Savage sentence on National Action founder as judge redefines ‘terrorism’

Alex Davies addressing H&D’s John Tyndall Memorial Meeting in 2014

Earlier today Alex Davies – co-founder of the national socialist youth group National Action – was jailed for eight and a half years under the ‘Terrorism Act’.

The sentence was imposed in the historic setting of Court No. 1 at the Old Bailey – perhaps the most famous courtroom in the world. Readers might imagine that Mr Davies is an exceptionally dangerous individual convicted of serious crimes involving weapons or planned acts of violence.

Yet in fact his ‘terrorism’ consisted quite simply of attempting to recreate a political organisation in a new form after it had been banned. He was never even accused of any actual or planned acts of violence, nor of any weapons offences.

National Action certainly engaged in some unwise strategies and foolish rhetoric which we have criticised on many occasions in H&D. But it’s important to realise that Alex Davies was not being tried for anything done during the existence of National Action.

His ‘crime’ was to have created a new group based in South West England and Wales after NA was banned in December 2016. Although his trial did not take place until April this year, he was arrested in September 2017 and the criminal charges were based on messages exchanged with fellow former members of NA. His new group was eventually called NS131 (which stood for ‘National Socialist Anti-Capitalist Action’).

Alex Davies at a National Action demonstration before NA was banned under the Terrorism Act

In fact it was very clear from evidence revealed during the trial that by 2016-2017 (i.e. the only period relevant to his ‘crimes’) Mr Davies was distancing himself from some of the wilder rhetoric of NA’s earlier days and adopting a more mature analysis and strategy. Yet while passing sentence Judge Mark Dennis QC repeatedly emphasised that he viewed the defendant’s crimes as particularly serious because Mr Davies is an unrepentant national socialist.

The judge said that during Mr Davies’s trial the court had been “chilled” by his description of policies of repatriation to create a “White Britain”. Of course until a couple of generations ago it would have been taken for granted that Britain was and should remain an almost entirely White country. Yet now merely to advocate such a policy is deemed part of a ‘terrorist’ outlook.

Similarly, until very recently it would have been assumed that a Briton could take whatever view he wished on historical personalities. Britain was at war with Napoleon for longer than we were at war with Hitler, but no one within the past two hundred years would have been criminalised for admiring Napoleon.

As so often, Adolf Hitler and Jews are the exceptions. Those who take a positive view of Hitler and a negative view of Jews (for whatever reason) are deemed to be a special category of thought criminal, deserving a special redefinition of ‘terrorism’.

This ‘antifa’ sticker is not seen as evidence of ‘terrorism’ but any national-socialist equivalent will get you a long jail sentence

Judge Mark Dennis also highlighted during his sentencing the fact that Alex Davies had produced a sticker showing a petrol bomb. The judge is presumably so ignorant of the recent history of nationalism and ‘anti-fascism’ in Britain that he does not know of the most famous logo of Anti-Fascist Action (AFA), which showed an ‘anti-fascist’ throwing a petrol bomb!

No ‘anti-fascist’ group has yet been banned under the Terrorism Act, even though two AFA leaders were convicted and jailed for real acts of terrorism – the IRA’s bombing of Harrods – and other ‘anti-fascists’ were responsible for planting the infamous IRA bomb in Warrington that killed two young children.

Claire Fox – a long-term apologist for IRA terrorism – served as a Member of the European Parliament for Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party and now sits in the House of Lords as ‘Baroness Fox’. IRA veterans and their families exercise political power in Northern Ireland.

Meanwhile, of all the political philosophies in history only national socialism is so feared by those in power in 2022 that they have set out to redefine ‘terrorism’.

A full analysis of the Alex Davies case and its implications will appear in the next edition of Heritage and Destiny.

Real ‘anti-fascist’ terrorism did not lead to any of their groups being banned under the Terrorism Act

Ursula Haverbeck’s latest trial: Lady Michèle Renouf reports from Berlin

Ursula Haverbeck (second left) outside the Berlin court of appeal on 1st April 2022 with (left to right) Dennis Ingo Schulz, Lady Michèle Renouf, and Nikolai Nerling

On April 1, 2022 an April Fools’ Day legal farce was played out under Allies (‘All lies’) Occupied German laws where judges are obliged to rule that forensic “truth is no defense”!

After three days of hearings (commenced in March) at the Berlin Regional Court, the Appeal hearing against the 93-year-old Frau Ursula Haverbeck came to an end. The verdict was one year’s imprisonment without parole for the civil and civic-minded “German grande dame of historical enquiry” (as dubbed by the late great Scots-French documents analyst and leading revisionist Professor Robert Faurisson).

Two statements formed the substance of the trial. One was made more than six years ago, the other more than four years ago. There are no time limits and no parole for those who express “heretical” skepticism on one forensic off-limits historical era. In fact, post-war Germany’s Basic Law is designed by the own-goal so-called victors to outlaw National Socialism in any form the law deems to call criminal, e.g. stickers bearing the wrong insignia or raising an arm to show how high your dog can jump! (Currently the latter “crime” raised by Alfred Schaefer got him an extra year in Munich Prison!)

Readers will be outraged to learn that, as an accredited correspondent for The Barnes Review and the American Free Press, my AFP pass was deemed invalid for entry to the Berlin courtroom press gallery…even as the Antifa hack was invited to take front row pride of place!

Luckily for me, although sad to see, the Public Gallery was barely a quarter filled. German citizens, as I learnt when covering the Schaefer Siblings trial in Munich (July 2018), fear ‘being seen to take an interest’ in such ‘heresy’ trials. They have to show their identity papers, à la Orwell’s “Big Brother”, for likewise this serves to intimidate the curious. Coronavirus G3 certificates were mandatory for the court even on the day when masks and other measures officially had been lifted! Somehow Attorney Nahrath had succeeded to make himself and client exempt. Mask mandates, one often sees, encourage unhealthy opportunities for State-endorsed, anti-civic bullying among citizens.

When Ursula emerged, never bitter, ever modest, from the courthouse, she was full of smiles, even hugs in modest gratitude for my coming to record her eloquent stand for the English-speaking world. Actually, when arrested at a Dresden Holocaust Commemoration in 2018, the first question the German police officer asked me was “do you know Haverbeck?”. Proudly as an old personal friend, I proclaimed her as the greatest living German patriot in all the land – a national treasure!

