Ireland set to adopt new ‘hate crime’ law
The Republic of Ireland’s parliament is about to pass a new law on ‘hate crime’ that will be among the most restrictive in Europe.
This will bring Ireland broadly into line with most European Union countries that already restrict historical investigation of aspects of the Second World War, notably the alleged mass murder of six million Jews in purported homicidal ‘gas chambers’.
Section 8 of the new law describes historical revisionism in similar terms to those used in many other debate-denying European laws that have been strengthened since the 1980s: “condoning, denying or grossly trivialising genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes against peace”.
Offences under this section will be punished by up to one year in prison. Moreover even possession of revisionist material will be criminalised under Section 10: courts will assume that an offender intended this material for distribution, and the burden of proof will be on a defendant to show otherwise.
The maximum sentence for such “possession” (which could be in printed or electronic format) will be two years imprisonment. There will be potential exemptions, including for material that can be shown to be of scholarly importance, but as elsewhere in Europe courts are likely to impose historical judgments that should normally be outside their competence.
In a direct attack on conservative Catholic traditions that were once the backbone of Irish society, the new law targets not only the usual categories of racial ‘hate crime’, but also offences against new, fashionable ‘protected characteristics’ involving gender and sexual orientation.
In short, it will be a ‘hate crime’ for anyone to fail to agree that a man who asserts he is a woman, has actually become a woman.
Almost all parties in the Dail, Dublin’s parliament, are supporting this Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill. In Northern Ireland, only Traditional Unionist Voice has so far spoken out against the new law.
At H&D, we are unsurprised to see Irish politics going down this route. It has long been obvious that despite the persistent delusions of many Irish-Americans, Sinn Fein is fully on board with a toxic mix of Marxism and post-1968 leftist liberalism.
Dublin is increasingly multiracial, and its political culture is almost entirely ‘woke’.
Added to these toxic trends is a more fundamental problem. More than any other country in the world (except Israel), the Irish Republic is founded on a set of historical lies and distortions, reflected even in the absurdity of fake ‘Irish’ titles for Prime Minister (Taoiseach), Parliament (Dail) and many other party names and official positions.
Having forged their own identity on the basis of ‘victim’ imposture, Irish republicans now find themselves obliged to surrender to those who deploy stronger ‘victim cards’.
Falangist leader exhumed from Madrid war memorial
On the 120th anniversary of his birth, the remains of Falangist leader José Antonio Primo de Rivera are today being removed from his tomb at the Valley of the Fallen (Valle de los Caídos), a vast memorial to the dead of Spain’s Civil War. H&D‘s Isabel Peralta reported today from the scene of José Antonio’s reburial in Madrid (see video below).
José Antonio founded the Falange Española in 1933 in an effort to transcend petty factionalism and offer Spaniards a non-Marxist critique of capitalism:
“The National-Syndicalist State will not stand cruelly aloof from economic conflicts between men, nor will it look on impassively as the strongest class subjugates the weakest. Our regime will make class struggle totally impossible, since all those cooperating in production will constitute an organic whole therein. We deplore and shall prevent at all costs the abuses of partial vested interests, as well as anarchy in the workforce.”
In November 1936, aged 33, José Antonio was murdered by leftist assassins in the prison yard at Alicante. After the nationalist victory in 1939 his Falangist followers carried José Antonio’s remains 300km to the Escorial near Madrid, and in 1959 he was reburied nearby at the newly consecrated Valley of the Fallen, a huge cathedral carved out of a mountain, where Spain’s caudillo Francisco Franco was also buried in 1975.
For decades the Valley of the Fallen was a place of pilgrimage for Falangist veterans and Spanish nationalists from various factions, who were often joined on November 20th each year (the anniversary of both José Antonio’s murder and Franco’s death) by comrades from across Europe. H&D‘s assistant editor Peter Rushton was part of BNP delegations to the Valley on several occasions during the 1990s.
