Hendrik's case is still very relevent. Not only does it show what a farce "democracy" and "freedom" have become in supposedly "free" countries, but it also shows the trends which will lead us even further from freedom and nearer to darkness and slavery if left unchecked. There is no doubt at all that a major attack is being waged against freedom of speech. In one instance, Germany's highest criminal court, the Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), ruled that the content of web sites hosted by non-German providers can make one subject to criminal prosecution under German law.

This could well include the web site that you are reading now. None of us would enjoy the prospect of getting locked up in a German jail for exercising our domestic right of free speech. In another instance, the German Federal Ministry of the Interior apparently contemplates using Denial-Of-Service (DOS) attacks to shut down foreign web sites. That German authorities would even contemplate this shows how far they are willing to go in their crusade against freedom of speech. We therefor feel rightly concerned about free speech in Germany, even though we are not residents of that country.

These are some of the more compelling reasons for our support of Hendrik Möbus, with whose plight we empathize deeply. Hendrik Möbus' case shouldn't be ignored regardless of one's political stance. There's either freedom of speech regarding politics, or there is no freedom of speech regarding politics.

The CFHM has had the opportunity to talk to Hendrik Möbus in the Buffalo Federal Detention Facility (BFDF) in Batavia, New York State, in May of 2001.

Hendrik, how German can a German be nowadays, without running afoul of the anti-free speech legislation in the FRG?

"The less the better," Hendrik responds wistfully. "You are allowed to be proud of, say, our marvelous democracy which the Allied Occupation Forces imposed on (West) Germany in 1948. When it comes to the German period prior to 1945, you are called upon to denounce just about everything to be on the safe side. And someone who lived in Central Germany, had better not dwell too much on the period prior to 1990."

(Hendrik refers to the German Democratic Republic (GDR), commonly known as "East Germany," which he described once as a "semi-Communist state," but with a few good points when compared to present day Germany.)

So you have no show of patriotism, like our Fourth of July?

"You might not believe this, but we have quite a few memorial days put aside for honoring the 'victims of Nazism.' The day that would come closest to your Independence Day is our Eighth of May." Hendrik laughs bitterly and resumes, "It's called the 'Day of Liberation'. Just imagine, we are supposed to celebrate our defeat, after which tens of thousands of German civilians starved, were raped, and otherwise suffered severely -- many died. How nuts can a system be that makes a celebration of such a national plight?"

But we have noticed a surge of national sentiments, especially among the German youth, of which you are but one example. If you can't properly express your German nationalism, how come so many (German intelligence sources speak of a number in between 60,000 and 80,000) Germans do just that?

"I think you pretty much answered your question by asking it. The German authorities, the media, schools, etc, make such a big effort to erase whatever pride one might take in ones heritage, that often it backfires. They then get the reaction out of people they intended to suppress in the first place. Young Germans travel far more frequently than previous generations. They witness the relaxed and sincere patriotism of other countries; they remember how pre-1945 German history is dealt with at home while it is regarded so differently by foreigners. They start wondering; they begin asking questions, but their peers, parents, and teachers have no honest answers for them. That's when they decide to look into this matter, and, well, they come away with conclusions the German system won't put up with. Moreover, with 'multiculturalism' so rampant nowadays, people are exposed to all sorts of alien, exotic cultures. They can't be Congonese or Vietnamese, no matter how hard they try, so eventually they fall back on their native culture for the sake of having any sort of identity at all."

How did you come by your opinions? We understand you made up your mind on such issues at a time when you couldn't do any traveling?

"I have fortunately had a very good relationship to my grandparents. They taught me a lot about genealogy, archeology, history, and the like. I loved listening to their stories of 'once upon a time.' So you can say, my opinions on nationality and identity lay dormant until I found the time on my hands needed for thinking through what I'd learned and gathered along the way. There was no conscious decision to become a nationalist, or whatever; it just happened that I got immersed in my studies and eventually arrived at the conclusions I felt most comfortable with."

Which are, needless to say, not conclusions the German powers-that-be feel most comfortable with. Anyway, in America we have a strong emphasis on learning how to be a good cosmopolitan who gives no offense to any "minority" whatsoever. Aren't you taught to get along with each other in Germany, Hendrik?

