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

Lancaster leftists outraged by democratic discussion

In most parts of the United Kingdom there are campaigns under way for elections to be held on May 5th.

Among the areas that do not have elections this year is Lancaster, but some political activity did take place there last week – and characteristically local politicians are outraged that anyone should dare to exercise their democratic right to a dissenting view.

Members of the pro-White pressure group Patriotic Alternative distributed leaflets in several parts of the city pointing out that on present demographic trends White Britons are set to become a minority in our own country.

Instead of discussing this question rationally – whether by challenging the statistics or by arguing openly that White extinction would be a good thing – local left-wingers complained to the police.

Quite disgracefully, Lancaster Police took it upon themselves to make a political statement that the leaflets were “inflammatory”. Such political debating terms are no business of the police. If there is any question about the leaflets’ legality, there are laws and courts to resolve the matter. We do not yet live in a country where it is acceptable for police officers to bully political campaigners.

Patriotic Alternative is not yet a registered political party, and as stated above there are no elections to Lancaster City Council this year. But when voters in Lancaster next visit the ballot box, they should feel secure that their local police are securing the integrity of the political process, not undermining it by seeking to suppress dissenting voices.

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

Berlin appeal court confirms 12-month jail sentence against 93-year-old Ursula Haverbeck – video interview update

Ursula Haverbeck (above centre) began her appeal hearing a few weeks ago where she was represented by Berlin attorney Wolfram Nahrath (above right).

On Friday afternoon an appeal court in Berlin confirmed the conviction and 12-month jail sentence against 93-year-old publisher and author Ursula Haverbeck.

Her ‘crimes’ involved expressing her opinions on German history, and asking ‘forbidden’ questions about the alleged murder of six million European Jews and the unique ‘mass murder weapon’ of the homicidal gas chamber.

Ursula Haverbeck (above second left) with supporters at her court hearing in Berlin last Friday: (above left to right) Dennis Ingo Schulz, Lady Michèle Renouf, and Nikolai Nerling

In the video below our correspondent Lady Michèle Renouf – who has been a friend of Ursula’s for many years and was in court for the final day of the appeal hearing – interviews Nikolai Nerling, known to German nationalists as the Volkslehrer, whose filmed discussion with Ursula formed the basis of one of the ‘criminal’ charges.

A further report on the case will appear here soon.

Isabel Peralta reports on her arrest – new video update + new Instagram link (March 27th)

Isabel Peralta, the 19-year-old student who during the past 12 months has emerged as the brightest leader of a new generation of European nationalists, was stopped by border security at Frankfurt airport last Tuesday (15th March).

On searching her hand baggage she was immediately detained, even though the only item found was a copy of Homer’s Iliad – which dates back to the 8th century BC!

Spanish and German security services whose officers were waiting for Isabel at the airport had clearly planned her detention in advance and had files ready on her political activities, none of which are grounds for deportation from Germany.

As explained in the video below, a process was under way to deport Isabel from Germany on grounds of “threat to national security”, long before her other bag was retrieved from the plane’s hold. Other items in that bag (widely reported in the media) were her private belongings and therefore not an offence under Germany’s ‘public order’ law. In fact the authorities had no grounds under the Schengen treaty governing EU travel even to search the bag.

This and many other aspects of the case – including the fact that Isabel was for many hours denied access to a lawyer – are now being pursued.

After being detained overnight Isabel was deported back to Madrid, where on Friday evening (March 18th) she gave the live interview above, now available with English subtitles.

Commenting on Instagram earlier today, H&D‘s assistant editor wrote: “Isabel Peralta is the bravest and best comrade I have encountered in any country. She has sought to direct the new generation of nationalists in a principled, intelligent but strategically sensible manner. She is the very opposite of a terrorist or criminal. Her treatment yesterday and today is a disgrace to the Federal Republic and I have every confidence that her legal representatives will ensure she is not treated in this manner in future. All friends of the real Europe should give Isabel every support.”

Later we shall report further details of this disgraceful abuse of power by the authorities of the Federal Republic. Legal proceedings continue and we are confident that Isabel’s German lawyer will resolve the matter in her favour.

An article by Isabel Peralta will appear in the May-June edition of H&D. Our readers will be hearing a lot more from this excellent representative of European youth. Click here for Isabel’s YouTube channel.