Frau Ursula and late husband Professor Haverbeck founded the “Collegium Humanum” in Vlotho in 1963. It was at first an educational centre for environmental education and protective action. Later in 2008 it was banned for, among other scientific matters, their estimation that National Socialism was a better political and environmentally beneficial system than either under Bolshevik Communism or Globalist Capitalism. It was at this time that Frau Haverbeck began to take a forensic interest in the unexamined science of an unique mass murder weapon and eyewitness impossibilities concerning how this industrialised wartime phenomena worked and where were the physical remains of a “Holocaust”.

After the trial Wolfram Nahrath, Frau Haverbeck’s attorney (and mine too) gave the AFP, TBR and H&D readers an opportunity to learn more about the conduct of his unique client’s case.

MLR: Does Ursula now go straight to jail?

Attorney Nahrath:
No. This is not the end of the Appeal process. Ursula Haverbeck can also appeal this verdict once again. Then the Highest Court of the State of Berlin, which for traditional reasons is called the Kammergericht (Court of Appeal) in Berlin, will have to decide whether the prison sentence of one year without parole is valid. If the verdict of the Berlin Regional Court is upheld, Ursula Haverbeck will have to go to prison once again. She will appeal this verdict and continue her legal fight.

MLR: The ancient “Kammergericht” court building came about during the middle of the 15th century by the Brandenburg Elector Friedrich II. Alas on this occasion the Appeal was heard in the new ugly appendage currently under scaffold.
Today I believe the populace (if ever asked) would find that putting an antique lady aged 93 through trials about her skeptical opinions, the real crime!

Dr. Rigolf Hennig (above centre with Ursula and Michèle) – Ursula’s loyal comrade – was a freedom fighter in the early 1960s for the return from Italy of the South Tyrol for reunification with Austria. In part successful, for today children there are allowed to speak German in schools. A dedicated organizer of Europäische Aktion, Rigolf’s final action before he died last month, was to translate TBR interview by Dr. Edward de Vries with Lady Renouf on her attorney’s victory in Dresden, published in the magazine Volk in Bewegung (People in Movement). Incidentally, this TBR interview was also translated into French by the revisionist Francis Goumain and published by the Swiss revisionist Rene-Louis Berclaz in the Swiss-French magazine Courrier du Continent.

Nathrath: The three days of trial, especially today, were a tremendous strain for the old lady. During the trial, her long-time comrade-in-arms and friend Dr. Rigolf Hennig died. Ursula Haverbeck, however, withstood the enormous strain and kept her composure.

MLR: Undauntable Ursula has outlived her valiant peers and goes on at 93 years to battle as an entire battalion in herself!
I witnessed today in that courtroom how Ursula stood tall for 35 minutes, and stoic, to deliver her closing speech. I also witnessed how the Judge – so “Woke” anti-culture in her biased mind, tone, and callous words – was extraordinarily unprofessional. This included her insulting impertinence to chastise a lawyer for “raising his eyebrows” during the summing up and sentencing. Quite as if you were on trial and subject to her personal judgment!

Nahrath: The presiding judge could, according to my impression, hardly hide her anger towards Frau Haverbeck. Her tonal emphasis and the way she chose her words did not correspond, in parts, to the objectivity that judges should use as a matter of principle, I felt. She asked why I “raised my eyebrows” but then refused any reply.

MLR: I heard the Prosecutor raised awareness of new “memory crimes” was it in the United Nations General Assembly Resolution?

Nahrath: Yes, Resolution 76/2022. This was raised before the presiding Judge said in her verdict to Frau Haverbeck that: “You are not a Holocaust researcher, you are a Holocaust denier. This is not knowledge that you spread, this is poison” and that she had “distanced herself miles from historical truth” and “damaged the memory of millions of murdered people.”

MLR: This puts one in mind of the Prosecutor in the Paris Court during the trials of Professor Robert Faurisson. She claimed the documents analyst “murdered the Jewish people twice” ie for a second time when dead! I witnessed when this Paris court Prosecutor stood to pray (in secular France!) to Yahweh “to protect His People from Robert Faurisson’s deceitful lips”!
One can anticipate, given the universally comprehensive “Definition of Anti-Semitism” that U.N. Resolutions for so-called “human rights” and “hate speech” and “memory laws” will amount to adoption of the Judaic Noahide Laws for Gentiles (ie a binding set of universal “moral” laws for those not among, but in service to Yahweh’s Chosen People). So much for our universal ‘we were never asked’ democracy!

Nahrath: As a defence attorney in such proceedings, one is severely limited in the possibilities of defence. Every application for the purpose of “counter-evidence” against the “obviousness” of the so-called “Holocaust” is wiped away on the grounds that this event is known and accepted as above all doubt by the court, i.e. it is obvious. For the defence counsel, each of these proceedings is a dance on the tightrope. One “wrong” word and he himself later sits in the dock. The phrase you yourself dubbed in your Telling Films Jailing the Lawyers is always an accompanying reality in Germany in connection with proceedings of “Holocaust denial”.

(left to right) Günter Deckert, Sylvia Stolz, and Lady Michèle Renouf following the release of Frau Stolz from a prison sentence

MLR: Having to defend clients under laws which prohibit a lawyer in cases of historical skepticism from presenting evidential exhibits in their client’s defense, makes achieving any unbiased justice seem virtually impossible. I witnessed in Mannheim Court where Attorney Sylvia Stolz was warned by the Judge if she continued to defend her client (the late great publicist Ernst Zündel) “too well” that she too would be prosecuted and indeed she was!
You had mentioned that serious attempts have been made upon you and other lawyers who have defended your skeptical clients “too well” – an “Alice in Wonderland” accusation. Completely the reverse of a rational courtroom where to do otherwise would be deemed seriously incompetent and open to action by your client for professional negligence!

Nahrath: I regret that I did not succeed in achieving a “better” result for my client in this second instance before the Regional Court in Berlin. All arguments, including the massive criticism against the penal provision of Section 130 (3) of the German Criminal Code and against the case law, ultimately went unheard.

