Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old February 1st, 2008 #1
Wagner
Senior Member
 
Wagner's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 850
Wagner
Default Germar Rudolf (Germany, U.S.)



http://www.germarrudolf.com/

Germar Rudolf
The Persecution of a German Scholar

Imagine an expert in DNA analyses. He is asked to verify if a defendant is the father of a child. He complies and confirms the fatherhood of the defendant. With his testimony, however, the expert contradicts the statements of many witnesses who claim the opposite. Imagine the judge ruling not to admit the expert testimony because it makes spectators assume that the witnesses lied out of sinister motives. The judge even puts the expert witness on trial for inciting hatred against the witnesses and sentences him to 14 months in jail. You think it can’t happen? It does happen in Germany...

German scholar Germar Rudolf has authored, edited and published numerous academic articles, brochures, books, and magazines in the German and in the English languages both in his native Germany and abroad. Until his abrupt deportation from the United States in Nov. 2005, he was the owner of a university-press-style publishing house that focused on detailed scientific and archival studies of well-defined historical topics. He is lauded as an academic of high standards by many professors from around the world. Yet the German authorities imprisoned him exactly because of his scholarly success, for his ground-breaking academic writings.

Rudolf’s crime: he did not obey a German penal law that forces everybody to parrot the official version of a detail of German history. You may wonder what detail that may be, but to be sure, it does not matter, because a government that prescribes the writing of history by penal law is dictating to its citizens what to think, and that is the exact definition of a dictatorship. Period.

To summarize Germar’s deeds:

An Academic "Thought Criminal"

Germar Rudolf (pictured) was asked by various defense teams to testify as an expert in chemistry at trials in Germany. Yet the judges refused to hear his testimony in open violation of German law, which does not allow the rejection of expert witnesses already present in the court room.

Rudolf’s rejected expert report was then published by a defendant who had requested it for his defense. This defendant considered it vital to draw attention to this illegal suppression of evidence, which he sought to do by adding a perfectly legitimate, though polemical, introduction and appendix to Rudolf’s report. Thanks to this publication, Rudolf was sentenced to 14 months in prison. The court argued that Rudolf’s findings in combination with the defendant’s comments could arouse hostile emotions against witnesses, whose testimonies conflicted with Rudolf’s findings.

A year later, Rudolf published a large scientific book about similar issues, for which he was also indicted. Although historians testified during this trial that Rudolf’s work is scientific and thus protected by Germany’s constitution, the book was nevertheless confiscated and burned by order of the court. Rudolf subsequently fled to England, where he established a small publishing firm for scholarly material similar to what he was prosecuted for in Germany. As a result, Germany requested his extradition. Therefore, Rudolf fled to America and applied for political asylum.

Rudolf continued his scholarly publishing activities in the "Land of the Free," lauded by scholars from around the world, but hated by German authorities. Rudolf defied and undermined German censorship, considered among the harshest worldwide. Hence, more than 30 criminal investigations were pending against him in Germany for his peaceful "thought crimes," each of them perfectly legal in the U.S., but punishable with up to five years in jail in Germany. German authorities also ordered the confiscation of his property, because they claim it was all acquired with money gained from "illegal" activities.

The U.S.A. – Still a Safe Haven for the Persecuted?

In 2004, the U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Services (INS – now part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ICE) rejected Rudolf’s application for political asylum. They ordered him to be deported in handcuffs, banned for life, with no possible remedy. Not even his marriage to a U.S. citizen with a child expected was considered.

The reasoning given by the INS-ICE:

1. Germany is a democracy, a state under the rule of law. Hence, Rudolf is not fleeing persecution, but lawful prosecution.
2. Considering Germany’s Nazi past, it has to censor its citizens in order to make sure that Nazism will never rise again.
3. Rejecting evidence is OK, because the U.S. also has rules for rejecting evidence. E.g., if an expert has already proved a point at issue, witnesses who contradict this expert can be rejected.
4. Rudolf’s application was found to be "frivolous" (deceitful), the most severe immigration violation, resulting in the harshest punishment possible.

This INS-ICE ruling is outrageous, because:

1. Just calling oneself a democracy doesn’t make it one. Almost all dictatorships call themselves "democracies" and "states under the rule of law." The proof lies in Germany’s civil rights record, not in its law books.
2. Justifying German censorship is like saying: Because Germany persecuted minorities, jailed dissenters, and burned books in the past, it now has an obligation to persecute minorities, jail dissenters, and burn books!
3. The INS has it upside down: Germany not only rejects, it jails experts because their research results disagree with witnesses.
4. Rudolf learned about the accusation of having filed a "frivolous" application only in the verdict, which named no evidence for it. It is as if someone were tried for theft, then sentenced for murder without proof!

