The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Full ArchivesKevin Barrett Podcasts
Lady Michele Renouf: I Risked 5 Years in Prison—and Won First-Ever Acquittal in German “WWII Heresy” Prosecution
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

On November 5th German prosecutors and a district court judge in Dresden suddenly ended their 32-month criminal case against Lady Michèle Renouf just days before the trial was to begin. Lady Renouf was charged with “incitement” under the §130 Volksverhetzung law, which has been used for the wholesale imprisonment of German dissidents, including scientists, authors and even the lawyers who defend them.

What speech crime was she charged with? Expressing grief, sympathy, and repentance for the crimes her (British) government committed against German civilians during World War II, including the firebombing of Dresden. Lady Renouf’s impromptu remarks during the 2018 anniversary commemoration of the Dresden Holocaust were heartfelt and utterly reasonable. Yet the German government wanted to imprison her for, as she says in this interview, “stating the bleeding obvious.”

I am providing a lightly edited transcript of this interview for two reasons: First, I want to provide full and easy access to Lady Renouf’s ideas as my way of pushing back against censorship. Second, this interview was marred by audio glitches, so listeners who find them annoying can just read the transcript.


(Republished from Truth Jihad by permission of author or representative)
• Category: History • Tags: Censorship, Dresden, Germany, World War II 
Hide 59 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. lavoisier says: • Website

    Thank you for this kind of interview KB.

    Imagine being prosecuted for the acknowledgement that your nation committed war crimes, and that the prosecution was not pursued by your nation, but by the nation whose people were the victims of these war crimes.

    In our totally corrupted and controlled world we must not only accept every last detail of the Holocaust narrative, we must accept that no matter what was done to the German people, no matter how heinous and barbaric, was moral and justified.

    Acknowledging war crimes against Germany raises a lot of questions that the Jews do not want asked.

    Hence the prosecution of this woman of conscience.

  2. I will be doing another round of editing (assisted by Lady Renouf) on the transcript of this interview later today, and will release it to non-subscribers by Saturday at the latest.

    • Thanks: Iris
    • Replies: @Ugetit
  3. Wyatt says:

    I have a great affection for the German people. The German descended Americans I know have always been upstanding people and the actual deutschenvolk from die vaterland are these meticulous, autistic robots that remind me very much of myself.

    That an English woman actually has a conscience and expressed remorse for all the brother killing that Churchill clamored for is a hopeful sign. That the juden-lite German government wanted to prosecute her for showing some humanity between Europeans demonstrates exactly why the Holocaust happened to begin with and why more and more people want to strip the “Never” out of “Never Again.”

    • Agree: Bookish1, Pat Kittle
    • Replies: @chuckywiz
    , @Pat Kittle
  4. I came across the Lady`s Jailing Opinions many years ago. It was the harbinger of the crackdown on information relating to the dubious veracity of a certain historical event – as if it were not already bad enough at the time. She is proof of Orwell`s “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

    • Agree: Jett Rucker
  5. Dresden was just a small part of this aerial genocide campaign.

    • Agree: Druid
    • Replies: @Alice in Wonderland
  6. George says:

    Why not give Birobidjan to the Palestinians? You can’t do that, the Palestinians were in Israel first.

  7. Karatic says:

    Kevin, I enjoy your informative and sometime controversial topics. I noticed that you have an Arabic Tugrah hung on your wall “Nasrum-Minnalah……” It is a great Ayat.
    I would like to bring another Ayat to your attention which happens to be my favorite and had helped me in my life. I had it hung in my hallway to remind me daily. And that is “Wata Izzo Mun Tashao Wata Zillo Mun Tashao …….. ” Meaning it is up to God to bestow respect or disrespect on someone…..”
    Despite all our efforts it is up to God to give or award respect. It was a guide in my life and line of work that kept me going despite all kind of negativity. Translation could not be precise but the concept is worth it in your profession where integrity is so important. Just the belief will be a guide.

    • Replies: @Kevin Barrett
  8. TGD says:

    In our totally corrupted and controlled world we must not only accept every last detail of the Holocaust narrative, we must accept that no matter what was done to the German people, no matter how heinous and barbaric, was moral and justified.

    The fire bombing murder of civilians in Dresden was a war crime for sure. The consensus estimate is 25,000 victims but others put the total at 100,000+. The main reason given for the action was that Dresden was a key German transportation hub and the Soviets wanted to stop troop reinforcements. There was also a component of Allied revenge for Nazi atrocities committed against civilians. The Nazis started strategic bombing at the beginning of the war by attacking Warsaw, Rotterdam, London, Coventry and other cities. As Arthur “Bomber” Harris wrote and said, “They sowed the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind.”

  9. @Carlton Meyer

    So, why not use these campaigns in Afghanistan back around 9/11/2001?

    If we cleared out Afghanistan, we could use it for all the world’s “refugees”. They could go there instead of the USA and Europe.