"Actually, we are." He responds with a nod. Grinning Hendrik explains: "We have a curriculum in school that is supposed to teach you to be a good citizen of the FRG, i.e. someone who mindlessly parrots the slogans of 'human rights,' 'equality,' 'the brotherhood of man,' and the like. I've observed that the more intelligent you are, the more likely you are to actually believe in that nonsense. Such notions as 'there is no race but the human race' are rather popular among students at our universities."

Hendrik laughs at that, then continues, "As long as your celebrities or favorite teachers feed you that line of crap, it apparently has the stamp of authority. But, really, if you just think about it for a moment, what is this baloney that 'we are all the same, we all bleed red, blab. blab blab,' when evaluated by common sense? It's insulting, that's what it is! Sure, the genes of, say, Blacks and Whites are almost identical -- so what? The genes of humans and chimpanzees are almost identical, too. Does that make chimpanzees the same as people? For that matter, the DNA of all mammals has pretty much the same makeup, and indeed, all oxygen-breathing life forms have red blood. Does that mean we have to ignore the differences because these don't matter? Give me a break!"

Hendrik shakes his head. He's apparently always amazed at this idiocy no matter how often he encounters it. "Now we have the apostles of the 'One Origin' theory that says all human life can be traced back to Africa. That's well and good, if we are speaking of actual pre-human ancestors of our kind. But no, these apostles proclaim that we were all Negroes to begin with, and we shouldn't distinguish between Blacks and Whites because we have come from Africa ourselves. Well, then we ought to stop fishing the oceans too, because our primordial ancestors came from the sea and the fish that we eat are distant relatives of ours. Really, we should acknowledge that all life has but a single origin, according to Darwin. So, if you start denying the inherent differences of the human races, you'd better go all the way and deny the inherent differences of any two life forms."

The argument for "racial equality" is, of course, an emotional one rather than an intellectual one. This can be confirmed by everyone who ever got caught up in this sort of discussion in school or in the work place. It isn't only the egalitarian who makes bold yet unfounded statements, however. What do you think of so-called "White Supremacists"?

"I've said it repeatedly before, and will say it again: I don't deem it productive to attribute 'superior' or 'inferior' qualities to the different human races. I believe in significant differences between races, peoples, and their cultures. That makes them unequal -- period. The notion of racial supremacy which elevates one race above all others is purely subjective, and relative to your point of view."

"The White race has many peculiar and unique achievements that other races don't have, but we oughtn't be judgmental about that. The other races see their own reasons to have pride in themselves. Now, in particular when the White Race is in such a mess -- and a mess largely of its own doing -- to call other peoples subhuman is really uncalled for. If we were as superior as some people seem to think, why is it that we have contributed the major share to our current calamity?" Hendrik isn't one for mincing his words, this much is obvious.

Aren't you afraid of stepping on toes with your outspoken opinions on "sensitive" issues?

"When I encounter arguments, I have a simple litmus test: common sense. Many views, especially the "politically correct" ones, are outright nonsense, but people are either too dumb to figure this out, or are too afraid to 'offend' some 'minority' group. I am neither; I indulge in freedom of speech without taking heed of what is the fashionable opinion and what isn't. As far as White racialists and nationalists are concerned, well, reality bites!"

"The crisis for our race, peoples, and cultures calls for an accurate and honest assessment of the situation and what must be done about it. It doesn't help to close your eyes and pretend we still live in the heyday of the British Empire, when notions such as "White Supremacy" could perhaps be entertained without warping the matters of fact. What we have to deal with now is a demographic trend which, if left unchecked, will lead to the White race's extinction -- not to world domination. So I say, let's be honest about it and admit we are fallible too -- and maybe more so than others. If we can come to terms with the present matters of fact, we can start from there to make our own matters of fact in the future."

To bring up another matter with which you are often confronted, what about those who accuse you of being a "sociopath" who finds pleasure in offending others rather than getting along with them. Is it true, Hendrik, that you are "capable of predatory behavior harmful to others, " as one critic has eloquently put it?

