Expert Vindication for Rudolf Auschwitz Report
This document is part of the Smith's Report periodical.
Use this menu to find more documents that are part of this periodical.
Believe it or not, there's good news for revisionists out of Switzerland. On September 9 a Swiss court acquitted a Swiss revisionist of "racial discrimination" for disseminating German revisionist Germar Rudolf's forensic report detailing the absence of evidence for homicidal gassing at Auschwitz and Majdanek. Even better, the court made its ruling because an expert witness in chemistry, after studying the Rudolf Report, found the report "scientifically correct."
While the eyes of the world focused last summer on the battle royal between the Swiss banks and the international Jewish groups, a smaller, quieter, but perhaps no less important drama was unfolding in a provincial Swiss court. Last May writer Rene-Louis Berclaz was brought to trial in the Third District Court at Chatel-St.Denis for racial discrimination for, among other things, circulating a French translation of German chemist Germar Rudolfs report on the chemical and structural evidence for gassings in the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz and Majdanek.
Rudolfs report, which incorporates the findings of its predecessors, American gas chamber expert Fred Leuchter and prominent Austrian civil engineer Walter Lueftl, is known to revisionists as the most comprehensive and searching forensic study of the Auschwitz gas chambers yet made. Its author, Germar Rudolf, was doing advanced study in chemistry at Germany's world-famous Max Planck Institute when he was dismissed for his revisionist activities, including his report on Auschwitz and Majdanek. He was subsequently convicted under the Bundesrepublik's obscurantist anti-revisionist laws and forced into exile, and the German edition of his Foundations of Contemporary History, a collection of much of the most advanced Holocaust revisionist scholarship available, was seized and burned on court order. (One wonders what American academics currently braying at the ridiculousness of Holocaust revisionism would make of criminalizing something so laughable—on second thought, most would probably welcome that.)
Berclaz had been accused of circulating the Rudolf Report—which he didn't deny—by the International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism (known by its French acronym LICRA), which has been prominent in the legal persecution of Robert Faurisson and other revisionists in France. Unfortunately for LICRA, Switzerland, despite its measures against such revisionists as Juergen Graf, Viktor Foerster, and Roger Garaudy, remains marginally more civilized than its neighbors Germany and France. Thus the court took the elementary measure of determining whether the Rudolf document, circulated as a scientific finding by Berclaz, either had, or lacked, scientific merit. Examining magistrate Jean-Pierre Schroeter assigned that task to Dr. Henri Remuz, a professor of chemistry.
From Remuz's assessment of the Rudolf Report as follows:
I can only reply to the second part of the Report which is devoted to the chemistry of “cyanide-hydrogen-acid” and some of its derivatives. Altogether, the author relies on literature which was written long before the Rudolf Report. Rudolf's analysis must be considered correct....
In the field of science, Germar Rudolf is no amateur, he is highly educated in organic chemistry, analytical chemistry and physical chemistry. How he came by those samples and who analyzed them, how Germar Rudolf, as a qualified committed chemist, interpreted those samples, I cannot offer an opinion. All top German scientific professors [304 in all—Ed.] in the field of organic chemistry have received the Rudolf Report. It would best be summed up in this way: “There are no reasons for any adverse commentary."
Henri Ramuz, May 18, 1998
Not all was lost for LICRA: Berclaz was given a four-month suspended sentence for misquoting prominent Zionist Nahum Goldmann's "I'm scarcely exaggerating. Jewish life consists of two things. Getting money, and whining." Berclaz left out the first sentence.
Additional information about this document
|Author(s):||Bradley R. Smith|
|Title:||Expert Vindication for Rudolf Auschwitz Report|
|Sources:||Smith's Report, no. 58, October 1998, pp. 4f.|
|First posted on CODOH:||Oct. 28, 2015, 5:27 a.m.|