MLR: I was appalled to see how the Judge projected upon your client her own unproven opinion that Ursula “knew she was lying” as in the peculiarly German meaning of “Holocaust-Leugnung“. In German, Leugnung means one knowingly lies when denying something – whereas in English to deny something does not necessarily carry any knowing intention to lie.

Nahrath: In her summary, the Judge put the 93-year-old in a bad light, insinuating that she wanted to make herself important with her appearance in the past years as a lonely woman, playing herself up as a “grande dame,” which the Judge concluded, from among other things, the fact that Frau Haverbeck reported in the trial about the quantities of “fan mail” to the prison. In fact, Frau Haverbeck received a large amount of sympathetic mail from all over the world.

Lady Michèle Renouf with Wolfram Nahrath outside the Berlin court

MLR: Yes indeed your client not only received sympathetic mail but also, I know she received flowers by the dozens when she was in prison, for I was among her many international admirers who sent them!

Nahrath: The Judge repeatedly explained why in her opinion Ursula Haverbeck had devoted herself to the subject of the “Holocaust” in the first place. In truth, the subject had not interested her at all for a long time during the era of the Collegium Humanum. Thereby the Judge claimed without proof that decades of research were undertaken partly while Ursula was still together with her husband Werner.

MLR: When and why did Ursula begin to take an interest in the “Holocaust”?

Nahrath: She had attended war crimes trials in Germany, read countless books and papers, and spoken with the authors. She had never received a definite answer from other authorities, such as the Central Council of Jews in Germany, the public prosecutor’s offices and other institutions, to the questions she had asked about the crime scenes and the means of committing the crimes.
Finally the director of the memorial of the concentration camp Auschwitz, Danuta Czech was shown on public television in 1993 with the statement that due to new findings the number of victims of Auschwitz had to be corrected, from originally 4 million to a good 1 million and the memorial plaque was then actually changed accordingly. Then a well-known Spiegel editor in the magazine Osteuropa reduced the total number of victims to approx. 565,000 (356,000 of them in Auschwitz), and he moved the location of this alleged gassing to outside the central camp. It was after these developments that Frau Haverbeck’s attention to the topic become more concrete.
She asked the comprehensible question: where then had the other many millions of people been gassed? Again, she had not received any answers from the appointed authorities. However, in the course of the years she had received and read more and more works, which brought further aspects of doubt, also about the means of the murder weapon “Zyklon B”.

The great revisionist scholar Professor Robert Faurisson outside one of his many court appearances

MLR: As I have understood from the leading historical revisionists whom I know personally, none “denies” anything; they simply confirm their forensic findings.

Nahrath: As a result, Frau Haverbeck gave more weight to the historians and the natural scientists than to the lawyers, whom she thinks are not ready to deal with these works and circumstances. She does not “deny” because she cannot do so at all. She is asking questions that have not been answered in this trial either.

MLR: I think I heard the Judge designate the works of British military historian David Irving, Swiss revisionist Jürgen Graf, Planck Institute graduate Germar Rudolf, Jewish “Holocaust” analyst Gerard Menuhin, and The Holocaust Industry author Professor Norman Finkelstein among others as “pseudo-scientists” and “deniers” who knowingly lie.

Nahrath: Today’s presiding Judge also chose the familiar path and described all these works as pseudo-scientific – and thus included works by members of the victim’s people. She claimed that Frau Haverbeck, who was 16 years old at the end of the war, knew precisely that the “Holocaust” had taken place as it had always been evident to all Germans. Therefore, the Judge proclaimed that it is particularly reprehensible that Frau Haverbeck only expresses herself one-sidedly and denies it against her better knowledge.

MLR: I marvelled at how Ursula at age 93 could endure listening right from the start of the day to the Judge reading aloud a relentless monologue of past cases of “speech crimes” committed by your client, without a moment’s pause for well over two hours!

Nahrath: In its formulations, the Judge’s opening statement took in already known guidelines from other judgments.
She did not ever address the question of the possible human rights violation of the penal provision. Frau Haverbeck and also the younger generation of Germans had no personal guilt for this “monstrous crime”, but according to the law they had the responsibility to ensure that such a “crime” would never happen again in the world. And for this, according to the presiding Judge, it was right and important that this penal provision existed in order to take action against people like Frau Haverbeck. Those who do not obey the law must go to prison.

MLR: Talk about “one-sided knowledge” set in cement! Our readers will be appalled at how any humane nation, nearly a century after a war, can send to prison a very elderly woman of evident intellectual calibre and good character, for her tenacity to study historical events, as the late Professor Robert Faurisson put it “like a police detective”.
The Judge said Haverbeck had learnt nothing when she talked about Jews and Germans for she should know that “Jews can be Germans and Germans can be Jews”.
The little this “Woke”-blinded Judge knows about racial differences and indeed Judaic Talmudic law wherein non-Jews are described as not human but “as cattle”. Thereby in accord with Jewish law, to save a human life means saving only a Jewish life.
I recall your once telling me that even conscientious judges also risk prosecution if they allow a lawyer to defend his “Holocaust” querying clients “too well”. This was at the time of my making a Telling Film called Jailing the Judges in 2008 when two Germany ex-Constitutional Court judges, Hassemer and Hoffman-Riem, called for the “Holocaust-denial” laws to be repealed.

Nahrath: Yes I do recall this, however no follow-up came of it.
Before the sentence was pronounced, I asked whether one could still sleep peacefully if Frau Haverbeck were to be sent to prison again for opinions expressed more than six years ago or more than four years ago. Frau Haverbeck had not killed, injured, robbed, raped, abused, stolen from or defrauded anyone, she had, merely, said something! However, the Judge dealt with this in her statement of the reasons for the verdict and said that it would be possible to sleep well.

MLR: Indeed it might be possible, in accord with her thoroughly “Woke” warped judgment, that this will earn her career rewards. I say “Woke”, because it was pointed out to me that she used politically correct, trendy made-up pluralisms – a mix of male and female gendered pronouns and new creations. Such “Woke”-addling notions aim to blur distinctions, erase the subtleties of expressing human relationships, and arrest commonsense.
I noted also that the male lay judge was casually attired in a jumper – representing a drop in sartorial standards unbefitting for an official appearance in court and disrespectful at a formal occasion.
What seemed so unrelated was how the Judge almost from the beginning of her opening statements and repeatedly thereafter referred to the conflict with Ukraine. I experience the Ukraine’s presidential broadcasts as wall-to-wall omniscient “Big Brother” monopolized bias, yet I did wonder how this too was being woven into the constitutionally biased case against Ursula?!