"The human being is a predator by nature -- and is quite good at that, I dare say." Hendrik concedes at first, but then he launches in to a rebuttal of the charges brought against his personality. "I find this sociopath accusation a bit irritating, to say the least. What makes people think that, I wonder? Is it due to my participation on a killing when I was a teenager? Or that I'm not dropping to my knees, waiting and begging for absolution? Now, I'd say it is my business how I deal with my history. I've served my mandatory term for this juvenile offense, I've paid a substantial 'reparation' to the relatives of the victim, and I've repeatedly stated my regret for having become involved in this mess to begin with. If that isn't sufficient as an attempt to make up for my wrongdoing, then do me a favor and get rid of the hypocritical legislation that promises 'rehabilitation' when all that is in fact wants is vengeance. I'm not the one who wrote such laws or abolished the death penalty. (CFHM note: in the FRG) For all I care, we can start hanging criminals in the public square once again.

"Instead of pretending otherwise, I acknowledge my own capability of engaging in predatory behavior -- because that helps to keep it in check by the ethical principles I adhere to. Aside from all that, what happened so long ago doesn't matter for me right now. The teenage Hendrik wouldn't do what the adult Hendrik does, and vice-versa. It's that simple."

Interestingly enough, "we good Americans" have recently raised our voices in unison (well, almost union!) to decry Timothy McVeigh's refusal to show remorse about the bombing in Oklahoma City. He's frequently referred to as an "abnormal monster, so normal in appearance, (who) has the brain of the slowest kid in a high school class, and he is evil" (Andy Rooney; Tribunes Media Services 05/13/01). Pretty much the same party line has been given out for describing you as a "freak, loser, kook, etc.," which still happens occasionally. Do you feel comfortable in the company of McVeigh? What's your point of view on what transpired in Oklahoma City?

"It has captured the imagination of Americans, hasn't it? Americans have suffered far worse casualties in bombings on foreign soil; but I think it's a shock to realize it can happen right here, can be perpetrated by one of your own. That is probably the actual cause for your outrage at McVeigh's act of defiance -- that he dared to blast this bomb right in your faces, thus robbing you of your safety from terrorism (which wasn't real, anyway)."

"Americans have curiously little qualms about carpet-bombing foreign cities -- and mind you, that's a feat you are quite good at -- but when the terror comes home, many do the little children act. Anyway, when the government declares 'open season' on its subjects, you have a state of war. And people get killed and maimed in a war. At least that's the reasoning of Tim McVeigh; who ought to know, as a veteran of the ignoble Desert Storm campaign. I don't believe the bombing has had any merit whatsoever, the psychological impact notwithstanding. But McVeigh acted as an idealist, and he values the principles of the original America as a sacred cause. I admire that. The people who castigate Timothy McVeigh for his 'lack of remorse' just don't comprehend this man. He's not 'evil' and he's certainly not a cold-blooded sociopath who delights in the suffering he inflicted. That's Oprah-reasoning at its worst. He knows that the deaths, of both 168 others and himself, would be in vain as soon as he started apologizing for what he did. That's as obvious as anything."

Be that as it may, the mass media has Timothy McVeigh neatly pigeonholed as an "evil monster" right next to Charles Manson. Media stereotypes are not only hard to break, they seem to be most welcome to the audience. What have you learned of stereotypes, Hendrik, and why don't you get immersed in them like so many others?

"I'm a natural skeptic, but even with that prerequisite I was hard pressed to resist popular, yet false stereotypes. After the controlled media first started reporting my case back in 1993, it slowly but surely registered on me how they not only got my case wrong, but many other things wrong as well. It took quite a while for me to understand that the controlled media deliberately recycles and reinforces false stereotypes."

"Here is a example, albeit a rather unimportant one, of how the the sterotypes of the media differ from reality: I read that there's been a remake of Planet of the Apes. I bet they didn't change any of the basic characters from the original version; i.e. the chimpanzee are inoffensive scholars, the gorillas are brutal soldiers, and the orangutans are cunning politicians. These charaterations are dead wrong! Chimpanzees are carnivores who frequently commit infanticide and cannibalism, the gorilla is a soft-tempered vegetarian, and the orangutan isn't the smartest ape. Instead of educating people, the media keeps on fooling them."

