THE RUDOLF REPORT

11. HUNTING GERMAR RUDOLFthe south English regional TV station ITV. Six or seven photographsof Rudolf were shown during the report which had been taken fromRudolf’s website www.vho.org. The public was warned to beware ofthis “nazi sympathizer”. The audience must have gained the impressionthat Rudolf was so dangerous that he was running around murderingpeople. Mr. Michael Whine of the British Jewish Board of Deputieswas pleased to appear before the cameras and announce that regardingRudolf, England was dealing with a “new breed of dangerous nazis”.The local press chimed in once more with “Escaped Neo-nazi still hidingin Hastings [...] he [...] was still being hunted.” (The Hastings andSt. Leonards Observer, March 31, 2000). Obviously, the powers thatbe are striving to familiarize the local populace with Rudolf’s likenessand condition them to be afraid of him. It wants them to complain tothe police about the desperado in their midst.On May 27, 2000, Günther Hoerbst of the Hamburger Abendblattreported on a report of the Israeli university of Tel Aviv entitled “Anti-Semitism Worldwide 1998/99”:“Twelve pages of the report are dedicated to Germany. The reportcomplains about the growing acceptance of the holocaust lie, primarilyby means of the internet and rightwing extremist groups. The report acknowledgesthat present German legislation provides the most ‘advancedand effective attempts at combating the holocaust lie’, but ‘it neverthelessis a growing phenomenon’. For instance, the leading German holocaustliar Rudolf continues to disseminate his writings over the internetfrom foreign countries, even though he has been convicted and sentencedin Germany.”What a pity that is!So far, the only more or less impartial article about Rudolf has appearedon January 7, 2000, in the Los Angeles Times, in connectionwith the Irving vs. Lipstadt trial. It was written by Kim Murphy. 640Freedom of the Press = A Truthful Press?Against several of the above-mentioned media pieces, namelythose where the person of Germar Rudolf himself had been attacked, itwould have been possible to demand a right of reply in the press.However, with respect to factually false assertions such as the fabricateddpa notice which did not touch Rudolf personally, there can be640 Online at: http://www.codoh.com/newsdesk/000107.html.401