  10. chuckywiz says:

    I agree with your statement about German people. I spent over two weeks last year in a small town in what was East Germany. I have travelled ti several countries and found Germans more cultured and sincere than some of their neighbors with a chip larger than a log.
    One thing I noticed people were reluctant to talk about WWII that I never understood. . May be next year. One lady at the front desk in an office, very well informed about history and current affairs, finally started to make some comments. I could detect some negativity about Russia, Russian Jews and “Holocaust”
    British Historian David Irwin lived and worked in Germany and documented WWII events through his research. Unfortunately, all his youtube material is purged from the internet. However, still available on different sites.
    Dr. Howard Zinn who flew several mission to Dresden talks about his visits to Dresden after the war and his becoming a pacifist. Must read his books, articles and watch his videos. The Dresden bombing was not called for.

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  11. @TGD

    British Ethicist A C Grayling on the morality of the firebombing of German civilians:
    ~13 min:

    “In the peace conferences in Geneva during the 1920s, early 1930s not only was the endeavor made to ban bombing, to outlaw bombing in war, but indeed . . . airplanes should be banned on grounds if there was one somebody would throw a bomb out of it.
    That didn’t persuade anybody largely because the militaries at the time had already grasped the potential of bombing, and after all the British had been using it very effectively in Iraq all during the 1920s to police recalcitrant tribesmen there. The person in command of that bombing endeavor in Iraq was a man called Arthur Harris.
    Harris was of that school of thought initiated by Duhe and others, that bombing was an extremely potent weapon that could bring a war to an end very swiftly, because it would terrorize the civilian population, persuading it to give up the struggle.”

  12. Robjil says:

    The All-lies targeted civilians in Dresden, like they did in other German, French and Italian cities. The same goes for Japan.

    A string of facts, however, indicate that these “legitimate” targets hardly played a role in the calculations of the planners of the raid. First, the only truly significant military installation, the Luftwaffe airfield a few kilometres to the north of the city, was not attacked. Second, the presumably crucially important railway station was not marked as a target by the British “Pathfinder” planes that guided the bombers. Instead, the crews were instructed to drop their bombs on the inner city, situated to the north of the railway station.[5] Consequently, even though the Americans did bomb the station and countless people perished in it, the facility suffered relatively little structural damage, so little, in fact, that it was again able to handle trains transporting troops within days of the operation.[6] Third, the great majority of Dresden’s militarily important industries were not located downtown but in the suburbs, where no bombs were dropped, at least not deliberately.[7]

  13. @TGD

    “The Nazis started strategic bombing at the beginning of the war by attacking Warsaw, Rotterdam, London, Coventry and other cities. “

    Germany never had a strategic bombing force, or indeed a strategy based on bombers operating independently. Bombing was conceived as an aid to ground forces, especially in blitzkrieg-style operations. Even the only operational ‘heavy’ bomber Germany produced, the HE-177, was supposed to be able to dive-bomb, one of the reasons why it only had two (powerful) engines and was delayed until late 1942 while engine troubles were (not very well) ironed out.

    The UK didn’t worry about dive-bombing and had three four-engined heavy bombers, the Stirling, Halifax and Lancaster.

    Germany was quite happy bombing undefended cities like Wielun, Rotterdam and Belgrade during WW2 as part of an invasion, but had to improvise plans against defended targets. It was the British who bombed Dortmund (May 1940) and Berlin (August 1940), and the French had bombed it earlier (May 1940).

    Wikipedia states

    “Germany began aerial bombing of British cities immediately after the British declaration of war on Germany in September 1939”

    which is a fabrication. Churchill wrote about the “phony war” period that “no air action, except reconnaissance, was taken against Britain; nor was any air attack made upon France“.

    It may be that the bombing of Berlin in August 1940, at the height of the Battle Of Britain, was a stroke of (fortuitous?) strategic genius, in that German retaliation upon London and other cities relieved the strain on airfields and radar installations which had up to then been primary targets, and enabled the RAF fighters to avoid being worn down in a war of attrition.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @Pat Kittle
  14. Ugetit says:

    As Arthur “Bomber” Harris wrote and said…

    I’d question anything that psychopath said or wrote and condemn anything he did including being born.

    • Agree: GeeBee
  15. Ugetit says:

    The Dresden bombing was not called for.

    Neither was any of the aggression against Germany. Churchill himself had to know that both were unnecessary although he only admitted to WW2 being so. The dude, along with “Bomber” Harris was another deranged crackpot, for sure.

    Those poor German folk…

    • Agree: Pat Kittle, Jett Rucker
  16. Ugetit says:
    @Kevin Barrett

    Well, make it snappy because I’m impatient to know what she said and I cannot stand listening to broadcasts or watching vids. 😉

    • Replies: @Kevin Barrett
  17. Well, I can’t resist.

    ‘Lady Michele Renouf: I Risked 5 Years in Prison—and all I got was this tee-shirt.’

    She is right. I have to agree about that. Hey, it was a joke, alright?

  18. @YetAnotherAnon

    Wikipedia states

    “Germany began aerial bombing of British cities immediately after the British declaration of war on Germany in September 1939”

    First I’ve ever heard of it.

