Diskussion om Germar Rudolf - Rudolf rapport

Perhaps the most read critique of revisionist use of pseudonyms is that of Harry Mazal of the Holocaust History Project, an anti-revisionist group that functions primarily on the Internet. Mazal mainly targeted Germar Rudolf, for what he calls his, "continuing attempt to obfuscate and confuse." Mazal writes,

"Mr. Rudolf, like many other Holocaust deniers, has created a variety of pseudonyms, referred to as nyms in common Internet parlance. Most deniers use such pseudonyms to conceal their identities in the various Usenet discussion groups." [14]

Mazal may not go as far as Lipstadt in attributing sinister intentions to revisionists, but clearly he believes that the use of nyms as he calls them are all about creating confusion and covering up true identities. He also takes a shot at Samuel Crowell complaining, "Some, like "Samuel Crowell" use a nym to avoid embarrassment in their legitimate work place." [15] Still, Mazal refuses to address why revisionists should be "embarrassed" in their work place and even further who might cause them "embarrassment." Beyond "embarrassment" many revisionists have lost careers due to their revisionist activities. [16]

Some revisionists also have been critical of the use of pseudonyms and pen names. Despite the long tradition of their use, various revisionists who are open about their work and viewpoints have sometimes expressed distaste at those who prefer pseudonyms. To the open revisionist, the use of a pseudonym can diminish the trust and confidence they are willing to place in the "underground" revisionist. Mark Weber, while editor of the Journal of Historical Review was often reluctant to publish works submitted under pen names. David Irving also has made various comments through the years targeted at those who prefer to remain in the shadows. This position is certainly more understandable from those who like Irving have lost everything and even suffered imprisonment for their battle for revisionism than from the anti-revisionists who hypocritically denounce the use of pseudonyms and applaud the repression of those who express doubt about the Holocaust. [las: quark, Bolt, Mabuse, A.E. Mathis och annat intellektuellt oarligt pack ]

Rudolf's energy and the sheer volume of his efforts resulted in his later publications often citing his earlier works. Rudolf now found himself in the uncomfortable position of having one of his pen names citing another of his own secret identities. Although clearly forced into this situation by repressive laws targeting revisionist publications, Rudolf's detractors had a field day. Rudolf has been charged with every type of duplicity and intellectual dishonesty by those who seem content to turn a blind-eye to the draconian legal system in which Rudolf found himself. Today, with the cooperation of the United States government, Rudolf is currently serving out his sentence for publishing his expert report in Germany.

Mannheim public prosecutor Grossmann demanded a 2 ½ year-sentence for Germar Rudolf in his closing arguments on 5 March for "inciting the people" in two cases, having "deliberately and contrary to historical truth denied the mass murder of the Jews and the existence of the [homicidal] gas chambers". He was accused of having described the Holocaust as an "invention".

The sentence will be handed down on 15 March.

According to the report by a regional German television website linked below, Germar Rudolf has fired his attorney Sylvia Stoltz, resulting in the trial proceeding more quickly than expected.

http://www.swr.de/nachrichten/bw/-/id=1622/nid=1622/did=787952/kabs4o/index.html

The last paragraph of this article is of some interest, for the Südwestrundfunk ("Southwestern broadcasting corporation" - i.e. the official German television and radio broadcasting program for southwestern Germany) reports quite objectively on Germar Rudolf's research:

SWR wrote:
The former employee of Stuttgart Max-Planck-Institute had worked out the so-called "Rudolf expert report" in 1991. On 120 pages he concludes that Zyklon B was "never" used in the Auschwitz gas chambers. In his paper the mass gassings of Jews are denied according to alleged "scientific analysis" of mortar specimen.

Der Vorsitzende Richter sagte jedoch, Rudolf habe nie ernsthaft versucht, sich mit Geschichte auseinanderzusetzen.