Robert Faurisson on Auschwitz: the facts and the legend

The great revisionist scholar Professor Robert Faurisson was born in Shepperton, West London, 94 years ago today. Immediately after returning to his home in Vichy from a conference organised by H&D in that same town of Shepperton, the Professor died aged 89 on 21st October 2018.

In January 1995, just before the much-heralded 50th anniversary of the capture of the camp by Soviet forces – which is now the basis for ‘Holocaust Memorial Day’ in many countries – Professor Faurisson published an essay summarising his revisionist research separating facts from legend concerning Auschwitz.

Prof. Robert Faurisson in 1975, during the early years of his great intellectual adventure in revisionism.

This essay can now be found at The Faurisson Archive, a comprehensive online resource compiling his essays on revisionism and other topics. The late Professor’s “unofficial blog”, containing an extensive archive – the entirety of his collected works in nine volumes and numerous translations in English, German and Italian – was destroyed by Google at the behest, of course, of the usual suspects last October on the fourth anniversary of Faurisson’s death, but has been rebuilt and enhanced by the Professor’s longtime translator and assistant.

As we reported a few days ago, the Archive also now includes an important rediscovery: an audio recording of a speech delivered by Professor Faurisson in New York in 1980, to a group of revisionists convened by Fritz Berg. Click here to read about this rediscovery and its importance to revisionist historiography.

And now for ‘Holocaust Memorial Day’, the Archive has published a new English translation of an important essay by Robert Faurisson: see the Holocaust Day update at the Real History Blog.

Work continues on re-editing and uploading material to the Faurisson Archive. And what Robert Faurisson termed the great intellectual adventure of revisionism also continues. Robert Faurisson would have been 94 years old today, but he remains ever young, ever relevant, ever at the forefront of the challenge to mystification and outright lies. Happy Birthday Robert!

Robert Faurisson Archive restored – including newly rediscovered audio

On 21st October last year – the fourth anniversary of the death of the historical revisionist and literary scholar, Professor Robert Faurisson – the usual suspects removed the online blog hosting a comprehensive archive of his writings in several languages.

Thanks to the work of Professor Faurisson’s righthand man and translator, the blog has been restored at a new address, robert-faurisson.com

This blog remains under construction with material being added and adapted to the new format.

Among the most recent additions is an important rediscovery: an audio recording of a speech delivered by Professor Faurisson in New York in 1980, to a group of revisionists convened by Fritz Berg.

Professor Robert Faurisson (above right) accepting an award from President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran.

This period was a turning point in revisionist history. As implied by the meeting chairman, this was the early days of what has since become the established religion of Holocaustianity.

The American miniseries Holocaust had first been broadcast only two years earlier, in April 1978, and then rebroadcast in September 1979, just a few months before this meeting. It was first broadcast in Germany in January 1979 and undoubtedly had more impact than any of the more ‘serious’ treatments of the topic by the likes of Claude Lanzmann, with far more brainwashing effect on Germans than the immediate postwar propaganda by Anglo-American occupiers.

Robert Faurisson’s first reaction to this Hollywood production appears on the blog (in French) here. In English his comments, headed “The docudrama Holocaust or the end of a taboo”, translate as follows:

Hitler’s “gas chambers” never existed.

The “genocide” (or: the attempted “genocide”) of the Jews never took place.

Those so-called “gas chambers” and that so-called “genocide” are one and the same lie.

This lie is of essentially Zionist origin.

It has allowed a gigantic political-financial swindle of which the State of Israel is the chief beneficiary.

This lie was denounced by the Germans as early as 1944.

From 1945 to the present day it has also been denounced by Frenchmen, Britons and Americans.

For thirty years, the general public knew nothing of the fact that the lie had been exposed. The mainstream media said nothing about this. On the contrary, they repeated the lie in an ever more deafening way.

From 1974-1975, they started talking about those who exposed the lie. With insults, and distortions of their words. They said, for example: “These people are Nazis, madmen, cranks. They deny the obvious. They dare to say that the Nazi concentration camps and their crematory ovens didn’t exist.”