  19. @Colin Wright

    ‘In wiki veritas’ paraphrased as the old Latin comment on inebriation. Would you expect a snowflake or a Normie to look any further? Mission accomplished.

    Anything to do with history that can be applied to the the present day (inconvenient history), politics or social constructs is eventually sanitized under the fig leaf of some kind of public self correction.

    Lady Renouf’s friend David Irving wrote about a couple of decades ago that he had to constantly correct ‘new’ information about himself until he eventually gave up.

    It is not bad if you want to look up bios on some celebrity or benign personality but don’t use it for notables like Ezra Pound for example.

    And when it does stray into verifiable truth such as the bombing of Coventry it may omit peripheral facts such as there being major aero engine factories there.

    The good news is that thinking people already know that. The bad news is that numerically, thinking people don’t matter.


    • Agree: Colin Wright
  20. Ugetit says:
    @Kevin Barrett

    Many thanks. I read it and must say that the lady is most impressive.

  21. The Terrorist Theocracy of Eretz Ysrael owes massive reparations to most of the world, and particularly to the Germans & Palestinians.

  22. @Wyatt

    The “Holocaust” being work camps where treasonous Jews had to do manual labor, a fate likened to death.

    • Agree: Cauchemar du Singe
  23. @YetAnotherAnon

    Wikipedia is a useful source of neutral information — but for anything political it’s a propaganda mill owned by Jew supremacism & manipulated by war criminal Jews:
    — (

    Hitler sincerely sought to avoid war with England, a country & people he admired, which is why, for example, Dunkirk was permitted. But Zionist Jews would not tolerate peace:

    “Germany Must Perish!”
    by Theodore N. Kaufman
    — (

    BTW, contrary to what (((they))) would have us believe, Germany was NOT the first to bomb civilian populations.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    , @Durango
  24. @TGD

    “a component of revenge”? Please. The Germans made mechanized war with the same regard for human life that ever other industrialized power showed, which is none at all. In the case of the 1939 air assaults on Warsaw, they could in no way be conflated with the strategic bombing conducted by the Anglo-American forces. The Polish armed forces deployed within the city of Warsaw, and every possible means available to the German forces were deployed in the reduction of the city’s defences. Likewise Rotterdam was subject to tactical aerial bombardment in support of a joint warfare campaign typical of the era.
    By the time Coventry was bombarded in November, 1940, the Commonwealth Air Forces had been hard at attacks on German cities for six months.
    The US deployed napalm in the destruction of the French city of Royan, killing some 1500 civilians in early 1945, in one of a series of Allied aerial assaults on the city.
    The Anglo-American air forces killed some 50 000 French civilians during the break-out and encirclement efforts in Normandy in the summer of 1944.
    The unrestricted aerial genocide conducted by the Good Guys in North Korea in the 1950-53 period pretty much demolishes any claim to moral superiority posited by the Anglo-American murder machine in the mid-centrury kill-fest.

    • Replies: @TGD
  25. @Pat Kittle

    I agree with you that Wikipedia, while fine for uncontentious stuff like electron energy levels in hydrogen atoms, is completely compromised when it comes to anything politically contentious. At some stage the people who run it are going to have to address this.

    BTW, contrary to what (((they))) would have us believe, Germany was NOT the first to bomb civilian populations.

    What in your opinion IS the first instance of this?

    Wiki again …

    “The first strategic bombing in history was also the first instance of bombs being dropped on a city from the air. On 6 August 1914 a German Zeppelin bombed the Belgian city of Liège. ”

    But go closer to the source.

    “August 6,1914 Luftschiff ZVI supported of the ground forces. By 0300 hours on August 6, it was over Liège. There, the crew dropped a load of 15- and 21-centimeter shells onto the Belgian fortifications. However, artillery fire struck the airship, and she began losing gas. ”

    So it was in fact tactical bombing, not strategic at all, and directed at defended fortifications.

    In the UK, left wingers have been pointing out since forever that Britain used poison gas on Kurdish tribes between the wars. – the kind of thing on account of which we we declared a no-fly zone over Iraq.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    , @chuckywiz
  26. German_reader says:

    Zeppelins did eventually bomb London during WW1 though (as were some German cities like Karlsruhe by French and British planes in 1917/18).

    In the UK, left wingers have been pointing out since forever that Britain used poison gas on Kurdish tribes between the wars.

    Is there actually solid proof this happened? I know that the British used air power against insurgents in Iraq (including use of delay-action bombs iirc), but I vaguely recall that the part about poison gas is a myth.

    Agree about Wikipedia, I’ve found it to be highly unreliable about some controversial subjects of WW2 like the “Hunger plan”, it doesn’t really reflect the state of debate even in mainstream research.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
  27. chuckywiz says:

    A while back I read somewhere that there were 7,000 or so international volunteers for wikipedia monitoring and screening. Removing any “undesirable” contents and rewriting.
    Wikipedia is good for quick lookup.

  28. Durango says:
    @Pat Kittle

    When I visited Auschwitz, the first thing I noticed was the size of the chimneys. There is no way so many human bodies could be incinerated in those under capacity ovens or furnaces.

