THE RUDOLF REPORT

GERMAR RUDOLF · THE RUDOLF REPORTHistorian David Irving against American writer Deborah Lipstadt. 66This report represents a retreat to the argumentative situation beforeJean-Claude Pressac’s first book, published in 1989, 67 ignoring almostall arguments brought forward by revisionists since that year. 68 In2002, however, Prof. van Pelt published a summary of the evidencepresented at said trial and his interpretation of it. 69 This book is the firstin English to intensively discuss various revisionist arguments, forwhich he mainly relies on the works of J.-C. Pressac. 70 It is a pity,though, that the cultural historian van Pelt tries to address manychemical, toxicological, engineering and architectural questions forwhich he simply lacks both expertise and experience.Most of the above-mentioned attempted refutations of theLeuchter Report, and subsequent discussion with other revisionists, aremarred by personal insinuations about the motivations of persons makinguse of revisionist arguments, or by polemical excursions, neither ofwhich contribute to the scientific discussion.3.2. On PoliticsThe question of whether or not systematic mass-killings of Jews inhomicidal gas chambers specifically constructed for the purpose ofaccomplishing their extermination took place under the National Socialistregime is apparently viewed as a political issue. Whether or nota moral appraisal of the National Socialist regime depends on the existenceor non-existence of gas chambers is disputable. A politicalevaluation of the Third Reich is not significantly dependent upon this6667686970Pelt Report, introduced in evidence during the libel case before the Queen’s Bench Division,Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London, David John Cawdell Irving vs. (1) Penguin BooksLimited, (2) Deborah E. Lipstadt, ref. 1996 I. No. 113.Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers, Beate-Klarsfeld-Foundation, New York 1989.Cf. G. Rudolf, “Gutachter und Urteilsschelte”, VffG 4(1) (2000), pp. 33-50 (online:www.vho.org/VffG/2000/1/Rudolf33-50.html); more exhaustively, in English, online:www.vho.org/GB/c/GR/RudolfOnVanPelt.html and …/CritiqueGray.html.Robert J. van Pelt, The Case for Auschwitz. Evidence from the Irving Trial, Indiana UniversityPress, Bloomington/Indianapolis 2002; cf. Robert H. Countess, “Van Pelts Plädoyer gegenden gesunden Menschenverstand”, VffG, 6(3) 2002), pp. 349-354; Paul Grubach, “Greuelpropagandades Ersten Weltkriegs und der Holocaust”, ibid., pp. 354-359 (online:www.vho.org/VffG/2002/3/Countess349-354.html and …/Grubach354-359.html).When he addresses chemical questions, he also refers to some degree to the work of R. Green,op.cit. (notes 63, 65).36