.

As well as having the chance to shake hands with these gentlemen, I also met several other notable, like-minded souls. As I explained to one man, the fact that I can speak French was certainly an important factor in my conversion to revisionism. And, as I explained in my recent Information Underground radio interview, before I came to be a revisionist, I was already active in the pro-Palestinian movement. It was Nicolas Anelka‘s quenelle after scoring for West Bromwich Albion in December 2013 which was the turning point, leading me to discover the work of Dieudonné, Alain Soral and, most importantly, Robert Faurisson. And it was my own quenelle gesture at last year’s Edinburgh Fringe Festival which put me firmly on the revisionist map.

*

Needless to say, mainstream media outlets haven’t even mentioned yesterday’s appeal. The press is more interested in giving a voice and a platform to terrorist Anders Breivik, guilty of murdering 77 white, Norwegian youngsters and who appeared this week in court to contest his ongoing solitary confinement: cue the obligatory photos of Breivik’s ‘Nazi’ salute as the proceedings began.

Breivik was reportedly ‘inspired’ to carry out his evil attack by arch-Islamophobe and über-Zionist Jew, Pamela Geller. It seems Breivik is being used to further smear National Socialism and, for the press, his voice and fake ‘Nazi’ salute would be more newsworthy than the academic, scientific, factual, historical findings of revisionists.

Although the general public is as yet unaware of revisionism’s total victory on all counts, revisionism’s enemies know that, for them, the battle is lost. Indeed, in January, the World Jewish Congress published a piece on its website proclaiming the world to be ‘full of Holocaust deniers’. Revisionism is flourishing all over the world, mainly thanks to the Internet, but not forgetting the counter-productive effect of repressive laws which attack our most precious freedom: the right to think for ourselves and be able to express our opinions without fear of censorship.

For over 50 years, Robert Faurisson has waged intellectual warfare on those determined to silence him. His enemies are, of course, enraged. European leaders in the style of David Cameron and Manuel Valls have recently moved to outlaw the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against the rogue state of Israel. The UK Jewish lobby has been desperately trying to force the UK justice system to set a precedent with regard to anti-Zionist comment online and several people have been arrested and their computers seized. It is doubtful, however, that any charges will be brought as these would need to be approved by the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) as well as by the Attorney General.

My own case of being institutionally harassed by elements within the UK Zionist lobby is finally being treated by police – one reason why I have refrained from blogging for the past three months – and, hopefully, a charge of malicious communications will be brought against my abusers who, like Breivik, are staunch supporters of Jewish supremacist Geller.

In the northern hemisphere as winter turns to spring, I feel more able to speak freely about revisionism, even with total strangers. Weary of political and media gangsters who feign disgust whilst shouting Zionist keyword phrases such as antisemitic “Holocaust” denier and far-right, Nazi extremist, I find it’s best to ignore their whining and concentrate instead on spreading the primordial message of revisionism as elucidated by Robert Faurisson in his 60-word (French) phrase, uttered in 1980 and still as true as ever today:

“The alleged Hitlerite gas chambers and the alleged genocide of the Jews form one and the same historical lie, which has permitted 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.”

Thanks to Robert Faurisson, the new Jewish religion of the “Holocaust” with its Zyklon B-filled Holy Grail has been exposed as a load of gaseous nonsense. The court of appeal is due to announce its ruling on May 19. Whatever the verdict, revisionism has already won the day.

Long live revisionism! Long live Faurisson!