Germar Rudolf, Resistance Is Obligatory (2012; PDF-Datei

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORY
demanded violation of law by suppressing evidence, which he is about
to perpetrate, is covered from higher up. Or in another case a different
judge clearly states on the phone to a defense lawyer that instructions
exist from higher up not to admit evidence about the Holocaust under
any circumstances.
And if a mishap happens after all, as was the case in this Court in
1994 when the judges Orlet, Müller, and Folkerts sentenced a historical
dissident only to a prison term on probation with the justification that he
was, after all, a decent chap, had only good intentions, and did not really
harbor illegal opinions, then this will be corrected upon pressure
from higher up by giving the respective judges the choice to either retire
early or face prosecution themselves, which proves that the so-called
independence of the judges in Germany has turned into a farce.
Since that event at the latest it is clear that historical dissidents are
considered guilty right from the start not only regarding the objective
side of the offense (i.e., the crime itself) due to the “self-evidence” of
the Holocaust – without having any means to defend themselves against
it – but that also the subjective side of the offense (i.e., the offender) has
to be predetermined: We revisionists have to be considered as criminals
who cannot be reintegrated and to whom neither legitimate motives nor
good character features or other mitigating circumstances must be conceded.
Hence we are both objectively as well as subjectively sentenced
before the trial has even begun.
The next interesting passage of the unnamed author is:
“The reader has seen throughout this book that from the very beginning
[…] there have been no politicals in our courts. [… They]
were merely common criminals.” (3/506)
Each government claims about itself officially that there are no political
prisoners in their country. Even the former communist East Germany
always claimed this about itself. It is self-evident that one must not
ask the government of a country in order to find out whether political
prisoners exist there. This is a trivial fact.
And yet in German courts of law, behind closed doors, one readily
admits that there are political trials indeed. In this context I may again
remind you at my experiences in Bielefeld in 1992: In that year, during
the trial against Udo Walendy in front of the District Court Bielefeld, to
which I had been summoned as an expert witness but as usual rejected
due to “self-evidence,” I listened by chance as the prosecutor lauded the
defense lawyer Hajo Herrmann for his competence, yet defended his
107