    A heck of fuel will be needed to burn a large population 1 million or 6 million (the numbers are lowered as new information comes out or challenged). Human body is 70% water and in order to evaporate the water before the body is burned a large amount of fuel is required. and in winter season the fuel requirement will increase.

    What was the source of fuel? Wood? Coal, Liquid fuel or Coke (not coca cola). Where were the storage for such fuel. No details available. Wikipedia failed to address. Fuel was so scare in the last phases of the II war. If the bodies were burned in open pits? what was the rain average in Auschwitz? or days of snow? Disruption in open pit burning.

    How were millions of bones disposed. Conversion of bones to ashes will require extreme temperature not possible in open pit where plenty of air is available to lower the temperature via draft phenomenon.

    I was surprised to see a Holocaust Museum in the capital of Macedonia (birth place of Mother Theresa). In fact in Albania the next door country of Macedonia several lives of innocent Jews were saved by the Albanian Muslims who sheltered them. No mention of this in any Museum or Hollywood.

    Holocaust did happen. My view is that the numbers are inflated.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  29. @Kevin Barrett

    The link in comment #19 did not work for me, but the ALL CAPS one up in the article did.

    Where can we read (in English) a copy of the specific charges brought against this woman or, if not set out there, something else citing verbatim the allegedly criminal words she uttered?

    • Replies: @Alison
  30. Mike P says:

    The consensus estimate is 25,000 victims

    The “consensus estimate” of the city police and of the Wehrmacht district officers – those people who organized the rescue and recovery – was 250,000. The 25,000 is just one more lie from the usual liars.

    • Agree: Fox
  31. Fox says:

    You are quite wrong with about everything you are writing, including the claim the the Germans started the bombing campaign. It makes apparently no impression even if the admission is made by British government officials themselves that it was Britain’s “splendid decision” to start bombing civilian targets in order to carry the front into the suburbs of the enemy hundreds of miles behind the front. I am referring to J.M.Spaight’s Bombing Vindicated (available from Ostara Publications as a facscimile reprint of the original 1943 impression).

  32. @German_reader

    “Is there actually solid proof this happened? “

    Wikipedia actually argues that it didn’t.

    It looks as if Churchill’s 1919 statement “I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes” has been taken as a statement of action as well as intent by people like Chomsky.

    As we all know, Churchill had unchallenged and dictatorial power in Britain between 1918 and 1945 😉

    The quote in context is far less bloodthirsty, and seems to relate to tear gas, as used extensively by the French State against its own citizens in the last few years (including dropping it from helicopters).

    I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gases: gases can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected.

    For full proof we’d need to go closer to the source, but it just goes to show. I’d always assumed the allegations were true.

  33. @Craig Nelsen

    Agree wholeheartedly. Look up any of your favourite commentators on Wikipedia and you will see nothing short of a character hit job.

    Another favourite of mine is:

    Among other things, it hilariously and unironically claims to explore authoritarianism. The only good thing that can be said about this ‘pandemic’ is that it has finally demonstrated to me just how stupid most people are.

  34. Alison says: • Website
    @Greta Handel

    There were no charges, nor any arrest. Renouf never once even set foot inside court. The whole operation is another carefully crafted excersice in controlled opposition. It is a shame that Kevin Barrett and Ron Unz discredit themselves by repeating information for which the only source is Renouf herself.

    Whilst Barrett, Unz and others are busy publicising the “historic victory” of Michele Renouf, Canadian truth seeker, Arthur Topham, was being sentenced for thought crime in Vancouver. And I, too, am once again in court, also for thought crime – in England.

    In Germany, Renouf’s lawyer, Wolfram Nahrath, is currently presiding over new cases brought by the state against Ursula Haverbeck and Marianne Wilfert. Even he states clearly that Renouf was not “acquitted.” – The question is, therefore, when is a criminal prosecution not a criminal prosection? When it’s a photo-op?

    • Replies: @Greta Handel
  35. anarchyst says:

    From an engineering and logistical standpoint, NONE of the claims made by holocaust™ “survivors” and promoters is possible.
    –Killing jews with “bug spray” (Zyklon B) is not only impossible, but is laughable on its face.
    –Transporting jews to “camps”, utilizing scarce energy sources, transportation and logistical difficulties only to kill them is not only problematic but impossible as well.
    –Tattooing camp inmates only to kill them is also problematic.
    –If the “camps” were truly “death camps” why would medical facilities, recreational facilities, brothels, movie theaters, and other amenities be needed?
    –“Gas chambers” with non-sealed wooden doors and the lack of ventilation systems for such facilities, once again, disproves the claims made by holocaust™ promoters. Doors that “swing the wrong way” would make retrieval of the bodies impossible. Ordinary light fixtures, rather than explosion proof lighting fixtures are claimed to have been the norm.
    –Claims by holocaust™ promoters that gassed bodies were blue or green (rather than bright red) from poisoning are totally false.
    –Claims that the inmates could tell when jews were being cremated by the color of smoke emitted from the crematoria chimneys are patently foolish and false.
    –Let’s not forget “lampshades, wallets, soap and shrunken heads” made from jews is also laughable,
    –Crematoria running 24 hours a day, without “downtime” for maintenance on the muffles and flames “visible out of the crematoria stacks” are also impossibilities. Crematoria are designed to burn “clean” with no visible smoke and definitely no flames outside the stacks would be possible. Not only that, the claims that thousands of bodies were cremated daily are a statistical impossibility as it takes approximately 1.5 hours to cremate a human body. If cremation were used on “6 million” jews, the cremation process would have been operating into the 1950s.
    –The lack of depositories for bodies and ashes is more proof that the “camps” were not “death camps” but rather “work camps” for the German war effort.
    –Anne Frank’s “diary” partially written with a ball-point pen which was not invented till the 1950s. Time travel, anyone? lol
    Germans were (and still are) excellent engineers and would not have engineered the grievous errors that are claimed by holocaust promoters.
    Follow the shekels…