Well, Hollywood isn't known for improving people's sense of reality, now, is it?

"Hollywood isn't alone in the make-believe business, of course, but it's a vile propaganda machine, for sure. You have this Spielberg drama Schindler's List, which brings up every cliché and stereotype about the Germans in WWII that ever was. The 'evil, sadistic Nazi-monsters' are tormenting and killing the 'gentle, inoffensive Jews,' but how fortunate there was a hero named Oscar Schindler to save the day! It's ludicrous, really."

"My grandparents have done their patriotic duty -- and more -- during WWII, just like everybody else in Germany, and also like those in the nations at war with Germany. They weren't rounding up Jews and stuffing them into 'gas ovens' but watching hostile propaganda like Schindler's List can sometimes make one wish they were! Did you know that this Oscar Schindler died abandoned and impoverished in France?"

Now that's some Jewish gratitude! It isn't something that would be taught at our schools or universities, like so much else. But then there really must not be much space in the curriculum with all the "Black History" and "Holocaust Education" using up the time! The situation at German schools must be rather dire, too. How did you digest your education, Hendrik?

"I've had the once-in-a-lifetime luck to watch one educational system tossed out in favor of a profoundly different one, back in 1990. The difference wasn't much when it came to the sciences, of course, but with history, literature, and the like the change was vast. We suddenly understood -- or were told, at least -- that what the GDR taught it's children was considered blatantly false by the new powers-that-be."

"From now on, we would 'learn the truth' -- taught to us by the very some teachers as before, by the way! Now, that was a surprise! It pretty much ruined my confidence in state-sponsored education. I had more trust in the educational sources you don't hear about in school --- books and publications which were hard to get, but worth it. All the public schools and universities serve but one purpose: brainwashing."

You said you didn't make up your mind about many fundamental things until you were behind bars. People who knew you prior to your detention are rather surprised and shocked when confronted by your present outlook. Do you think your radicalization concerning politics, especially your harsh attitude towards German authorities, could be rightly interpreted as a sort of knee-jerk reaction to your arrest and subsequent detention? Is the real motivation behind your dissident beliefs just the resentfulness you have about spending time in prison? You once said you strongly detest being not in charge of your own life and fate.

Hendrik considers this for a minute, then says, "My experience with German officials during the time of my juvenile detention has certainly contributed to my very negative opinion of the system in general. I've seen the system for the lying, tyrannical, and cynical entity that it is. However, I think I could have vented my frustration in a very different fashion, if not for my personality traits which lay dormant until this precarious moment."

"I came out of this rite of passage as a revolutionary instead of a criminal. My intellectual, spiritual, and political progression is the logical conclusion of the impulses I received from my environment as a child. And to the people who critisize me for not having been a National Socialist from birth, I'll quote Sir Oswald Mosley: 'In a world of changing fact and situation, a man is a fool who does not learn enough to change some of his original opinions.' My dealings with German authorities opened my eyes, all right, but I could not have comprehended what I saw without having suspected it all along."

Even though you appear rather dispassionate when you relay your encounters with German security forces, the statements of German officials along with their actions prove that emotions run high at the other side. Do you think you are the victim of vendetta?

"You can certainly get this impression. Political police, public prosecutors, judges -- they take it very personally that I eluded them when they were just getting ready to sack me for good. Damn, they even seem upset about not having me figured out earlier! The funny thing is that I never attempted to conceal my opinions. They could have known my attitude and outlook all along -- and they probably did. What they did not know, however, was the influence I would wield among young people on an international scale when I was released. When they figured that out, they moved earth and heaven to get me back behind bars again."

Indeed, one distinct attorney investigating you, a certain Joachim Petri of the D.A.'s office in Mülhausen, Thüringia, called you a "dangerous influence" on German TV. He furthermore stated his office would do whatever it took to get you arrested again. And you did nothing even remotely criminal, did you?

"Not a thing. I only spoke my mind and raised my right arm. What is criminal about that, except that German anti- free speech legislation says it's a crime?"

Here's a quote by a certain Mr. Lass, the presiding judge at the local court in Erfurt, Thüringia: "Hendrik Möbus knew how to fool the psychologists." Can you please explain to us what special trick you know to thwart the scrutiny of psychologists?