In 1977, the mass media continued still more vigorously. They put out cries of alarm. They said that Nazism was reappearing in Germany and a bit all over the world.

Not once have they agreed to give those whom they accuse a chance to speak.

Not once have they made known the precise opinions of the people accused.

Why is this?

Because they are afraid that the general public, on seeing what these people actually are and what they actually say, will realise that they have been lied to.

The general public would see that they are serious people, well informed, concerned with the truth and not with propaganda. They have never denied the existence of the concentration camps and the crematory ovens. They say that those camps existed and they add that the Germans were neither the first nor the last to use concentration camps. They say that those crematory ovens also existed and they add that there is nothing bad about burning corpses rather than burying them, above all in places where there is a risk of epidemic.

Moreover, they say that never did Germany’s leaders either give the order or equip themselves with the means to kill anyone simply because of his or her race or religion. The alleged “holocaust” of six million Jews is a lie orchestrated, like it or not, by the media. The American film Holocaust, described as a “docudrama”, is nothing but a farce and a political and commercial operation to boot. It constitutes the admission that now, in 1978, the Zionist taboo can choose only between sex-shop Nazism and show business hype.

Professor Faurisson with Lady Michèle Renouf, the British campaigner for the right to free historical research.

Yet in the thirty-five years since Holocaust was first broadcast, cultural ‘occupation’ has proved more relentless than literal military occupation. Reportedly around half of the West German population watched the series.

Robert Faurisson pioneered the resistance to this brainwashing, and in 2023 his work is more relevant than ever before, as the reach of Holocaustian laws spreads even to countries such as the UK, Spain and Canada that were once relative havens of free historical investigation.

The Vincent Reynouard extradition hearing in Edinburgh next month will be an important stage in this steady encroachment of tyranny. It will be said that this is not backdoor criminalisation, because Vincent’s ‘crime’ was committed in France and it is ‘simply’ a matter of extraditing him to face French justice, regardless of the fact that he infringed no UK law.

But the effect is to move towards acceptance by the British media (and by British police and border control officers who collaborate with their European counterparts) that ‘Holocaust deniers’ and ‘Nazis’ are ipso facto criminals.

Here and at the Real History blog, a campaign of resistance to this tyranny is being prepared. Keep watching these two sites for further details, coming soon.

Udo Walendy: soldier, patriot and scholar (1927-2022)

Udo Walendy – German patriot and pioneering revisionist scholar and publisher – died last night aged 95. The following obituary is reposted from the Real History Blog.

Born in Berlin, he was among the last of the wartime generation, having served as a teenager in the Reich Labour Force, then as a Luftwaffe auxiliary, and finally as a soldier in the Wehrmacht, turning 18 less than four months before the end of the war.

After an early career in education and business, Udo became one of the very first pioneers of revisionist history, publishing the first edition of his book Wahrheit für Deutschland – Die Schuldfrage des Zweiten Weltkriegs (‘Truth for Germany: the guilt question of the Second World War’) in 1964, a decade before the 1970s explosion of revisionist scholarship. This book appeared in many subsequent editions in several languages.

Among his most significant contributions to that scholarship was his long-running series Historische Tatsachen, published latterly by Siegfried Verbeke’s VHO in Flanders.

A major figure on the international revisionist scene, Udo was a long-time board member of the Institute for Historical Review (IHR), and was a witness at both of the groundbreaking trials of Canadian-German revisionist publisher Ernst Zündel, in 1985 and 1988.

When the NPD was formed in 1964 as the main nationalist party in what was then West Germany, Udo Walendy became one of its first members, serving on the party’s federal executive from 1967-73, and as state chairman of the NPD in North-Rhine-Westphalia from 1971-73.

In 1996-97 Udo Walendy served prison sentences under Germany’s notorious debate-denying Volksverhetzung law, and was prosecuted on many other occasions, as well as suffering frequent official harassment and the seizure of his books and magazines.

