The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 570

"Poland's Concentration Camp" ??


Harry
17 Feb 2010 #361
So, reading make you sick, right? Troglodytes like you dont read books, because they are obviously too long.

No, I just don't see the point in taking time to read the pathetic ramblings of a liar like you. I wouldn't waste time reading David Irving and the same goes for your lies.
Ozi Dan 26 | 569
18 Feb 2010 #362
If your response to my previous contention that:

"Polish people can't be held responsible for it - it's anathema to the concept of popular government."

is this,

Well that logic certainly is hard to argue against.

then why do you persist with this rhetoric:

You can tell Poles about their concentration camps in any way you want: they still won't listen and will still deny the camps were Polish concentration camps.

^ You didn't actually think I (or anybody else) would actually wade through that much sh*t in a single post did you?

I just did (it took about 30 seconds only), and found Boguslaw to have raised some issues that are weighty and ripe for your responses. Where are they? I'll simply assume that you agree with Boguslaw's contentions in default of a response, ok.

you are a closet nazi.

Harry is actually a true blue Aussie, like me.

David Cesarani.

I watched an interesting if somewhat disturbing and heartbreaking (I had to switch channels when discussions switched to the murder of young children) documentary last night regarding the Einsatzgruppen actions in East Poland, Ukraine and the Baltic states in 1942. Prof. Cesarani was a guest commentator, and was, in my view, quite critical of what he suggested to be Polish civilian involvement and 'auxillary' assistance in these actions.

Whilst he's certainly entitled to his opinion, the issue I found to be curious was when he spoke of other nation's 'auxilliary assistance' he went to some pains to give context to their involvement, but neglected to give context to auxilliary assistance from Poles, leaving the viewer with an impression of Polish 'auxilliary assistance' being an end in itself. Whilst giving context to a scenario should in no way be construed as an excuse or exculpatory mechanism (cf. an understanding of the situation), shouldn't it be afforded to all, regardless of nationality, when discussing these things? Or, should the Polish nationality be excluded from contextual narrative?
Harry
18 Feb 2010 #363
I just did (it took about 30 seconds only), and found Boguslaw to have raised some issues that are weighty and ripe for your responses. Where are they?

Oh look: it's my very favourite little Australian racist! How's life bashing Lebs Dan? I do love your latest lie: that you can read 4,000 words per minute. Bog's post was 1,999 words and you read it in 30 seconds, so that is 4,000 words per minute. Well done Dan, I had no idea that you are actually a world class speed reader. According to the world speedreading council, the world record is 4,251 words per minute. I'm sure that you weren't really trying hard when reading Bog's post, that record is well within reach for you.

As for Bog's 'issues', as a special favour for you (and early present congratulating you on your soon to be held world record), I'll try to find time today to give his verbal diarrhea the reply it doesn't deserve.

I was asking for ACCLAIM scholars and you provide me names of some anticommunist second-class historicians who not even use the term "concentration camp".

Yes, they take great care to use only the official name. But the description they provide makes it very clear that the camp was not a labour camp and was actually a concentration camp. No doubt you are also one of those people who denies that the Nazis ever ran extermination camps and uses as 'proof' the fact that the camps were called SS-Sonderkommando.

Some quootes from your link:

"Although the Świętochłowice camp bore the official title of a labour camp, it also fulfilled the function of a penal camp"

So you agree that the official title of the camp does not tally with its true purpose. Good, we're making progress. A penal camp is a place for punishment. A camp where people are punished for their ethnicity = a concentration camp.

You insist that all the victims of the post-war deserved what they got because they were Nazis. So at best you support the extra-judicial execution of innocent people who are accused of crimes and at worst you support the extra-judicial execution of the families of people who are accused of crimes and the extra-judicial execution of people who come from the same ethnic group as people who are accused of crimes. Forgive me for quoting you out of sequence but let's get this topic out of the way now.

From the text which you have just quoted from: "For instance, the son of a woman from Świętochłowice died in the camp. He was probably born in the camp and on the date of his death - 9 September 1945 - was 4 weeks old." Is it your position that this baby was in the Hitler youth? Or is it that he was "allegedly" a child?

Also from the text which you have just quoted from: "Other preserved documents of the Ministry of Public Security contain lists of internees divided into the following categories: Poles, Jews, Ukrainians, Germans, Volksdeutsche, German collaborators, and others. The Poles included primarily members of independence organisations: the Home Army and the National Armed Forces." Is it your position that the Home Army accepted as members persons who members of nazi organizations? Or is it your position the the National Armed Forces accepted such persons?

As long as you will not give me those names it will be clear that you are a closet nazi.