The left-wing government in Madrid have for several years made clear their determination to desecrate José Antonio’s grave as an act of political spite. Last autumn they introduced new laws designed to criminalise aspects of Spanish history. One was designated a “democratic memory law” and the other was a new law against “anti-semitism”, which effectively means a law exempting Jews and Zionism from criticism.
José Antonio’s family surrendered to official pressure, and took the decision to go ahead with his exhumation and reburial of his remains at Madrid’s San Isidro cemetery.
H&D correspondent Isabel Peralta first wrote about the impending exhumation of José Antonio in Issue 110 of our magazine, and also made several videos discussing related issues (see versions below with English subtitles).
Isabel has recently been banned from Twitter but has a new website at www.isabelperalta.net with an English version at www.isabelperalta.net/english
Reports on the Spanish government’s attack on their own history will appear at these sites and here at H&D. Isabel also writes in the forthcoming edition of our magazine, which will be published at the start of May.
The Martin Luther King race relations industry
Among the most ludicrous products of the worldwide ‘race relations’ industry is the veneration of Martin Luther King.
This cult’s latest emanation is a sculpture unveiled this week in Boston, Massachusetts.
Amid controversy about the sculpture, critics and supporters alike have missed its essential absurdity.
The artist responsible for this work says he was inspired by a photograph of King embracing his wife: but nothing could be more ridiculous than seeking to venerate the ‘martyred civil rights leader’ as, of all things, a faithful husband.
By today’s moral standards, Martin Luther King would be condemned as a serial adulterer. Indeed one of his main political enemies – FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, who viewed King as a crypto-communist – had by the time of King’s murder compiled many volumes of evidence about his infidelities.
Had King not been the victim of a literal assassination, there was ample evidence to assassinate his character. One FBI document records how King laughed as he watched a colleague rape a woman.
This and many other shocking allegations were discussed almost four years ago in a mainstream magazine article by a respected biographer.
But all this has to be written out of history, because King’s status as patron saint of black liberation is simply too important for our rulers to allow facts to contaminate the legend.
Celebrate St Edmund – the original English Patron Saint
Today – November 20th – is St Edmund’s Day. While St George (who had no historical connection to England) is commonly regarded as our Patron Saint, the original Patron Saint of England was St Edmund, who was King of East Anglia for about fourteen years until he was killed by Danish invaders in 869.
These invaders destroyed all records of Edmund’s reign, so it’s no longer even known precisely when and where he was born.
But about 150 years after his death, the Anglo-Danish King Canute converted to Christianity and began the tradition of venerating St Edmund as a Christian martyr and Patron Saint of England. For the next 500 years the abbey that Canute founded to house his relics, at Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, was one of England’s most important shrines, attracting pilgrims from across the country.
Mediaeval chroniclers depicted Edmund as having been born in Nuremberg and descended from Saxon kings. His actual birthplace is uncertain, though we do know that the East Anglia over which he ruled was one of several Anglo-Saxon kingdoms in what later became England, and was established around 550 by Germanic tribes arriving from the Frisian region (in what is now the Netherlands and north-western Germany) and Jutland (in what is now Denmark).
St Edmund’s origins, his death, and even the date of his feast day, combine to make him a highly appropriate patron saint of England in 2022 – when more than ever we should be aware of our racial roots and aware of the need for solidarity with our fellow Europeans against the encroaching tyranny of the multiracial new world order.
Liberals tell us we are a nation of immigrants, and point to the successive waves of migration that created England: including Edmund and his Anglo-Saxon ancestors, as well as the Viking invaders who killed him.
Racial nationalists by contrast understand that our fellow Europeans are our racial cousins, whereas the offspring of non-Europeans remain fundamentally alien, whether they were born in London or Lagos.
So whether he was born in Nuremberg or Norwich, St Edmund was an English king and a European king.
