Commie-era ex-SB and militia being phased out, Poland's interior minister

Polish interior min. Mariusz Błaszczak told Polish Radio that over 16 percent of Poland's police commanders started their careers with the Citizens' Militia, as the police force was known before the collapse of communism in 1989.

Such officers are gradually leaving their jobs after the conservative Law and Justice party won a landslide victory in Poland's parliamentary elections exactly a year ago, Błaszczak said. Thanks to the post-RT clique a quarter-century too later, but better late than never.

I just love it!!!
On a different thread you are saying that it was ok for Kaczynski to be a prosecutor during those times because there were still bad ppl to be judged and put in jail. But to be a policeman wasn't ok? Who would supply the bad ppl and evidence to that prosecutor?

You made my day I must say.
BTW, it wouldn't have anything to do with those policeman reaching retirement age now, would it?

YEs, having no functioning police force in 1989-1990 would have been just the absolute optimum solution! Logic is not your strong point, ne c'est pas?

The Party, obviously. Just as the Party now tells prosecutors who to and not to investigate.

Never said it was OK. This whole prosecutor business was made up by HB and repeated in his style like a broken record. He is such a numbskull that repeating some statement countless times saves him from overtaxing his birdbrain to think up new nonsense. Remember: he never provided a stitch of proof about this.

This should have been dealt with in the early '90s but the clique did not allow it. They stopped effective lustration and toppled the govt to prevent secret police files being opened. Then the soft-on-commies Jewish post-KORites and ex-PZPR goys took over nearly all the leadership posts and left the rest of the nation out in the cold. They not only stole the coutnry blind for 25 years but they would love to keep on doing it. Fortunately, the pro-Polish PiS government like a heroic caped crusader put a stop to it. No wonder the losers are ranting, fuming and spewing hate.

Why do you tell such pathetic lies, DDCS? The fact that Chairman Kaczynski volunteered to prosecute dissidents during the commie era is well known, even his brother is on record talking about it.


Keep telling yourself that repeating your lies will make them true, DDCS. Everybody else can look at this post: polishforums.com/news/poland-kukiz-petru-newly-emerging-political-74590/2/#msg1565098
where I write "Chairman Kaczynski volunteered to become a public prosecutor, to prosecute 'criminals', as his brother makes crystal clear on page 92 of the storming good Alfabet braci Kaczyńskich. "

This is true; but the really relevant question is whether this was the price to pay to have Poland lead the bloodless coup that ultimately toppled the communist order in CEE, a little like what Yeltsin and Putin did with their "I let you replace me at the helm of Russia but you do not prosecute me or my immediate family members".

If that was part of the roundtable agreement, as I suspect it was, then it might well be a price worth paying to have a peaceful transition, however despicable from a moral point of view.

HB, provide a verbatim link which should roughly go: Jarosław Kaczyński zgłosił się na ochotnika, żeby zostać prokuraotrem publicznym w celu ścigania antykomunistycznych dysydentów" or forever keep your peace.


After the official dissolution of the USSR and in view of Yeltsin's anti-Soviet and pro-Polish stance, there was no threat of a Soviet blood bath. There might have been during the Yanaev revolt, but Yeltsin took care of the rascal.

Sorry, DDCS, but we're limited to 50 word quotes here. However, the book in question is available on Google books: books.google.co.uk/books?id=Cj_igU7isPwC&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92

Enjoy.

More Hairy Bollocks, HB? That one sentence is far less than 50 words, around 15 I gather.
I especially wonder who they phrased "volunteered to prosecute dissidents"?

Your text, DDCS, is fewer than 50 words; however, the text in which Lech Kaczynski confirms that both he and his brother volunteered to prosecute dissidents during the commie era is longer than 50 words. But you've been provided with the link, why not read the words there? And then you can tell us why people who volunteered to arrest all criminals, including dissidents, should be removed from public life while those who volunteered to prosecute anybody the Party told them to, such as Mr Michnik, should be allowed to participate in public life.

All we need is the above, no more, no less!

This is overreach. They volunteered to work in the section of the judicial system that prosecuted dissidents.

That's damning enough.

Polly, I am surprised someone "au fait" like you gets its chronology so wrong.. The roundtable talks in Poland started in Feb 1989 and ended in April of the same year, with the first free elections in Poland in June. Yeltsin did not come to power in Russian until 2,5 years later (Dec 1991) when the Soviet Union was dissolved. Gorbatchev himself resigned on 25/12/1991.

