Polish history is 100% glorious

True enough, M-G :) The Groucho video works well with some :)

Is insulting the one you don't agree with also the Polish way? If it is, it's not really a Glorious trait of the Glorious Ppl, isn't it?

Btw: Groucho is always great, yes :)

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)

It depends how heated things get ;)

And it seems here that things heat up pretty quickly :)

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)

et


Really? Its a news to me, you first deploy torrent of slogans intertwined with few facts interpreted your way and then if somebody do not agree with you, you quickly get angry and annoyed and start sprouting nonsense and insults.

Let's agree to recognize that we have different view of the world and then exchange our arguments and views in peaceful manner.
There no need to overheat thyself, as a judge(we cannot trust our objectivity) I propose Sean S :)

Let the tournament commence !


Your claims to be proved yet!I'll enlighten you - your word is not an definite proof ending all discussion.


You rebuked me for using that word.


its BS for you!


that your opinion to which you are entitled thanks to CC in a way - however I say that you are biased and you cannot see above your bias and prejudices!

Notice that discussing with you I'm not using any religious arguments but only those I can logicically justify.On the other hand you are continuously using slogans and expressions one has to believe in without poof, that you take something for granted it doesn't mean I have to do the same.

To put it simple - your arguments are biased, emotional and demand acceptance of your values- on the other hand my arguments are based on logic and common sense.

Small type of great ones, that do hum
Within this whole world's narrow room,
......................................................Poor Fly, caught in an airy net,:)


I'm missing your point here, Communist ideology exists (you are one example of it:)), Communist country's exists as well (Cuba, Northern Korea), Communists do live still, they are in their 60 and 50ies - nothing vanished!

You perception is crooked I suppose from NL point of view Communists really vanished - I've thought that "historian" should know better!


How so? They could fight but choose to surrender.I fail to see that they were worse off than Poland. The Czechs regained their industry most of the citizens and all their land.

Whereas Poland ....do I have to spell it for you?


Really ? Who's army were in the town, in the country ? Who's was in charge?
I don't know who perpetrated the deed because it was soviets apparatus of terror and soviet propaganda tools - called by the silly little westerners - soviet juridical system, and they called the shots!

They could do anything, and blame anyone they choose!
Someone died! At the time in Poland many people died - some hunted in the woods , some tortured, humiliated and killed in the damp dark dungeons!

You said that Poles cannot do wrong - well Poles can do wrong and many Poles are rare bastards, some killed Jews!(gee?! shock!?,phew!)

However non Polish officer would ever order to kill innocent, unarmed bystanders and absolutely not if there were involved children - its absolutely out of the question!Nor would he stand aside without orders to do so! Who could give such orders?

Is not blindness, is intimate knowledge of Polish culture - and cultural code - you are doing a gross mistake, ignoring that!


About your remarks concerning CC:hahahahahaha....try maybe to read some serious historical stuff instead of rubbish booklets !!
I told you, you choose level of our discussion!
Don't you know about Islamic invasion against Christian Europe - Constantinople, France, Italy! ?Go and read!
Sean
Lock horns ? maybe, but I'm better then that :)
I-S (good night)

See, Ironside, you prove my point to the core. Everything I say is dead wrong and you jump on your hind legs over it. Every time, over and over again. It gets old and boring. And: don't call me a Communist. I am not and I have never been. Calling everybody who disagrees with you a Communist again proves my point once more. I'm just tired of it after trying many times as somehow I liked you, but you react the very same way every time, over and over again. It really gets overboard now. This complete and utter denial of valid facts just gets on my nerves. Never thought it would come to this point. Gave you a second and a third chance, but no hope for recovery.

I have read decent, unbiased books about Church history, probably different ones than you did as some of them were written by Catholic Historians and some by non-Catholic Historians. Not by Catholics as everybody knows before starting to read where the plot is heading to. You'd be surprised how many very decent books there are in the West. But probably not the kind amateur-historians like you will ever read. I'll give you a tip: as a project, read some publications concernng Holocaust and anti semitism published by the Simon Wiesenthal Institute and make notes. After that, read (Polish or non-Polish) historians that approach the same matter with a different angle that may contradict to the publications of the SWI and make notes too. After you've done all this, compare the notes from the first reading session with those of the second session, compare them and find the greatest common divider(s). Sum them up, take out all the unnecessary noise and distill the essence. Then you will have a clear and neutral view on the matter, in which you have elements of both views yet it has become your own. That would be good for you. That's how I do it and always have done it and it's probably the best way to come to true objective conclusions. You should try that too.