"Hell, shrinks! I've been through examinations by two psychiatrists and six psychologists during the past eight years. The trick? I've not put up a show. They examined me thoroughly and came to the unanimous conclusion that I pose no danger to anyone, including myself. They were, of course, not pleased with 'the world according to Hendrik Möbus,' but that didn't matter in the least, as they were examining my tendencies towards criminal and anti-social behavior, not my politics. The only bloody fool in this affair is Mr. Lass who can't keep his mouth shut!"

Since you seem to like this dear fellow so much, Hendrik, here's another quote by the same man: He said your music, Black Metal, had "provided the impulse for the crime (the killing Hendrik was a part of) and continues to encourage new crimes." Your comment?

Hendrik shakes his head sadly, and says, "That's bloody nonsense, as everybody familiar with the background of the incident A Love Triangle with Tragic Consequences: Hendrik Moebus Reveals the True Motive for Sandro Beyer's Death ought to know. Music was of no relevance whatsoever. Instead of asking what Black Metal did to me, you should rather ask what I did to Black Metal!" Hendrik grins. It's not a secret that he became one of the key players in the emergence of NSBM (National Socialist Black Metal) around the globe (Hendrik Möbus Discusses his Role as a Music Producer following his release from detention in 1998.

It's not that Mr. Lass' notion is unique, however. Music and videos have been blamed for providing inspiration in many other cases of juvenile delinquency. What do you view as the causes for violence among kids and teenagers?

"I don't want to sound preposterous, but doesn't the Bible have Jesus saying that Satan is the Prince of the World? I think that human nature, the degree of intellectualization not withstanding, has a tendency to be destructive by default. If left to one's own devices, with no moral force to guide him, one acts out his predatory inclination. That is what Jesus wanted to tell us. Christendom has understood this and, by the blood it shed, has proven this point for the better part of its history. Now we have the Feminists, Moralists, and Psychologists who contradict Jesus' statements by proclaiming man is born 'innocent,' but happens to become contaminated by 'negative influences.'"

"They believe that if one neutralizes or counteracts these influences, a saint will emerge! That's why they scapegoat music, movies, books, video games, and the like when anything goes 'wrong' and 'innocent kids' turn violent. There is a lot of very nihilistic influence in our' pop-culture', I grant you that, but it's a symptom of rather than a cause. Movies, music and video games don't cause high school massacres or other instances of juvenile violence."

"It is as Jesus said, the driving force of the (human) world is the 'beast in man'. You may domesticate the beast by providing man with a meaningful and constructive guideline for his life, and that is very much the task of ethics and religion, but our contemporary system does not allow for that. Our system, set up by people seemingly out of their mind, pretends that the 'pursuit of happiness' suffices to keep our demons at bay."

"Well, if there's any happiness for a predator, it sure is the unlimited opportunity to prey on others. We can't out run what is part of ourselves. Blame Mother Nature for that!" Hendrik's dystopian statements are a far cry from the generally self-serving phrases common among our intelligentsia, which praise the alleged 'progres' we have made throughout the history of mankind."

You have your doubts about our moral "evolution", have you?

"Indeed I have."

What do you think of physical evolution?

"The theory of evolution usually attributed to Darwin is still too much of that: a theory. I agree with his observation of selection, specialization, and adaptation. But to draw a straight line from a single-cell organism to the current abundance of species seems too far-fetched to me. And the step from inanimate matter to animate matters remains as much of an enigma now as it did before. Sure, some scientists speak of many million of years during which, by chance, the first primitive organism could have developed. But it's a fat chance, if no one is able to duplicate the same process in a modern day laboratory. For all their fancy utilities, our scientists remain just as unlucky as the medieval alchemists when it comes to creating life out of matter."

"And look at the vast variety of species in our flora and fauna -- can this be due to random mutation only? I have yet to hear of a mutation that aids in survival for higher organisms. I have yet to hear of a new species coming into existence! I only hear that we eradicate species. And we undoubtedly have a skill for breeding new races of livestock and pets, but that is manmade evolution, not what supposedly brought about nature as we know her. We haven't even managed to discover our 'missing link' with our pre-human ancestors. There are species which have been around for millions of years more than mammals, why haven't they developed intelligence yet? Anyway, there are too many gaps in the evolution theory, as we learn it in school, to be comfortable with it."