For an update on Isabel’s case in Madrid against the professional liars of the international media, please click here.

UPDATE 20th March: On Friday evening Isabel appeared on a live broadcast from Madrid, in which she answered a range of questions about her unconstitutional detention. The story is very different from that told by the mainstream media. Please click here to watch an English-subtitled version of this broadcast. We apologise for very occasional passages that are unsubtitled for technical reasons.

UPDATE 27th March: Isabel Peralta has a new Instagram account at https://www.instagram.com/aquiles.helade/ See her introductory video below (with English subtitles).

Isabel writes: “Following the censorship suffered by people and organisations critical of the state welfare system – a system whose highest values according to the constitution are ‘freedom’, ‘equality’, and ‘political pluralism’ – I feel compelled to open another account. All Europeans must have the right to know the true ideas of their blood.”

Berlin court sets crazy timetable for Ursula Haverbeck, 93

(above left to right) Ursula Haverbeck, Rigolf Hennig and Lady Michèle Renouf

H&D readers will be familiar with the case of Ursula Haverbeck, the courageous German publisher and activist – now aged 93 – who has been subjected to repeated persecution by the German authorities for the ‘crime’ of asking questions about her own country’s history.

Former co-organiser of the Collegium Humanum which staged conferences and lectures featuring some of the greatest names in German academia, Ursula Haverbeck is herself a survivor of one of the most traumatic episodes in German history, having had to flee East Prussia as a 16-year-old when her country was invaded by Stalin’s brutal Asiatic hordes of the ‘Red Army’.

From 1992 to 2003 she founded and chaired the Verein Gedächtnisstätte (Memorial Sites Association) which aimed to build a suitable memorial to German civilian victims of the Second World War, and to end “the unjustified unilateral nature of the view of history”.

Since 2004 she has been repeatedly prosecuted under Germany’s notorious Volksverhetzung law which forbids rational discussion of alleged events now taken out of history and sacralised as the quasi-religion of ‘Holocaust remembrance’. It is forbidden in Germany to investigate whether, where and how the alleged murder of six million Jews in homicidal ‘gas chambers’ on the alleged orders of Adolf Hitler actually took place.

Following several convictions, Ursula Haverbeck was jailed in May 2018 at the age of 88 and remained incarcerated for more than two years. H&D‘s great comrade the late Richard Edmonds addressed a rally in Germany on Ursula’s 91st birthday in 2019 – click here for details.

H&D has just published a groundbreaking revisionist essay by assistant editor Peter Rushton, dedicated to Ursula Haverbeck and her fellow campaigners for free historical research Lady Michèle Renouf and Isabel Peralta. Click here for details.

At the age of 93 there are several further ‘criminal’ proceedings against her. (In Germany it’s common for several stages of appeal to take place before a jail sentence is actually served.)

Court hearings like other aspects of life have been affected by the pandemic, but the Berlin appeal court has now ordered that this 93-year-old lady must attend four days of hearings spread over three weeks, on March 18th, 21st and 25th, and April 4th 2022.

This necessarily involves either repeated travel from Frau Haverbeck’s home (more than 200 miles from Berlin) or a long stay in a Berlin hotel, which might not even be allowed under CoVID regulations.

Ursula Haverbeck at one of many court appearances with her Berlin attorney Wolfram Nahrath

There are strong differences of opinion among H&D readers about these CoVID regulations, so that aspect of the argument should be for the moment ignored. Even if one regards the German government’s CoVID measures as entirely justified, what surely cannot be justified is the continued persecution of a brave 93-year-old simply for asking questions about her own country’s history.

Frau Haverbeck’s alleged ‘crimes’ would of course be perfectly legal in the UK, and in the USA would be protected by constitutional rights.

The continued existence of the Volksverhetzung law and its use in this manner to silence dissent is a disgrace to a nominally ‘democratic’ nation. H&D‘s assistant editor remembers his arrest and interrogation by the East German communist secret police in 1987, when he was a young student. Today’s ‘democratic’ authorities in the Federal Republic have shown themselves to be no better.

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.