And I suppose you're a big fan of Norman Davies too? Haven't looked in that particular thread yet, but I am sure you will pop up there sooner or later.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)

Well, maybe read my post once more? I said let agree to disagree.
You are jumping from one point to the other without order.
As for CC history I'm not that interested, what I know comes from history books not concerted on Church history.


hey! you're doing the same - you say ping I say pong - say something else for a change!


What facts? I do not deny facts I do interpret my way! Why should I read them your way ? Give me a good answer. please!


I never did! Gee! you always accuses me of something I feel like accused sometimes- chill out! see the smiley after communist :) ?????


I Don't understand ! Are we discussing above?


Wouldn't be that a very superficial and general view of things?


Not really but he made few good points there!
I-S (good night! this time I'm going to sleep, I think you didn't read my previous post closely due to late hour, do it tomorrow)

polish history

• 
  g.jpg
  

That’s what Spaniards were waving at Somosierra at the advancing Poles. So do you keep it for posterity's sake, you know - just in case? LOL

Napoleon was impatient to proceed, he ordered his Polish Chevaux-Légers escort squadron of 125 men..............typical Polish ass lickers, they never fight alone.
always with the help of somebody.
LOL!!!

pot...kettle....black.

What a loaded and ridiculous topic meant to provoke more Poland-Bashing.

But what can one expect from good old "I love to see Poland Bashed Harry".

Just more of your Pole-Baiting eh Harry?

Yeah just read half of the comments of the topics on the Polish Forum and all you read are comments from Non-Poles (like you) AND Poles saying how glorious and wonderful Polish History is LOL!!!!!!!

Obviously it was never going to get any Poles to assess the way in which they view their country and adjust their knee-jerk reactions to anybody mentioning any way in which their country might improve.

Well why bother when the tide is against you? Canute and all that, i believe he was half Polish:)

And as a kick that would start a discussion 'how Poland might improve' you started this thread with your sorry buIIsh!t about 'history'...?

One more issue thought, for a change try to refer to my arguments and points as I do regarding to your arguments.
You on the other hand mostly concentrate about how I'm stubborn and incurable poor bastard - instead try to argue for a change?

I-S( Then soon with the emblem of truth overflowing,And dripping with reason, He rose from the depth.Where for time too long to remember, Was resting on canopy woven from His dreams.)

Ok, I will address one point: first of all, this was an example. Secondly, no it's not a superficial and/or general view as you take two opposites and compare them to each other. You will find that even the most opposite views have certain points which are the same. Reading in just one corner of events leaves one with a very one-sided view on things. And that's not the purpose of history. Some amateur historian on this forum said that history teaches ppl. It does, but only when you're a history teacher :) For the rest it's a quest to find an as accurate as pssbl view on things and in reality this comes down to the most neutral view. And a neutral view in turn you can only get when you read material from both sides. That is what the purpose of history is.

It's like watching a football match: you have fans from club A and fans from club B and there's a group of ppl who are neither. The ones who are neither fan of A nor B have the best view on the match as they are not clouded in their opinion by their love for a particular club.

You could go and read all concerning the matter, but then you spend way too much time on one particular event. Furthermore, you will have to do that with every event and by the time you get a clear point of view on all the matters, you're way past your retirement age. I read as much as I can from both sides and try to come with a most clear view on things. Sometimes this is favourable and sometimes it's not. It's as simple as that.

Previously mentioned Kielce incident, for example, was committed by Poles. Be they Communists, Catholics, Anarchists or Hopsasasa Polka Dancers, it doesn't matter. It weren't Russians or Germans who did it. It were Poles. And the circumstances under which things took place are open to debate, but one fact remains undisputed in all circles and that is that it were Poles who committed it. I read many sources dealing with the issue, yes, Polish sources as well as far as they were translated. But no matter how coloured the descriptions were, nobody, not the Polish historians, not the other historians claims it were (Communist) Russians who did it. They all say it was Poles who did this. And a Communist Pole is still a Pole, right?

