Caroline Colls, local girl makes good

[borjastick]

It's quite a well used and perhaps infamous picture as it is used in multiple places and stories to support the 'evidence' of mass murder. It isn't from Treblinka, that much is for sure and when you look at it carefully it certainly doesn't scream 'death queue' to me, they look jolly, happy and one or two are smiling. It is in 'Masters of Death' along with a bunch of other pictures that are supposed to be from Babi Yar but are clearly posed.

[Kingfisher]

And of course this one:

My friends father was one of the first allied soldiers to enter one of these camps at the end of the war and the photo´s that he took of virtual skeletons in striped rags and the piles of unburied bodies was even when I saw these pictures many years after the event was horrifying , how man could do this to others is beyond comprehension .

I don't need to explain the fallacy to anyone here, but it got 150 recommends so far, so it's alive and well out there.

For those saying it didn´t happen or that they wouldn´t have done what these survivors had to do I say hang your heads in shame and give over with the mock heroics because you don´t know what you would have done in their situation

So it's OK for Jews to collaborate in murdering their own, but Ukrainians and Germans "following orders" get hanged.

This one got printed but massively red-arrowed:

The truth is that these men were part of the Sonderkommando, who received better food and conditions in return for their work disposing of the corpses of those muurdered. There were hundreds of them in each camp doing this work, but the horrible truth is that the Naazis would not have been able to kill so many were it not for the assistance of these people - who in many people's view saved themselves at the expense of their friends and families. And the reason they revolted was not an attempt to prevent more mrders, but to save themselves from their own executtion scheduled for the next day. While it's easy to say that I wouldn't have assisted the Naazis in their work, I think the real heroes in the camps were the men who refused to assist, and died as a result.

[Fergi]

Coll's shameless attemt at deception is breathtaking.

I was looking through this post:

http://forum.rodoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=40

And found this brazen fraud:



Colls displays a very blurry photo with a caption that leads one to believe they are looking at human remains, not the garbage that it really is.

[Fergi]

I just found a direct quote that Colls gave during her presentation when this slide was up:

...And you can see here from the images, you can see that there is surviving, um, remians...

http://vimeo.com/41004006

Go to 1:04:40

[Mkk]

The gullible stated:

My friends father was one of the first allied soldiers to enter one of these camps at the end of the war and the photo´s that he took of virtual skeletons in striped rags and the piles of unburied bodies was even when I saw these pictures many years after the event was horrifying , how man could do this to others is beyond comprehension .

Notice the bolded.

Despite this many of the gullible still think the photos of starved people at the end of a long and bloody war when the supply lines were down proves a intent at extermination.

[tyger]

Caroline Sturdy-Colls's PhD thesis is now available at the University of Birmingham.

http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/3531/

[Hektor]

Fantastic Find!

The landscapes and material remains of the Holocaust survive in various forms as physical reminders of the suffering and persecution of this period in European history. However, whilst clearly defined historical narratives exist, many of the archaeological remnants of these sites remain ill-defined, unrecorded and even, in some cases, unlocated. Such a situation has arisen as a result of a number of political, social, ethical and religious factors which, coupled with the scale of the crimes, has often inhibited systematic search. This thesis will outline how a non-invasive archaeological methodology has been implemented at two case study sites, with such issues at its core, thus allowing them to be addressed in terms of their scientific and historical value, whilst acknowledging their commemorative and religious significance. In doing so, this thesis also demonstrates how a study of the physical remains of the Holocaust can reveal as much about the ever-changing cultural memory of these events as it can the surviving remnants of camps, execution sites and other features associated with this period. By demonstrating the diversity and complexity of Holocaust landscapes, a case is presented for a sub-discipline of Holocaust Archaeology.

The scale of the supposed crime should make research far easier, since the bigger it is, the more evidence has to be expected.


Why not admit it? The evidence to be found is perfectly in line with what's to be expected, when the Revisionist thesis of Treblinka, Belzec, Sobibor having been internment centers and transit camps is true.

[Hannover]

A case study in weasel words.