Due Process Aborted

Apart from his dealings with INS-ICE, Rudolf pursued legal processes in the U.S. federal courts that, by contrast, proceeded and continue to proceed generally favorably. In October 2005 ICE intervened in this process and after a brief incarceration deported Rudolf in chains to Germany, where he was immediately confined in a maximum security prison near Stuttgart. In late 2006 – early 2007 he was put on trial in Mannheim and received a prison sentence of two and one-half years, to commence after serving the earlier 14 month sentence.

A favorable court ruling in March 2006 confirmed Rudolf’s right to return to the U.S.A. to apply for residency based on his marriage to a U.S. citizen. This ruling has been resisted by ICE, which argues that a new regulation formulated by them can be applied retroactively to Germar. That claim was challenged in court by Germar in Sept. 2007 but has not, as of 18 Dec. 2007, been decided by the court. Legal arguments aside, the bottom line is that ICE is doing everything possible to deny Germar U.S. residency. The authority of this purely administrative agency is great in this area, as the subjects involved do not have the rights of legal residents. However the courts still have the last word, provided the applicant can sustain the long legal process required.

The World’s Leading Historical Dissident

The reason for all this? Germar Rudolf was the world’s leading publisher of independent Holocaust studies not funded by any government. He published university-style research that critically re-examined and corrected generally held views of the Holocaust, while at the same time confirming the unjust suffering inflicted upon Jews during that human catastrophe.

Germar’s publishing operations have, since his deportation from the U.S., passed to other, unrelated people.

But doubting aspects of the official version of the Holocaust, even if it confirms the injustice done to Jews, offends powerful people in the U.S. In Germany, it is a crime so severe that the German authorities not only jail dissenters, burn their books, and block their Internet sites, but also outlaw motions to introduce dissenting evidence in trials and prosecute defense lawyers who dare to do so anyway.
__________________
We are 8% of the world population, dropping like a rock, and have a major kike infestation problem. podblanc.com
 
Old February 1st, 2008 #2
Wagner
Senior Member
 
Wagner's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 850
Wagner
Default Re: Germar Rudolf

More on Germar Rudolf: http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dis...olf/Rudolf.htm


http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dis...f/2May2007.htm
THE RUDOLF JUDGMENT AS HANDED DOWN ON 15 MARCH 2007 BY MANNHEIM DISTRICT COURT

The Trial of Germar Rudolf in Mannheim District Court

________



Justice, where art thou?

THE RUDOLF VERDICT HANDED DOWN BY MANNHEIM DISTRICT COURT

- on 15 March 2007 and certified copy 2 May 2007

Translated by J. M. Damon



****************



[Page 1 of Verdict]

Case Number: 2KLs 503 Je 17319/01

Official Seal: Mannheim Landgericht (District Court)

Zweite Große Strafkammer (Second Superior Criminal Chamber)

In the Name of the People: Verdict

In the criminal trial of Germar Rudolf, born 19 October 1964 in Limburg/Lahn, presently incarcerated in Heidelberg prison, married, diploma-engineer of German citizenship;

On suspicion of inciting the masses among other offenses, the Mannheim District Court, Second Superior Chamber, in its session of 14 November 2006 through 15 March 2007, in which the following named persons participated:

District Judge Schwab, Presiding;

District Judge Becker and District Judge Beck, Associate Judges;

Sylvia-Andrea Anders and Wolfgang Voit, jurors;

District Attorney Grossmann, Chief District Attorney Seiler and District Attorney Skopp, of the District Attorney’s Office;

Attorneys for the Defense Bock of Mannheim, Stolz of Ebersberg, and Pauls of Munich; and

[ Page 2 of Verdict ]

Court Secretary Fritz, official in charge of documents on the day the verdict was announced;

Pronounced the following legal verdict on 15 March 2007:

The accused Germar Rudolf is sentenced to a cumulative sentence of two years and six months incarceration for two counts of Volksverhetzung (Inciting the Masses) and Verunglimpfung des Andenkens Verstorbener (Disparagement of the Memory of the Dead.)

In consideration of the amount of 21,600 euros, the court orders no additional fine.

The accused shall pay the cost of the trial.

The book by Germar Rudolf, >>Lectures on the Holocaust: Cross Examination of Controversial Issues<< is hereby banned.

Laws and Regulations applied in this verdict:

Sections 130 Paragraph 1 Numbers 1 and 2; Paragraph 3, 185, 189, 194; Paragraphs 1 and 2, 54, 52. 53, 73a, 74d of Strafgesetzbuch (Penal Code).