Nahrath: Years ago when the Americans sent weapons to the East, Frau Haverbeck predicted war would erupt between the Ukraine and Russia. She saw the Ukraine as the geopolitical tinderbox between Europe and Asia. On the Internet she had said in 2017-18 that if we do not solve the problem in the Ukraine, we shall see the beginning of WW3. I said this observation shows Frau Haverbeck looks ahead to future geopolitical happenings not only to the causes of past events and thereby her mind is mentally alert and responsibly concerned with the present.
I requested acquittal and I am convinced that this was and remains the only correct request. The legal battle in this matter is not yet over.

MLR: Thank you Wolfram for your thoughts. Clearly you and your equally valiant client are nobody’s April Fools!

The aspect of that Day in Berlin which heartened me the most was the way the police guards in the courtroom ceased to take any further robotic interest in whether some persons in the public gallery where wearing their masks correctly … once Attorney Nahrath began his closing speech.

Viennese attorney Dr Herbert Schaller (above right) with his client Ernst Zündel and Lady Michèle Renouf on the day of Ernst’s release from Mannheim prison

At this moment RA Nahrath put me in mind of the late great Austrian attorney Dr. Herbert Schaller, the veteran who got David Irving out of the Viennese Prison on Appeal in 2007. After that success in which he was able to address (in Austria) the vagueness of “Holocaust” eyewitnesses, this prompted the own-goal so-called victor Authorities to introduce a new age-limit for practicing in his field of law specifically to prevent him (already aged 85!) from taking on new and again successful cases! There is something about that wartime generation whereby many of those sixteen years’ old survivors exemplify the four inseparable Classical Virtues, of Measure, Just Objectivity, Forensic attitude, and empathetic Courage.

The Berlin court guards shifted their focus totally on Nahrath’s every word, riveted by his measured tone and modest eloquence. With evident balanced authority, he commanded their rapt attention.

It showed me that anti-German brainwashed policemen are still capable of listening and taking in alternative reasoning. All, thereby, may be by no means lost!

Michèle, Lady Renouf

Tony Blair’s favourite oligarch hit by sanctions: ex-PM and ‘Holocaust’ lobby under scrutiny

Moshe Kantor hosting a conference in Terezin, Czech Republic, where he demanded that laws against ‘Holocaust denial’ be extended across Europe

As far back as 27th February H&D raised questions about former Prime Minister Tony Blair and his favourite oligarch Moshe Kantor, a close friend of both the ex-Labour leader and the Kremlin godfather Vladimir Putin.

We pointed out that since 2015 Blair has been chairman of Kantor’s ‘European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation’, which campaigns for ‘tougher laws against extremism’.

Naturally the extremism Blair and Kantor wish to criminalise involves such things as publishing a magazine or running a bookshop. For this type of extremism the likes of Blair and Kantor endorse the approach of Spanish prosecutors, who wish to jail Pedro Varela for twelve years, or German prosecutors who wish again to jail the 93-year-old Ursula Haverbeck, or German border guards who defy their own laws and their country’s obligations under the European constitution to deport the 19-year-old student Isabel Peralta.

Invading a neighbouring country is, by contrast, not ‘extreme’: not if the invader is Moshe Kantor’s close friend Vladimir Putin.

Moshe Kantor has founded and sponsored Jewish lobby groups and ‘academic’ foundations around the world: he is now under sanctions for his ties to the Kremlin’s campaign of propaganda lies and brutal aggression against its neighbours

Yesterday – more than five weeks after we raised these questions – the British authorities belatedly acted against Kantor, adding him to their sanctions list.

Kantor’s many leading positions in international Jewry and Zionism include President of the European Jewish Council; Vice President of the UK’s Jewish Leadership Council (a registered charity); Chairman of the Policy Council of the World Jewish Congress; and President of the World Holocaust Forum Foundation.

In many of these roles he has worked closely with Tony Blair, who was one of the most pro-Israel Prime Ministers in UK history.

In 2015 Kantor organised a conference in the Czech Republic where he called on European governments including the UK to adopted standardised laws criminalising ‘Holocaust denial’. Defying the views of scholars and legal experts who wish to repeal these ‘historical memory laws’ that jail people for their opinions, Kantor wanted to make the laws stricter and the punishments harsher.

Tony Blair joined Kantor in promoting these arguments and demands for legal crackdowns on opinion-crime, via a major article in The Times newspaper.

The main vehicle for demanding these new debate-denial laws was the ironically named European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation, with Kantor as President and paymaster, and Tony Blair as chairman.

Now Kantor himself is facing legal sanctions – not for opinions, but for his documented ties to the Kremlin’s war machine and lie machine.

Moshe Kantor and Tony Blair honouring Prince Albert of Monaco for his obeisance to the Holocaust lobby

It is now beyond dispute that for the past twenty years or more, Vladimir Putin has used Holocaust propaganda as an instrument of Russian diplomacy and as a justification for Russian military aggression.

Now is the time to ask the forbidden questions. Whatever European courts might say, it’s time to demand historical truth.

Back in 2007 – in a letter prominently published in a national newspaperH&D‘s Peter Rushton discussed the way that Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir had used Holocaust propaganda to pressure US governments into allowing Israel to get away with nuclear proliferation. His letter ended: “Should a self-interested version of 1940s history be allowed to dictate the nuclear power politics of the 21st century, with potentially disastrous consequences?”

In 2022 the same question becomes more urgent, and we can no longer allow the risk of prosecution in many European countries to silence that question.

In 2015 Tony Blair and Moshe Kantor demanded new laws to crack down on ‘antisemites’ and ‘Holocaust deniers’.

Therefore this week H&D will launch a new website section – Real History and the True Europe – in which over the coming months we shall ask the important questions about Europe’s history and culture, including the ‘Holocaust’.