Two faces of heroism: Wolfgang Fröhlich and Admiral Sir Tom Phillips

Wolfgang Fröhlich earlier this year with his 2021 Robert Faurisson International Prize

Ending a sad month for H&D, following the loss of our comrades John Bean and Ian Carser, we learned that the great Austrian revisionist – 70-year-old chemical engineer Wolfgang Fröhlich, who earlier this year was awarded the Robert Faurisson International Prize – has died. His longstanding comrade Franz Radl informs us: “As I was told he had to spend several weeks in the intensive care unit because of his Covid-19-illness.”

This tragic news arrived just as I was writing a historical article for this website about the events of December 1941, and it seems now strangely appropriate to combine the two, and reflect on two different but complementary faces of heroism with regard to the Second World War and its legacy for us in the 21st century.

Wolfgang Fröhlich’s heroism was that of a man who speaks the truth as he sees it, with the benefit of specialist technical knowledge and scholarship, knowing that the personal consequences will be catastrophic. In this respect (though from Catholic Austria) he stood in the tradition of Martin Luther who reputedly said in 1521 when summoned to recant his ‘heresy’: “Here I stand, I can do no other”. There is no reliable record that he actually said those words, but he did defy his inquisitors, and we know that he did say: “I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience.”

Beginning in the 1990s, Wolfgang Fröhlich similarly stood by his seriously researched and thoughtfully expressed views which amount to the most serious ‘heresy’ of our times: challenging historical orthodoxy regarding the purported extermination of six million European Jews in ‘homicidal gas chambers’ on the orders of Adolf Hitler.

Wolfgang Fröhlich appeared as an expert defence witness at the 1998 trial of Jürgen Graf (above left) and was himself arrested five years later. Alongside German-Canadian revisionist Ernst Zündel (above right), Fröhlich became (in the words of Prof. Robert Faurisson) one of the first victims of President George W. Bush and Rudolph Giuliani in their efforts to crush revisionism.

This challenge began when Fröhlich appeared as an expert defence witness during the trial of Swiss revisionist Jürgen Graf and his publisher Gerhard Förster in 1998. By that time he had for a few years been distributing revisionist texts to Austrian politicians, journalists and others. Based on his own expertise as a specialist in the use of poison gas for exterminating vermin, Fröhlich had concluded that the ‘official’ story about ‘homicidal gas chambers’ being used to kill Jews and others with hydrogen cyanide (‘Zyklon B’) in German ‘extermination camps’ was scientifically impossible.

Even after the Graf trial, it took some time before Fröhlich himself was troubled by the authorities. In 2001 he published a 368-page book entitled Die Gaskammer Lüge (‘The Gas Chamber Lie’). This led to a warrant for his arrest, but no immediate proceedings followed.

It was not until June 2003 that Fröhlich was arrested, an event which according to Prof. Robert Faurisson seems to have been linked to a speech in Vienna by President George W. Bush’s special envoy on combatting ‘anti-semitism’, the notorious Rudolph Giuliani, later right-hand-man to President Donald Trump.

Giuliani demanded action against revisionists, writing in the New York Times that “revisionist viewpoints put us at risk of a repetition of race-based genocide”. Washington demanded, and Vienna obeyed. Wolfgang Fröhlich was arrested on 21st June 2003 and spent twelve of the next sixteen years in prison – the rest of the time on trial or awaiting trial. During one of these intervals of semi-liberty, in 2006 Fröhlich attended the Tehran International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust – an event offered uniquely by Iran as being open to all sides of debate on this topic – accompanied by his indefatigable Viennese attorney, Dr Herbert Schaller. He received an ovation from the Iranian audience after simply telling them that he was legally prevented by the Austrian authorities from expressing his views even in Tehran.

Wolfgang Fröhlich (second right) with fellow speakers at the 2006 Tehran Conference including his attorney Dr Herbert Schaller (centre) and Lady Michèle Renouf (far right).

Austria became among the most oppressive of the many European countries that during the past quarter-century have criminalised ‘Holocaust denial’, with increasingly severe penalties against those who apply normal historical methods to a period that has been taken out of history and turned into a secular religion.

Even after his release in March 2019, Fröhlich spent the rest of his life as a condemned criminal without normal pension and other citizen’s rights. He was even labelled by prosecutors (in true Stalinist fashion) as a criminal ‘lunatic’ as punishment for the lucid, rational expression of his historical and scientific views. During his last two years, Fröhlich was engaged in a series of legal battles to expose the unprofessional conduct of ‘expert’ psychiatric witnesses who had been prepared to parrot the prosecution’s line.

