Robert FAURISSON August 25, 2014
The case of
Gregory Chelli (alias Ulcan, alias ViolVocal), or the French
police’s inaction, thus far, in the face of a form of Jewish
terrorism
Residing, it seems, at times in his native
Paris, at other times somewhere in Romania and sometimes in
Israel, precisely at Ashdod, right beside the Gaza Strip, the
thirty-year-old French-Israeli Gregory Chelli, member of the
Jewish Defence League, works, notably by means of the Internet,
at making the life of men and women whom he considers
anti-Semitic miserable. He sets up provocations in the course of
which he makes the police services look ridiculous. So far he
seems to have enjoyed an impunity comparable, proportionately
speaking, to that of the State of Israel itself. Up to now Alain
Soral, Dieudonné and their families have been among his
best-known targets.
In our turn, we – my wife and I,
along with some members of our family – have had to endure his
provocations. I am 85 and my wife, who is nearly 83, is in poor
health: her eyesight is diminishing, she is prone to falls and,
when she does fall, she cannot get back up without help; she
almost always need my presence at her side; if I have to be out
of the house for more than half a day I must arrange things so
that she will not remain alone. From March 8, 2012 if not
before, and for as long as he was able to phone us at our old
number, this Chelli assailed us with a hundred calls of insults,
abuse, threats (including death threats) and – I stress this
point – on some of those occasions committed numerous actual
assaults, details of which will be seen below. He has gone on
making fun with impunity of the French police in general and its
anti-violent crime sections (the “BAC”) in particular, something
that costs the taxpayer dearly. The police register our
complaints but nothing or almost nothing comes of them.
To begin, here is a selection of the words this thug has
addressed to my wife, words that can sometimes be heard in the
recordings that, not without relish, he diffuses on the
Internet: “Bitch, I shit on you, I piss on you... I enjoy seeing
your husband’s smashed head... I ––– you, I’m going to make your
life impossible, I’m going to call your neighbours.” The
“smashed head” is an allusion to photos showing me on a hospital
bed after my sixth physical assault, on September 19, 1989, when
three “young Jewish activists from Paris” set upon me in Vichy,
where I live. From November 1978 to May 1996 I sustained ten
assaults, particularly at the Palace of Justice in Paris, where
the guard corps consistently refused me any protection, in
direct words such as : “We are not your bodyguards!”, or “You
may go to such or such place [in the building], but at your own
risk!” or, from the commanding officer, a lieutenant colonel:
“My grandfather was at Dachau...!”. Not once was any of my
attackers or any of the organisers of the assaults arrested. In
one case alone – that of September 1989 – the Jew behind an
attack in which I nearly lost my life was merely questioned; he
explained that on the day of the assault he had been far from
the scene, at the house of a Jewish friend whose name he gave;
asked to give other names, he responded that he could not
because it had been the day of a masked ball... to which the
friend had invited him.
I lodged my first complaint
against Chelli for telephone harassment and assault at Vichy
police station on March 9, 2012 (report of Guy Dablemont, police
officer). I specified that the individual had also phoned two of
my neighbours in the middle of the previous night, telling the
first that there was a gas leak in my house and that he must go
and inform me of it (and the neighbour, in a state of complete
panic, did so), and announcing to the second that I was a
terrorist. Both told me afterwards that they were ready to talk
to the police if their testimonies were required. But the
police, to whom, with their agreement, I later conveyed their
respective identities and addresses, never asked them anything.
The very next day, March 10, the historian Paul-Eric Blanrue,
whom I knew to be remarkably knowledgeable on the subject of
Jewish activism, revealed Gregory Chelli’s identity to me,
supplying a wealth of information about him which I then shared
with the police. On Sunday, March 11, our grand-son B., aged 20,
phoned me and my wife to say that, on orders from his father,
living near Vichy, neither he nor his twin brother would be
coming to visit us any longer because their father had received
a phone call [from Chelli] telling him that someone was going to
set fire to his house. It must be said that, in his youth, the
father of these twins aspired to become a judge but had to give
up his law studies because of the trouble brought on by the
misfortune of bearing my surname. Thereafter he had, for the
same reason, also abandoned two other possible careers and lived
in fear of losing the job that he had nonetheless managed to
get. He ended up telling those around him one day that he wanted
to kill me. I understand and forgive him.
Continuing his
campaign against me and my wife, Chelli kept up his assaults on
the telephone: “Son of a whore, son of a whore, son of a whore,
we’ll get you one day... We’re waiting for you to come to Paris
to see Dieudonné, Soral. You’re worth shit.” I contacted the
police and asked when my two neighbour-witnesses were going to
be called in, as they wished to be. Answer: they will be called.
