Yeah, that was the same court that just gave Ernst Zundel the maximum sentence of five years. The judge was afraid to hand out the maximum sentence a second time, so close after Zundel, so he allowed Rudolf to plea-bargain down to 2.5 years.

Rudolf, a chemist, tested bricks at Auschwitz for traces of Zyklon B. The only cyanide he found were in huts used to delouse mattresses. In 1995 he was convicted of publishing his scientific conclusions, so he fled to Spain, then England, then Mexico, and then the USA.

When he finishes his sentence, he will face charges for having run a web site while he was in the USA. Also, the German Ministry of Education has filed a lawsuit against him.

It's perfectly legal to lie if you're a politician or a talk show host.

But, if you're an ordinary person with the temerity to search for the truth you are persecuted and imprisoned.

Disgraceful.

---------------------------------------
"Money" has no value - people do.

"A chemist, Rudolf has published pseudo-scientific claims"
Why pseudo-scientific? Rudolf is a serious physical chemist, trained in the Max-Plank Institut fuer Festkoerperphysik, a highly acclaimed scientific institution, where he received his Ph.D. and where he carried out his chemical analysis of Auschwitz gas chamber wall plaster. If there isn't a better place than the MPI-FKP Stuttgart where to carry out these tests, I don't know ... The proper response of the establishment would have been to prove Rudolf wrong, using serious scientific investigation. The fact that it wasn't done and the establishment went such a long judicial way to punish intellectual curiosity, makes us think what science is good for in the AshkeNazi-dominated XX Century.
Ah, and - of course - statistical human genetics is a bona-fide serious science, whilst Rudolf's analytical chemistry isn't: that's a good one!

So you think it's better to prove someone is wrong by using FACTS and LOGIC? Don't you think it would be easier to fire them from their job and put them in prison?

I should have noted that "psuedo-scientific" smear. Rudolf was trying to verify the findings in the Leuchter report. As I understand this, Leuchter's findings had been attacked because his samples of concrete taken from the "gas chambers" had measured the presence of cyanide as a percentage of the weight of the entire sample. This was said to minimize the amount of cyanide, because the gas would only seep in to the outer portion of concrete.

I had heard about this from watching a video about Leuchter called "Dr. Death". I always wondered why, if Leuchter's findings were wrong, no one had bothered to do them correctly. Well someone did, and now he is in prison.

There was a study done by Markiewicz, which tended to disprove Rudolf's findings. I suppose that study was not illegal because it had the "correct" results.

Rudolf disputes the methodology and findings of the Markiewicz study at: http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/cq/leuchter.html

In addition Rudolf states (my emphasis): "Scientists should interest themselves with the scientific arguments of other scientists and not their possible intentions. That applies even between established science and Revisionism.

- Regardless of whatever intentions whatever Revisionist may have: The suggestion of presumed intentions does not weaken one single technical argument of Revisionists and therefore has no place in a technical publication.

- Whatever the outcome of the controversy over Revisionism may be, the scientist should interest himself only with the truth and not with the effect that Adolf Hitler or anybody else may have on the political-moral purity of the West.

- Whoever imputes a political intention in the research of his scientific counterpart, which he does not bother to prove, suggests to the reader that this scientific counterpart wants merely to produce wished-for results and should not be taken seriously as a scientist. In this way we leave the area of scientific argumentation and enter the area of political agitation.

- The assertion that all Revisionists want to white-wash the Hitler regime fails. Neither the founder of Revisionism, Paul Rassinier, a former member of the French resistance who was held by the National Socialists in several concentration camps, nor Dr. Robert Faurisson, who was once involved in the political left, nor Serge Thion nor the american Jew David Cole, to mention only a few, want to white-wash the Hitler regime. The same applies to me.

- He who stays in a glass house should not throw stones."

It's like North America with their pedophiles, child rapists and killers. It's like the high domestic violence and child abuse that no country in the world can equal or top. These mutated home-grown "humans" in Canada and the USA (UK follows closely) don't stay in jail very long. There's hardly a death penalty in the USA save for a few states. And that's a joke too, as these scum spend time in la la land and are finally put to death HUMANELY, non-violently, and PAINLESSLY, with DIGNITY,

Wish I could say the same for their victims but forget about it.

So where is an IDF soldier when you need one?

Over there, in Israel, they murder little "terrorists" for throwing rocks.

In Lebanon, children are bombed and massacred, as well, for living in a country that is home to Hezbollah, or just for living in a beautiful country that Israel can never equal.

I say, let's bring those IDF to America. Maybe we can get rid of the scum in our country.

Nah. Forget it.

Knowing the IDF of Israel, they would probably join the league of the mutated sociopaths that occupy our cities.

They would be right at home.

____________________________

America? Can you smell the stench?
Your children's blood
for the blood of the
children of the Middle East

"So you think it's better to prove someone is wrong by using FACTS and LOGIC? Don't you think it would be easier to fire them from their job and put them in prison?"
(ChristopherMarlowe)
I'm saying only that had the Zionist Dictatorship (in Germany and worldwide) taken that FCTS and LOGIC stance to prove Rudolf wrong, then their Holocaust Religion would have been put on a firmer basis. Instead, by throwing people like Rudolf, Zundel, Irving in prison and beating up Faurisson etc. the New Tartar Yoke is acting like the Church in the Middle Age in order to enforce its dogmas. And like the Church then, the Yoke now is succeeding only in undermining its grip on collective consensus over its dogmas.
I didn't know of the Markiewicz scientific refutation of Rudolf's work and of Rudolf's criticism of Markiewicz' methods. Clearly, the discussion ought to have remained scientific, the fact it didn't shows the Yoke has much too much to hide.