The fact that 20th November is the Feast Day of St Edmund, King and Martyr, is also appropriate for another reason. Today on the frontline of the European racial nationalist battle against alien tyranny, our Spanish comrades mark the anniversary of the martyrdom of José Antonio Primo de Rivera, the Falangist leader murdered by communists on this day 86 years ago. November 20th has for decades been a day of pilgrimage for Spanish nationalists to the Valley of the Fallen, where he is buried in a vast basilica carved out of a mountain near Madrid.
The 21st century equivalents of his murderers now aim to desecrate José Antonio’s grave at this memorial to the victims of the Spanish Civil War. As H&D‘s European correspondent Isabel Peralta explains in the video below, this is part of a tyrannical “democratic memory law” by which Spain’s left-wing government is imposing a particular version of history. In this one-eyed ‘history’, the Spanish communists and their allies are to be treated as heroes – in fact Spain this month has a new postage stamp celebrating its Communist Party – whereas nationalists are to be damned as villains.
Isabel herself will next week face trial under the Spanish equivalent of the UK’s race laws: a politically motivated trial designed to distract from the failure of Spain’s immigration policy. H&D will soon be reporting on this trial, and before then we shall have a report on today’s commemoration of José Antonio.
The battle for Europe continues – and St Edmund is the ideal patron saint for Englishmen to concentrate our minds on this battle.
So let us all celebrate St Edmund today, celebrate the legacy of José Antonio, and celebrate the new generation of racial nationalists who will reclaim and rebuild a Europe fit for Europeans.
Remembering the Fallen
104 years ago today, four years of European civil war ended. In what was then termed the ‘Great War’, or simply ‘the war’, but which we now call the ‘First World War’, nine million soldiers died in combat, with another 23 million wounded. Though civilian casualties were fewer than in the second European civil war that broke out just over twenty years later, it’s estimated that around five million civilians died as a result of the conflict.
At 11 am today, Britons will fall silent to remember those terrible events and our ancestors’ sacrifice.
Alongside respectful memory, there should also be anger.
Earlier this year, the work of Britain’s best-known war poet, Wilfred Owen – who was killed in action in northern France, exactly one week before the end of the war – was removed from the GCSE English Literature course by one of the main examination boards.
H&D readers will not be surprised to learn that this change (which also involved removing the work of Philip Larkin, arguably the greatest 20th century English poet) was made in the name of “diversity”.
Whatever else nine million Europeans died for during 1914-18, they certainly didn’t die for the dubious benefits of “diversity”.
So even if schoolchildren will no longer study Wilfred Owen, H&D readers should today read and think about his Anthem for Doomed Youth.
What passing-bells for these who die as cattle?
— Only the monstrous anger of the guns.
Only the stuttering rifles’ rapid rattle
Can patter out their hasty orisons.
No mockeries now for them; no prayers nor bells;
Nor any voice of mourning save the choirs,—
The shrill, demented choirs of wailing shells;
And bugles calling for them from sad shires.
What candles may be held to speed them all?
Not in the hands of boys, but in their eyes
Shall shine the holy glimmers of goodbyes.
The pallor of girls’ brows shall be their pall;
Their flowers the tenderness of patient minds,
And each slow dusk a drawing-down of blinds.
Multi-coloured Tory leadership 2022: ethnic alibis for anti–”wokeness”
The political circus of modern Conservatism has pitched its tent in the full glare of media attention. Racial nationalists and (more broadly) traditional patriots are looking on in despair.
On 7th July Boris Johnson – despite having won a landslide majority in December 2019 to deliver Brexit (and for better or worse, having largely succeeded in doing so) was forced to resign. His departure will be delayed until election of a successor.
Until this afternoon there were no fewer than twelve candidates either declared or on the point of declaring. (Within the last hour this was reduced to eight nominated candidates for tomorrow’s first ballot.)
And the most striking aspect is that the most traditionalist, anti-“woke” candidates are from ethnic minorities.
Suella Braverman, whose parents were ethnic Indians (partly Goan) arriving in the UK from Africa in the 1960s, is presently Attorney General. Three years ago she attracted criticism from left-wing and Jewish lobbies after daring to state that her party was committed to “a battle against cultural Marxism”, though nothing she has said or written suggests that she has any advanced understanding of what this term means.