You don't strike one as a Christian, or an overtly religious man at all for that matter. But the idea of a genesis is part of nearly every religion and creed. Is it also in yours? What do you propose instead of Darwinism, and how does the human being fit into your cosmology?

"I don't take Genesis, or any other creation myth, literally of course. I certainly can believe in our creation one step at a time, I just don't like the chance factor inherit in the commonly used model. There's order in everything. You find patterns, programs that are executed over and over again, everywhere you look. The ecosystem on earth is so fine-tuned and interdependent that no one can accurately predict what the outcome of our usually mindless manipulations. Where there is such an order, there ought to be sentience. The Judeo-Christian definition of this sentience is much too petty and personalized to be believed, however."

"And the human being, why, he's supposed to be the keeper and executioner of this order. We can, nay, we will, have real evolution, meaning the development and growth of refined and enhanced life forms, once we comprehend this order and acknowledge our duty to it."

"What is currently happening, this denial of the natural order (just think of the insanity suffered by those who wish to breed a raceless, sexless new man!), goes against our destiny. In the long run, we have to reach out to the stars and be missionaries of the life-force!"

Your friends are aware of your love of science fiction novels and movies. Have you found your vision of the human future in the writings of sci-fi authors?

"There was good sci-fi material that was being published prior to 1945 and which falls in step with ideas of my own. However, I'm rather fascinated by the Dune series of Frank Herbert. The galactic empire he writes about is something I can very well relate to. Herbert describes a future that once again resembles the culture we had in Europe long ago; a future in which ideas of nobility, heredity, and destiny define one's place in the pattern of the greater order. To know where you come from is to know where you are going -- a maxim simple enough to be all but forgotten by the majority in our 'Western' society."

You have painstakingly researched your blood (i.e. descent) and soil (i.e. origin). But do you really know where you are going to go on your "Quest for the Grail", as you call it? Can you imagine where your life may end?

"I'm a shameless Romantic in the German tradition. I have not tried to map out my life like others try to do, because that doesn't work. I believe in destiny, and where it leads me is where I intend to be when my hour of departure arrives. The way to reach this destiny is immaterial." Hendrik can't return to his ancestral homeland, Germany, without being imprisoned. His family, and many of his friends, still live there.

How can you put up with the grim prospect of being exiled from your homeland for an indefinite period of time?

"It saddens me terribly that I can't be anywhere near my people for years to come, should I succeed with my bid for political asylum. But then, I would be away from them in a German prison also, not knowing when this ordeal will end. When faced by the prospect of show trials, prolonged solitary confinement, and psycho-terror; upon my return to Germany, I do not have any reasonable choice besides asking for political asylum in the USA."

With this unenviable fate at hand, you have been called a martyr by fellow idealists. Do you think that this term does you justice?

"Goodness! I wouldn't even think of regarding myself as a martyr. The cause has so many heroes and martyrs who are all but forgotten, like e.g. the 400 comrades hanged after the Nuremberg tribunal, that my own fate pales in comparison. I'm not play-acting a role like others who once confronted by the consequences, opt out of the struggle in the blink of an eye. I know the system is dead serious about its side of this struggle, and when this entails my going through an ordeal for the ideals I uphold, so be it. Whether or not this constitutes martyrdom, I honestly don't know."

The ordeal you talk about is one inflicted on you not only by the authorities. There have also been reports about an escalating conflict between you and a certain Nathan Pett of an alleged organization called the "Pagan Liberation League" (PLL) from Spokane, Washington. What can you tell us about your encounter with Pett?

"Nathan Pett, aka Nate Zorn, is a nasty psychotic. I stayed with him and his 'brother' Michael Lujan from 12/99 to 6/00, a relationship that turned sour and ended when they both attempted to murder me."

There's talk about an incident involving you getting beaten up with a hammer, is that it?