Until his eyesight failed in his final years, Udo Walendy remained extremely active as a revisionist and as a patriot, standing as mayoral candidate for the NPD in his home city of Mönchengladbach in 2014, when he was already aged 87.

The last of the wartime generation are leaving us, as are many of the pioneering revisionist generation of the 1960s and 1970s. The great intellectual adventure of our times (as Robert Faurisson called it) continues, as the torch is passed to new revisionist leaders such as Vincent Reynouard, now battling extradition to France where a new prison sentence would await him, and then on to a new generation of brave and articulate European intellectuals.

The truth – or as Professor Faurisson preferred to put it, “exactitude” – will never be silenced. Wahrheit macht Frei!

French scholar arrested in Scotland by ‘anti-terrorist’ police

French revisionist scholar Vincent Reynouard was arrested in Scotland on Thursday 10th November. He is presently in an Edinburgh prison cell, where he will remain at least until 23rd February next year, when a court will determine whether he should be extradited to France, where he would be jailed under that country’s laws restricting historical and scientific enquiry. (There will be a further hearing in Edinburgh on 8th December this year, but the main case will not be heard until February.)

Vincent Reynouard built his scholarly reputation with a detailed re-examination of what had been termed the ‘Massacre of Oradour’, and went on to become one of the world’s leading sceptical investigators of the ‘Holocaust’. Francophone readers should visit his excellent website.

British and American readers might be shocked that a specialist squad of police from SO15 – the Counter-Terrorism Command, directed from London – swooped on a small Scottish village to arrest this 53-year-old scholar, who is not accused of anything that would be a crime in the UK.

Despite Brexit, French prosecutors seem able to demand extradition from the UK of a man who has committed no crime under UK law.

Yet in fact this is simply the latest example – though an especially important example – of an increasing trend across Europe, where politicised courts and prosecutors, aided by politicised police forces and intelligence agencies, are seeking to crush any dissent and enforce a quasi-religious obedience to one particular view of 20th century history.

For a detailed report on Vincent Reynouard’s arrest in the context of this disturbing European trend, visit the Real History blog for an in-depth article by H&D‘s assistant editor Peter Rushton.

We shall report on the case as it develops. Scottish readers able to assist Vincent should contact H&D as soon as possible.

15th November update: As a sequel to my article about Vincent Reynouard’s arrest, this morning I expose the background of the veteran politician who acted as intermediary, lobbying the British authorities to spend time and money pursuing this law-abiding French scholar.

This is the front page of tomorrow’s Herald, the Glasgow-based newspaper published since 1783 but now owned by Americans.
There is no “anti-nazi law”: the French authorities are seeking Vincent Reynouard’s extradition under a law banning critical enquiry into ‘Holocaust’ history. No such law exists in the UK and it is shameful that Police Scotland collaborated in this arrest.
The leading French nationalist journal Rivarol also has Vincent Reynouard on its front page – though unlike the Glasgow Herald, Rivarol defends traditional European freedoms.

How and why the National Front began its march to the Cenotaph

Today military veterans, politicians, religious leaders and other VIPs will lay wreaths at the Cenotaph in Whitehall, and at other war memorials throughout the United Kingdom, in memory of the men and women from Britain and her Empire who gave their lives during the wars of the 20th and 21st centuries.

More than half a century ago, in the early days of the National Front, the NF began a tradition of holding a separate march to the Cenotaph, followed by a wreath-laying ceremony. Ill-informed observers might think that this was in poor taste – an attempt by the NF to politicise an event that ought to be above politics.

In fact the opposite is the case.

A.K. Chesterton, who later became founding Chairman of the National Front

The NF under its founding chairman A.K. Chesterton (who had himself been awarded the Military Cross for his actions during the Battle of Épehy in September 1918) began this tradition not in order to exploit it for partisan purposes, but as a response to the late 1960s’ Labour government’s politicisation of Remembrance Sunday.

Ever since Remembrance commemorations began in 1919, they had always been a memorial not only to servicemen and women from the British Isles, but from the whole of the British Empire.