    • Replies: @Durango
    , @Sebastian Max
  36. GeeBee says:

    Kevin – many thanks for the transcript of Michèle Renouf’s interview. I find myself puzzled, however, that she didn’t elaborate on the events leading to the case being dropped. She says early on in your interview that:

    ‘Because my case really does reveal the non-ended Allied victors’ occupation for the last 71 years. And this would have come out in my trial. And that is why in the end, the Germans decided two days before my trial, which was due to begin on October 16th, to back down. They actually backed down! And it was an extraordinary decision to actually acquit me without trial’,

    and she tantalisingly goes on later to state that:

    ‘So the same law that is causing these people to be imprisoned would have imprisoned me, but for the enormously gifted skill of my German attorney—and I’m very happy to explain that in due course—I, too, would be sitting in prison right now’.

    Yet we are not told any details of the whys and wherefores of the German legal team’s decision, nor of the input of her ‘enormously gifted’ German lawyer. Is there any chance of learning a little more of this, as it is surely highly significant that a ‘first’ was scored here by Michèle, and it would be instructive to know the details?

    • Replies: @niceland
  37. @Karatic

    Glad you’re enjoying the controversies! That “Nasrum-minAllah” in the background is on my Khairuddin Barbarossa Barbary Pirate flag. (I’m doing “pirate radio”…)

    “Wata Izzo Mun Tashao Wata Zillo Mun Tashao” is also appropriate. When I started doing 9/11 truth teach-ins at the University of Wisconsin in 2004 I quickly came to realize that my academic life had been influenced by fear of being disrespected by colleagues and to a lesser extent students, and that the solution was to stop caring about anyone’s opinion but God’s, as in the Mullah Nasruddin story:

    “One day Mullah Nasruddin and his son were walking to market with their donkey. While they were on their journey, they encountered a group of people who commented: ‘Now look at these fools. Both of them walk in the hot sun and none rides the donkey!’ So the Mullah put the boy on
    the donkey.

    “After a while they encountered another group of people who commented: ‘Look at this strong boy. Is this the youth of today? No respect for the elderly! He is riding the donkey while his poor old father has to walk!’ When these people had passed them, the young boy felt ashamed and insisted that his father ride the donkey while he walked instead. So the boy got off and the father rode
    the donkey.

    “A short time later, they passed more people who said: ‘Now look at this! The poor young boy has to walk while his father is riding the donkey!’ When these people had passed them, the Mullah said to his son: ‘I think the best solution is if we both ride. That way we can avoid any criticism.’ And so they did.
    After a short distance, they again encountered other people, who said: ‘Look at that poor donkey having to carry both of them! He’s exhausted’. So they both got off the donkey and the man carried the donkey over his shoulder.

    “When the people saw them walking along the road, they laughed, pointed at the poor man labouring in the heat, under the weight of the donkey, and said: ‘Look at that silly man carrying the donkey! Why would you go to the trouble of having a donkey to carry it everywhere?’ The man put the donkey down and they walked as they had at the beginning of the journey.

    “Now the Mullah turned to his son and said: ‘This shows us how difficult it is to adjust to other people’s opinion. The truth is you can’t please everyone so you just have to do what you know is right and please God.’”–%20The%20Father%2C%20The%20Son%20and%20The%20Donkey.pdf

    • Replies: @Durango
  38. niceland says:

    I second this motion.
    Please provide more details and facts.

  39. Durango says:

    Interesting observation about Anne Frank diary written with a ball point. May be “Back to the Future” concept by Steven Spielberg. I spent two weeks in Katowice, Poland on a work assignment. The city is not far from Auschwitz. We used to pass by the site quite often. The site is big, however, not that massive as shown in the Hollywood movies (probably wide angle).

    We met a polish gentlemen who at the age of 12 assigned by his catholic church to carry milk (in buckets) and bread to the prisoners. According to his narrative the German Guards knowingly looked the other way so he could carry on his assignment. One day while returning from the camp he heard a loud command of “Halt” (that was what the gentleman said). Instead of stopping the kid threw the bucket/s and ran. There were lot of bullets around him, While running he tripped and rolled down on a small hill and was saved because of the fall. That was the last time he visited Auschwitz. Where are such true stories from Hollywood. Not all (Majority) Polish folks were collaborators.

