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

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORY
2. Legal Remedy
The normative decisions of the German Federal Supreme Court as
well as the continual refusal of the German Federal Constitutional High
Court to even accept appeals on constitutional grounds are the secondary
reason for the unconstitutional conditions in Germany. The absolutist
extension of the principle of self-evidence effectively amounting to a
prohibition to even introduce evidence goes back to decisions of the
German Supreme Court, as does the most recent demand to convict defense
lawyers for filing motions to introduce pertinent evidence. The
German Supreme Court has moreover extended the jurisdiction of the
federal German judiciary to the entire Internet in the wake of the case of
the revisionist Dr. Fredrick Töben. It has forced German courts to always
negatively judge the character of historical dissidents with the
case against the Günter Deckert, who had been prosecuted for his revisionist
statements. And finally it has refused to legally protect judges
whose independence had been levered out by means of public pressure
and threats of prosecution, just because they adjudged positive personality
traits and sincere motives to a revisionist (Deckert, same case), as
in the case of the Mannheim judges Orlet, Müller, and Folkerts.
And in the face of all this misfortune it turned out that the European
Court of Human Rights has simply rubber-stamped all cases of government
persecution of historical dissidents brought to its attention.
Hence no remedy is possible on the judicial level either. 239
3. Remedy by Civil Rights Organizations
To what extent human rights organization could remedy the situation
in the first place is anyone’s guess. The largest organizations, in any
case, like for instance the leftist Amnesty International, have so far categorically
refused to recognize revisionists as political persecutees. Less
left-leaning organizations, like e.g. the “International Society for Human
Rights” (www.ishr.org), are themselves afraid of societal persecution,
should they publicly lobby for our rights, as I have explained before.
I hope it is clear what kind of damning indictment this is for the
federal German society.
239 In 2009 the German Constitutional High Court decided that it, too, endorses this admittedly(!)
illegal practice of prosecuting peaceful dissidents with special laws, see note 233.
196