As long as you insist that it is perfectly acceptable to kill innocent men women and children, you are not even human.

It is only cheap sophistry of a con-men. You are doing everything to trivalise nazism and depict Poles as someone who was even more criminal than nazis. By doing so, you want to erase remembrance about nazi past, as well as remembrance about nazi terror against Poles, and bit by bit justifying that terror suggesting that those Poles should be condemn equally with nazis.

I do love the way that you lie and at the same time accuse me of cheap sophistry. Right here I say "Nazis ran concentration camps and extermination camps) and after Nazi occupation (i.e. Poles ran concentration camps)." I clearly say that only Nazis ran extermination camps but you still lie that I suggest Poles were as bad Nazis. Pathetic, even by your standards.

You dont care about human rights and staff, you just cant come to terms with a fact that nazism was the most genocidal and pathologic creed ever, so to undermine that fact, you have to accuse victims of nazism for even bigger crimes and by doing so you can say that nazis were not doing anything special, since Poles were the same.

As pointed out above: your lie about me accusing Poles of bigger crimes than Nazis has been exposed as a lie.

You are disgusting.

You aren't even human: you think that killing 4-week old babies is acceptable on the off chance that they might have been in the Hitler youth.

Neither Morel nor Geborski were proven guilty let alone that behaviour of some members of IPN had all the hallmarks of antisemitism when its comes to the former one.

Geborski got a free pass for being old, something his victims didn't. Morel got the same and shouldn't have. As for anti-semitism and you, let's come on to that in the next point.

Symptomatic, that would imply, that you dont care about fate of Jews under nazi occupation, but you treat them as an objects, probably to trivalise crimes of real nazis and their collaborators.

You dare to say that I don't care about the fate of Jews under Nazi occupation? I don't see you taking part in this thread arguing against the holocaust deniers.

polishforums.com/news-politics-4/holocaust-was-jewish-invention-says-top-polish-bishop-41630
Could it be that you have no problem with people denying the holocaust and only a problem with people pointing out that some Poles took part in the holocaust?

Irony, you try to accuse Poles for Holocaust and killing of Jews and then you are accuse one of those Jews that Poles - contrary to your version of history - saved during Holocaust for being responsibility for killing innocent women, children an men.

Why is it so difficult for you to understand that some Poles saved Jews and some Poles killed Jews? Just as some Poles saved Poles and some Poles killed Poles.

You cant forgive him that he survived Holocaust, can you?

It is certainly a pity that Morel survived. But I can see that you are fine with his actions: after all, he was only killing Germans, not real people.

The Polish nation could do nothing between Q4 1939 and Q3 1944 because it didn't exist! Some Poles fought against the Nazis and some Poles fought for the Nazis: it is that simple.

You are playing the fool: the Polish run concentration camps were opened in 'liberated' Poland before the end of WWII, not in Nazi-occupied Poland.

But speaking about those bad things that people did in the past, about which they dont want to learn, so they are bound to repeat them. Have you ever heard about Halabja?

Yes of course I have heard of Halabja. Just because you have not heard of gas being used at any other time doesn't mean it hasn't happened: go read a book about the Yemeni civil war, then go read one about the Iran-Iraq war. Pay particular attention to how the USA provided satellite imaging to make the Iraqi weapons more effective against Iran.

Its quite symptomatic that you stress existence of illegal detention centres in Poland in which small group of people

And it is symptomatic that you inflate the casualties of what is important to you while both minimising the number and demonising those who you approve the mistreatment of.

Well, I see an analogy between this behaviour and that other one, when you lament about so called "polish concentration camps".

I ignore the Kurds by not mentioning them in a thread about Poland? You, on the other hand, ignore victims of genuine and genocidal terror by claiming that before they can be called victims it must be established whether a four-week old baby was in the Hitler Youth.

Your behaviour indicate, that you havent learned anything from the nazi past. Quite on the contrary, you are doing everything to dillute facts.

Yes, I state repeatedly that the Nazis ran extermination camps and strongly argue against holocaust deniers, so I must be doing everything I can to dilute the facts. You, on the other hand do not state that Nazis ran extermination camps and say not a word against holocaust deniers.

Had it not been for this catastrophe, the survival rate for Jews in hiding in Warsaw would have been similar to the survival rate of Jews in hiding in the Netherlands."

Wonderful speculation. Got any facts to support it?