[Page 3 of Verdict]

The grounds for this Verdict, which are abbreviated according to Section 267, Paragraph 4 of Strafprozessordnung (Rules of Criminal Procedure), are as follows.

I.

1. Germar Rudolf was born 29 October 1964 in Limburg/Lahn and spent his childhood in his parents’ home with an older sister and a younger brother, with exception of a period in which his parents were provisionally separated and he lived with his mother. His father was a Sozialpädoge (“worker in social education”) and his mother a certified sales representative whose last position was secretary to the pastor. Both parents are now retired.

Rudolf began school in 1970 and graduated with Abitur in 1983.

He then began studying chemistry at the University of Bonn in 1989, which he concluded with grade average 1 (the best.) After concluding his university studies he performed his year of compulsory military service. After this, in conjunction with Promotionsstudiengang (graduate studies), he was occupied as a doctorial candidate at the Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research in Stuttgart. During the years 1991 through 1993, he began moving in rightist circles and authored a research paper with the title Gutachten über die Bildung und Nachweisbarkeit von Cyanidverbindungen in den “Gaskammern” von Auschwitz (Expert Report on the Formation and Provability of Cyanide Compounds in the “Gas Chambers” of Auschwitz), in which he concluded that mass murder of humans with cyanide gas (Cyclon B) cannot have occurred as alleged, since no residue of the gas is to be found in the masonry walls. In Spring of 1993 this paper was mailed to prominent persons in the legal, political, economic and scientific establishments. In the course of events surrounding the distribution of his expert report, which led to public outrage, Rudolf lost his position at the Max Planck Institute. He concluded his dissertation, but a date for its defense was never set, and he was unable to complete his doctoral degree. In May of 1994 he married and assumed the name of his wife, Scheerer. Two children were born of this marriage, a daughter Tamara (born September 1994) and son Kay (January 1996.) After October 1994, he worked as consultant for the Dill firm, which was owned by a supporter of Major General of the Wehrmacht Otto-Ernst Remer.

[Page 4 of Verdict]

This position was dissolved after his employment with the Dill firm was made public in a television exposé in May of 1995. On 23 June 1995, following a trial lasting seven months, Stuttgart District Court sentenced Rudolf to a prison term of one year and two months (see I. 2). When the appeal of his sentence was rejected, he avoided serving his sentence by fleeing to Spain by way of France. When he learned that Spain was about to criminalize “Holocaust Denial,” he left that country in June of 1996 and settled in England. After a month his wife and children joined him there. He then relocated from Pevensey Bay to East Dean, under a false name. He did not inform officials of his correct address. In 1998 he founded Castle Hill Publishing House with Internet site, through which he distributed Revisionist literature. He had adopted the mission of promoting, distributing and educating the public in Holocaust Revisionism, that is, the thesis that during the Third Reich, there was no nationally organized and systematic genocide of Jews. In 1999 he and his wife separated, and she returned to Germany with the children. They were divorced in August of 2000, with the mother retaining custody of the children. Before his incarceration he telephoned his children regularly. One of the children visited him in the summer of 2004, the other in summer of 2005. Following his divorce, Rudolf re-assumed his own name. When in Fall of 1999 a British journalist located him and made his address public, he fled England to avoid extradition to Germany and made his way to the United States, where he accepted a position under Dr. Robert Countess at the inactive Theses and Dissertations Press, through which he published revisionist literature in the English language. Since he had no work visa, he had to leave the US in July of 2000 and went to Mexico, where he remained pending solution of his visa problem. He was unsucessful in this endeavor. In October 2000 he again entered the US and requested political asylum. Following this he changed his address several times, supporting simself as author and publisher of mostly Revisionist literature.

[Page 5 of Verdict]

In September 2004 he married his present wife, a citizen of the United States. Their daughter Natalie was born in February 2005. In August his wife resumed her profession of teacher. Since he had already reduced his publishing activities and closed his office, he applied himself to caring for their daughter and keeping house. On 19 October 2005 Rudolf was arrested during a visit to an office of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and extradited to Germany on 15 December 2005, as his appeal for political asylum as well as request for Daueraufenthaltsgenehmigung (long term resident alien status) had been refused. Federal German Police arrested him on his arrival in Frankfurt am Main on the basis of an outstanding warrant issued by the office of the District Attorney of Stuttgart, for failure to serve a prison sentence. Since that time he has remained in custody. On 14 January 2007 he completed the sentence of one year and two months imposed by Stuttgart District Court. During the time of his incarceration in Stuttgart Prison and continuing after his transfer to Heidelberg Prison Heidelberg before the beginning of his trial in Mannheim, both children of his first marriage visited him every month. He maintains intensive contact with his wife in the United States by telephone and correspondence. She visited him numerous times during a two month stay in Germany between June and August 2006.

