Resistance

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORYown ignorance about the matter with the fact that he merely helps out acolleague who couldn’t attend but who is otherwise in charge of these“political cases.” There exist therefore especially delegated prosecutorsamong the public prosecution upon whom it is incumbent to prosecutecitizens due to their views for – underhandedly admitted – political reasonsin order to protect the state from these very citizens. And if suchtrials end with a prison term, how are those convicted inmates to becalled? I want to postpone addressing this question to a later point intime.Now to the next quote:“For us… the concept of torture inheres in the very fact of holdingpolitical prisoners in prison…” (1/331; this is the statement of aprosecutor about methods of the previous regime.)That is also the official view of the Federal Republic of Germanyabout political prisoners during the time of National Socialism, andrightly so. And since we are talking about torture, I may once moremention my foot shackles, which were used on me again during thetransport to the court, quite in contrast to the utmost majority of otherprisoners who are never transferred with shackles. Are you at all awarehow painful fetters are, how they cut into the ankles with every step? 128But now to the next quote:“One important additional broadening […] was its application[…] ‘via intent.’ In other words, no [crime] had taken place; but theinterrogator envisioned an intention…” (1/61)This is pretty much exactly along the line of argument of myStuttgart trial. At that time a revisionist could only be sentenced for incitingthe masses, if he had committed the so-called “qualified Auschwitzlie,” that is to say, if he had expressly claimed that Jews had inventedthe Holocaust in order to gain political or financial advantageous.But I had never claimed such a thing. Even the Stuttgart courthad to admit this, which did not prevent them, though, to sentence meby insinuating that I had had the “intention.” I may quote the accordingpassages from the verdict: 129“Although [the text passages] do not expressively accuse theJews of having invented the accounts on the Holocaust particularlyto gain political and material advantages, in the eyes of this court128 Following an order by the Presiding Judge no fetters were used after that day in court.129 District Court Stuttgart, ref. 17 KLs 83/94, p. 115.108