/commentisfree/2009/oct/12/stephen-fry-auschwitz-poland

Ah yes, you would of course would be another of the Poles who nails Fry to the wall (for looking a bit Jewish and being very gay no doubt). But what did he actually say? ",and remember which side of the border Auschwitz was on," As many of us know, the Nazi Auschwitz complex was never in Poland: it was in Polish areas annexed by Nazi Germany, it was on the German side of the border. But when a homo says something which Poles can use to attack him, of course some Poles will pick up that stick and beat him with it: you certainly do.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
18 Feb 2010 #364
What credible defence has there been to the contention that Polish commies set up a gas chamber as late as 1948? Not to gas extra people, of course, just to add extra evidence. To me it seems strange because it would have been done in 1945/6 if anything.
Harry
18 Feb 2010 #365
What credible defence has there been to the contention that Polish commies set up a gas chamber as late as 1948?

I imagine that it would be the same defence as is used for the contention that all evidence of the holocaust was planted by aliens which are in the employ of the shape-shifting Rothschilds, i.e. if you want to make such a ridiculous claim, kindly provide some evidence for me to laugh at.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
18 Feb 2010 #366
Did I say that the claim was made by me or that I supported it? No, I asked you to comment on it, nothing more/nothing less. It's discussion, not defensiveness.
Harry
18 Feb 2010 #367
Did I say that the claim was made by me or that I supported it? No, I asked you to comment on it, nothing more/nothing less.

Yes I know that you personally do not make that claim. The "you" in my post was directed at whoever would make such a stupid claim.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
18 Feb 2010 #368
Well, Irving made it apparently based on solid evidence. I found it weird to say the least but there we go. However, he cogently has a go at many conventional stats.
Harry
18 Feb 2010 #369
Well, Irving made it apparently based on solid evidence.

Irving is the excuse for a human who described Poland in 2007 as follows:
"present-day Poland sucks; filthy, primitive, dirty, hopeless, no sense of pride."
fpp.co.uk/docs/Irving/RadDi/2007/030307.html
(This was after he had visited Warsaw and Krakow!) So there is very little point in placing any reliance at all in his 'observations'.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
18 Feb 2010 #370
I think he is a closet Hitler supporter. To say that we shouldn't have intervened is plainly wrong. That showed a total lack of consideration for Poland.
Ironside 50 | 10,910
18 Feb 2010 #371
I think he is a closet Hitler supporter.

Maybe , nevertheless I think that he thick ignorant with delusion of grandeur.
Harry
18 Feb 2010 #372
Irving is many things but ignorant isn't one of them. Unfortunately he very much abuses the knowledge he has.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
19 Feb 2010 #373
It's easy to slander a man but let's face it, nobody here could stand up to him in a debate. He's been around the block and has trawled all the major archives. He would wipe the floor with anyone here which means that his views hold precedence over anyone here. He is streets ahead in a research sense.
Harry
19 Feb 2010 #374
He would wipe the floor with anyone here which means that his views hold precedence over anyone here. He is streets ahead in a research sense.

Having read his views on my own neighbourhood, I know he's full of **** about it. There are also a couple of things which I've seen for myself that he denies even exist, so I know he's lying about them too. Would be quite amusing to show slides of photos which show him to be a liar. But most people already know he is.

If you fancy a really good laugh, read his Radical's Diary account of his last trip to Poland and then go to those places yourself. I know the British expert who acted as his guide here and the verdict is very much that Irving is a complete prick who looks for evidence to back the decision he's already made about what happened.
King Sobieski 2 | 716
19 Feb 2010 #375
How's life bashing Lebs Dan?

all aussies are leb bashers?
Harry
19 Feb 2010 #376
Of course not. Not all Aussies are racist but some are: Dan is one of the racists, a fact shown by the way he uses racist slurs aimed at posters here.
King Sobieski 2 | 716
20 Feb 2010 #377
yeah, there are racists in every country and closet.

unfortunately, the lebanese immigrants in australia are what turkish immigrants are to europe. but thats off topic, so carry on.
Marek11111 9 | 816
20 Feb 2010 #378
Harry, Harry, Harry here you go again accusing people of lying you are example of ignorant instigator and a liar
Harry
20 Feb 2010 #379
And yet again you call me a liar but as always you can not give even a single one of the supposed lies. You are utterly pathetic.
jonni 16 | 2,485
20 Feb 2010 #380
It's easy to slander a man but let's face it, nobody here could stand up to him in a debate. He's been around the block and has trawled all the major archives. He would wipe the floor with anyone here which means that his views hold precedence over anyone here. He is streets ahead in a research sense.