Rudolf’s income consisted of approximately one third subscriptions to the magazines which he published, Viertelsjahrehefte für frei Geschichtsforschung (Quarterly Publications for Free Historical Research) and “The Revisionist” magazine. Another third consisted of sales of his books; the remaining third of donations from supporters. His income averaged around 1500 US dollars per month. He contributed approximately 500 dollars per month to the support of his two children by his first marriage. During his incarceration he has given power of attorney to an unnamed person for the management of Castle Hills Publishing House.

[Page 6 of Verdict]

2. Rudolf has the following criminal record:

Stuttgart District Court (Case number Az. 17 KLs 83/94) sentenced him on 23 June 1994 to a prison term of one year and two months for the crimes of “Incitement of the Masses” in conjunction with “Disparagement of the Memory of the Dead” as well as “Aufstachelung zum Rassenhass” (“Spurring Racial Hatred”).

The verdict was based on the following circumstances:

Rudolf is the author of a work entitled “Expert Report on the Formation and Provability of Cyanide Compounds in the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz,” hereinafter called “Expert Report.” In this report, he demonstrates that mass murders using hydrogen cyanide could not have taken place in the National Socialist murder camp of Auschwitz. He prepared this study during the years 1991 through 1993 to support his rightwing opinion, which refuses to accept the negative consequences of the National Socialist regime for Germany. In early April 1993 Rudolf, along with other persons of rightwing persuasion, sent the Expert Report, along with polemic commentaries in forewords and postscripts, to at least 1000 persons in the Federal Republic. These persons, among whom were all German professors of Inorganic Chemistry, occupied prominent positions in the judiciary, politics, economics and science.

In his Expert Report, Rudolf develops the thesis inspired by a report written by the American Fred Leuchter (the “Leucher Report.”) The report maintains that if testimony of witnesses concerning mass murders using hydrogen cyanide (Cyclon B) were true, cyanide compounds would still have to be present in the ruins of the walls of the alleged gas chambers (morgues of the crematoria) at Auschwtiz Murder Camp. Such compounds cannot be detected, in contrast to the delousing chambers at Auschwitz, in which Cyclon B is known to have been used, but in which it has not been alleged that murders took place. Therefore, Rudolf contended that mass murders could not have taken place as witnesses have claimed.

The Introduction to the Expert Report, which relates to the Holocaust, was written under the name of the witness Otto Ernst Remer. Remer alleged that Holocaust claims are lies designed to mainpulate, defame and blackmail the German nation. In addition, he claims, they are an “unbelievable, satanic perversion of history” in which vassal politicians and venal media have collaborated for decades, to the great detriment of the German people. In a discussion written under the name of E. Haller, which appeared in the November 1992 issue of the Revisionist periodical “Remer Dispatches,” he understated the conditions in Auschwitz Concentration Camp. He denied that Auschwitz was a murder camp and he maintained that Holocaust stories have created a myth to justify the Allied rape and plunder of the German people, as well as create an identity for the Jews and Israel. The discussion is presented in the form of a report on the Remer trial for “Incitement” that had taken place in Schweinfurt District Court in October 1992.

Continued here.
__________________
We are 8% of the world population, dropping like a rock, and have a major kike infestation problem. podblanc.com

Last edited by Wagner; February 1st, 2008 at 01:13 AM. Reason: Add URL to rest of article.
 
Old February 1st, 2008 #3
Wagner
Senior Member
 
Wagner's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 850
Wagner
Default Re: Germar Rudolf

Why are the Jews persecuting Germar? Read his Lectures on the Holocaust here and discover for yourself just how big a fraud the "holocaust" really is.
__________________
We are 8% of the world population, dropping like a rock, and have a major kike infestation problem. podblanc.com

Last edited by Wagner; February 1st, 2008 at 11:10 PM. Reason: typo
 
Old June 24th, 2009 #4
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,338
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

15 days until Germar’s release

http://www.germarrudolf.com/

Germar Rudolf


The Persecution of a German Scholar


Imagine an expert in DNA analyses. He is asked to verify if a defendant is the father of a child. He complies and confirms the fatherhood of the defendant. With his testimony, however, the expert contradicts the statements of many witnesses who claim the opposite. Imagine the judge ruling not to admit the expert testimony because it makes spectators assume that the witnesses lied out of sinister motives. The judge even puts the expert witness on trial for inciting hatred against the witnesses and sentences him to 14 months in jail. You think it can’t happen? It does happen in Germany...

