Resistance

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORYamounts to a manslaughter by criminal negligence on a massivescale.g) The National Socialist persecution of the Jews meets the legal definitionof genocide even without mass murder.Item g) refutes the claim that my book Lectures denies the genocideand the other items a) to f) refute the claim that my book approves ordownplays the National Socialist persecution of the Jews, because nowhereis it depicted by me as a “police measure” or an “inevitable act ofwar” or anything similar, quite to the contrary.The Public Prosecution of Stuttgart also denied that Meyer’s essaymeets the legal definition of trivialization, which according to the PublicProsecution of Stuttgart is given,“if it results from the pertinent statements that the genocidal actscommitted by National Socialists during the Third Reich are to bedownplayed, 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 withthe 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 countfor Auschwitz drastically and is thus closer to the figure of revisioniststhan 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 chamberbuildings of the total of six claimed by established historians forBirkenau, so that Meyer here too is closer to the revisionists than toestablished historians. (Revisionists contest all six buildings claimedto have been used as such). Whether and to what extent witness testimonies are considered implausibleand thus have to be rejected, as Meyer declares as implausibleall witness statements about the four alleged homicidal gaschamber buildings contested by him and moreover also the statementsby former camp commander Rudolf Höß, who was forced bytorture to confess. With this critical – although hardly scientificallysubstantiated – attitude toward witness testimonies, Meyer is onceagain closer to the revisionists than to the established historians, who164