This is a cross-post by Jonathan Hoffman
On 7 March Alison Chabloz was cross-examined by the CPS’s barrister, Karen Robinson. Grinning and adopting a persona of bemused innocence, Chabloz repeatedly pleaded that her songs – said to be grossly offensive – were artistic creations which should benefit from artistic licence. She even claimed that the use in one song (((Survivors))) of the melody of Hava Nagila had nothing to do with wanting to compound the offensiveness: “How can an artist explain the reasons for a particular inspiration?”
She didn’t understand the phrase ‘denied the Holocaust’. When it was explained to her, she responded that there should be an official ‘forensic’ investigation into the Holocaust. She questioned whether gas chambers were used. She suggested that the sources for the number of 6 million Jews killed in the Holocaust are unsure: it was unlikely to be more than 1 million. Ms Robinson asked her if the Holocaust is a fiction intended to create a Jewish homeland. She responded that it was exaggerated. “A disproportionate amount of blame was put on the losers by the victors.” The “so-called” Holocaust has been used to sustain the “criminal” State of Israel. By sending schoolchildren on trips to Auschwitz and “indoctrinating them into believing in the deathcamps – of which there is no truth – the so-called Holocaust abusers are using emotional weapons to prevent national feelings amongst European people and to demonise the Germans”.
In a police interview Chabloz said: “My grandfather didn’t fight for our towns and cities to be taken over by non-whites and by non-Christians and he didn’t fight for rules that enable two men to get married and adopt children”. She said that diversity is causing great harm to the UK. She said her views were about loving one’s own people, not about hating others. Ms Robinson: “That Ms Chabloz is nothing more than racism”.
Ms Robinson asked about Chabloz’s claim on her blog that her songs ‘have provoked a sharp reaction’. That – she said – means that she knew the songs were offensive. Her response was “they chose to be offended”. Asked repeatedly why some people called for her arrest, she said it was because they find the songs funny. “I don’t have powerful friends in government and the police to bring a private prosecution against those who have threatened me.”
Regarding the words and music of three of her songs. Chabloz repeatedly defended herself by saying that the songs were ‘satirical’ and ‘parodies’ and by pleading artistic licence and the creation of a ‘work of art’: “There are plenty of Jews who find my songs very funny”. Here are the words of one of the three songs for which she is on trial:
For the words of these songs, and the conclusion of Jonathan’s post, click here