German scholar Germar Rudolf has authored, edited and published numerous academic articles, brochures, books, and magazines in the German and in the English languages both in his native Germany and abroad. Until his abrupt deportation from the United States in Nov. 2005, he was the owner of a university-press-style publishing house that focused on detailed scientific and archival studies of well-defined historical topics. He is lauded as an academic of high standards by many professors from around the world. Yet the German authorities imprisoned him exactly because of his scholarly success, for his ground-breaking academic writings.

Rudolf’s crime: he did not obey a German penal law that forces everybody to parrot the official version of a detail of German history. You may wonder what detail that may be, but to be sure, it does not matter, because a government that prescribes the writing of history by penal law is dictating to its citizens what to think, and that is the exact definition of a dictatorship. Period.

To summarize Germar’s deeds:

An Academic "Thought Criminal"


Germar Rudolf (pictured) was asked by various defense teams to testify as an expert in chemistry at trials in Germany. Yet the judges refused to hear his testimony in open violation of German law, which does not allow the rejection of expert witnesses already present in the court room.

Rudolf’s rejected expert report was then published by a defendant who had requested it for his defense. This defendant considered it vital to draw attention to this illegal suppression of evidence, which he sought to do by adding a perfectly legitimate, though polemical, introduction and appendix to Rudolf’s report. Thanks to this publication, Rudolf was sentenced to 14 months in prison. The court argued that Rudolf’s findings in combination with the defendant’s comments could arouse hostile emotions against witnesses, whose testimonies conflicted with Rudolf’s findings.

A year later, Rudolf published a large scientific book about similar issues, for which he was also indicted. Although historians testified during this trial that Rudolf’s work is scientific and thus protected by Germany’s constitution, the book was nevertheless confiscated and burned by order of the court. Rudolf subsequently fled to England, where he established a small publishing firm for scholarly material similar to what he was prosecuted for in Germany. As a result, Germany requested his extradition. Therefore, Rudolf fled to America and applied for political asylum.

Rudolf continued his scholarly publishing activities in the "Land of the Free," lauded by scholars from around the world, but hated by German authorities. Rudolf defied and undermined German censorship, considered among the harshest worldwide. Hence, more than 30 criminal investigations were pending against him in Germany for his peaceful "thought crimes," each of them perfectly legal in the U.S., but punishable with up to five years in jail in Germany. German authorities also ordered the confiscation of his property, because they claim it was all acquired with money gained from "illegal" activities.

The U.S.A. – Still a Safe Haven for the Persecuted?


In 2004, the U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Services (INS – now part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ICE) rejected Rudolf’s application for political asylum. They ordered him to be deported in handcuffs, banned for life, with no possible remedy. Not even his marriage to a U.S. citizen with a child expected was considered.

The reasoning given by the INS-ICE:

Germany is a democracy, a state under the rule of law. Hence, Rudolf is not fleeing persecution, but lawful prosecution.

Considering Germany’s Nazi past, it has to censor its citizens in order to make sure that Nazism will never rise again.

Rejecting evidence is OK, because the U.S. also has rules for rejecting evidence. E.g., if an expert has already proved a point at issue, witnesses who contradict this expert can be rejected.

Rudolf’s application was found to be "frivolous" (deceitful), the most severe immigration violation, resulting in the harshest punishment possible.

This INS-ICE ruling is outrageous, because:

Just calling oneself a democracy doesn’t make it one. Almost all dictatorships call themselves "democracies" and "states under the rule of law." The proof lies in Germany’s civil rights record, not in its law books.

Justifying German censorship is like saying: Because Germany persecuted minorities, jailed dissenters, and burned books in the past, it now has an obligation to persecute minorities, jail dissenters, and burn books!

The INS has it upside down: Germany not only rejects, it jails experts because their research results disagree with witnesses.

Rudolf learned about the accusation of having filed a "frivolous" application only in the verdict, which named no evidence for it. It is as if someone were tried for theft, then sentenced for murder without proof!

Due Process Aborted


Apart from his dealings with INS-ICE, Rudolf pursued legal processes in the U.S. federal courts that, by contrast, proceeded and continue to proceed generally favorably. In October 2005 ICE intervened in this process and after a brief incarceration deported Rudolf in chains to Germany, where he was immediately confined in a maximum security prison near Stuttgart. In late 2006 – early 2007 he was put on trial in Mannheim and received a prison sentence of two and one-half years, to commence after serving the earlier 14 month sentence.

A favorable court ruling in March 2006 confirmed Rudolf’s right to return to the U.S.A. to apply for residency based on his marriage to a U.S. citizen. This ruling has been resisted by ICE, which argues that a new regulation formulated by them can be applied retroactively to Germar. That claim was challenged in court by Germar in Sept. 2007 but has not, as of 18 Dec. 2007, been decided by the court. Legal arguments aside, the bottom line is that ICE is doing everything possible to deny Germar U.S. residency. The authority of this purely administrative agency is great in this area, as the subjects involved do not have the rights of legal residents. However the courts still have the last word, provided the applicant can sustain the long legal process required.