After the Rhodesian government of Prime Minister Ian Smith declared independence in 1965, Harold Wilson’s Labour government in London employed a range of vindictive policies (including economic sanctions) aiming to force the Rhodesians into submission.

This Rhodesian postcard was recently unearthed by propagandopolis.com who suggested it was issued soon after UDI, but H&D suspects it dates from the summer of 1967 when Rhodesians and British patriots began to organise defiance of the British government’s ban on their presence at the Cenotaph.

Eventually this included banning Rhodesian veterans from Remembrance Sunday events at the Cenotaph. (There had already for more than twenty years been a calculated decision to shun veterans of Britain’s 1945-48 war against Jewish terrorists. British Palestine veterans were not banned from the Cenotaph, but until very recent years they were given no official recognition and had to organise their own memorial events.)

Not only Rhodesians themselves, but their comrades from across the Empire (including the British Isles) were outraged by this insult.

Future Rhodesian Prime Minister Ian Smith, seen here in 1943 as a young RAF officer, suffered serious injuries during the Second World War. Yet in the late 1960s Britain’s left-wing government banned Smith and other Rhodesians from the Cenotaph ceremony.

H&D‘s assistant editor Peter Rushton has recently discovered letters from the 1960s which explain how pro-Rhodesian Britons (including several very well known war heroes) planned their response in defiance of the Labour Party – a response which eventually led to the NF beginning its tradition of marching to the Cenotaph.

The full story will be told in the January edition of Heritage and Destiny.

Today H&D readers will join British and Commonwealth citizens around the world in remembering the dead of 20th and 21st century wars – regardless of their political views and regardless of which part of the Empire they came from, we will remember them.

In addition to the Whitehall ceremony, British nationalists attend war memorials across the UK to pay tribute to the fallen. Here two elected borough councillors, H&D editor Mark Cotterill and Michael Johnson, lead one such delegation in Lancashire in 2006.

European nationalists celebrate Ursula Haverbeck’s 94th birthday as she faces new jail sentence

Ursula Haverbeck (above left) with her lawyer Wolfram Nahrath

Ursula Haverbeck is one of Europe’s bravest and most intelligent campaigners for historical truth and justice. In 1963 she and her late husband Werner Haverbeck founded the Collegium Humanum – an educational institute based at their home in the northern German town of Vlotho.

The Collegium provided a wide range of educational and ideological training for several generations of Germans, with speakers including the intellectual founder of the modern European environmentalist movement, Dr E.F. Schumacher.

In 1992 Ursula became active in an organisation seeking to build proper memorials for the German civilian victims of the Second World War, whether victims of the terror-bombing campaign by the Western allies, or the campaign of mass rapes, murders and expulsions by Stalin’s Red Army.

This might have been thought a simple acknowledgment of historical fact, but increasingly Ursula drew the hostile attention of German state authorities who wished to impose an authorised version of history.

Increasingly this state-imposed version of history has concentrated on criminalising any attempt to question the alleged ‘Holocaust’ of six million Jews in supposed homicidal gas chambers on the presumed orders of Adolf Hitler.

Ursula Haverbeck was greatly influenced by the German judge Wilhelm Stäglish and his pioneering book The Auschwitz Myth

Historians, scientists and even lawyers who draw attention to the serious evidential problems with the orthodox ‘Holocaust’ narrative were first demonised and driven out of their jobs, then criminalised, and increasingly subjected to long jail sentences.

Ursula herself was first fined for this invented thought-crime of ‘Holocaust denial’ – defined in Germany as Volksverhetzung, or ‘public incitement’ – in 2004.

Since then she has repeatedly been dragged into court, despite her advancing years, for the ‘crime’ of asking politely worded questions about ‘Holocaust’ history in letters to academics, politicians, and other public figures; for writing historical articles in magazines; and more recently for the ‘crime’ of answering questions in an online video interview.

Ursula Haverbeck with her fellow campaigner for historical truth, Horst Mahler, who has spent many years in German prisons for thought-crimes.

From May 2018 until November 2020 Ursula served two and a half years in prison for such ‘crimes’, and earlier this year she was sentenced to a further 12 months imprisonment.