1 The landscapes and material remains of the Holocaust survive in various forms as physical reminders of the suffering and persecution of this period in European history.
2. However, whilst clearly defined historical narratives exist, many of the archaeological remnants of these sites remain ill-defined, unrecorded and even, in some cases, unlocated.
3. Such a situation has arisen as a result of a number of political, social, ethical and religious factors which, coupled with the scale of the crimes, has often inhibited systematic search.
4. This thesis will outline how a non-invasive archaeological methodology has been implemented at two case study sites, with such issues at its core, thus allowing them to be addressed in terms of their scientific and historical value, whilst acknowledging their commemorative and religious significance. In doing so, this thesis also demonstrates how a study of the physical remains of the Holocaust can reveal as much about the ever-changing cultural memory of these events as it can the surviving remnants of camps, execution sites and other features associated with this period. By demonstrating the diversity and complexity of Holocaust landscapes, a case is presented for a sub-discipline of Holocaust Archaeology.

1. What "material remains"?

2. "Some cases"? No, it's ALL cases.

3. "Inhibited systematic search"? Inhibited by what? Who? Why are they inhibited?

4. "Ever changing cultural memory"? IOW, Jews keep changing their stories. Shocking.

Summary:

There are no human remains that are alleged. Simple as that. The scam is utterly exposed.

No massive human remains as alleged, No 'holocaust' as alleged.

This is too easy.

- Hannover

We're talking about an alleged '6M Jews & 5M others' ... 11,000,000.
There is not a single verifiable excavated enormous mass grave with contents actually SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka, 1,250,000 at Auschwitz, or 250,000 at Sobibor, 34,000 at Babi Yar) even though Jews claim they still exist and claim to know exactly where these alleged enormous mass graves are.

[Dresden]

"However, whilst clearly defined historical narratives exist....."

Stories exist.

".....many of the archaeological remnants of these sites remain ill-defined, unrecorded and even, in some cases, unlocated"

My Unicorn remains ill-defined, unrecorded, and unlocated.

But it's real ..... in my mind.

[EtienneSC]

Could someone read the thesis and find if there is any information on what is underground in the part of the camp area covered by the concrete memorial? The following is based on a quick reading of promising sections:

Figures 4.8, 4.9, 4.10, 4.12 and 4.19-22, as described on page 13, look relevant to the question of graves or burial pits. Some of the other descriptions are hard to interpret, but may also be significant. There are also two wartime aerial photographs (4.13 and 4.14 on pages 163 and 164). The survey area in Figure 4.8 (page 147) seems to cover the whole of the camp. But then she writes:

"A GSSI TerraSIRch SIR System-3000 with a 400MhZ antenna facilitated high resolution subterranean mapping to a maximum depth of 4 metres across an area of 14,400m² in Areas B and C (Figure 4.8 and 4.10).

Areas B and C (page 148) do not look like the areas that Eric Hunt "did not doubt" to contain criminal traces of some kind (i.e. the area under the concrete memorial). But on page 463 she suggests that Area B includes some of the memorial area. On page 212 we read:

a comprehensive examination of subsurface remains must not have been undertaken in advance of the memorial's construction

So I'm not clear what she thinks is under the memorial, given that this was not known before, or if she did any ground studies on the areas marked as "areas of ground disturbance" and "generalized local disturbance" on the wartime photographs on pages 163-164. Page 184 may be relevant to the question of graves. She writes on page 195

"Although analysis of the remains themselves is not possible, owing to the need and desire to respect Halacha Law, the corroboration of witness accounts and survey data has allowed the probable locations of graves to be identified,

I'm not sure what justifies this statement. The description of killing methods on the following pages is interesting, partly because of its implausibility and reliance on eye-witnesses. Pages 207 on contains descriptions of pits - as addressed by Thomas Kues when the initial results were published. She says:

It would appear that the physical remnants of Treblinka have largely been ignored since the war and it is possible that this relates to the continued sense of unease that this site invokes. In particular, the absence of historical evidence that allude to the likelihood that archaeological remains would survive at Treblinka in the official narratives hints towards this and raises further questions about perceptions of the camp. Does the presentation of the events in a way that suggests all trace was removed allow us to elevate the atrocities of the Holocaust to a level far beyond human capabilities? By believing that the Nazis were capable of completely destroying traces of their crimes and removing all trace of human life at the site, does this facilitate the dehumanization of the events and justify our lack of understanding of them?