The World’s Leading Historical Dissident


The reason for all this? Germar Rudolf was the world’s leading publisher of independent Holocaust studies not funded by any government. He published university-style research that critically re-examined and corrected generally held views of the Holocaust, while at the same time confirming the unjust suffering inflicted upon Jews during that human catastrophe.

Germar’s publishing operations have, since his deportation from the U.S., passed to other, unrelated people.

But doubting aspects of the official version of the Holocaust, even if it confirms the injustice done to Jews, offends powerful people in the U.S. In Germany, it is a crime so severe that the German authorities not only jail dissenters, burn their books, and block their Internet sites, but also outlaw motions to introduce dissenting evidence in trials and prosecute defense lawyers who dare to do so anyway.

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=96681
 
Old February 24th, 2011 #5
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,878
alex revision
Default

Public email from Germar Rudolf


Public Email, further dissemination permitted


Germar Rudolf, somewhere in Mexico, Feb. 21, 2011

Dear friends, dear supporters:

Ever since I left England end of August last year, I've basically kept radio silence, for which I ask for understanding and forgiveness. I owe you my gratitude for your continued moral and in a few cases also generous financial support, which are very important to me.

Please permit me to tell you about my late odyssey, which might make it understandable why contact has been severed for the past six months.

On August 31 I traveled to Latin America hoping that my application for permanent legal residence in the US ("greencard"), which I had filed in late 2009, would soon be adjudicated positively, so that I could join my wife and daughter in the U.S.

As a reminder: When I was arrested and deported from the U.S. in November 2005, I was banned to return to the U.S. for five years. My motion to have this ban lifted early, which I had filed in the summer of 2009, has not been decided to this day. Although my application for a "greencard" was processed by the U.S. Consulate in Frankfurt, Germany, in April 2010, it was not finally adjudicated due to the still pending ban. I was told to get in touch with the consulate after the ban had either been lifted or expired. Since the ban expired in mid November 2010, I traveled to northwest Mexico in expectation of a decision.

On getting in touch, the consulate informed us on Nov. 15, 2010, that they would need five workdays to finally adjudicate my application, after which they would get in touch.

Since we still hadn't heard anything after eight workdays, we inquired again. In early Decem-ber 2010 we were told that there had been a delay due to a change of staff. They apologized and promised to wrap up the case within the next 14 days at the latest.

After two more weeks we again had heard nothing from the consulate. Repeated inquires remained unanswered. As a result, Christmas for the Rudolf family fell through. I spent it separated from my family in Mexico…

End of December 2010 the consulate finally got back to us and apologized once more for the long delay, yet explained this time that the case was so complicated that they could not even give an estimate as to how long it will take to adjudicate it. A formal inquiry filed shortly afterwards about the state of affairs revealed in early February that my application is no longer dealt with by the consulate in Frankfurt, but that it is now in Washington, where it is subjected to lengthy security screenings.

Considering that I have been an open book to the U.S. authorities ever since my asylum case was initiated in 2000, nothing justifies this lengthy "security screening." After careful consideration and intensive consultation we therefore decided to go back to court. On January 31, 2011, we filed a "Writ of Mandamus" against the U.S. government, asking a Federal Court to force the government to render a decision. The government has 60 days to respond to this suit, after which the court will either dismiss the case in lack of jurisdiction or will decide it rather quickly (assuming that water doesn't flow uphill…). By the end of April/early May we hope to know more about our future. However, all the court can do is force the U.S. government to decide somehow. In case this happens, we now expect them to turn down my application for some bogus reason.

Since my Mexican tourist visa waiver will expire end of February, I have to leave the country. I will temporarily live with friends in Central America. Should there be no silver lining at the horizon by the end of April/early May, I will return to Europe. Since I am prohibited to be a spouse to my wife and a father to my daughter, I will at least be a father to the children from my first marriage by temporarily returning to Germany.

Meanwhile my wife prepares herself morally to leave the U.S. permanently this coming summer. She can no longer bear the stress of a career, of raising our daughter as a single mother and of running a household without any support. We will probably settle permanently in England, provided that my wife obtains a permission to immigrate. For this I have to prove according to British law that I am capable of supporting my family – which I cannot do currently, as I am formally seen homeless and jobless.

Marital and family bliss are apparently meant only for rich people in England… I've been out of prison for more than one and a half year now , but I am still separated from wife and child, with no end in sight. It feels like I am still a prisoner. (Not to mention that my lawyer bill for January alone amounted to 7,701 US dollars straight.)

