1 star because I can’t give it 0. Germar Rudolf: bigot, racist and holocaust denier. German Holocaust Denier Imprisoned for Inciting Racial Hatred: A German. Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of ‘Truth’ and ‘Memory’. At the start of his trial in November, Germar Rudolf had called the Holocaust ‘a. Germar Rudolf, also known as Germar Scheerer, born 29 October , is a German chemist Rudolf knew his work would be associated with Holocaust denial, but insisted that even Remer had a right to legal defense. ), ISBN ; Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of Truth and Memory.
|Country:||Republic of Macedonia|
|Published (Last):||27 May 2017|
|PDF File Size:||3.97 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.23 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Holocaust Handbooks: Germar Rudolf: ‘Dissecting the Holocaust’
They are driven by the gnawing suspicion that, given professional historiographers’ penchant for revision, urdolf will eventually be little or nothing left of the once so solidly established view of the Fascist regime of terror.
It is easy to see how far from the straight and narrow such erroneous views lead: However, suits against this law are always th, and complaints by German judicial experts, stating that this special law against freedom hplocaust speech which was not thought through to the end,  is an ” assault against the intellectual freedom of all dissidents ”  and that its ” legitimacy is at least questionable ” are generally ignored.
Free download of the book: TR rated it really liked holocaus Jan 02, The voices warning that the intellectual climate in Germany is becoming more dissecitng more poisoned by this opinion terrorism and that Germany’s democracy is in grave danger are now growing louder,  but of course the German media, those ” enemies of free society “,  keep these voices from the public, and the rest of the world also studiously ignores them.
Everybody who is confronted with this opinion must wonder what he should think of a state that tries to define certain views of history as the ultimate truth by means of the threat of prosecution, and which slanders dissidents as enemies of democracy. If the details really do not matter very much at all, then why is there such dissectihg refusal to discuss them and to consider other opinions? Often it is considered sufficient to cite portions of documents out of their proper context, or arbitrarily select a few documents from many others of relevance.
The Leuchter Reports Vol. But the power that brings total victory intoxicates.
Germar Rudolf – Wikipedia
I long for the end of an era that has brought the world, Jewry, and the German people as much misfortune as perhaps no era before. Every presidential address, every minute of silence, every history textbook would be a lie. Beyond that, it would be little short of a miracle if the judges in the Federal Republic of Germany had not learned – from the way in which their Mannheim colleagues’ careers were abruptly cut short – that if they wish to keep their own jobs, they better convict Revisionists without mercy.
The reaction of the German historians in particular was appropriately furious, even if those same historians had backed somewhat similar theses in the previous decades.
A pile of rydolf bodies or an open mass grave, for example, can be presented as evidence for the gas holocauet murders, but what is there to prove that the pictures do not in fact show the German victims of Allied air-raids, or the victims of starvation or epidemics in German or Allied camps, soldiers killed in action, victims of pogroms, or even persons killed by the Soviet secret service?
Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of ‘truth’ and ‘memory’
Historians should take general warning from the fact that the Allies and their accessories found every conceivable means for forgery at their disposal after the war – original letterhead stationery, typewriters, rubber stamps, printing presses etc.
After all, one must wonder how the recipients of coded orders would know when to take the wording of an order literally and when to go against it, and in which way – and all this in light of the fact that acting against orders carried at ggermar very severe punishments in the Third Reich.
Exactly the same is true for Prof.
In other words, if Racists, National Socialists and anti-Semites are to be prevented from using Holocaust revisionism for their own political purposes, their opponents have to cover revisionism themselves. Antoine Shehadeh marked it as to-read Nov 19, Aside from the fact that, where gas chambers and mass extermination are concerned, both authors clearly give eyewitness testimony priority over all other forms of evidence and thus proceed in a grossly unscientific manner, their books also exhibit two other grave errors.
This may be due to the fact that such campaigns of book destruction are not generally publicized – in other words, they are carried out behind the public’s back.
There have dissecting many revisionist rudolg of these arguments,  so that this handbook will give only a few examples. Mayer put it,  or for which there are absolutely no ” documents, traces or material evidence ” at all, as French historian Jacques Baynac recently said. If a person or group blocks investigation of an allegedly unique crime on grounds of moral outrage, then that person or group is guilty of a unique crime itself.
Even self-denial on the part of the scientist can result at most in a delay, but never in a termination of the process of learning and discovery. The defense must show that the evidence it wishes to present is superior to all evidence previously presented at German courts, which was used to justify the ruling of self-evidentness, or.
Benz simply ignores the emigration of the Jews from Europe that has become known as another Exodus and which began prior to World War II, was largely interrupted in and reached its high point between and Obviously, as was already the case before World War Two, a weak and self-destructive Germany, descending into a new totalitarian state in whose internal affairs the powers-that-be meddle at will, is again preferred to a strong German democracy, which would obviously present unwelcome economic, political and moral competition.
By now, clearly even historians perceive the dissectiny and jurists’ efforts to grossly restrict contemporary historians’ freedom of research as very oppressive. The fact that to this day no one sees fit to gather this evidence, which the Soviet anti-Fascist propaganda of the past decades would not have been the only one to jump at, makes me wonder, to put it mildly; all the more so because nowadays, expert reports on technical matters are required for even the most routine court case following, say, a car accident, never mind for murder trials, where a single life was lost!
The treatment of vanquished Germany by the germag Allies has been truly unique in modern times, since the same Allies otherwise allow even the most notorious murderers opportunity to dlssecting themselves in court.
Goldhagen represents in effect the climax of this approach,  and it has been massively criticized for this even from the establishment side. These documents were released only recently, which has led to some speculations about whether the western Allies may have known much earlier about a German policy of extermination of the Jews and whether perhaps even more than 6 million Jews were killed by the Germans in World War Two.
Well, there we have it: It is to be hoped that revisionist historians will be able to resist the Faustian temptation to intoxicate themselves on their power that probably will increase in future.