When announcing her leadership bid a few days ago, Braverman told an interviewer: “We need to get rid of all this woke rubbish.”
Meanwhile Kemi Badenoch, who until last week was “Equalities Minister” in Johnson’s government, launched her campaign with an article in The Times that focused heavily on anti-“woke” arguments.
Badenoch, daughter of Nigerian immigrants, wrote: ”Our country is falsely criticised as oppressive to minorities and immoral, because it enforces its own borders. We cannot maintain a cohesive nation state with the zero-sum identity politics we see today.
“Exemplified by coercive control, the imposition of views, the shutting down of debate, the end of due process, identity politics is not about tolerance or individual rights but the very opposite of our crucial and enduring British values.”
What is truly pathetic about this leadership contest so far is that so-called “right-wing” conservatives are hiding behind the skirts of black women, apparently in the belief that in 2022 any opinions that might remotely be described as “racist” can only be expressed via a non-White spokeswoman.
Thus the Conservative Party leadership contest has become almost like the multiracial dystopian vision of London depicted in the series Gangs of London.
Ethnic backgrounds of the initial twelve declared or likely contenders included:
a Nigerian (Kemi Badenoch); a Goanese Buddhist (Suella Braverman); a Pakistani Muslim (Rehman Chishti – dropped out) and an Pakistani apostate Muslim (Sajid Javid – dropped out); two Indian Hindus (Rishi Sunak – present favourite – and Priti Patel – dropped out); an Iraqi Kurd and apparently apostate Muslim (Nadhim Zahawi); a Jew (Grant Shapps – dropped out); and a semi-Jew (Tom Tugendhat).
Only three of the eight nominated or initial twelve potential candidates are of straightforwardly British or Irish background going back three generations or more: Jeremy Hunt, Liz Truss and Penny Mordaunt.
Some readers might be surprised that of the nine ‘ethnic’ candidates, only one was a practising Muslim, and he dropped out having come nowhere close to securing sufficient nominations. This is Gillingham MP and imam’s son Rehman Chishti, recently appointed to a junior post at the Foreign Office. Chishti took his oath of allegiance as an MP on the Koran, but also had copies of the Torah and the King James Bible placed on the despatch box during his swearing-in. Even such conspicuous devotion to multi-faith liberalism got him nowhere.
Instagram’s war on truth: H&D writer banned within 24 hours
H&D writer Isabel Peralta – the 19-year-old student from Madrid who is the best and brightest of a new generation of European nationalist activists – launched a new Instagram account this week, but was banned within 24 hours!
Readers can judge for themselves whether this ban was justified under Instagram’s rules against promotion of ‘hate’.
Every attempt to ban Isabel from social media exposes the hypocrisy of our rulers and exposes what they truly fear.
Our rulers are happy with the crudest and most ill-focused expressions of ‘hatred’ and anti-social behaviour.
They fear a clearly expressed ideological challenge to their anti-European agenda.
We have total confidence that Isabel Peralta will continue that challenge with courage, intelligence and ideological fortitude.
Though banned now from Twitter and Instagram, Isabel still has a YouTube channel – but she has no connection with numerous other social media accounts that use her name.
Earlier today H&D published an English-subtitled version of Isabel’s latest video (see below), in which she recommends books and other cultural foundations for those who wish to dedicate themselves to a 21st century European renaissance.
England Women’s victory overshadowed by racism row
Three of the H&D team popped down to the editor’s local to watch the opening game of the 2022 Women’s European Championship, between the hosts – England and a highly fancied Austria.
We seemed to be the only ones interested in watching the game on the pub’s big screen, which got under way with the now customary pre-game knee bending to an American druggie criminal (on the orders of the FA Gestapo now doubt) and fireworks, in front of a tournament record crowd, at Old Trafford (home of Manchester United FC) on Wednesday.