In fact, as I have pointed out, they were never to be called.
Second report signed by Mr. Guy Dablemont, March 12, 2012. No
action followed. On March 19 I obtained an interview with
commander Janiszewski of Vichy police station. The man seemed
amiable and interested but there was still no follow-up on the
case. On March 21 I wrote to him. To no avail. Throughout the
month of May at the station I would speak, four times, with
Major Gay, who made a strange objection; as the case involved
YouTube he told me straight out: “The police can’t do anything
with [against] YouTube.” On June 21 he promised me that he would
work on the telephone numbers from which the calls had been made
but warned me that I would not have the right to note them or to
obtain the names and addresses. On June 30, Chelli, getting my
wife on the phone, told her: “We’re going to put ground glass in
your ––.” On January 9, 2013 the thug, pretending to be a
doctor, announced to me: “This is Chabanais [Charente] hospital.
Your wife is dead.”
On February 9, 2013, with the
harassment continuing, a serious incident occurred. At around 3
am, three members of the BAC showed up at our house. It seems
someone had phoned pretending to be me, saying: “I’ve just been
attacked by three blacks; they’re in my basement, raping my
wife.” I tried to get an appointment with commander Janiszewski.
Impossible. They promised me he would call me. He was not to
call me. On my way to the police station I was walking up
Boulevard de la Salle on the left-hand pavement. A little old
man who had recently shouted at me: “Oh! You, you’ll go to hell”
and who, myself making no reply, had followed after me, calling
me a “dirty bastard”, was on the opposite pavement in
conversation with the owner of a garage there and another
person. He noticed me. He was talking loudly but I could not
make out what he was saying, although it was obviously about me,
and heated words indeed. This time I decided to call him to
account. I went up to him and asked the reason for his attitude.
He replied: “You should be ashamed, denying the existence of the
concentration camps”, thereby proving he had not read anything I
had written! He is a state education retiree: a former schools
inspector called Jacques Thierry.
I wanted to discuss
this matter with commander Janiszkewski but could not manage to
contact him.
On February 21 I finally saw him. He
informed me: “They’ve got [Chelli’s telephone] number” but, of
course, this number was not revealed to me and I was never to
know what action, if any, followed the discovery. Regarding the
incidents with the retired inspector he said: “We’ll see to that
later”, but nothing was seen to “later”. A new complaint was
lodged, with a report bearing the signature, this time, of
Bernard Manillère, police officer.
New calls, new insults
on March 14, 16 and 17: “You’re still alive, –– !”; “So then,
rotter, old fossil, old fossil, old fossil.” On March 19 I sent
a new letter to commander Janiszewski, pointing out that the
harassment had now lasted for over a year and that I knew
nothing about the investigation except that the thug’s telephone
number had apparently been found. No reply.
April 3,
2013: “I’ll go and piss on your grave... Son of shit... Your
daughter... Your son disowned you like a dog... Your wife sells
her paintings. I’m Gregory Chelli... I called your neighbour for
the gas leak... I’ll make YouTube videos.”
As I ended up
changing my phone number, which caused me considerable nuisance,
we were no longer to receive insults, abuse or threats liable to
lead to assault. But the situation would suddenly worsen.
The newspaper in France that has vilified me the most since
the late 1970s, throwing me to the dogs, Le Monde, today owned
by Louis Dreyfus, has this summer begun to denounce the
practices of Gregory Chelli because he rebukes its journalists
for their criticism of the State of Israel’s current behaviour
in Palestine, particularly in Gaza. An intriguing reversal of
the situation. The thug’s victim is no longer Faurisson,
concerning whom the newspaper has reported virtually nothing of
the attacks he has had to endure; on the contrary, Le Monde was
at the head of media campaigns against the revisionists, dubbed
“stubborn liars, gangsters of history”, of whom I myself would
seem to be the paragon. This time the victim is primarily a
weekly of the political left and of big money, Le Nouvel
Observateur, or its website called Rue89. See “Qui est le hacker
sioniste soupçonné d’avoir piraté Rue89?” (Le Monde, August
10-11, 2014, p. 7 or http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2014/08/08/ouverture-d-une-information-judiciaire-apres-le-piratage-de-rue89_4469405_3224.html).
See also: “Le Monde and Le Nouvel Observateur solidaires de
Rue89”, August 12, 2014, p. 7 or http://www.lemonde.fr/actualite-medias/article/2014/08/10/attaques-informatiques-le-monde-et-le-nouvel-observateur-solidaires-de-rue89_4469720_3236.html.