On this website, in our magazine, and in a book to be published later this year – The Dogs That Didn’t Bark: British Intelligence, International Jewry and the Holocaust (the first of a series examining aspects of Britain’s secret history with the aid of new archival discoveries) – we will examine whether, just as Moshe Kantor and Vladimir Putin have exploited ‘Holocaust’ stories for propagandist purposes, other official and unofficial propaganda agencies were behind parts of the original ‘Holocaust’ narrative in the 1940s.

We shall re-examine the work of revisionist scholars including the late Professor Robert Faurisson, including work newly available in English translation.

We shall have interviews and court reports from across Europe, as politically biased judges seek to jail nonagenarians for ‘criminal’ opinions.

And we shall reveal other political abuses of the judicial system, where a new generation of European political activist is threatened with prosecution to distract from government treachery and failure to enforce immigration laws.

This online project and publishing venture will look at many other topics besides the ‘Holocaust’, but we shall not be afraid to challenge the establishment consensus. Europe is again at war. Historical and political truth is too important for us to tolerate its restriction by the courts.

Vladimir Putin and Moshe Kantor during an ‘international forum’ that Kantor sponsored on the 60th anniversary of the Soviet ‘liberation’ of Auschwitz

Spot the criminal – Germany seeks to jail 93-year-old publisher while ‘Holocaust’ museums hang on to billionaire gangster’s donations

Ursula Haverbeck at the Berlin appeal court, 18th March 2022

Ursula Haverbeck – the extraordinarily courageous German patriot and educator now aged 93 – was back in court earlier today in Berlin, appealing against convictions for ‘Holocaust denial’ and a 12-month prison sentence.

This is a combined appeal against two convictions and sentences for similar ‘crimes’, one in 2017 involving a speech to an audience of 80 people in Berlin; the other in 2020 relating to a YouTube interview conducted by Nikolai Nehrling, known in German nationalist circles as the Volkslehrer.

Mainstream German press reports see nothing wrong in dragging a 93-year-old lady through the courts for the ‘crime’ of doubting and asking questions about the alleged murder of six million Jews by a mysterious unique mass murder weapon – the alleged homicidal gas chambers.

H&D’s assistant editor has met Ursula several times, and she could not be further from the stereotype of an ‘inciter of hate’. She is a polite, very well-educated lady who expresses her views in reasonable terms. And it should be noted that she is one of the last generation of Germans who experienced the horrors of fleeing with her family from the invading barbarians of Stalin’s Red Army in 1945.

Ursula Haverbeck knows what it means to be a genuine refugee.

Ursula Haverbeck (above centre) with her Berlin attorney Wolfram Nahrath (above right) at today’s hearing

A very different type of human being is Roman Abramovich, chief financial fixer for the bloodstained tyrant Vladimir Putin.

BBC’s Panorama broadcast a detailed investigation of Abramovich’s criminal career on Monday evening. It is crystal clear that – aided and abetted by both Boris Yeltsin and in particular Putin – Abramovich built his fortune on defrauding the Russian people of literally billions of pounds worth of their national assets.

The beneficiaries of Abramovich’s loot include two of the world’s leading ‘Holocaust’ museums. A few days ago we discussed his links to Yad Vashem in Israel. Now it has become clear that the Imperial War Museum in London has no intention of returning the money given by Abramovich for its vastly expensive new ‘Holocaust’ gallery.

The museum has not disclosed quite how much Abramovich donated, but the total budget for the exhibition is at least £30.5 million.  In addition to his personal contribution (or should we say the contribution of the long-suffering Russian people, since Abramovich’s wealth comes from assets stolen from them) Abramovich also staged a fundraising event for the project at Stamford Bridge, the home of Chelsea Football Club, which he owned until his London assets were frozen this week.

London’s world-famous Imperial War Museum, founded in 1917, bends over backwards to avoid any association with ‘racism’ or ‘slavery’ – yet shamelessly hangs on to millions donated from the ill-gotten fortune of Roman Abramovich

At the time of the donation in October 2018, the Imperial War Museum’s director gushed that: “This donation will enable IWM to reinterpret these galleries, which will present critical insights into the Holocaust as well as integrate the devastating events of the Holocaust into the broader history of the Second World War, revealing why this often overlooked dimension is so important.”

Quite shamelessly – given that it is one of the world’s leading military museums so ought to be taking a close interest in the world-changing events currently under way in Ukraine – the IWM says it will be “retaining the funds from Roman Abramovich”, and in the sly tradition of the barrack room lawyer insists: “This is compliant with all government regulations regarding sanctions”.

Meanwhile Yad Vashem has said only that it is “suspending its strategic partnership” with Abramovich and has yet to confirm whether it will hand back any of the stolen money.

While the Kremlin dictator Putin attempts a real genocide, valiantly resisted by Ukrainian patriots, his gangster henchman Abramovich has funded several prominent examples of a one-sided view of history – exploited for the benefit of yesterday’s Soviet butchers, today’s Russian imperialists, and the shameless Zionist pirates of both yesterday and today.

Those like Ursula Haverbeck who face trials across Europe for the ‘crime’ of ‘denying the Holocaust’ doubtless appreciate the irony that official ‘Holocaust history’ is funded by one of the world’s worst fraudsters, whose career of theft and brutality has been protected by a genuine war criminal.

On Monday Ursula Haverbeck’s latest court ordeal continues in Berlin. H&D will carry further updates throughout the case, both here and in forthcoming issues of our magazine.

Blair’s unusual silence explained

Tony Blair with his patron Moshe Kantor, one of Vladimir Putin’s closest Jewish oligarch allies and main sponsor of the World Holocaust Forum

Many readers have wondered why Tony Blair has been remarkably quiet so far about Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

Look no further than Blair’s very close relationship with one of Putin’s favourite billionaire Jewish oligarchs, Moshe Kantor. Among many prominent positions in international Zionism, Kantor is President of the European Jewish Congress and Chairman of the Policy Council of the World Jewish Congress.

Since 2015 Blair has been chairman of Kantor’s ‘European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation’, which campaigns for ‘tougher laws against extremism’.

