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

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORY
4. Arbitrary Interpretation of Terms (Immunization against
Criticism)
As the last point of my judicial observations I want to talk about the
interpretation of terms used by German judges and prosecutors, as they
are common in cases like mine. These interpretations are marked by
total arbitrariness, as I will show in the following, which by the way is
an illegitimate tactic of immunization against criticism, as I have shown
in the context of science. The terms subsequently quoted and discussed
can be found literally in my indictment:
a. The prosecution of dissident Holocaust researchers, writers, or publishers
is rationalized by claiming that their writings “incite to hatred”
“in a way capable of disturbing public peace,” that they “insult,”
“maliciously expose to disdain,” “denigrate,” and/or “disparage”
by, among other things, “denying” historical events or by representing
them “consciously against the truth.”
b. The German term used in this context for “denial” – “leugnen” –
means to deny something against better knowledge, hence insinuates
knowledge of the truth and conscious statements against it. Yet no
court has the capability to find out what an individual was consciously
aware of during an activity in the past. But most of all it is
beyond the competence and authority of a court to determine what is
true or what a citizen has to consider to be true. “Consciously
against the truth” is therefore the most absurd phrase of the German
jurisprudence, which seriously thinks it can determine historical
truth and consciousness by verdicts. One cannot treat history like
that in courtrooms.
c. A writing isn’t already “insulting, disparaging, offensive, libelous,
denigrating, or mind-poisoning” just because a reader subjectively
feels that way. That is particularly true for writings containing opinions
which are considered to be totally erroneous by a majority or
even to be a breach of a taboo. Because even if those opinions considered
to be totally erroneous are presented absolutely soberly, they
still have a very emotional effect on the reader due to their eccentricity
or because they violate a taboo. Historical examples of novel
views are galore which were initially regarded as completely erroneous
and which had an extreme emotional effect despite being presented
soberly.
136