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

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORY
amounts to a manslaughter by criminal negligence on a massive
scale.
g) The National Socialist persecution of the Jews meets the legal definition
of genocide even without mass murder.
Item g) refutes the claim that my book Lectures denies the genocide
and the other items a) to f) refute the claim that my book approves or
downplays the National Socialist persecution of the Jews, because nowhere
is it depicted by me as a “police measure” or an “inevitable act of
war” or anything similar, quite to the contrary.
The Public Prosecution of Stuttgart also denied that Meyer’s essay
meets the legal definition of trivialization, which according to the Public
Prosecution of Stuttgart is given,
“if it results from the pertinent statements that the genocidal acts
committed by National Socialists during the Third Reich are to be
downplayed, palliated, or that their true severity is disguised (cf.
GBHSt 46, 40).”
This is said to not apply to Meyer, because he finishes his essay with
the claim that it “does not relativize the barbarity, yet verifies it.”
Whether a dissenting essay on the Holocaust as authored by Meyer
“relativizes or verifies the barbarity,” does obviously not depend on
how many victims are claimed, as Meyer reduces the victim count
for Auschwitz drastically and is thus closer to the figure of revisionists
than to that of established historians (established: 1.5 million;
Meyer: 0.5 million.; revisionists: 0.15 million).
Whether, and if so then how many, homicidal gas chambers are denied,
as Meyer denies the existence of four homicidal gas chamber
buildings of the total of six claimed by established historians for
Birkenau, so that Meyer here too is closer to the revisionists than to
established historians. (Revisionists contest all six buildings claimed
to have been used as such).
Whether and to what extent witness testimonies are considered implausible
and thus have to be rejected, as Meyer declares as implausible
all witness statements about the four alleged homicidal gas
chamber buildings contested by him and moreover also the statements
by former camp commander Rudolf Höß, who was forced by
torture to confess. With this critical – although hardly scientifically
substantiated – attitude toward witness testimonies, Meyer is once
again closer to the revisionists than to the established historians, who
164