After her appeal was turned down, Ursula was due to enter prison on October 25th but this has been delayed for procedural reasons, so she was not in fact behind bars on her 94th birthday yesterday.

H&D understands that her jailing is however imminent.

A campaign in support of Ursula Haverbeck is already beginning across Europe. To celebrate her birthday yesterday the Spanish organisation Devenir Europeo displayed a banner in Madrid honouring Ursula’s courage and indomitable intellectual fortitude. One of the campaign organisers is H&D‘s European correspondent Isabel Peralta.

A new generation of European patriots and intellectuals are challenging the lies that have been imposed on our continent for more than seventy years.

Young Spanish intellectuals from Devenir Europeo displayed a banner yesterday in central Madrid to celebrate Ursula Haverbeck’s 94th birthday and to inaugurate a campaign for her release and the repeal of European thought-crime laws.

Political prisoner Ursula Haverbeck will spend her 94th birthday in jail

Ursula Haverbeck – seen here with her defence attorney Wolfram Nahrath – is a political prisoner in today’s ‘democratic’ Germany.

Today the Court of Appeal in Berlin confirmed that Ursula must serve a 12 month jail sentence for the ‘crime’ of questioning aspects of her country’s history. She will be summoned to prison at some point during the next few weeks.

This means that Ursula will spend her 94th birthday on November 8th behind bars.

As Tim Garton Ash, the late Eric Hobsbawm and many other historians of widely varying ideological backgrounds have stated, it’s time to scrap the ‘historical memory’ laws that disgrace today’s Europe.

Further updates on Ursula’s case will appear here and at the Real History blog, as well as news of protest actions against tyrannical debate-denying laws that are spreading throughout Europe. Such laws are likely to be heading for the UK under a Liz Truss government – extending our own already tyrannical ‘race laws’. It’s time for Britons and fellow Europeans to reclaim our heritage.

How Rudolf Hess tried to stop war – and why others wanted to kill him

Rudolf Hess in 1986, a year before his death

Thirty-five years ago today, the 93-year-old Rudolf Hess died at Spandau, where he had been the sole prisoner for more than twenty years. He had been incarcerated for almost half a century, since his crash landing in Scotland in May 1941.

Hess flew to Britain hoping that Germany and Britain could end their mutually-destructive war. He proposed that Britain should develop her Empire which was in no way threatened by Germany, who only required the return of her relatively modest colonies from the Kaiser’s era.

Under Hess’s proposals, Germany would be given a free hand in Europe, including dealing with Stalin’s Soviet Union.

After war had intensified during 1940, Hess perceived that Britain would not now easily agree a peace settlement without losing prestige, so he decided to take the risk of flying to Britain himself, “so that by his own presence in England, England would be enabled to consider an approach.” Hess hoped that he could provide some foundation on which peace talks could proceed.

Instead this martyr for peace found himself in one prison or another for the rest of his life.

Rudolf Hess believed he could convince British leaders of Adolf Hitler’s true intentions

To begin with Hess used cautious language about the Soviet Union, not wishing to give away too much in advance of what he hoped would be serious negotiations with the British. But by July 1941 when he wrote a memorandum titled “Germany – England from the viewpoint of war against the Soviet Union”, eventually handed to government minister and Daily Express owner Lord Beaverbrook, Hess was open (and prescient) about the overriding threat from Moscow that he believed an Anglo-German alliance should combat.

He believed that Germany was strong enough to defeat Russia, correctly pointing out that German morale was far higher in this war than it had been during the First World War:
“It will hardly be doubted that the spirit of the troops is magnificent. The elements which in the [first] world war eventually weakened the spirit of the German troops – the disruptive influences from home infected with Marxist communism, and hunger at home – are missing today.

“Thanks to the effects of national-socialism, the German armed forces are not only immune from Bolshevik propaganda, but fantastically anti-Bolshevik.”

Nevertheless, Hess asked influential Britons such as Beaverbrook to consider the consequences for the British Empire of a German defeat.

