Mr I. Hertz, no doubt Jewish himself. I gave you the source. Why would he lie?

Waaait a minute, I just found Krege's site ('report') back I had seen many years ago:
http://www.vho.org/VffG/2000/1/Krege62-64.html
This is what I meant all along.
Photo of Krege doing a lecture: http://judicial-inc.biz/Trebli6.jpg
....yet another attempt at derail snipped...
this thread is itself, a crime against humanity.
Certainly not war propaganda by the largest criminals ever living on the face of this earth: the Soviets. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism
You are a very strange person. The conclusions of the Krege report conclude.....
"Ergebnis
GEFUNDEN:
Der Boden besteht zum größten Teil aus unberührter Erde, Sand und Steinen. Die Bäume sind älter als 50 Jahre.
NICHT GEFUNDEN:
Massengräber, Einzelgräber, Knochenreste, Menschenasche, Holzasche, Bodenunebenheiten, Bauelemente oder Baumüll, Baumüberreste oder Baumstümpfe, Höhlen oder Hohlräume, Goldzähne.
Which means in English means "Conclusions.... NOT FOUND: Skeletal remains, human ashes, wood ashes, ground disturbance, components or building dust, tree stumps from firewood, grave holes, gold teeth.
Are you saying Krege was not looking for the things he made a specific conclusion about? Have you actually read the Krege Report? It's obvious you haven't.
Is it so difficult to understand that he went to Treblinka to scan the soil and next to analyze his findings at home? He obviously wanted to research the holocaust aspects of the camp and the presence of huge mass graves (870,000 people). At home he looks at the images and draws the conclusion: there are no signs of mass graves. In the first place you want to establish the easiest verifiable matter: was there a grave at all? And if you find that the soil was largely undisturbed than you have already drawn your most important conclusions being there was no mass grave.
Is it so difficult to understand that he went to Treblinka to scan the soil and next to analyze his findings at home? He obviously wanted to research the holocaust aspects of the camp and the presence of huge mass graves (870,000 people). At home he looks at the images and draws the conclusion: there are no signs of mass graves. In the first place you want to establish the easiest verifiable matter: was there a grave at all? And if you find that the soil was largely undisturbed than you have already drawn your most important conclusions being there was no mass grave.
I am not submitting a scientific report to you am I? If I was I would also need to include citations, an abstract, the university to which I submitted my paper and the peer review it has withstood. That's how I did things at Anthropological Prehistory at Sydney university for digs.
I now realise that you are not actually reading anything we post or your own evidence.
.
No, Germar got fired for unauthorized use of his employer's name to publish his crap, implying that it had their approval.
.
He hasn't read the Krege "Report" either! He didn't know the conclusions!