You can imagine how I feel

Since I will probably be traveling during the next three months, email is the only realistic way of contacting me.

If you want to support my family and me financially, you can find details below about how this can be done.

With kind regards

Germar Rudolf


DONATIONS:

Account holder:Germar Rudolf

Bank name:HSBC Bank

IBAN:GB57MIDL40200571299948

BIC:MIDLGB2129U

Bank address: 94 Terminus Road
Eastbourne BN21 3ND
Great Britain


Yahoo! Groups
 
Old February 25th, 2011 #6
Lagergeld
Tard Corralled
 
Lagergeld's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,618
Lagergeld
Default

Nice... I thought he was on permanent radio silence stuck in Germany forever, basically. Hopefully once he gets settled in a freer country he can continue his work.
 
Old February 6th, 2013 #7
barù
Member
 
barù's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: R.S.I. : Repubblica Sionista Italiana
Posts: 366
barù
Default free ebook

http://vho.org/dl/ENG/tfh.pdf

Don Heddesheimer: The First Holocaust. Jewish Fund Raising Campaigns with Holocaust Claims During and After World War One


edit by Rudolf
 
Old November 3rd, 2014 #8
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,878
alex revision
Default

Half a Century of Rebellion — Interview with Germar Rudolf

October 29, 2014


Q: Thanks first of all that you have agreed to this interview.

A: You’re most welcome.

Q: And then, of course, happy birthday! How does it feel to be half a century old?

A: Thanks, well, not good. But then again, I don’t really care. After 50 years we all are of the same age. And a year is a pretty arbitrary time span, cosmologically speaking, so it really has little meaning in the larger framework of the universe. That’s how I try to look at it.

Q: That’s quite a perspective to have. But let’s keep it simple. Here on earth, and that’s what counts for us humans for now, a year is an important time span. Looking back at your first fifty years on this planet, what strikes you most?

A: How much I have changed. When I grew up in Germany, I could never even imagine living elsewhere and speaking other languages as if they were mine. And now here I am, doing exactly that. I am also a little ashamed of the narrow mindset I used to have when I was young, and I can only imagine how ashamed I will be of my current mindset, should I ever reach 100 and be able to look back with some wits left. I’ve grown mentally and matured, and the mere fact that I can recognize this is perhaps the good thing about turning 50. But I can also see that there is a lot of room left to grow and mature in the future.

Q: Talking about growth and change, when I look at your own website at www.GermarRudolf.com, it seems that the site has been static ever since your last posting of February 2013. There doesn’t seem to be any growth or change going on there. What is going on?

A: I simply don’t have the time to keep the website up to date. I have collected a number of items here at home, about which I would like to write about on my website, but I simply have other priorities.

Q: What are these other priorities?

A: Family, plain and simple. In early 2013 my wife and I got licensed as foster parents, and in April of that year two foster children were placed in our home. Ever since it’s been an emotional roller coaster ride for all of us, in particular for me, the primary care giver.

Q: So you are taking care of these kids?

A: Yes, these two foster kid and our own biological daughter, plus the household coming with it. You know: house cleaning, lawn mowing, cooking and so on. My wife and I, we have what you might call inverted gender roles, if you take the usual gender roles as the norm where Mommy stays at home and takes care of the kids and Daddy pursues a career and provides financial security. My wife has a career she does not want to give up, and I had mine destroyed early in my professional life and little to fall back on. So the choice came naturally. As a matter of fact, we had already decided in 2004, when we were expecting our daughter, that I would stay home and take care of her.

Q: For most of your professional life you have been an author, editor and the publisher of your two outlets, Castle Hill Publishers and Theses & Dissertations Press. And I might add that as such you had quite an impact. Wasn’t that a career worth continuing?

A: No, not really. After I had been arrested and deported from the US back in 2005, my small publishing company got into serious trouble, as there was nobody at the helm with the required skills. By the time I got out of prison in 2011, there was little left that could provide financial security for a family.

Q: But you had started from zero before, while a family breadwinner, back in 1996. Why didn’t you try this again in 2011?

A: True, I had built up that small publishing company against all odds, which also meant, though, that I was sacrificing my first family in the process. My first wife left me and filed for divorce, not least because I was putting my work before my family. When I got a second chance with my second wife, my priorities had changed. I am simply not putting my family in jeopardy anymore for the sake of publishing controversial material. Especially not my kids. It did hurt tremendously when I had my first two kids taken away from me. I don’t want to go through this trauma again. Besides, I love being a daddy. That is therefore my primary passion in life for the time being.