The problem is that not only does he have no academic credentials, but his 'research' is deeply selective and carried out with the sole purpose of advancing his ideology. He's quite good at bombarding people with information with the aim of bamboozling them, but his arguments don't stand up to either logical reasoning or impartial examination. As various court cases have proven.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
20 Feb 2010 #381
Still, I stand by my statement. There is nobody here who has the depth of research that he has. It's his life's work.
Orzelbialy - | 17
21 Feb 2010 #382
Alright Harry I'm not going to lam bast you with insults as I'm sure many people have done that already and it serves no purpose. First off I'd just like to remind you that just as many Poles went to the concentration camps to be shot, gassed or torched alive as Jews were and many of those concentration camps you named off were filled with Polish children, who were then butchered because they could not be Germanised. Your main point seems to be that the concentration camps were still being run up until 1946 and 1947. Well those camps were being run by the communists whom had arrived in 1945, a government which was imposed on the Polish people and run by collaborators, all of whom are now called traitors in Poland.This was also allowed to happen through the western betrayal might I add when the British and Americans sold Poland out at Yalta. The camps were there to intern "questionable" elements such as many Polish nationalists, Jews and Germans that could have opposed this government and were guarded by Russian soldiers. If there were deaths there, they would have been minimal, such minuscule numbers compared to the death factories the Germans were running. Finally if you still blame the Polish people for those deaths and you want to hold them accountable for the murders done by an imposed government then I want to hold you accountable for the entire Genocide of the Native Americans, the imposing of dictators around the world and the dropping of the nuclear bomb on the Japanese if your American. If your British I want you to be held accountable for the enslavement of millions of Africans, the slaughter and colonization of the Indians, the Bombing of Dresden, the deportation of the Acadians and the list goes on. You simply cant label whole peoples murders'.
1jola 14 | 1,879
18 Jun 2010 #383
Thread attached on merging:
"Polish concentration camp" headlines enrage NYPD cop

Big Apple cop Stefan Komar, son of Polish immigrants, wants the prestigious newspaper to publish a correction, apologize and promise that it will not continue to use the expression "Polish concentration camps" when referring to Auschwitz and other WW II Nazi German camps in Poland.

The policeman also wants to persuade advertisers to withdraw ads from the Wall Street Journal if the newspaper does not meet the request.

The expression "Polish concentration camp" referring to a Nazi concentration camp in Poland was used in an article published in Wall Street Journal on 14 May.

thenews/international/artykul133723_polish-concentration-camp-headlines-enrage-nypd-cop.html

Well, we know the argument, and we are looking forward to reading in the Wall Street Journal about the "American terrorist act" when referring to 9/11.

Good man, officer Komar. We salute you from Poland.

Will this issue never go away? My take on this is that one major publication needs to be sued. Is there any precendent for that?
Matowy - | 295
18 Jun 2010 #384
What's the problem? Those camps were located in Poland. Calling them Polish concentration camps leaves a little room for misinterpretation (linguistically), but everyone knows who they were managed by.
vetala - | 382
18 Jun 2010 #385
I also don't see what the fuss is. I've seen much more insulting and misleading things in the press. But if so many people are bothered by it then I guess it would be better to be more careful.
Rogalski 5 | 94
18 Jun 2010 #386
Calling them Polish concentration camps leaves a little room for misinterpretation (linguistically),

I would agree with Jola on this one and would support having not only the accurate but also the politically correct label of "Nazi death camps in Poland."
ender 5 | 398
18 Jun 2010 #387
Yeah man?! What's the fuss about?

but everyone knows who they were managed by

Calling them Polish concentration camps leaves

no room in brain for other thoughts.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
18 Jun 2010 #388
I also don't see what the fuss is

I'll briefly explain; I've had conversations with people who don't know anything about WWII and a few believed that Poles were the Nazis. That affects innocent Poles who are considered the bad guys.

Unfortunately, image is considered reality. Hope this helps.
Matowy - | 295
18 Jun 2010 #389
I'll briefly explain; I've had conversations with people who don't know anything about WWII

Then you shouldn't waste your time talking to such people. It would take a massive effort of being willfully ignorant to not know anything about the largest war the world has ever seen. I don't see the point in adjusting something just to cater to the dumbest possible people. People like that need a lot more than some phrase changes to get some sense knocked into them.

That affects innocent Poles who are considered the bad guys.

There are no "bad guys" anymore. WWII is over, Nazism is dead, that's it. Anyone who thinks otherwise isn't going to be dissuaded by calling Polish concentration camps "Concentration camps located in Poland".
vetala - | 382
18 Jun 2010 #390
ender
Dear God, what is this?... Ok, now I get your point.

ZIMMY
Just changing the wording won't change people's misconceptions, something more is needed.


Home / History / "Poland's Concentration Camp" ??
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.