"Yes. You see, I've kept rather quiet about this incident for quite a while. It's not that I'm ashamed of anything. I'm rather embarrassed by what Pett and Lujan did. They both behaved utterly dishonorably, and have thus tainted me with their disgrace as well."

What happened?

"It happened when I stayed with that whiny, neurotic wimp Lujan (CFHM note: a short, dark-skinned, dark-haired, dark-eyed, 'Aryan,') in Richmond, Virginia. Previously, I had been staying with his friend Pett. But Pett began accusing me of 'robbing tens of thousands of dollars' from him and was getting increasingly irrational. This 'tens of thousands of dollars' was not money he actually had, but rather money he thought he would make in the future with his mail order music business. He seemed to think that if one just announced that one was selling CD's, huge amounts cash would start flowing in out of the blue. When this didn't happen, he blamed me. I tried to reason with him. I even reimbursed him with merchandise which he got from me for free, to sell through his mail-order. After all, he'd helped me out at first and paid for my airfare."

"But Pett wanted to turn this act of solidarity into some sort of infinite moral obligation. When he realized he couldn't get his way by sending me infantile death threats, he resorted to blackmailing Lujan, whom Pett refers to as 'the little Rabbi.' He got Lujan to help him plan, and eventually to participate in, the crime he had in mind. Pett took a flight to Richmond and met up with Lujan. Then they both assailed me while I was sleeping. They bound me with duct tape and handcuffs and took me to the shower. There Pett beat me with a carpenter's hammer, while Lujan pointed a gun at me. Lujan was supposed to shoot me in the neck. However, he didn't do this. He was not half as raving mad as Pett himself. Good for him!"

"And for all his tough talk, Pett didn't have the stamina to follow through with his death threats either. All he did was rob my personal belongings -- among which were approximately forty rare CD's he later sold through eBay.com."

"Pett believes he's some kind of hero now, although all he accomplished was to prove he's a punk who has the same code of honor as a street hoodlum -- none at all, that is!"

That's quite a story, and it's too bad you encountered those creeps before you finally ended up in decent company. Still, Pett refuses to outright admit to this attempted murder. He even sometimes denies ever having been with you at all. He says he would be arrested for felony charges if what you are saying were true. Why do you think Pett is a free man while you are imprisoned?

Hendrik snorts contemptuously at this. "You don't have to be a genius to figure that one out, do you? Why should the Feds bust someone who is on their payroll? The Feds told me as much when they arrested me. And why was my arrest warrant issued in Spokane, in July 2000, with Pett's name and address on it? The Feds talked to him and he sang like a canary in duet with his 'brother' Lujan. What they both did to me is of little to no interest to the Feds, except that they can hold it over Pett anytime they wish."

"Their strategy is two fold: (1) By keeping him free, the suspicions about this character will further defragment the movement. People will wonder whether or not to believe him, etc. (2) the Feds know that some people will actually keep trusting Pett, no matter what, and Pett will be fully willing to cooperate with his new masters. So it makes a lot of strategic sense to have Pett out there running errands and maintaining his one-man outfit, the PLL. And before you ask, I haven't told the Feds anything about Pett they didn't already know. As a matter of fact they know him better than I do. They needled me for having picked such inappropriate hosts for my stay in Washington and Virginia."

"Pett is such a 'clever' revolutionary, however, that he couldn't help but go on bragging about his 'heroic act' in Richmond on the Internet when he got back home. Anyway, this kook is a bloody nuisance, but not worth paying much attention to. So, I have brought this up now, for once and for all."

There might be still some readers undecided as to whether or not Hendrik Möbus' account of the incident accurately conveys what happened. Pett sometimes refutes charges that he tried to kill him, while he keeps referring to the incident rather unambiguously at other times. But Hendrik has no sound motive for leveling such charges against a man who actually helped him, if it wasn't the truth. And Pett's inconsistent and irrational behavior is affirmed by many of his former acquaintances.

An irresponsible and principleless man like Pett must be anathema to you. Doesn't it frustrate you, and shake your faith in the so-called "movement," when you contemplate this unfortunate incident?