The crowd of 68,871 was by far the largest for a European Championship game and the enthusiasm of the youthful, female, noisy and mainly White supporters fired England to a lively start.
27-year-old Beth Mead (who plays for Arsenal) grabbed the decisive goal in the 16th minute for the England Lionesses – as they are now called – knocking the ball over the head of Austrian goalkeeper Manuela Zinsberger after being picked out by Fran Kirby (who plays for Chelsea).
Although Austria defender Carina Wenninger valiantly attempted to clear off the line, with her effort striking the bar and flying away from goal, the ball was ruled to have crossed the line, after the officials did a VAR check.
It was Mead’s 15th goal in as many games for England and the Lionesses’ all-time top scorer Ellen White (who plays for Man City) went close to adding a second, 10 minutes later, flashing a header from a cross by Lauren Hemp (who also plays for Man City) just wide.
With a few more pub regulars now watching the game, it felt like England could quickly establish a comfortable lead with Georgia Stanway (who plays for the German side Bayern Munich) finding space to create and Kirby delivering some clever passes on the left.
But the Austrians settled into a compact shape and occasionally threatened on the break while England gradually ran out of their early burst of inspiration.
It remained 1-0 to Lionesses at half time, when a few more locals came into the pub, including “old Charlie” who is rumoured to have been a regular in there for at least 50 years!
When the teams out for the second half, Charlie looked up a little confused, and turned to us. “How come there are no coloureds playing for England lads?” (Sarina Wiegman the new England manager had again picked an all-White starting 11!). One our guys replied: “well that’s the team Wiegman picks. She just picks the best players and does not care about what colour they are. Unlike the England men’s side, which HAS to have x number of non-Whites in it”.
Charlie laughed, and said: “OK that makes sense, at least we may win a few games now, with a manager like that!” and then went back to supping his pint of John Smiths.
Of course, the last England men’s team manager to pick a side on merit rather than on colour, was Glen Hoddle, and look what happened to him!
Anyway, back to the second half; the Lionesses struggled to create many clear-cut chances and lacked sharpness in attack with the Dutch manager forced to make a triple substitution in the 64th minute in an attempt to add some spice.
“Now we will see a few coloureds,” laughed Charlie. But how wrong he was. To the sheer horror of the Wokeists, Wiegman brought on three more White players! You just could not make this up!
Austria were on the back foot for most of the latter part of game but came close to a leveller in the 78th – England goalkeeper Mary Earps (who plays for Man Utd) doing well to keep out a curling effort from Barbara Dunst.
In her post match interview, Wiegman (who won the last tournament as Netherlands coach in 2017) said “It was the first game of the tournament,” so important to win the game to have a good start. I think we showed different phases in this game, some good and some not-so-good.”
Although the match was shown live on the BBC (one of the most liberal-left-Woke broadcasters in Europe), nobody from that channel questioned Wiegman about her all-White team selection.
However, after the game, the attacks on social media started on her, for again not picking any non-White players again. Some lefty linked to the terrorist group Black Likes Matter, was so outraged at how White the England team was, that she wrote on Facebook that “Wiegmans England team looked more like the Bund Deutscher Mädel – than an England Women’s Soccer team!”
It will be interesting to see how the FA act on this, and whether she is “brought in” to have a quite word about her team selections with the FA Gestapo chiefs at their Wembley headquarters, before the Lionesses next match.
Footnotes: –
- The Bund Deutscher Mädel was the League of German Girls – the female version of the Hitler Youth 1926 – 1945.
- England’s other Group A rivals include Northern Ireland (who also have an all-White side): they play Norway today at Southampton’s St Mary’s Stadium.
Woke censorship of UK Latin teaching
The tide of ‘woke’ political correctness has finally reached one of the final bastions of traditional British education – the small number of schools that still teach Latin.
Classical education was fundamental to many generations of Britons, including those who built and ruled the British Empire (often in conscious emulation of the Romans). Now that traditional education is deemed to have transgressed against the holy commandments of ‘woke’.