More specifically, the journalist concerned is Benoît Le Corre;
on this subject I recommend the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cg-EFZkj7nI.
The reporter’s father, hearing the words of the thug Chelli, has
suffered a heart attack and been placed in an artificial coma;
see http://rue89.nouvelobs.com/2014/08/14/vengeance-dun-pseudo-hacker-contre-rue89-vire-tragique-254205.
Given the circumstances, the fact that the case should have
“taken a tragic turn” does not surprise me; my own myocardial
infarction of October 16, 2012 occurred in similar
circumstances.
I have a long experience of Jewish
attacks; often they aim at the heart. On July 12, 1987, I was
beaten with extraordinary violence by the Jew Nicolas Ullmann at
the Vichy “Sporting Club”, with no possibility of defending
myself: all his blows were to my chest which, four days later,
had become one enormous bruise. “Your guy was a real bomber!”
was the remark of the Cameroonian doctor at Confolens (Charente)
hospital on seeing the damage. As usual, I did not bring charges
because I could not afford to retain a lawyer, and experience
had taught me that if there were a trial my assailant would
either be acquitted on the presumption of good faith or else be
ordered to pay me a pittance in damages. For many French judges
my opponents are automatically in good faith. In 2007 former
Justice minister Robert Badinter, who had the chutzpah to state
on television that as a lawyer for the LICRA he had had me found
guilty in 1981 of being a “falsifier of history”, proved
incapable of proving his assertion in court during the case I
had brought against him for it. And for good reason: never in my
life have I been found guilty of distorting or falsifying
anything whatsoever; the court had to take note of this and rule
that Badinter had “failed in his offer of proof” (p. 16 of the
judgment) but, the judges dared to add, Badinter had been in
good faith! And, losing my suit, I then had to pay €5,000 to my
extremely rich “good faith slanderer”. The year before historian
Pierre Vidal-Naquet, the most worthless of my opponents, wrote
on the website of Libération: “If I had got my hands on
Faurisson I would not have hesitated to strangle him” (January
6, 2006). He knew that, smothered with fines and other financial
penalties, I was hardly likely to prosecute him and that, in the
event of a trial, he could count on a court presided over by
Nicolas Bonnal, with François Cordier as representative of the
Justice ministry, two friends who had taken special courses in “Shoa”
history organised by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Paris and
the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions in France (CRIF).
Suddenly, on Saturday, August 16, 2014, at 12.30 am, there
appeared on our doorstep, very tense, four members of the BAC
and two uniformed policemen. The BAC men had arrived on the
scene with weapons and shields. The one in charge neither
introduced nor identified himself. A neighbour who had not been
involved in last year’s episode came out on the street in his
pyjamas. He held out to one of the policemen a telephone handset
on which he was still in conversation with Chelli. It is the
latter who can be heard in a long recording. The neighbour, for
his part, did not have all his wits about him. He ought not to
have followed the thug’s instructions and come out of the house
in the middle of the night as he did.
My wife is
distraught. She can no longer sleep. Personally, I refuse to
dwell too long on the consequences of what I call “the Jewish
torture”. I do not know what the Chinese torture is but I know
the Jewish torture: it is particularly vicious. My mind tries
hard to erase the various incidents but my body forgets nothing.
For many years it has hardly ever left me in peace, especially
at night, when the cries I let out during my nightmares wake up
those near me. I smile and, at times, even laugh. A matter of
temperament. I laugh, for instance, with my friend Dieudonné and
I adopt the judgment of Pierre Guillaume, expressed in a play on
words on the name “Dieudonné”, which literally means
“God-given”: “The laughter given by God is the final solution of
the Jewish question” (Le rire par Dieu donné…).
I have
learnt that my new file is in the hands – quite a coincidence –
of Major Gay. The good man has done nothing in the past; he will
do nothing in the future. Three times, in the evening, at around
nine o’clock when he goes on duty, I have been to the police
station to keep him informed of what, in the course of the day,
I have garnered on the subject of Chelli but the matter clearly
does not interest him and he asks me to take my written reports
with me as I leave. Finally, on my third visit, a surprise: he
informs me that my file has been sent to the regional police
service (SRPJ) in Clermont-Ferrand. By a new coincidence, the
file is in the hands of a commander there who, a few days ago,
on a complaint of the LICRA of Strasbourg, came to Vichy to ask
me fifteen questions about two articles on “Robert Faurisson’s
unofficial blog”: our appointment was also at the police
station. However, for the most part, I limited myself to letting
him put down in his minutes my ritual sentence: “I refuse to
collaborate with the French police and justice system in the
repression of historical revisionism.” Amiable and smiling, he
did not seem to begrudge me for exercising what, in this case,
was a right under the law.