"Honestly, it doesn't. I'm not a sentimental fool who has no inkling of human nature. As a matter of fact, I've acquired quite a faculty of perception for assessing other people. In this particular case, though, the extraordinary circumstances drastically limited my options. I would not have given Pett and Lujan the chance for acting out their dysfunctionality if I had had more mobility."

"Anyway, the likes of them are extremely rare in the movement -- at least in Europe where you can't hide for years behind P.O. boxes and email accounts without ridiculing yourself and making yourself an outcast. I've met far more decent people; people who do not think that the movement is an appropriate arena for narcissism, egotism, and kookism."

So you don't think of yourself as a loner who deals with mere abstractions?

"Quite certainly not," Hendrik replies emphatically. I'm not a gregarious type, it is true, but I seek out company and enjoy being with compatible others. I have numberless acquaintances and many friends. (CFHM note: we can testify to that!) It's even a talent of mine to pool human resources for accomplishing a mutual task. I can be rather good at managing people. I think I could enjoy being an intelligence officer, but there is no country I'd like to work for! My prospective employer in this regard ceased to exist over 50 years ago!"

The so-called "movement" (of White racialism/National Socialism) is said, by the mass media and government employees, to be a "growing threat" in Germany and elsewhere. Yet for all this scary talk of "right-extremist violence," the official criminal statistics show there are only sporadic attacks on foreign residents, if any at all. Many more people get killed or injured by street crime or by car accidents, than are killed or injured by what are believed to be "xenophobic outbursts." Do you think the so-called "movement" is dangerous?

"That it is considered dangerous in this sense is a deliberate attempt at disinformation by the powers-that-be. They intend only to vilify us. There are a few instances of undisciplined hooliganism, that are decried by the media, but many more merely constitute self-defense. And the controlled media, both in Europe and America, doesn't report the countless cases of non-White-on-White crimes as instances of racial violence."

"I have to emphasize that our objective is not, and must not be, going after individual non-Whites. That's KKK history, and we all know what little good this produces. No, we have to deal with the system that makes it possible for our race to be extinguished, our peoples dispossessed, and our culture erased."

If this objective wasn't dangerous to the powers-that-be, 'the movement' (for lack of a better term) would remain pretty much ignored and unmolested. The movement has gained tremendous momentum since 1995. If this development can be continued during the next five years, we could actually begin seeing some light at the far end of the tunnel."

Where do you imagine you will be in five years? Still with the so-called "movement"?

"I rather think so," Hendrik nods. "But don't ask me for any forecasts. My future is so uncertain at the moment, I could be here today, and gone tomorrow. As long as I'm true to myself, there will be progress however."

In this context, do you mind commenting on the rumor that has it you are considering converting to Islam?

"I'm certainly interested in Islam, and would like to learn more. I would always like to learn more come to think of it," Hendrik says and smiles. "And I have a great deal of respect of the Palestinian freedom fighters, and I hope their struggle will not be in vain. I'm also impressed by the revolution that established the Islamic Republic of Iran in 1979. They managed the synthesis of ancient culture and contemporary civilization, just like the National Socialists in Germany did."

So you think our present "Western" culture is unfit for a contemporary civilization?

"What culture? Freakish paintings, misshapen sculptures, cacophonous music, and imbecile literature: that's not culture, not by a long shot. It's a sickness that ails us, and it oughtn't astonish us that our civilization is falling apart all around us. Our revolution is, and must be, a cultural-spiritual one in the first place."

Where you are right now, you should be quite safe from some of this sickness though, aren't you?

"Yes, I do get to miss the Jerry Springer Show! But, seriously, I'm in solitary confinement Psychoterror in INS Detention without sunlight, fresh air, exercise, or recreation -- that includes TV. I'm reading newspapers, magazines, and books however; that has the advantage of keeping my mind and imagination occupied. It's rather sad to think of the high rate of illiteracy among Americans. Doesn't Genesis say: In the beginning was the word?"

And that provides an appropriate conclusion for our interview. Thank you, Hendrik. The CFHM will keep spreading the word on your case, which is a courageous call for freedom. We hope to be of your assistance as long as your ordeal lasts, and beyond.

"I appreciate that, " Hendrik declares, "my case is not about a single individual, but ought to concern every one who values the freedom to speak his mind, indeed, the freedom of the mind!"