Q: Did prison change you after all? I remember reading letters you sent from the German prisons where you were held for your writings. They sounded quite belligerent and rebellious. And even afterwards, in 2012, you published a book titled “Resistance Is Obligatory” that followed the same line. What has changed?

A: Well, what do people do when they are scared in the dark? They pretend to be courageous by whistling a song or talking loudly and proudly. That was part of it. You need a certain amount of rhetoric to get through trying times. Plus, I really didn’t know back then what exactly I would do after my release. My wife and I decided to go the foster route only in late 2012 when our attempts at having another child of our own weren’t going anywhere. I wasn’t even sure I wanted another baby. Going a third time through the diaper things seemed a little too much for me. So starting with kids that were a little older seemed logical.

Q: And do you regret this decision?

A: Sometimes yes, when the drama is peaking and frustrations wear me down. But usually I do not regret it, even if times are rough. The children of other parents who have gone through a lot of trauma of their own early in life are quite a different challenge than your own children. If you are a decent parent, your own kids have no trauma to deal with. Foster kids, however, usually come with so much emotional baggage that it really is a struggle to take care of them. And from the experience of my wife, who has worked with troubled children for more than two decades, I know that sometimes these children remain scarred for the rest of their lives. No matter how loving and caring you are as a foster or adoptive parent, some of them will never be emotionally fully balanced and might never reach their full potential. And that is so sad to see.

Q: Is that what you are going through with the two kids you have taken on?

A: Well, when they came into our home, they were an emotional mess. They have come a long way since, but they both still have lots to work on. So it’s an ongoing drama. On the other hand, I love children, and I want these children to be loved. So that’s what I do. Then, after lots of tender loving care, of nurturing and guiding discipline, we started recognizing the progress they are making, how they are flourishing now, compared to what we first saw. And that is so rewarding. It simply makes me happy. More than anything else I could ever do. Plus I also see our own daughter grow emotionally when she does her part to help these two younger foster siblings to become better persons. My daughter is absolutely amazing in this regard. She is an awesome role model for them.

Q: So are you out of revisionism for good then?

A: No, but I play more of a supporting role with various projects in the background. I have a lot of experience and knowledge in the field, and I want others to benefit from it on their way to making a difference. For now it’s simply time for me to step back and let others take the lead.

Q: I take it from this that your views and emotions about revisionism have not changed?

A: No, not at all. Well, maybe marginally when it comes to revisionism’s role in the world. But not about its scholarly approach and contents.

Q: What do you think about revisionism’s role in the world?

A: I’ve become more of a purist. I think revisionism ought to be an academic enterprise and should avoid any entanglement with social or political groups. At this moment, there is no chance that revisionism will have a considerable breakthrough anywhere. We need a major paradigm shift in the Western world for this to happen. So for now, all we can do is collect evidence and prepare it in a way for posterity to see and understand, once the time has come.

Q: Hasn’t that always been your position?

A: Well, I may have had that insight, but I myself was acting against it at times, because I thought for many years that a breakthrough is imminent. I don’t believe in breakthroughs anymore.

Q: Any examples you care to give about such an entanglement of revisionism with politics?


A: That’s a question I hate, because no matter what I say, there will be people resenting it, and I’ve had it with resentment. So I take the Fifth.

Q: You have given David Duke several interviews over the past three years. He’s very political in his approach, is he not?

A: Yes.

Q: Doesn’t that count as a case of entangling revisionism with politics?

A: No, because first of all Germar Rudolf is not revisionism. When I talk to David Duke or anyone else, I am talking as an interviewer—a sounding board—not as a representative of any sort of position. In addition, even if I were talking as a representative of something, talking to people is a profoundly human activity which should never be curtailed. I therefore reserve the right to talk to anyone who talks to me in a decent way. What I was referring to was entanglement on an organizational level.

Q: Will we see you again as an openly active revisionist at some point in the future?

A: Maybe. I keep my options open. It all depends on developments far outside my control.

Q: What’s your most important wish for your 50th birthday?

A: Apart from the usual wishes – happiness and health for me and my loved ones?

Q: Let’s focus on revisionism.

A: Well, I still wish for a breakthrough. But it won’t come by itself. It will take a lot of work and dedication, perseverance and circumspection.

Q: Well, this won’t happen for your 50th, I’m afraid. Maybe something smaller. What would you wish from our readers?


A: An understanding for my current priorities in life, and if they think revisionism is important, I’d hope they’d pitch in wherever they think they can.

Q: Thanks a lot for this interview

A: I’m the one who should be grateful for lending me your audience.


http://germarrudolf.com/2014/10/half...germar-rudolf/
 
Reply

Tags
germar rudolf

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52 PM.
Page generated in 0.19238 seconds.