Vladimir Putin with his close ally Moshe Kantor

Naturally the extremism Blair and Kantor wish to criminalise involves such things as publishing a magazine or running a bookshop. For this type of extremism the likes of Blair and Kantor endorse the approach of Spanish prosecutors, who wish to jail Pedro Varela for twelve years, or German prosecutors who wish again to jail the 93-year-old Ursula Haverbeck.

Invading a neighbouring country is, by contrast, not ‘extreme’: not if the invader is Moshe Kantor’s close friend Vladimir Putin.

Roman Abramovich, another of Putin’s favourite oligarchs, ostracised in Britain but defended by Israel’s ‘Holocaust museum’ Yad Vashem, to which he has made large donations

Moshe Kantor also funded the World Holocaust Forum, which provided a platform for Putin to indulge his now familiar ‘anti-Nazi’ posturing.

Israel’s ‘Holocaust museum’ Yad Vashem has repeatedly accepted major donations from Putin’s favourite oligarchs, including not only Kantor but also Roman Abramovich who now faces ostracism in the UK for his close Kremlin ties but is still very welcome in Jerusalem.

Prosecutor seeks 12-year prison term for leading Spanish nationalist

Prosecutors in Barcelona are demanding a total of twelve years imprisonment for the leading nationalist activist, author and publisher Pedro Varela in the latest sign that Spain is on the frontline of the struggle for European civilisation and real history.

Varela (now 64) has for decades been among the most courageous and intelligent racial nationalists in Europe, and has already faced years of legal persecution. For fifteen years during Spain’s transition to ‘democracy’ following the death of the country’s military leader General Franco, Varela was president of CEDADE (‘Spanish Circle of Friends of Europe’) which had close international links with defenders of the true Europe including the Tyndall-era BNP.

During the 1990s the first BNP delegation to the annual November commemorations for Franco and Falangist leader José Antonio Primo de Rivera – a delegation which included H&D‘s assistant editor – visited CEDADE’s Madrid office, and even then Pedro Varela was in jail (that time in Vienna, where he was eventually acquitted).

Pedro Varela introducing the British historian David Irving

CEDADE was officially dissolved in 1993, but Pedro Varela continued operating the Europa bookshop in Barcelona and associated publishing houses. Meetings at the bookshop have been addressed by guest speakers from across our movement, including Lady Michèle Renouf and the late Richard Edmonds.

After a conviction in 2008 for “justifying genocide”, Varela spent time in prison between 2010 and 2012. In 2015 he addressed a meeting of the London Forum organised by Jez Turner, and was given the ‘scandal’ treatment by the Mail on Sunday.

A Barcelona court in 2016 ordered the closure of the bookshop which was searched by a squad from Spain’s political police: these latest charges are a delayed outcome of those raids, but also reflect a new hardening of Spain’s left-wing government, determined to construct an undeniable ‘official history’.

We are sure that H&D readers will support Pedro Varela and our Spanish comrades in every possible way as the battle for real European history moves into a new and more intense phase. Both here and in our magazine, we shall soon have major updates on that battle.

The new radical nationalist group Bastion Frontal is – like Pedro Varela – fighting for all true Europeans against what Yockey called the “culture distorters”.
The late Richard Edmonds was one of many leading figures in the racial nationalist and historical revisionist worlds who spoke at Pedro Varela’s bookshop meetings in Barcelona over the years.

The tragedy of National Action: Ben Raymond given ten-year sentence

Earlier today Ben Raymond – the co-founder of national socialist youth group National Action – was given a 10-year extended prison sentence after being found guilty of offences under the Terrorism Act.

Ben Raymond, co-founder of National Action

This was the latest and most serious of a series of trials in which NA activists have been accused of a variety of offences since the group was banned under the Terrorism Act at the end of 2016.

Yet Mr Raymond’s offences seem to have had little to do with anything that a normal Briton would call ‘terrorism’. Reading the remarks of Judge Christopher Parker QC who passed sentence today at Bristol Crown Court, it seems that Mr Raymond’s main offence was producing propaganda for views that the rulers of today’s liberal, multiracial Britain find unpalatable.

In numerous articles over the past five years, H&D has explicitly criticised NA’s strategy, and no doubt when the time comes for an overall assessment of the group, when other trials presently under way have concluded, there will be further criticisms.

But any honest racial nationalist looking at today’s sentence would have to admit two things.

First, that whatever we think of Mr Raymond’s approach, to call him a terrorist deserving a 10-year prison sentence is a travesty and a gross distortion of the English language.

Second, that we older heads in the racial nationalist movement must face up to our responsibility for the political circumstances that led to NA’s creation in 2013. During the previous decade we had a golden opportunity to build a British racial nationalist challenge that was radical yet realistic and responsible. We threw that opportunity away, and we must accept our share of the blame for the tragedy of National Action.

Creators Harassed by Political Police in Merseyside

James Mac, a good friend of H&D was recently arrested, in Kirkby (Knowsley) by Merseyside’s political police, because a pro-White pride sticker appeared in his local area, and taken to Copy Lane Police Station in Bootle (just outside of Liverpool).

James is an activist with the Creativity Movement UK. Creativity is promoted by two organizations: the Creativity Alliance (CA), also known as the Church of Creativity, and The Creativity Movement. The groups have common origins, both being created in 2003 after Matt Hale, successor to Ben Klassen (who founded The Church of the Creator in 1973) was arrested and sentenced to forty years in prison in the USA.  Matt Hale had renamed the organisation “New Church of the Creator”: H&D has reviewed a number of his books in the past.

Here is the report James kindly sent us.

‘The police have finally caught up with me,’ I often joke to family, as a pro-White activist in an area where coppers often speed past, sirens blurring. On August 25th, it wasn’t a joke anymore.

After a morning jog, I arrived home to find police riot vans at the door. I was arrested under the Orwellian ‘crime’ of ‘inciting racial hatred’. A sticker had been discovered on a bus stop. The egregious message? ‘Proud to be White? Contact like-minded people’. I was the alleged ‘perpetrator’.

One of the stickers for which James Mac was arrested

In came a dozen or more mask wearing, taser wielding coppers, ready to do a thorough job on my house, looking for ‘incriminating evidence’. They would certainly find evidence of Racial Loyalty. Meanwhile, a screeching female copper began ranting about a ‘Creativity Agenda!’ It sounded like a term coined by the enemy, eager to demonise. I was not eager to acknowledge it.