At the centre of the row is the Cambridge Latin Course, a series of books first introduced in 1970 and now used in the vast majority of those British schools that still teach Latin. (Although when I was taught Latin from 1978-1984, we used much older textbooks, and until this row developed I knew nothing of these Cambridge books.)
The books teach children their first simple Latin phrases by introducing the household of a Roman called Lucius Caecilius – a real man who lived in Pompeii, the city largely destroyed by volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD. Caecilius himself had probably died seventeen years before this eruption, but his home can still be seen in the ruins of Pompeii and some of its contents are in the Naples archaeological museum.
The problem for modern politically correct censors is that Caecilius – like all wealthy Romans of his era – owned slaves. These slaves were probably White, but the racial politics of our own era means that any mention of slavery requires all White people to grovel in apology, however absurd, ahistorical or otherwise meaningless such apologies are.
The teaching of history is no longer an end in itself – still less is it allowed for Europeans to have any pride in their classical ancestry. Rather, it is compulsory to search for aspects of the past that lead to denigration of our own civilisations.
In addition, the school and university curriculum must be purged of anything that might cause offence to any protected group. The league table of protected groups is headed by Jews, then extends via ethnic minorities, the infinitely expanding variety of sexual minorities, and eventually to women in general. The only group without a victim card to play in this game are White men.
And the problem with the Cambridge Latin Course is that the slaves in Caecilius’ household are portrayed as going about their daily tasks in a normal and even happy environment.
A nuanced approach to teaching Latin (and Ancient History) would have to accept that there were many brutal realities, or just very strange aspects of life in the ancient world that are not suitable for young children, so inevitably when they are introduced to this world it will be in a sanitised and incomplete form.
But for the woke generation of teachers, the whole point of teaching any subject is to instil wokeness. So the Cambridge Latin Course seems likely to be scrapped, and replaced by something that better suits the brainwashing agenda of the 2020s.
Perhaps one of Roman history’s traditional villains will be reinvented as a hero for the 2020s?
Publius Clodius was a vicious gangster and pervert whose murder by a rival gangster in 52 BC led to one of the great speeches by Cicero, the most famous legal orator in history, who successfully defended Clodius’ murderer Titus Annius Milo.
In this speech (Pro Milone) Cicero refers to Clodius’ part in one of the greatest scandals of Ancient Rome some ten years earlier, when Clodius disguised himself as a woman in order to infiltrate the traditional women-only religious rite of the Bona Dea.
This was an all-night festival conducted at the home of Rome’s ceremonial chief priest (on this occasion Julius Caesar), but in an environment that was not only all-female but which had to be ritually cleansed of all male associations before the ceremony (even of male animals or works of art portraying men).
So when Clodius dressed as a woman and attended the event, it was a major scandal, inevitably involving rumours of sexual perversion involving Caesar’s then wife and even Clodius’ own sister. Modern readers are perhaps most familiar with the case because of the phrase Caesar used when divorcing his wife: although there was no proof that she had connived with Clodius, “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion”.
Clodius was prosecuted for incestum (which in Roman law meant ‘sacrilege’ rather than what we would now call ‘incest’, though one of the allegations was that he had indeed committed incest with his sister).
He was eventually acquitted because a powerful political ally bribed the jury. In 2022 the verdict of woke historians does not need to be bought. After all in our world, we are no longer permitted to recognise biological differences between men and women, so the Bona Dea ceremony itself would be unacceptable and Clodius would be judged a pioneering transsexual hero!
Perhaps the cross-dressing adventures of Clodius will replace the now-unacceptable Cambridge Latin Course as a means of introducing children to the classical world?
Or more likely the entire history of that world will be scrapped, and replaced by something more suitable for teaching European children that they must bow down before Africans.
Ursula Haverbeck’s latest trial: Lady Michèle Renouf reports from Berlin
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!
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”.
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.
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”.
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.
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