  40. Durango says:
    @Kevin Barrett

    Thanks for sharing your experiences. The belief in God’s word (Ayat) kept me going in my professional life. I became very bold (not arrogant) and adopt the policy of Clint Eastwood movie phrase “Go Ahead Make My Day”. Of course I had to work hard and became very good what I did.
    But I still look back and bow my head to God’s blessing.

    May all those adverse events of 2004 were preparing you for a bigger assignment. That is what I could say. Rahmat. Thanks again

  41. @Alison

    Provisional thanks.

    I seem to have stepped in … something.

    Mr. Barrett, it’s now your turn — and silence will be deafening.

    • Replies: @Jett Rucker
  42. Jett Rucker says: • Website

    The precedent provided by this case does not crack open the door to reasoned public discussion of that Holocaust in Germany. Lady Renouf’s material only concerned war crimes committed against Germans by the Allies.
    Good enough, as far as it goes.

    • Replies: @Alison
  43. Jett Rucker says: • Website
    @Greta Handel

    I am, as so frequently, disappointed in doubt.

    I do not expect my doubt to be alleviated.

    And I do so hate to doubt stories that appeal to my own inclinations.

  44. Alison says:
    @Jett Rucker

    It is ironic.

    When I appealed my conviction in the High Court in London, Renouf’s assistant, Peter Rushton, claimed in “Heritage & Destiny” that I was responsible for setting a precedent under English law.

    “Chabloz succeeds in crimalising [historical revisionism]”, screeched the header…

    I paraphrase: “She has managed to put proper revisionists at risk of prosecution because of her offensive songs…”

    This was after the pair (together with a handful of admirative cap-doffers apparently afraid of being crossed off someone’s Christmas list) accused me publicly, without any evidence whatsoever:

    a) of being a spy for “anti-fascist” organisation Hope Not Hate,
    b) of “sabotaging” Faurisson’s final conference in 2018, and,
    c) of being responsible for Faurisson’s death the following day.

    Four defamatory articles were published all in all, including a video, urging truth seekers to stop supporting me.

    As with the claimed “historic precedent” in Dresden, it is important to note that there is not a single piece of evidence to back up any of these preposterous claims. Renouf was asked a few questions by Dresden police. The rest is pure hype.

    Kevin Barrett should perhaps try asking Michele Renouf why she attacked in the most despicable and counterproductive manner a fellow Englishwoman – one who has been arrested (seven times), prosecuted (three times) and even thrown in jail for singing satirical songs and is still being persecuted and prosecuted for thought crime in England – where no such memory laws exist!

  45. Alison says:

    PS It was in 2018 when my original trial began in earnest that these controlled opposition agents first began attacking me publicly.

    For the past three years, these same rats have been doing their very best to try and finish off the job begun six years earlier by a certain foreign interest lobby group.

    And hey presto! Just as a new proseuction against me gets underway (in England), look who pops up – again!

    In comparison, Tommy Robinson’s style of grifting seems almost more honest.

  46. TGD says:
    @Rufus Clyde

    The Germans made mechanized war with the same regard for human life that ever other industrialized power showed, which is none at all.

    Wars get out of hand if continued long enough resulting in massive civilian suffering. The US Civil War is a prime example. On July 30, 1864, Confederate general John McCausland and 2800 confederate troops attacked Chambersburg, PA and when the rebels’ demand for money was not met, they burned Chambersburg to the ground.

    From November 15, 1864 to December 21, 1864, Union General William Tecumseh Sherman marched from Atlanta, Georgia to Savannah, Georgia burning and destroying everything in sight with the exception of Savannah. It began with the 4 month Atlanta Campaign (May to November, 1864) after which Atlanta was burned to the ground. This was in retaliation for the burning of Chambersburg. The US Civil War was a prelude to the “Total War” fought by the Allies against Nazi Germany.

    The lesson should be clear: avoid war at all costs. But the global war mongering classes won’t allow that.

  47. Thanks to Dr Barrett and for publishing this interview. In response to those asking for further information about the case, I should explain the following.

    I was called upon to undertake archival research for Lady Renouf’s defence and had the case (as expected) proceeded beyond Amtsgericht (district court) level would have been a witness on some of the historical issues raised. I compiled several dossiers of background material, parts of which will be published during the coming weeks on the blog linked below.

    The formal position is that the German court does not have to give any reason for abandoning the prosecution of Lady Renouf – at just two and a half days notice, following more than two and a half years of trial preparations since Lady Renouf’s arrest in February 2018.

    Therefore the simple answer to those requesting details of the court judgment is that there will be no such judgment, other than a declaration that the criminal charges under para 130 (Volksverhetzung) and the entire case brought against her have been officially abandoned.

    I should make clear that there was no plea bargain, and the case ended with Lady Renouf not guilty of any offence. In plain English she was acquitted – fully exonerated – though not of course acquitted in court since no such court hearing took place. The prosecution threw in their hand.

    Guided by defence attorney Wolfram Nahrath (perhaps the most experienced German attorney in such cases) we can only deduce the reasons.

