the Rudolph Report?

[Sergey]

Germany tries 'Holocaust denier'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6147400.stm

A German man deported from the US has gone on trial in the Germany city of Mannheim for alleged Holocaust denial.
Germar Rudolf published a study saying the Nazis did not use gas to kill Jews at the Auschwitz concentration camp.

Of course the Holocaust took place. Millions of Jews were killed: shot, beaten, frosen, starved, worked to death, gased. Prevailing method is irrelevant from my point of view.

Frankly speaking I have my own private opinion:
1) number of gased was not huge and
2) it (the previous statement) is not a Holocaust denial.

Maybe I'm not right?

[David Thompson]

Sergey -- If you want to discuss Mr. Rudolf's notions, that's fine, but as you know we're not interested in unsourced personal opinions about what is "not huge."

Undocumented claims undercut the research purposes of this section of the forum. Consequently, it is required that proof be posted along with a claim. The main reason is that proof, evidence, facts, etc. improve the quality of discussions and information. A second reason is that inflammatory, groundless threads attack, and do not promote, the scholarly purpose of this section of the forum.

This requirement applies to each specific claim. In the past, some posters have attempted to evade the proof requirement by resort to the following tactics, none of which are acceptable here:

A general reference to a website, or a book without page references; citations or links to racist websites; generalized citations to book reviews; and citations to unsourced articles.

Noncomplying posts are subject to deletion after warning.

3. Opinions

Since the purpose of this section of the forum is to exchange information and hold informed discussions about historical problems, posts which express unsolicited opinions without supporting facts and sources do not promote the purposes of the forum. Consequently, such posts are subject to deletion after a warning to the poster.

The same reasoning applies to opinion threads.

H&WC Section Rules
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962

[alf]

Finally the "Rudolf Report" will be held up to public scrutiny in a Court of Law, something Rudolf was so careful to always avoid. re Irvings second appeal where the Report was hurriedly withdrawn.

I will look forward to his justifications of using his own aliases as references in his report. His hate "science" was exposed years ago, only denialists cling to it.

It will be good to see the sad little hate monger stripped of all credibilty in Court. Hopefully his jail guards will be Jewish, that would be poetic justice.

[lisset]

Alf I could not agree more - this would be excellent if it camae to pass.
However , do you think that his work being critically and objectively evaluated will mean anything to the revisionist and those who deny the Holocaust and the vast majority of the Hitler Goverments crimes ?
I can hear the excuses being made already and the " this counts for nothing" mantra "reving up" , from the "rev"isionists that is.

Being exposed time and time again as people who have no case does not seem to be a problem to them - it is almost as if it does not really matter, increasingly they focus on their right to make their case rather than the substacne of that which they wish to present.

Thanks for the link - I hope his case gets some news coverage in the UK.

[Sergey]

Sergey -- If you want to discuss Mr. Rudolf's notions, that's fine, but as you know we're not interested in unsourced personal opinions about what is "not huge."

Undocumented claims undercut the research purposes of this section of the forum. Consequently, it is required that proof be posted along with a claim. The main reason is that proof, evidence, facts, etc. improve the quality of discussions and information. A second reason is that inflammatory, groundless threads attack, and do not promote, the scholarly purpose of this section of the forum.

This requirement applies to each specific claim. In the past, some posters have attempted to evade the proof requirement by resort to the following tactics, none of which are acceptable here:

A general reference to a website, or a book without page references; citations or links to racist websites; generalized citations to book reviews; and citations to unsourced articles.

Noncomplying posts are subject to deletion after warning.

3. Opinions

Since the purpose of this section of the forum is to exchange information and hold informed discussions about historical problems, posts which express unsolicited opinions without supporting facts and sources do not promote the purposes of the forum. Consequently, such posts are subject to deletion after a warning to the poster.

The same reasoning applies to opinion threads.

H&WC Section Rules
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962

Dear mr.Thompson!

My apologies. I will try to obey the rules. I was born in the Soviet Union, so I'm still hungry for freedom of speech for freedoms of opinions. So I hope that I could be forgiven in this context.

[michael mills]

Strictly speaking, there is no crime called "Holocaust denial" in Germany.

Trials of so-called "Holocaust deniers" are based of the accusation of having committed one or both of two offences that have been on the statute books for quite some time. These are:

1. Defaming the memory of the dead. This offence originally referred to an act of making a defamatory statement about a specific deceased person known by name (eg saying to a widow that her late husband had been a child-molester) , but its meaning has been widened by German courts to cover any statement made about victims of the National Socialist regime that those courts consider defamatory, even where the statement in question is not made about any specific person.

2. Incitement to racial hatred. Originally, this offence referred to spoken or written statements about an ethnic group that were intended to inspire hatred of that group (eg "All Jews are criminals"), but again its coverage has been extended to include statements about victims of the National Socialist regime that do not overtly incite hatred of the ethnic groups to which those victims belong, but which are held by the courts to constitute covert incitement.

It would be interesting to know with which of the above offences Rudolf is charged, and which of his statements are held to constitute defamation of the memory of the dead, or incitment to racial hatred, or both.

[David Thompson]

Sergey -- Please understand that the research sections of the AHF exist for our readers, and that the main reason readers come here is to be able to get sourced information which is not readily available to them. While I appreciate your desire for freedom of opinion, sourced information is what we're interested in here. For those who have only opinions and no information, we encourage the use of outside resources such as blogs, billboards, and the local park or street corner. Forgiveness is always available to those who keep our forum's goals in mind.

[David Thompson]

Michael -- You wrote:

It would be interesting to know with which of the above offences Rudolf is charged, and which of his statements are held to constitute defamation of the memory of the dead, or incitment to racial hatred, or both.

I agree, and it would also be interesting to know whether there are any other charges against him. It's too bad that the news accounts aren't more specific.