They surprise me, all those
Jews along with all the people who live in the panicky fear that
they have, and rightly so, of those whom I call “the
Jewish-Jews”. They think I can be intimidated; however I can say
that, although I have often felt fear, discouragement, anxiety,
I have never known timidity. They believe I am French and
intelligent. For them, after forty years of blows and injuries,
trials, insults of all kinds and especially after so many
attacks on my wife, my children and my grandchildren, I’m sure
to break down. They are wrong. They run on blinding hatred. I do
not. Admittedly, I am French by my father but, by my mother, I
am British, or rather Scottish. Unlike the pure Frenchman, born
clever and whose eye sparkles with intelligence, I see no reason
to believe that my fight is lost before it begins. I am even
persuaded of the contrary. Let’s recall the British in June
1940: they were lost. Unintelligent, they did not grasp the
fact. Then, with the decisive support – at first surreptitious –
of their cousins across the Atlantic they continued the fight
and that’s how they won it. But even so, above all the reader
mustn’t go and take me for an admirer of the alcoholic Winston
Churchill! Under his leadership the Western Allies, perfect
“democrats” that they were, offered a good part of Europe to
Stalin and amassed the very worst crimes in Europe and elsewhere
while their propaganda specialists, as in the First World War,
lied to the fullest, ascribing, for example, to the Germans the
invention of “corpse factories” which, during the new war, would
become “death [by gas] factories”, built at Auschwitz or
elsewhere. Their propaganda endorsed the gargantuan Jewish
mystification of the alleged extermination of the Jews (which
produced millions of miraculous survivors), the alleged Nazi gas
chambers and the alleged six million. Finally, they incur, after
the Americans, a heavy responsibility for the crime par
excellence that was the judicial masquerade of the International
Military Tribunal (three lies in three words) at Nuremberg,
presided over by a British judge; article 19 of this tribunal’s
charter pronounces that “The Tribunal shall not be bound by
technical rules of evidence...” while article 21 stipulates that
“The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common
knowledge but shall take judicial notice thereof. It shall also
take judicial notice of [an endless series of documents and
reports signed by the victors concerning the crimes of the
vanquished]...”. So it was that the Soviet report on the
massacre of thousands of Polish officers at Katyn, attributing
it to the Germans, was to have, like a multitude of other
reports each more insane than the rest, the value of authentic
evidence with no possibility of appeal, and for all eternity.
Three cheers for the Allies in general and also for those
Frenchmen à la Fabius who grounded their 1990 antirevisionist
law on... the Nuremberg trial!
On the strictly historical
and scientific level we, the revisionists, have made all our
opponents, without exception, bite the dust. To take just these
examples, the Raul Hilbergs, Léon Poliakovs, Georges Wellerses,
Pierre Vidal-Naquets, Jean-Claude Pressacs, Robert Jan van Pelts
have been annihilated. For Hilberg, revising his first argument
from top to bottom under the avowed influence of “Faurisson and
others”, there was, all told, no record of extermination
because, it seemed, within the “vast bureaucracy” of Germany the
bureaucrats decided to proceed with the extermination of the
Jews only “by an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus-mind
reading”, and without leaving any written trace of their
gigantic undertaking. For Poliakov, “No document remains,
perhaps none has ever existed”. For Wellers the Nazi gas
chambers were the greatest of possible secrets, a “State
secret”. In Vidal-Naquet’s view, one must not believe his
co-religionist Arno Mayer, the Princeton professor who wrote:
“Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and
unreliable” but should trust in Pressac and his theory of
“limited gassings”; however the same Pressac, as would be
discovered later, eventually surrendered in open country,
deeming that, “rotten” with too many lies, the official history
of the German camps was bound “for the rubbish bins of history”.
For R. J. van Pelt, “the last of the Jewish Mohicans”,
Auschwitz-Birkenau, visited by millions of pilgrims, contains no
“physical evidence” of an extermination of the Jews.
Until recently the general public were still unaware of these
“victories of revisionism” (see, with all the necessary
references, the two studies I have devoted to the subject, on
line respectively at http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.it/2006/12/victories-of-revisionism.html and http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.it/2011/09/victories-of-revisionism-continued.html)
but thanks to the Internet and especially thanks to the arrival
of a third generation after the monstrous slaughter of
1939-1945, the biggest lies of the victors of the Second World
War are beginning to appear in daylight for what they are.
Obviously the holocaustic or shoatic drumming and the
denunciation of revisionism by the forces at the disposal of the
“single way of thinking” are only worsening. What of it? An
entire youthful generation is discovering the successes of
historical revisionism with enthusiasm.