Given this, what you think the reaction was in the rest of Europe and the world, who just had come to the discovery of the horrors that happened during the Holocaust? What you think their reaction would be when they heard that an angry mob in some godforgotten place in the middle of nowhere does just exactly the same? What would you do if you heard about it and you were living in some other country, just learning about the Holocaust? You probably would get angry. See? Everybody always wonders as to why other ppl look upon the Poles as being anti semite; well I think this Kielce incident played a huge part in it, hammering into the psyche of post-war Europe.

Hope it's clear now. Some work lies waiting for you. Good luck. I'm sure you can do it. You're a good kid and I don't hate you at all (I don't hate anybody for that matter), albeit a bit flamboyant most of the time. I think you will get better if you just put in some work and try to read some other sources. If you want me to, I can give you tips for good material, just ask.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)

MG, there is no sense in discussing with hardened antisemites as IS.
I wonder why he still likes the Old Marshal. He would never have understood this kind of Dmowski-ite persuasion.

Possibly, let assume for a moment that everything you claim to have happened and the way it happened is true.
Still, it would be a deed committed by individuals Poles, not Polish state, nor independent Poland institutions. So, I fail to see the significance of Kielce as a proof of anti-semitsm, its more likely proof that some demoralised elements of society were capable of committing a crime. Well, the same could be said about every country but no country is judged by its criminals.

What if NL was being judged by its SS Division?

Exactly, who would gain to give Poland such a reputation ?Soviets!
Who was really in charge in Poland? (regardless that individuals Poles,were in soviet ranks)
Who is responsible?
Soviets!
Do you see logical chain of thought here?
One, more thing - Poles in soviet ranks were traitors!
You do not seriously expect me to take responsibility for criminals and traitors?Nor for action of government in Poland in 1946 - soviet tool and puppet !


By all means give me tips for good material, I think that I should gain as much knowledge as I can about Kielce incident.


There's a crisis in the kitchen
But that don't stop you ***********; - you're a bastard troll!

I-S (well)

The difference between this and the Kielce pogrom was that the Kielce pogrom took place AFTER WW2. And that's the significance of this incident. Repeat, it took place hardly A YEAR AFTER THE HOLOCAUST. Doesn't that ring a bell by now? What do you think the average European would've thought about that? That guy doesn't think: "hey, it's probably the Soviets because they are in charge!" NO! He didn't think like that. He only read that again there were Jews murdered for whatever reason, right after the biggest mass murder ever on that very same ppl.

I really don't know how I should get that significance through to you, but put it in simple logic: this is what the average newspaper reader read back then: 4th of July 1946, Jews murdered in Poland. 14 months after the Holocaust ended. And keep in mind that in 1946 Europeans were still grateful to the Soviet Union for their tremendous war effort. Then you read news like this. What you think the average newspaper reader will first think? I will answer that: it happened in Poland, so Poles did it. Damn them! That's what the average reader in 1946 thought when he read about the incident. He didn't think of the complex new situation that was going on in Poland at the time, he just thought: darn, those Poles do hate Jews. And if this isn't clear enough as to why the Kielce incident was so important in the image forming of the European about Poles as being anti semite, then I give up. I cannot make it much clearer.

I will gather some material for you. Give me some time as I'm busy as it is.


Perhaps; but they were still Poles.


I didn't describe the events as such, I described the perpetrators. And like I said it were Poles that committed them. And the question whether or not this incident was used by the Soviets in order to give Poland a bad name abroad, is not really relevant in this respect. That came, if it happened, later on, not at the moment the actual events ocurred.

