THE RUDOLF REPORT

11. HUNTING GERMAR RUDOLFnot yet finally been declared illegal by any court decision, to justify aprison term without probation.By the time the judges handed down their verdict in June 1995,Rudolf had published three books. About the first, Rudolf’s ExpertReport on chemical and technical details of the alleged gas chambersof Auschwitz, the verdict states at page 23:“This work, the basis of his publishing activities, is essentially writtenin a scholarly style. It addresses a chemical detail (the problem ofhydrocyanic acid) and does not make any general political conclusions.”In general, the verdict says about Rudolf’s three main works (ExpertReport, Vorlesungen zur Zeitgeschichte, Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte):“They are characterized by a scholarly attitude with reference tohis expertise as a scientifically trained chemist. Tone and form are generallyheld in a way, as if they were interested only in the matter. Additionally,intensive discussions of details, tables and graphs as well as voluminousreferences to literature are meant to give the impression of anunbiased and open-minded scholarship. This is primarily true for thethree large publications of the accused” (p. 23 of verdict)About Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte—now published in Englishunder Dissecting the Holocaust—the verdict says, it includes “a maximumappearance of objectivity” (p. 26), which later was confirmed bytwo German mainstream historians in expert reports they wrote in supportof Rudolf’s scholarly work. Of course, the court had to insert theword “appearance”, to cast doubt on the quality of these works, becauseotherwise it could not possibly have sentenced Rudolf.Considering the contempt and hate this verdict shows againstGermar Rudolf, such words of open endorsement cannot be underestimated.Since the court had to admit that Rudolf’s main works are formallyscientific and scholarly (form, i.e., appearance, not content, isthe only criterion for scholarly works!), the accused could not possiblyhave committed any crime by publishing them, since the German constitutionguarantees the freedom of science without restriction in article5.3 of the German Basic Law (Germany’s unofficial constitution). SoRemer’s additions were used instead to tie the rope around Rudolf’sneck.With this finding, the court turned the historical dissident (revisionist)Germar Rudolf into a “thought criminal”.351