A Jew, Socialist
and millionaire, former Prime Minister Laurent Fabius has won
renown through his activity in favour of his “community” on the
French and international level. He has particular distinguished
himself by his personal role in the repression in France against
those who dare to question the Holy Trinity of the “Holocaust”
or “Shoa” religion. Under a law of July 13, 1990, often called
by the joint name “Fabius-Gayssot” but which ought to bear quite
simply the name “Fabius”, French judges convict and impose heavy
sentences on revisionists who have concluded from their research
and investigations, similar to those of the forensic and
scientific police, that 1) an exceptional crime called “the
systematic extermination of European Jewry” with an order and a
plan of execution never took place, and that there never existed
2) an equally exceptional weapon called “gas chamber” (or “gas
van”) or 3) a total of six million Jewish victims.
As for
Fabius’s former wife, Mrs Françoise Castro, a Jewess, she
revealed in 1986 that “[there is an] extraordinary novelty in
political behaviour, the Left has allowed Jewish militias to
establish themselves in some quarters of Paris and also in
Toulouse, Marseille, Strasbourg [and to have] regular contacts
with the Minister of the Interior” (Le Monde, March 7, 1986, p.
8). Regarding the impressive list of successes of these militias
I refer the reader to a study of eighteen pages that I published
in June 1995 under the title “Jewish
militias. Fifteen years, and more, of terrorism in France”.
In many places in my Ecrits révisionnistes (seven volumes
published, at least two others to come) specific examples of the
privilege enjoyed by Jewish hoodlums, notably in the Palace of
Justice in Paris, can be found. With the complicity of the
higher authorities of the palace guard and of justice officials
like the two mentioned above, the substitute prosecutor François
Cordier and the presiding judge of the seventeenth criminal
chamber Nicolas Bonnal, or the latter’s predecessor Jean-Yves
Monfort (who once dared, on live radio, to call on good French
citizens to cause “disorder” – sic – if not to riot in show of
their support for the justice system against the revisionists),
some real lynching sessions, with open force, of revisionists or
their supporters have taken place in the heart of the
courthouse. And not a single reporter from the mainstream media
has denounced these attacks, during which the guards and, more
rarely, the gendarmes act out the same appalling comedy: let the
young Jews gather and strike, then run away and out of the
building; whereupon the men in uniform just may start attending
busily – grotesque, purely contrived scenes – to the victims
like so many nannies.
To those interested in the eternal
“Jewish question”, for which I personally am not at all
impassioned, I recommend the writings of Hervé Ryssen. For my
part, I have focused my attention on the religion of “the
Holocaust” or “the Shoa”, a religion with historical pretensions
which is, of course, Jewish but which reigns throughout the
Western world among both the Jews and the goyim or Gentiles. It
is in crisis. Too many historians have ended up showing the
fallacious nature of the allegations of that alleged tribunal in
which, at Nuremberg, the victors in coalition allowed themselves
to try an enemy whom they had crushed and whom they held at
their mercy in the worst conditions. This religion has given
itself an official character: in many democratic countries,
including France, its allegations regarding history have
acquired the force of law.
However, if the duty of a
citizen is to obey the law, it is also to fight against “the
unjust force of the law”, that is, tyranny. Our duty is
therefore that of Resistance against the most gigantic imposture
of modern times, even and especially if it is protected by the
police, the judges and the prison guards.
In the near
future it will be interesting to see the French police and
justice system at work; they have been so active in assailing
the freedom of inquiry and expression of revisionist
intellectuals and so passive when a stop should be put to the
criminal activities of a Jewish thug who, in addition to it all,
makes fun of the police and judges.
I am at the
battlements, observing; I will make my report.
Addition of August 30, 2014: Another neighbour of mine, owner of
a restaurant in the town centre, has just revealed to me that on
the night of August 16, wanting to return home, he was stopped
by policemen near his house who, agitated and ready to shoot,
ordered him, guns drawn, to move away because his neighbour
Faurisson was extremely dangerous. It is likely that those men,
having first gathered in Vichy police station before moving into
operation, had not been made aware of the treatment which, for
the last two years and five months, I had been made to endure by
a hoaxer carrying on with impunity who, on February 9, 2013, had
already staged a scenario exactly the same as what he was
repeating on August 16, 2014. Had they known they would not have
been in such a nervous state. But perhaps some high-placed
persons wanted to let an incident occur. After all, except for
one case, in the last forty years in Vichy neither the police
nor the municipality has expressed any interest in the safety of
a Faurisson.