The question format and stress on "perceptions" sounds like mystification to me. The following echoes the more mundane and maybe realistic local views found by Robert Faurisson (which she knows nothing of, it seems):

the expression of territoriality for many in the Polish community, who do not wish for the site to define their region, has been demonstrated through a lack of acknowledgement of the site's function; the area is often passed through as part of family walks and leisure activities as if it were any other part of the Polish countryside. Given the fact that the site does in fact appear like a country park, it does little to convey the brutality of events that occurred at the site. During the fieldwork, young couples were even picnicking at the site and despite having read the signage at the site detailing that it was an extermination camp, this appears to have caused little more than intrigue for many; how and why such a disregard for the events at Treblinka has come about is unclear. (pages 224-225)

The conclusions on Treblinka starting on page 228 are general in nature. Perhaps that is telling.

On GPS she writes: "although GPR offered the best depth potential of all of the geophysical methods, the rough nature of the terrain in some areas inhibited its use." There is a useful series of witness diagrams of Treblinka starting on page 450. There is some technical description starting on page 462. She mentions Mattogno & Graf's Treblinka: Extermination Camp or Transit Camp (2004) on page 387 and in the bibliography (a little shyly, without a space before it).

In general, she relies on eye-witnesses who are cited without assessing their credibility and shows a lack of interest in the possibility of archaeology undermining witness accounts in any substantial way. There may nonetheless be interesting observations relevant to the location and size of possible mass graves buried in the body of the thesis.

[Hannover]

Sturdy-Colls said:

"Although analysis of the remains themselves is not possible, owing to the need and desire to respect Halacha Law, the corroboration of witness accounts and survey data has allowed the probable locations of graves to be identified,

Not possible?
Absolute BS. Just more weasel words, excuse making. My, my.

1. There is no Polish OR Jewish "law" which says exhumations of corpses cannot be done when a mass crime is alleged or for practical purposes.
In fact, any court would require seeing such alleged massive remains.
In Israel exhumations are routinely done for a variety of legal & practical reasons.

Try taking this into a legit court of law.
'Please your honor, there really are remains of 900.000 Jews buried in huge mass graves at Treblinks, we know where the mass graves are, ... but, but, well, umm, we can't show the court. You must trust us, we're Zionists.'

highly recommended:
The Big Excuse: 'excavation & exhumation of Jews forbidden'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6817

- Hannover

We're talking about an alleged '6M Jews & 5M others' ... 11,000,000.
There is not a single verifiable excavated enormous mass grave with contents actually SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka, 1,250,000 at Auschwitz, or 250,000 at Sobibor, 34,000 at Babi Yar) even though Jews claim they still exist and claim to know exactly where these alleged enormous mass graves are.

[Zulu]

It would appear that the physical remnants of Treblinka have largely been ignored since the war and it is possible that this relates to the continued sense of unease that this site invokes. In particular, the absence of historical evidence that allude to the likelihood that archaeological remains would survive at Treblinka in the official narratives hints towards this and raises further questions about perceptions of the camp. Does the presentation of the events in a way that suggests all trace was removed allow us to elevate the atrocities of the Holocaust to a level far beyond human capabilities? By believing that the Nazis were capable of completely destroying traces of their crimes and removing all trace of human life at the site, does this facilitate the dehumanization of the events and justify our lack of understanding of them?

.

Must we understand that the nazis were so inhuman that they were able to make all the traces of their crime disappear and, by so, they facilitate the dehumanization of the events and justify our lack of understanding of them?
But, why do Caroline write then the following?