I will say it again, no matter how you turn it, it were Poles that committed this crime. Be this Poles more or less hired by Soviets, or members of the local dance club, that really doesn't matter. What matters is who the ppl abroad saw as the perpetrators and to them it was the Poles. And they were right back then. Political side effects are not yet relevant in order to put this fact firm. These were afterwards.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)

The average newspaper in Europe back then just like now had Jews in them. So the negative reaction that the "average European" had of actions against Jews might be negative since that was the reaction the Jewish writer was trying to ELICIT from the average reader. Just like today! (Anti-Polish Bigot Richard Cohen of the Washington Post in early June tried to pull these anti-Polish shenanigans. But his anti-Polish Lies and anti-Polish Bigotry was so bad that Polish Americans and even some Jewish Americans made him take back some of his anti-Polish Lies and Bigotry in his later column)

But tell me, why didn't the average European newspaper talk about all the horrible things Jewish communists were doing? Too bad those European newspapers hid the fact that many high ranking Jewish Soviet Communists precipitated these anti-semitic incidents in Poland for JUST THE EFFECT you mentioned. To have an adverse reaction with other Europeans, or at least those who give 2 sh*ts about the Jews.

Jews Jews Jews Jews Jews seems to be all you are obsessed on. Frankly why should people care about them at all? They are no better han anyone else. We're all equal.

Tell me why didn't those newspapers back then and even now talk about all the horrible things communist Jews were doing INCLUDING setting up the Kielce pogrom for anti-Poland propaganda?

Stalins Jews (News suppressed by the daily press)
ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999,00.html


Well the average European back then didn't have all the facts and was not aware of the role Communist Jews had in setting up Poland for these kind of propaganda events. The Jews in the newspapers purposely used the average European naivety about sneaky communist Jews against them and purposely took a situation out of context to maximize anti-Polish propaganda put into their brains by the Jewish writers of these newspaperes.

Are you aware MG of the cocky attitude of Jewish writers in newspapers? Even 50 years ago Jewish American "news" writers would randomly pick a town in Poland, blatantly make up "anti-semitic events" that allegedly occured and put them in newspapers (The New York Times still does this today). When Polish Americans who had family in those towns would contact the Jewish writers and adamantly tell them they and their families have NO knowledge of those "anti-semitic" events going on in their home towns, the Jewish writer would then come clean and ADMIT he made the story up "just for shock value" "and to sell newspapers".

Come now! You're obviously clearly obsessed with 'proving that the Russians killed our Lord'.


Would you like to admit that you made that up just for shock value and to supportyiur bigoted theories, or shall we just conclude that you're a moronic liar?

there, fixed it for ya ;)

Will you pls get the fcuk out of here? Pls fcuk off. You already made it clear that you don't like Jews many times before and fail miserably to see the point. So now just fcuk off.


No. He should just get the fcuk out of here. I have never seen a ppl who manage to blame deeds they performed themselves on the victims or on sb else instead of taking responsibility for it themselves. Perhaps the word "responsible" isn't in the Polish dictionary, let alone "historical responsibility? Well on the other hand, it's not collectively, I wouldn't want to say that, but it just seems that all those bigots who do are united on PF.

>^..^<

M-G (losing definitive patience with this Polish nonsense)

Taking responsibility has never been a strong suit here. The way corruption is dealt with is evidence of that. They laugh it off but seldom do anything concrete to resolve the problem.

This debate is pointless, it has deliberately been set up to antagonize.

Indeed. However, this one does gloriously fail to see the point I was making. This wasn't about Poles vs Jews, this was about history writing and the keying of milestones within historic timelines and their direct aftermath as well as its repercussions in the long run. Kielce is the perfect example to demonstrate this - yet this bigot comes along and turns it into one of his infamous anti Jewish rants. I've been patient long enough with this nonsense. Comes a time that you have to say it's been enough.

>^..^<

M-G (sorry Seanus)

Well, it's a conscious choice of people whether to be antagonistic or not, HC. Some parts of Polish history are glorious and I guess part of that assessment comes through association. They have endured similar problems to the Scots, just on a bigger scale for them. Their very own national anthem even commemorates their struggle and states that Poland hasn't disappeared/died yet (jeszcze Polska nie zgineło). We shouldn't downplay their achievements and should always see the broader context in which they were won.

You cannot weigh achievements against crimes.

Pointing out failures or periods of failure is by no means downplaying achievements. It's just part of the bigger picture. And you NEED to know the bigger picture, else you get stranded in a kind of particularism which bring about a skewed world view and particularily a crooked view on one's own history. Unfortunately a lot of the ppl on here have fallen victim of this particularism as it shows.

But that wasn't what my post with Kielce as example was all about. But I am sure you know what it was about. You're smart enough to understand what I was trying to say there.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)