Adherents to Creativity have been spreading the good word across Britain for many years. The controlled, virulently anti-White media grudgingly acknowledge the legality of our promotional materials. Why this drama and why now? It will be interesting to find out.

A surreal experience that could only make one enquire to the arresting officer, isn’t this a bit excessive? After a proper declutter job, including the confiscation (theft?) of promotional materials and electronic devices, I was carted off to the police station.

‘All these vans just for me?’ 
‘Yes, and an unmarked car, too.’

Booked in at the station, I got the old fingerprint and mugshot treatment, then carted off to the cells. All very surreal. 
‘Wow, this is really happening.’

How could you not find comedy in it all? This heavy handed treatment, for what? An alleged sticker ‘offence’? With a pro-White message? What is the aim? To make you regret ever being pro-White? It is enough to leave you in a fit of giggles.

I took the opportunity to rest. There was no getting sleep with so much adrenaline. ‘Just lay down and close your eyes.’

After a couple of hours I was introduced to a duty solicitor. I made it clear: everything I ever do, say or support I am happy to defend in court. However, today, it was NO COMMENT. The solicitor’s one task: remind me not to play the fool and get drawn into engaging with these people.

Copy Lane police station, where James Mac was taken to be questioned after his recent arrest

Into the interview room, I was questioned by the two arresting officers. They had been doing a bit of research, invading my privacy, checking bank accounts, etc.

I am a passionate adherent to my religious faith, Creativity. I was subjected to ridicule by the dishevelled Copper A, who repeatedly mocked my sincerely held faith.

‘…the SO-CALLED religion of Creativity.’  I found this highly offensive and super intolerant.

I stuck to my guns of ‘No Comment’. However, in retrospect perhaps I should have utilised the duty solicitor and requested to have the aforementioned obnoxious behaviour corrected.

Better groomed Copper B said this was a chance to tell my side of the story. He proceeded to comment on my shoe purchases, which are of good quality and ethically made.

‘Very nice shoes, James. What’s that all about? Do you think only White people wear shoes like that?’

I chuckled to myself and rolled my eyes. How embarrassing. We are supposed to believe these people are fair and balanced?

The coppers try to make you feel small. They are the headmaster and you are the naughty pupil. My religious conviction is strong and unbending. I did not feel like the inferior party. Just the opposite. I am certain of my morally superior position. Be they activists with sinister motives or normal people ‘just doing their job,’ before me were agents of the forces of darkness.

The interview was over sooner than I expected. At my home these people demanded passwords to electronic devices, threatening legal repercussions. I expect the officers to press for them. Strangely, they did not. I discovered I had no such legal obligation. Not unless the warrant states it, which it did not.

Once released I jogged home. Family members were present in support. What is this alleged ‘horrendous crime’ that caused so many military style vehicles to screech up to my door? they enquired. When news broke the whole episode was because of a sticker asking a self-respecting White person if they are proud of their biological heritage, there was a lot of rage. There was much frothing at the mouth and cursing.

Another of the stickers for which James Mac was arrested

The police are not popular. For all their research, evidently they were ignorant of my popularity. Perhaps they liked the idea of ‘exposing me’ and making me a social outcast, but unfortunately I am a family favourite. The one elderly relative who I suspected may give me a telling off instead said ‘You are the only one brave enough to say what the rest of us think!’ Oh well.

The crazy incident has become my perfect ice breaker. Neighbours come with grievances about the current state of affairs. Friends and acquaintances rage against the police and compare them to a notoriously ‘non-kosher’ farm animal.

The hypocrisy of the police is not lost on the average White person. The ‘Black Lives Matter’ rubbish has these coppers literally GROVELLING ON THEIR KNEES. You do not need to explain. No need to spoon feed. They figure it out all by themselves.

The reputation of the police is in the sewer. Frankly, I have no sympathy. Give them the benefit of the doubt and they surpass themselves with disgraceful behaviour.

I have found the whole state harassment experience reinvigorating. If the sinister forces were aiming to intimidate and have me scurrying for cover, they are mistaken.

I am bursting with enthusiasm for Creativity. I am eager to talk to as many people as possible about my experience and my abiding passion for White people.

——

Check out The Creativity Movement’s website and full report of James’s arrest at –  https://creativitymovement.net/blog/police-harass-creators-in-england/

Media hype assorted cranks and loons in effort to criminalise nationalism

Benjamin Hannam, the young police recruit arrested in his bedroom, whose Hollywood Nazi fantasies have been portrayed as ‘terrorism’ and led to his conviction last week.

During the last fortnight several criminal convictions in English courts have provided further ammunition for those seeking to restrict political freedoms in Britain.

The UK has not had anything approaching ‘free speech’ on racial matters since the first Race Relations Act in 1965, and as H&D has explained in several detailed articles over the years, these restrictions have been progressively tightened. This dishonest campaign by the political establishment has involved deliberately distorting the truth about serious crimes.

Of course most H&D readers would rightly regard the entire structure of race law as a sinister infringement of what were once traditional British freedoms, and as part of a concerted effort quite literally to change the face of Britain.

However this does not mean that we should regard everyone prosecuted under these laws (or the related extension of terrorism laws to encompass a range of non-violent if unwise political activities) as some sort of hero or heroine.

To do so – to campaign on behalf of everyone convicted under these laws as though they were all quite simply free speech martyrs – would be foolish and counter-productive: indeed it would be to play the enemy’s game.

For example, two of those recently convicted under the ‘terrorism’ laws were autistic children who had bought into the imagery of ‘nazism’ rather than anything substantial.

It really was pathetic to see national newspapers give front page treatment to the case of 22-year-old London police officer Benjamin Hannam, who as a confused teenager with a Jewish step-grandfather and a Muslim girlfriend had briefly been involved with the now-defunct National Action and one of its offshoots.

He had also downloaded the ‘manifesto’ of a real terrorist maniac, Anders Breivik, and in common with several of his ilk seemed to view Breivik – an ultra-Zionist whose beliefs and actions were the very antithesis of national socialism – as some kind of ‘nazi’ / ‘fascist’ comrade.

