This is a letter from Paul Grubach to Amnesty International.
August 16, 2006
I have been informed that one of the main purposes of your organization is to defend human rights worldwide. I am writing to you now to inform you of a very serious human rights violation that is taking place in your own nation, and to request that you would publicly speak out about it.
Mr. Germar Rudolf, a former chemistry doctoral candidate at the prestigious Max Planck Institute, is a German citizen who was forced to flee his native Germany because he has questioned and refuted certain aspects of the Jewish Holocaust story. In short, I believe that he showed that the alleged Auschwitz gas chambers never existed. In the United States, near Chicago, Revisionist scholar Rudolf was recently torn from his American wife and their child and delivered to Germany. He is in prison in Stuttgart.
You can read Germar Rudolf's scientific report on the alleged Auschwitz gas chambers at:
In Germany, freedom of research is guaranteed by the constitution. Yet, this self-same civil right evaporates if a scholar asks certain questions about the Holocaust and comes to answers unwelcome by the authorities. That is to say, in Germany a scholar and publisher of scientific material can be jailed for his views, peaceful and scientific as they are.
Freedom of research can only exist where one is allowed to ask questions and to give answers exclusively arrived at by the evidence, but not by orders from the government or by penal law. Where humans are prohibited to ask questions and to give answers, not only does science cease to exist, but humanity itself.
To be perfectly specific. Scientist Rudolf asked questions about the Auschwitz gas chambers, and he gave answers exclusively arrived at by the chemical and toxicological evidence. In this case, science has ceased to exist and blatant tyranny is the order of the day, because he has been imprisoned for his findings.
Let us look at this from an even broader perspective. The UN Declaration of Human Rights is very clear and unequivocal on the right to freedom of speech. It states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression." By imprisoning and persecuting Germar Rudolf because of his opinions and expressions about the Holocaust, the German government is guilty of violating his right to freedom of opinion and expression.
In response to my accusations, you may defend your government's actions with the following line of reasoning: "What Germar Rudolf says about the Holocaust is racist hate speech that must be banned in order to prevent another resurgence of Nazism in Germany. His stuff is an incitement to hate. Therefore he deserves imprisonment."
Even if what Rudolf has to say about the Holocaust ideology is "racist hate speech," it still could be true. Simply labeling a viewpoint as "racist hate speech" in no way disproves the viewpoint.
But let us give your government the benefit of the doubt and assume that everything (!) that Rudolf says about the Holocaust is indeed 100% false, and that it is indeed "racist hate speech." A truly democratic society grants its citizens the right to be hopelessly and demonstrably wrong. The right to freedom of speech is not to be applied selectively, depending upon the nature of the viewpoint in question. It is to be applied universally and consistently to all members of a democratic society. If it means anything at all, freedom of speech means the right to hold and expound controversial and unpopular opinions. Don't imprison Rudolf. Release him and defeat his ideas in open and democratic debate.
If contemporary Germany truly were a liberal democracy that respected everyone's right to freedom of expression, the German government would release Germar Rudolf and defeat his ideas in a nationally televised debate. This would be the way that you could help to prevent the resurgence of a dictatorial and oppressive National Socialist form of government. By releasing Germar Rudolf and engaging him in open debate, this would show the German people that a democracy that respects everyone's right to freedom of opinion and expression is superior to a right wing dictatorship that suppresses freedom of speech.
Let us again give my critics the benefit of the doubt and assume that Rudolf's work is indeed an incitement to hate. If you ban hateful material and imprison its authors because their work is an incitement to hate, then, to be fair, you would have to imprison Jewish rabbis that publish certain Jewish religious literature in Germany.
Indeed, the late Israeli scholar Israel Shahak showed in his scholarly study, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, that the Jewish Talmud, some important Judaic religious publications, and certain rabbinical laws actually incite Jews to hate non-Jews. So, to imprison Germar Rudolf because he has published incitements to hate, but then allow Jewish people who publish hateful parts of the Talmud, some important Judaic religious publications, and certain rabbinical laws go free, is to engage in selective justice. And selective justice is in fact injustice.
In a word, the continued imprisonment of my friend and colleague Germar Rudolf (and others like him) for expressing their opinions on the Holocaust ideology only serves to undermine the German people's faith in your so-called "democracy."
As I said at the beginning of this letter, I ask that you publicly speak out on behalf of Germar Rudolf.
Mr. Rudolf can be contacted at
Asperger Str. 60
I await your response.
Paul Grubach grub222 [at] aol [dot] com
Copy: Germar Rudolf