This is not a quiz show. The point is that after the USSR had been dissolved and Yeltsin was in charge was a good time to start things with a tabula rasa. It was then that those who had persecuted Poles (murders, abduction, disappearance, torture, forced confessions, etc.) should have been weeded out and not allowed in the judicial or law-enforcement fields of Free Poland.

You don't address the point. If there was an agreement during the roundtable talks not to prosecute those who were in power at the time against a peaceful transition, how can those in charge then (Bolek in particular) renege on their word 2 or 3 years later? I understand the frustration of those who suffered from the deeds of the communist regime (such as the family of my wife) and I would probably react the same way if I suffered like them. But most of those who suffered are committed Christians and doesn't christianity teach to forgive? More over, now that 25 years have elapsed, seeking vengeance is all the more destructive. It creates polarisation in Polish society, and having now lived in Turkey for the past 3 years, I see how polarization can be destructive for the long term future of society.

And those who prosecuted dissidents, or who volunteered to do that, such as Chairman Kaczynski?

I think the idea of holding up one's end of an agreement is pretty alien to polly, we know what he thinks of rule of law (a scam whereas rule by party leader is superior) so any agreement he made would be reneged upon as soon as he thought he could get away with it.

When police negotiate with a kidnapper or potential suicide, they will promise anything to get him to back out. The Soivet-imposed puppet regime was a criminal organisation so no agreement concluded with them was eternally binding.


Yeah sure, and HB volunteered to run errands for the underground CPGB but not for free. Sterling, dollars, roubles or euro?

Any sources for that claim? I've provided ample sources to demonstrate Chairman Kaczynski volunteered to prosecute dissidents during the commie era, how about you provide sources to support your claim?

In my book, no one, even when discussing with an opponent one despises, should promise things they cannot/knowingly won't deliver. It is a question of self respect (my word is my bond). Furthermore, I am not a specialist but I doubt the police act as you describe. Don't you think that promising things which are not delivered subsequently would backfire massively , ie that would critically diminish police credibility in future critical situations hence make them ineffectual?

Did I call it or did I call it? agreements, rule of law, all mere trifles to the ultimate prinicple of rule by party leader, prl style.


Exactly. Reneging on negotiated deals is a very bad idea.

Historical note: That's one reason the first PiS government failed, they were constantly making deals and then trying to renegotiate before the ink was dry. JK has a history of negotiating in bad faith.

None whatsoever. Not a single quote saying JK "volunteered to prosecute dissidents", just beating about the bush, conjectures, insinuations....

Whether you like it or not, that is standard police procedure world-wide. If someoneis threatening to blow up a building or kill a hostage or some such heinous act, the police bring in a specially trained psychologist to talk him out of it. He/she will promise a get-away car, passport, money, whatever until he desists. Then it's straight in the slammer. Like the Third Reich, the Soviet-imposed PRL puppet government was a criminal organisation with which no deals were binding. But rather than dislodge that formation, the soft-on-commies Michnik/Kwaśniewski/Mazowiecki clique entrenched their positon creating the post-communist III RP.

Makes you wonder about the people who signed up to prosecute the enemies of the Party, as Chairman Kaczynski did. And the people who volunteered to be the mouthpiece of the regime in the Polonia press, I wonder how they sleep at night.


Please stop with your fantasies, DDCS, his own brother tells us that Chairman Kaczynski volunteered to serve in the department that prosecuted dissidents.

Now, how about a source for your claim that I work for the CPGB?

What is DDCS?

Where's the quote: "My brother volunteered to prosecute dissidents"? No wonder you cannot provide it. If you say it exceeds 50 words, that means you have tried to pick and choose, read between the lines, draw hasty conclusions and bend words and suggestions into a totalitarian-style indictment to suit your mean-spirited pettifoggery. Stalin would have been proud of you!

The source I linked to quotes Chairman Kaczynski's brother confirming that they both volunteered to work as prosecutors in the office that prosecuted dissidents during the commie era. If you want to claim that Chairman Kaczynski volunteered to prosecute criminals but said that he would not prosecute political crimes, kindly give us a source confirming that.


Your question is off-topic, so I'll answer it in the bin.

In other words, the best you can do is paraphrase a longer text, building your claim on things scattered over a larger area and usually taken out of context. A quote, as you should know, is a sentence enclosed by inverted commas.