Anders Breivik, the Zionist fanatic whose ‘racist’ murder spree has led him to be regarded as some sort of ‘nazi’ / ‘fascist’ hero by fools on the fringes of our movement

There are one or two people on the fringes of our movement who indulge such dangerous nonsense, and it’s time for responsible racial nationalists, national socialists, historical revisionists – indeed all of those involved in the broad campaign for the rescue of historical truth and national, racial, and cultural integrity – to draw the line.

Racial nationalism is not the mindless promotion of hatred, and racial nationalists are the very opposite of nihilistic terrorists. National Socialism is not Hollywood nazism or psychotic satanism. Historical revisionism is not a platform for crank conspiracy theory or vacuous Jew-baiting.

There is serious work underway – led by individuals with decades of experience as well as new recruits of high calibre – to defend serious racial nationalist politics and historical revisionist work in post-pandemic and post-Brexit Britain.

We are not going to be derailed by fantasists, cranks, or enemy informants – nor by those thousands of miles away who issue grand proclamations while utterly ignorant of the personalities and realities involved.

Footballer and ‘rapper’ find out whose lives really matter

Tom Pope (above left) scoring for Port Vale against Manchester City in January 2020

Footballer Tom Pope has been banned for six matches by the Football Association – not for any offence committed on the field, nor for misuse of drugs, nor for anything remotely criminal.

His offence was to post something deemed ‘anti-semitic’ on Twitter.

Readers should understand that Tom Pope is not one of the multi-millionaire class of Premier League footballers. He has made his career at humbler levels of the English game, with 274 appearances for his present club Port Vale, in League Two – the old Fourth Division – scoring 90 goals and three times voted Port Vale’s Player of the Year.

Tom Pope is a long way from being a ‘famous’ footballer, but he has a cult following within a tiny subculture of the game – mainly among Port Vale fans, who are not numerous.

In January this year Tom Pope scored in one of Port Vale’s few ‘glamorous’ matches, an FA Cup tie against England’s wealthiest club Manchester City, who predictably won 4-1.

A jocular Twitter exchange after the match led one fan to ask him to “predict the World War III result”, to which Pope replied: “We invade Iran then Cuba then North Korea then the Rothchilds (sic) are crowned champions of every bank on the planet.”

Tom Pope’s offending ‘tweet’ for which he has now been fined and banned by the English Football Association.

The circumstances (and the typing error) showed that this was semi-jocular banter rather than premeditated ‘anti-semitism’, and indeed nothing about Jews or Judaism was mentioned.

However the thought police were soon on the case. This week an FA disciplinary panel convicted Pope of an “aggravated breach” of FA Rule E3 – “bringing the game into disrepute”.

One “aggravating” factor was that Pope had failed to accept that his post was “anti-semitic”. In his defence he had told the panel that he had watched hundreds of videos about 9/11. “He explained that he found the videos convincing in predicting the invasions of four countries – Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Sudan. He believed, based on those videos, that the Rothschild banking business had funded the invasions of those eight countries so as to be able to take over their banks.”

Though the FA has never claimed that Pope held “anti-semitic beliefs”, its judgment argued that “the ordinary reasonable person knows very well that the Rothschild family have been used for centuries as a synecdoche for the Jewish people – maligning the family in discourse in order to malign all Jewish people.”

They added: “It is of particular concern that even now Mr Pope does not acknowledge the antisemitic message that is conveyed by the Statement. It is also of concern that he has not seriously questioned the conspiracy theories that he has allowed to inform his views.”

Consequently in addition to his six-game ban Pope was fined £3,500 and ordered to complete an “education course” – i.e. at the age of almost 35 he is being forced to undergo a brainwashing course in establishment definitions of ‘antisemitism’.

In a now-deleted ‘tweet’, Jeremy Corbyn thanked ‘Wiley’ for supporting Labour during last year’s election campaign.

Also in the news this week for Twitter ‘anti-semitism’ is the rapper known as Wiley (real name Richard Cowie), whose art will be little-known to H&D readers but who is “considered a key figure in London’s grime music scene”.

This acclaimed “Godfather of Grime” was awarded an MBE for his “services to music” in 2018 – perhaps a desperate effort by Theresa May’s Conservative government to win some credibility among young urban blacks and their fellow-travellers – though he endorsed Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party in last year’s election.

During recent weeks ‘Wiley’ has made several posts to his now-suspended social media accounts, comparing Jews to the Ku Klux Klan (on the basis that both Jews and the KKK supposedly exploit blacks), and calling Jews “cowards” and “snakes”. So far as one can make out, his politics seem to be a version of the usual ‘victim game’, by which everyone else in the world – Europeans, Arabs and Jews included – is responsible for Africans’ misfortune.

What ‘Wiley’ fails to recognise is that in this ‘victim game’, one set of people (not blacks) will always hold the ultimate trump card. He has entered an auction that he can’t win, but where he will nevertheless have to pay.

‘Grime artist’ Wiley is in trouble for ‘antisemitism’.

Unlike Tom Pope, it seems that there is a prima facie case against ‘Wiley’ under Britain’s race laws, and police are investigating. The Zionist lobby group Campaign Against Antisemitism (who were behind the prosecution and jailing of London Forum founder Jez Turner) are petitioning the government to withdraw the rapper’s MBE, and he has been dropped by his management company.

Needless to say, even this is not enough. Leading Zionist campaigners including Jewish Chronicle editor Stephen Pollard are staging a 48-hour boycott of Twitter this week, writing: “You refuse to act against Jew hate. You enable the likes of @WileyCEO to spread their poison.” The Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis also joined the Twitter boycott.

Even the Home Office and the Prime Minister’s office have joined in the kvetching, with Downing Street spokesmen saying this afternoon that social media companies must “go much further and faster in removing hateful content”.

And here of course is the real issue. While mainstream conservative parties on both sides of the Atlantic depend heavily on Facebook (in particular) to manipulate voters’ minds – including playing subtle games with racial politics – they are determined to censor anyone using social media to ask radical questions. Hence they seize on the likes of Tom Pope and ‘Wiley’, so as to justify a broader purge.

Next Page »

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter

  • Follow us on Instagram

  • Exactitude – free our history from debate deniers