“Consequent on the Anglo-Bolshevik alliance, a victory for England would be a victory for the Bolsheviks.

“…Should England’s hopes of a German weakening be realised, the Soviet state, after the expansion of its armament capacity, would be the strongest military power in the world.

“Only a strong Germany as counter-balance, supported by all Europe, and in trustful relationship with England, could hinder this.

“I believe that Germany, destined by fate, was compelled at a given moment to draw aside the curtain covering the secret of the Bolshevik army, so that revelation of the danger might even yet make possible the defence of the civilised world.

“…England should further bear in mind the danger that would face certain parts of her Empire when the Bolshevik giant – which today is hardly conquerable by the biggest army in the world – has reached the military strength to be anticipated in the future.

“The danger will be still further increased by the attraction of Bolshevik ideas with the native-born populations with a low standard of living.

“…I am convinced that world domination awaits the Soviet Union in the future – if her power is not broken at the last minute – with the loss to Great Britain of her position as an Imperial power.”

Which of us in 2022 could say he was wrong?

The current issue of H&D includes an article by our assistant editor Peter Rushton giving the most likely explanation of Hess’s murder in 1987.

And way back in 1941, soon after Hess’s arrival in Britain, there was an abortive plot to kill him, involving exiled Polish troops and an officer of the Special Operations Executive – the ‘dirty tricks’ wing of the British war effort.

For a discussion of this and other aspects of today’s 35th anniversary of Hess’s murder, visit the new Real History blog by our assistant editor.

Remembering Henry Hafenmayer

A year ago today our friend and comrade Henry Hafenmayer died at the shockingly young age of 48.

A former train driver who was dismissed for his political opinions, Henry became a prominent public champion of German historical revisionists, in a country where one can be jailed for questioning the official version of ‘Holocaust’ history. He was best known for his website Ende der Lüge (‘End of the Lie’) and associated social media accounts.

In this task he was especially closely associated with four jailed revisionists: former leftist lawyer and philosopher Horst Mahler (now 86); publisher and ecologist Ursula Haverbeck (now 93); lawyer Sylvia Stolz, first jailed for defending the late Ernst Zündel; and filmmaker / video blogger Alfred Schaefer.

All four have served long prison sentences, and Mr Schaefer was only recently released from jail in Munich. During 2022 he was been awarded – jointly with his equally courageous sister Monika – the Robert Faurisson International Prize and the George Orwell Free Speech Award.

Henry’s friends Alfred and Monika Schaefer

With awards such as these and in celebrating the release of Alfred Schaefer, the spirit of Henry Hafenmayer lives on.

Henry also lives every time honest Europeans asks questions about their own continent’s history, despite the never-ending efforts of the enemies of truth.

Here in the UK we are – in theory – one of the last free European countries, in the sense that there is no law specifically forbidding historical research and discussion, as there is across so much of Europe.

Yet even here there is pressure for changes to ‘hate crime’ laws and online regulations.

At the end of 2021 the influential lobby group ‘Hacked Off’ presented a report to Parliament in which Heritage and Destiny was cited as the prime example of “harmful extremism”. They argue that H&D is too intelligently written to break existing laws, and is all the more damaging for that reason – so new regulations should be written to ban us from the internet even when we have done nothing illegal!

One of the three examples presented to Parliament, showing our “harmful extremism” was our obituary to Henry Hafenmayer!

A tribute to Henry Hafenmayer by our Spanish comrades at Devenir Europeo

We expect the new Prime Minister – almost certainly Liz Truss – on taking office next month to press ahead with new laws that favour Zionist lobby groups, and we are likely to be in their sights again.

Henry Hafenmayer will continue to live not only in our hearts and minds but in the fears of our enemies!

During the next week there will be further announcements here and at the Real History blog about new developments in the fight for historical truth.

Another defeat for London Holocaust Memorial plan – is it time to scrap the scheme?