    When a card player throws in his hand, it is always because he has good reason to suspect that he will lose more by going further with the game than if he quits and accepts his loss.

    It’s a similar situation when the prosecution throws in its hand. By the time they abandoned the case in mid-October 2020, Dresden prosecutors had good reason to fear the consequences of a trial, since by this stage they (and/or allied agencies of the Federal German state) had good reason to know some of the arguments that would be presented and publicised at trial, especially if it proceeded to higher levels of the court system.

    Some of these issues will be explored at length at the blog set up to deal with the case,

    There will be no direct reply to malicious agents provocateurs who, like everyone else, will have to await publication of the relevant material on that blog, some of which will also appear in Heritage and Destiny, of which I am assistant editor –

    I can however promise that well-intentioned commenters on this site will not be disappointed by what is in store!

    • Replies: @Greta Handel
  48. @Peter Rushton

    This account varies from that of commenter “Alison.” In particular, it appears

    The formal position is that the German court does not have to give any reason for abandoning the prosecution of Lady Renouf – at just two and a half days notice, following more than two and a half years of trial preparations since Lady Renouf’s arrest in February 2018.

    Therefore the simple answer to those requesting details of the court judgment is that there will be no such judgment, other than a declaration that the criminal charges under para 130 (Volksverhetzung) and the entire case brought against her have been officially abandoned.

    that my question (#30) can and should have been answered by now, and in direct reply, not by pointing readers to another website. Here it is, rephrased:

    Please restate (in English) the specific charges for which this woman was arrested and, if not set out there, cite verbatim the allegedly criminal words she uttered.

    Thank you.

    • Replies: @Peter Rushton
  49. @Greta Handel

    The charge was as follows. I’m taking this from the official English translation as provided by the Dresden court, which as you will see contains occasionally unidiomatic English.

    “You are accused to having approved and downplayed, publicly and during a meeting, an act committed under the rule of National Socialism of a type defined under § 6, par. 1, Völkerstrafgesetzbuch (Code of Crimes against International Law), in a manner used to endanger public peace. Punishable as: Incitement of the masses, Pursuant to § 130, par. 3, StGB (German Criminal Code).”

    The “facts” of the case listed on the charge sheet were as follows, again sometimes in unidiomatic English translation, such as the incorrect use of the conditional “would have been”.

    “On 17.02.2018, between 2.45 pm and 4.50 pm, a public meeting of Gerhard Ittner took place in Postplatz in Dresden on the occasion of the anniversary of the Dresden bombing on 13th and 14th February 1945. Within the framework of this meeting you set up to the stage and made a speech around 3.40 pm.
    “First, you said in English that a holocaust would have been carried out only against German and Japanese civilians during World War II. Only the bombing of the City of Dresden and using of two atomic bombs would have been a holocaust.
    “Then, you literally said in your Speech, among other things:
    “‘So, as I say, when your government or your federation, which is the government, declares war on another country, you personally may not want to be part of the war. But unfortunately, that’s how it is in wartime. So that every Jew therefore was made by the Jewish Federation a fifth columnist. Therefore it is normal practice in wartime to put your fifth columnist into concentration camps. That is not exceptional cruelty by the Germans.’
    “By these statements you deliberately approved and downplayed the genocide carried out against the European Jews during the time of National Socialism in Germany. You tried to present these acts as a justified and normal military practice and you compared them with the bombings by the Allies during World War II. By doing so, you approved at least that your words could be heard and understood by the meeting’s participants as well as by other persons.”

    As I mentioned earlier, parts of the detailed dossiers of evidence that would have been used in court by the defence against these criminal charges, will in due course be published on the blog

    • Thanks: Greta Handel
  50. Alison says:

    Do editors of the Unz Review know that Peter Rushton is a longtime state/Searchlight mole, now working for Hope Not Hate?

    Twice now, associates of this man and his lady friend have threatened me with violence. He also threatened to sue me last year for a comment made by a third party about his ladyfriend.

    Why doesn’t Rushton threaten to sue Dr Larry O’Hara? Someone should perhaps ask Nick Davies of The Guardian.

  51. Alison says:

    Whereas Mr Rushton fails miserably in his “expert” defence of someone (his own kinswoman) in a country with no memorial laws, he somehow achieves miraculous success, playing a similar role for someone else, in a country that does.

    My commiserations to Mrs R for not getting the photo-op she wished for in my original trial. Perhaps if I’d have been a bloke (e.g. Simon Sheppard), things might have been different..?

    • Replies: @GeeBee
  52. GeeBee says:

    Alison – I have followed your exchanges regarding Michele Renouf and Peter Rushton with the greatest interest. It would appear that each of you is, in your different ways, accusing the other of working to destroy or damage the necessary revisionism, which affords us our only hope of getting to the bottom of ‘the rabbit hole’, where the truth of the colossal, unnecessary and indeed criminal enterprise we call World War Two lies hidden.