During one of Fröhlich’s court ordeals in 2015, Prof. Robert Faurisson wrote:
“I know Wolfgang Fröhlich. He masters his subject. He expresses himself with moderation. He is not an excited or fanatical person. On the contrary! He honours his country and historical science.
“His fate is upsetting. We must always remember the degree of ignominy to which the ‘elites’ who rule the German-speaking world have sunk and, in particular, the German or Austrian magistrates capable of sending a man of this quality to prison for thirteen years.”

Wolfgang Fröhlich’s heroic stand for truth and justice is sure to survive his death, and inspire future generations as Europe recovers its dignity, sovereignty and traditions.

Admiral Sir Tom Phillips (1888-1941) died eighty years ago this month in a war that he deeply opposed, seeing it as the consequence of disastrous decisions by British governments.

By contrast another very different hero – Admiral Sir Tom Phillips – was lost in the mists of history until I found a document in the wartime diaries of Hugh Dalton, the minister in Churchill’s wartime government who took charge of the ‘dirty tricks’ department of Britain’s war effort, the Special Operations Executive.

Admiral Phillips was a hero of a type familiar to students of Greek tragedy – where one often finds a man trapped by circumstance, who has no alternative but to confront his fate.

In June 1940, just a month after Churchill had taken over as Prime Minister and taken Britain over the brink into ‘total war’ – Admiral Phillips told Dalton that this war was a disaster for Britain and was the consequence of several appalling decisions that had alienated countries that should have been our allies.

“He does not care anything about the Italians, who are a worthless lot, but the Spaniards are a very different story. To have Spain as an enemy would jeopardise the whole of our control, both of the western Mediterranean and the Atlantic sea routes. It is unthinkable that we should have been brought to such a point. We backed the Bolsheviks in Spain in 1936 and ’37 against the only man who, in modern times, has been able to make Spain strong. The horrors committed by the Bolsheviks in Spain were seen by our sailors and are on record.

“This was the climax of a foreign policy which had first adopted an attitude towards Germany which made war with her inevitable; had then successively alienated Japan, Italy, and now, finally, Spain. The French had not been fighting in these last weeks. This was because they too had become Bolsheviks. Weygand [the French supreme commander from May-June 1940] had said that the only tough troops in France were the Poles, and that if he had had ten more Divisions of them, he would have won the battle.”

Despite his perception that this war was a disaster for his country, Admiral Phillips took command of British naval forces in the Far East in October 1941. Immediately after Pearl Harbor he set out on his flagship HMS Prince of Wales to confront Japanese forces (the very forces whom he believed should have remained British allies – a view also taken by his former colleague, the ex-Director of Naval Intelligence, Admiral Sir Barry Domvile, who by this time had been interned without trial in England for opposing Churchill’s war policy).

On 10th December 1941, the Prince of Wales and her fellow battleship HMS Repulse were sunk by Japanese air attack. Admiral Sir Tom Phillips – who had so strongly opposed the entire war policy – went down with his ship.

Had he the opportunity, no doubt the Admiral – like Wolfgang Fröhlich – would echo Martin Luther: “I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience.”

Piece by piece, their fellow Europeans will recover accurate knowledge of their own history.

George Orwell wrote in 1984: “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”

Our task, in our present, is to recover that control.

New video: Justice in Germany (new link)

A celebration of those who have fought for justice and real history in Germany, the UK and across the European world. A shield and medal created by British campaigner Dr James Thring to celebrate a legal victory in this continuing battle, leads to broader discussion by Anglo-German friends of Lady Michèle Renouf including her attorney Wolfram Nahrath.

Discussion of the positive contributions made by friends of justice and historical truth includes those Britons who opposed terror bombing strategy in the 1940s, and the groundbreaking contribution to the honour of Britain by the British historian David Irving in his 1963 book The Destruction of Dresden.

This video marks the first anniversary of Lady Michèle Renouf’s Dresden court victory.

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/

Next Page »

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter

  • Follow us on Instagram

  • Exactitude – free our history from debate deniers