The vast ‘Holocaust Memorial’ which has now been rejected three times by planning authorities and courts, but which the British Government still insists on promoting

Vastly expensive plans for a huge Holocaust memorial in London, next to the Houses of Parliament and Westminster Abbey, have suffered another defeat after the Court of Appeal refused to hear the case.

In April this year the High Court blocked the plans, and this week an appeal by the UK Holocaust Memorial Foundation fell at the first hurdle.

Former prime minister David Cameron launched the plan in 2014 by appointing a Holocaust Commission which reported the following year, recommending a prominent new memorial with attached “learning centre”. The plan soon acquired cross-party support and in July 2016 Victoria Tower Gardens – a park adjacent to Parliament – was chosen as the site.

Architects David Adjaye and Ron Arad were chosen for the project. Their initial budget of £50 million has since risen to a current estimate of £102.9 million.

In 2019 Westminster City Council’s planning authority rejected the proposal. The two leading politicians who co-chaired the project – Conservative Lord Pickles and Labour’s Ed Balls – wrote to the council complaining that planning officers were “giving excessive weight to the number of objections lodged on the planning portal”.

These objections lodged with the council included a detailed report by H&D‘s assistant editor Peter Rushton (who now also writes the Real History Blog). His report to Westminster City Council was based on detailed research into the planning history of the original London Holocaust memorial in the 1980s – click here to read.

The late Richard Edmonds recorded a film with Lady Michèle Renouf on the site of the proposed memorial. Click here to view this film.

Foreign Secretary Lord Carrington with Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Carrington, who had won the Military Cross for his bravery during the Second World War, wrote of the original plans for a London Holocaust Memorial: “The whole idea is preposterous”.

Government ministers sought to override Westminster Council by appointing a Whitehall inspector who recommended acceptance of the plan. Housing minister Chris Pincher officially approved the scheme in July 2021. (Pincher has since been disgraced after a series of alcohol-fuelled sexual assaults on young men; his downfall led to the recent resignation of Prime Minister Boris Johnson.)

In April this year Mrs Justice Thornton in the High Court ruled that Pincher had acted unlawfully, because Victoria Tower Gardens is protected by a statute dating back to 1900 which specifically prevents it being used as anything other than a garden open to the public.

This week the Court of Appeal ruled that there was no realistic prospect of the High Court judgment being overturned, so it would not hear the case. “There is no real prospect of successfully arguing that the judge’s construction of the 1900 Act was wrong… On the contrary, it was plainly correct.”

The Appeal Court judges rebuked the Holocaust Memorial Foundation for arguing that objectors to the proposal should not have been allowed to raise one of their successful legal points: “It is extremely unattractive for the losing party to argue that his opponent should not have been allowed to introduce a legal argument that turned out to be correct.”

In a typically shameless and arrogant gesture, government minister Paul Scully and Holocaust Educational Trust chief executive Karen Pollock insisted this week that they still support the project, despite it now having been rejected three times – by city council planners, the High Court, and the Court of Appeal.

Lord Pickles, seen here with former Prime Minister Theresa May, is co-chairman of the Holocaust memorial project. He also advocates introducing a law to ban “Holocaust denial” in the UK.

H&D understands that the only realistic possibility of forcing through the project now would be for the government to introduce legislation (which would have to be passed by both Houses of Parliament) repealing the 1900 law and allowing Victoria Tower Gardens to be used for something other than a park.

If such a law is proposed, we shall use this as an opportunity for a long-overdue debate on the whole principle of whether London should be forced to have a vastly expensive Holocaust memorial. Such a debate must ask the central questions:
What was the ‘Holocaust’?
What did British intelligence and British ministers know (or think they knew) about the ‘Holocaust’ during the 1940s, and what was the factual basis for their knowledge?
What was the relationship between international Jewish organisations and the British war effort, including propaganda and subversive warfare organisations?

If the British taxpayer is expected to pay more than £100 million, and sacrifice a large chunk of the nation’s capital city, to memorialise the ‘Holocaust’, then we have a right to expect answers to these questions.

« Previous PageNext Page »

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter

  • Follow us on Instagram

  • Exactitude – free our history from debate deniers