    It is especially interesting that both you and Rushton have accused one another of being involved with ‘Hope not Hate’, an organisation that of course seeks to defend these lies concerning WWII. Yet Lady Renouf apparently risked her freedom in addressing the crowd at Dresden. If, as you contend, she is some sort of ‘controlled opposition’, this might well explain the German court’s decision to walk away from the charges. Perhaps they were initially brought without them knowing who – and more especially, what – she was.

    You used the analogy of someone ‘apparently afraid of being crossed off someone’s Christmas [card] list’, and in that regard I was certainly much struck by Lady Renouf’s own quite extraordinary list of that same nature, when I read the transcript of her interview with Kevin Barrett. She claims to have met, known and be friends with an astonishing number of very famous and influential people who are on ‘our’ side: Ernst Zundel, Gerard Menuhin, Tom Goodrich (“a good chum of mine”), Eric Lowe, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Robert Faurisson and Muammar Gaddafi. Quite some rolodex!

    As I say, I’ve followed your exchanges but unsurprisingly find myself wondering why you and Lady Renouf’s ‘team’ are at loggerheads. I’d love some further clarification, if I might ask. Also, I’ve looked at your blog and find that some of the entries are password protected. How might one read them please?

    Best regards.

    • Replies: @Alison
  53. Alison says:

    Thanks for your reply. The best way to get in touch directly is via the contact tab on my website.

    Like Arthur Topham in Canada, and like other dissidents in Germany, I am also under a strict gagging order which prevents me from publishing openly on my website, hence the protected posts.

    This gagging order has been ongoing since January. I am currently editing a legal update of this latest court case, (as well as a chronology of the controlled-opposition-led, cat-fight, or mud-wrestling, call it what you will), which will be published once I get the OK, hopefully within the next couple of days.

    For further clarification: Gerard Menuhin and I have been collaborating now for more than five years. Our latest project – once again with lyrics (and inspiration) courtesy of Mr Menuhin – I had hoped, would serve as a befitting memorialisation of Mrs Renouf’s many photo-op missions. As well, for more than a year now, I have been working alongside French lyricist, Germain Gaiffe, longtime co-author of “notorious” French comic, Dieudonné.

    Like myself over here in England. Dieudonné finds himself the target of lawfare, notably for songs with lyrics written by Mr Gaiffe.

    Here’s the rub: both Mr Menuhin and Mr Gaiffe – both my co-authors – belong to a certain population group that I am barred from mentioning.

    As in the case of Simon Sheppard’s satirical publications, Rushton and Renouf seem to have no problem with Dieudonné’s satirical output. Au contraire: they only have problems with my songs. I, for one, would like to know why.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
  54. GeeBee says:

    Many thanks for your kind reply. I shall attempt to contact you via your website in order to discuss this most interesting matter further.

  55. @anarchyst

    All good points you’ve raised. Not to mention the extensive propaganda efforts by the Allies before the war even began (which continued not just during the war but also intensified after the war), and by the “pre-signalling” of the “six million” long before Hitler and the Nazis came to power, plus allusions to this number in Talmudic/Kabbalah prophecy – ie, the “Holocaust as Religious Wish Fulfilment”

    There are also oddities such as alleged Krema being virtually entirely “reconstructed” by the “Allies” after the war, and including truly ludicrous attempts at bolstering tales of Jews being trapped in these “gas chambers”, for example the post-war concrete poured walls complete with “scratch marks” (to lead one to speculate that frantic and dying Jews clawed desperately at the walls and scratched these grooves into the walls trying to “climb” to “fresh air). This despite the fact that human fingernails are far too soft to make any impression on concrete – the only thing that would happen is that the fingernail itself would become sanded or pulverized into powder by such friction and possibly, briefly leave some organic residue (powdered keratin) which would slough off rapidly and certainly would not leave any trace after even months let alone up to the present day. The entire idea is laughable. And yet hundreds of thousands of people have been paraded through these reconstructed buildings, and nobody is saying boo. Nobody dares to say “What the hell are these marks supposed to be? Who put these here? When was this done?” People just sheepishly and blindly accept this insanely bizarre fakery without even a challenge. Out of fear of being blasted as a “Nazi”.

    Its amateurish and idiotic “mistakes” like these that prove that what is presented to the public as historical artifacts is in fact, at least in certain verifiable instances, nothing but a huge hoax. And if one piece of evidence is fake, why can’t most or all of them be fake?

    Fake coerced testimony obtained by torture and threats at Nuremberg – that should all be discarded as unreliably tainted as well, as it would be in any civilized society with a modern justice system. The rule of law does not permit the use of torture to obtain confessions. Even evidence obtained without proper procedure or stored without a proper chain of custody to prevent tampering is tossed out. This is our justice system – and yet all of that was out the window at Nuremberg.

    Allowing the “victims” of the alleged offenses to serve as investigators, prosecutors and even judges is a massive conflict of interest that also would never be allowed in a civilized society. All of these norms discarded in order to conduct these show trials.

  56. Druid says:

    It seems that every one of your podcasts has terrible audio!!!

  57. Druid says:

    She’s right! Judaism has a bad influence on the world today! And I’m Muslim!

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Kevin Barrett Comments via RSS