The barrier to progress is not a physical one in the truest sense, but one that relates to the variety of issues surrounding these events and, in part, the semantics that have built up around the physical remains e.g. the belief that the term destroyed should be taken literally to mean that all remains were completely removed. An examination of any other period in history demonstrates that, despite attempts by perpetrators to remove the physical remnants of war and genocide, it is impossible to do so entirely. Methodologically, there is a need to adapt to account for these issues and to promote the results of these studies to a wider audience than just the archaeological or pedagogical community, thus ensuring that the potential of archaeological research is recognised. (p.427)

That means that the "examination of any other period in history demonstrates that [...] it is impossible to do so entirely".
So, according to Caroline, despite the high level of inhumanity of the nasty nazis, they couldn't make all the traces of their crime entirely disappear.
Thank you Caroline. Now, go back there and find the real material traces of the murder of 870 000 jews.

[Zulu]

So, according to Caroline, despite the high level of inhumanity of the nasty nazis, they couldn't make all the traces of their crime entirely disappear.
Thank you Caroline. Now, go back there and find the real material traces of the murder of 870 000 jews.

Did somebody find what are the actual "discoveries" of CSC in her thesis?
When I read the final lines of his conclusion, I can only be very suspicious about her results.

This thesis has demonstrated the potential of such a discipline to contribute to knowledge of this period. The challenge for the future is one of raising awareness; awareness of the value of, and need for, the investigation of the physical remains, in particular the potential of these investigations to contribute to education; awareness of the commemorative value of the remains and the fact that they do survive in various forms; and, finally, awareness that studies which consider the post-abandonment history of the sites in question, when compared to other sites, can reveal the diversity and constantly changing nature of the European Holocaust landscape. (p.444)

My interpretation:

This thesis has demonstrated the potential of such a discipline to contribute to knowledge of this period.

I found nothing relevant at Treblinka but the methodology I used is very promissory for the future if the aim is to find material evidences of the story.

The challenge for the future is one of raising awareness; awareness of the value of, and need for, the investigation of the physical remains,
...

As the revisionists say: only the discovering of physical remains is relevant to prove the number of victims, their origin and the way they were killed. That is a real challenge for the future and unless we find something actually relevant, our holocaust is mere BS.

...in particular the potential of these investigations to contribute to education;

If our investigations are successful, no need anymore to show human skin lampshades, human soap or thousands of shoes and eyeglasses to the credulous believers.

awareness of the commemorative value of the remains and the fact that they do survive in various forms;

At the end we will be able to put something valuable and not only BS in the numerous Memorials and Museums dedicated to the story all around the world.

and, finally, awareness that studies which consider the post-abandonment history of the sites in question, when compared to other sites, can reveal the diversity and constantly changing nature of the European Holocaust landscape.

In other words, we must be well aware that without physical evidences it is not easy to maintain this story straight.

[Elroy]

On the subject of Caroline Colls:

She and her team did not "find" that tile anyway. The notion she discovered a tile and spun it to be something it obviously isn't is busted enough.

But this is giving her the academically correct "benefit of the doubt" of the least incriminating possibility.

The almost certain likeihood is she used the false witness statement (itself absurd) to select a tile with a pattern "like" the star of david and planted a broken piece of it for the camera's to be "found".

Some problems - only half a tile? Where were the other tiles? Or even the other half nearby? Why wouldn't lidar or the other methods used show up a mass of bricks? The tile was the wrong way around also supports this, and the false witness would not have been able to see it, bit of a coincidence there happened to be a star pattern here? Found this piece, stopped digging? Not believable.

The tile she selected with the star had to be of a type produced at the time, an old, aged tile. That is because if they had a proper star of david tile for the psyhce war job made fresh- it would be too obvious and too bustable.

The team if pushed might be able to turn around and claim that "testing" of the tile revealed it being from the era and show such results. If they made the tile fresh with a real jewish star- they couldn't. There can be no "testing" for diesel as far as I know (?)

The idiocy of the operation is not even researching the actual nature of the star pattern she chose, thinking it would serve sufficiently as a star of David to everyone watching.

In fact ^This scenario is almost guaranteed in my opinion.

^Does anybody share this deliberately planted tile, not even found hypothesis?

I think it's the front runner by far. Almost proven above the lighter revsionist view.