The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
User: Guest

Posts by Pan Kazimierz  

Joined: 4 Jul 2009 / Male ♂
Last Post: 12 Sep 2009
Threads: 1
Posts: Total: 195 / Live: 31 / Archived: 164
From: PL, Rzeszów
Speaks Polish?: Si, por supuesto.

Displayed posts: 32 / page 1 of 2
sort: Latest first   Oldest first   |
Pan Kazimierz   
17 Aug 2009
Life / Why are Poles in other countries called "Plastic Poles"? [168]

Poland contains the greater part of my family history. Would it be odd for me to have some interest in it?


Not always. Poor people are more likely to get caught and go to jail. Ever hear of white collar crime? There's plenty of it.

Just not quite as much as 'blue-collar' crime.
Pan Kazimierz   
16 Aug 2009
Life / Why are Poles in other countries called "Plastic Poles"? [168]

Respect is earned, not bought, lol?

That's because it's the poor who are more likely to commit crimes. Reason being: they're poor. Stealing and selling drugs just doesn't make sense when you're rich.

About "teacher's pets", I don't recall any correlation with money as opposed to things like 'desire to learn', 'willingness to work', etc. And the people (like myself) who could get away with stuff that most others could not were just the charismatic ones.

Also, you don't choose the place of your birth. Why would you be proud of something that you didn't do? You could be proud because you choose to live like and belong to a certain people, but just because you were born within their borders, or your ancestors of some sort were? Particularly if you don't even speak the language.
Pan Kazimierz   
15 Aug 2009
Life / Is it me or do any guys in Poland not have shaved heads? [113]

It is fashion here, isn't there something about if you shave your hair it grows back thicker and stronger?

There is, but it's actually been found an urban legend, much to the disappointment of many frustrated teenagers hoping to develop their facial hair ahead of time through such means.

shaved heads are really some of 98-99, get on with the times people! having some sense of fashion does not mean you are per se gay.

Fashion, what?

I can see absolutely no sense in a man's having long hair. I thought I did, when I was a kid, but then I joined a wrestling team, got my hair cut, and discovered how much more convenient (and manly) this was. Haven't grown it out since. Just give it a buzz and a slightly shorter buzz on the sides and trim sideburns and back, and done, which takes about ten minutes to do (including cleaning up) in my own house, at my own convenience, every few weeks. I can feel refreshing breeze on my head, I don't sweat so much, easy to wash, easy to dry, easy to style (i.e. no need to style).

I recall such problems of long hair: captured and increased sweat/stank, would get in the eyes and ears and be really annoying, heat, pain to wash, had to use this ridiculous device called a comb to straighten it, if any of you have ever seen one (I believe they're regular accessories of women's purses), had to have it cut by some other person who liked to give their lame and unwanted opinion on ridiculously trivial matters for money (which required, worse, waiting in the building for excessive lengths of time first), and of course required ridiculous effort to wash and dry. Plus, shaggy/unkempt look... how many male politicians do you see with long hair in modern democracies? Why do you think this might be? Final ruling: no advantage whatsoever over shorter hair.

Also, harp all you want about people with short hair trying to 'look tough' (which works); if a man instead wears long hair, despite its many inconveniences, I can only see two reasons: either they're rather chubby people, which long hair does help to hide (really, that works), or they're trying to 'look sensitive', in which case likely they're either afraid to actually let girls find this out by actually talking to them, or they're maybe not looking for girls in the first place.

Or maybe they actually like the Middle Age Peasant look, I'm not sure. I guess I did too, when I was a kid.
Pan Kazimierz   
13 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

Haha, okay.

Crow, I think I'd honestly much rather see Poland in a formal union with Germany than with the rest of the Slavic world... does that make me a traitor?
Pan Kazimierz   
12 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

The Poles will continue to speak Polish/the Germans will continue to speak German and the officials will have to use both....from bilingual kindergartens onwards etc...:)

Our education system/s could more than handle such a mandate.
Too bad the politicians, at least the existing ones, would never go for the idea. I honestly think it could be awesome...
(sorry, Crow!)
Pan Kazimierz   
12 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

I told you...Germany and Poland just should merge!
We would be the coolest country in Europe!

That's probably quite true. We could put the capitol in Silesia for major awesome. But wait... what language?
Pan Kazimierz   
8 Aug 2009
Life / Polish/European Guitar Tabs Site? [8]

A few months ago, I returned from the States, where I'd spent a few years in college, etc. During my time there, I picked up the hobby of playing guitar, which is something that I enjoy doing and, I think, also do rather way.

Now, this was made easier and more fun due to the presence of the website, which contains an extensive list of tabs of songs submitted by the common folk available easily and for free.

One thing I have come to notice about this site, however, is that it tends to be lacking in non-English songs, particularly of the not-world-famous variety. Is there a Polish/European equivalent to this site, is it free, and, of course, where can I find it?

Thanks in advance.
Pan Kazimierz   
8 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

What the hell are you on about, he was one of the best mediators we have had in history. Once again you talk complete twaddle. You'd do well to read a little bit about the man before you call him a drunk.

Indeed, we honor him now with his initials upon our toilets.
Though I can't see how this is related to him being a drunk - i.e. someone who frequently drinks (alcoholic beverages) to excess.
Pan Kazimierz   
8 Aug 2009
News / Is NORD STREAM dangerous for Poland's natural enviroment? [372]

Very nice - environmentally friendly, North Africa's additional water supply, and Russian-free. What else can you ask for? Go for it, Germany - good job :)


And, exotic life-forms be damned, imo. Would anyone here complain about the extinction of mosquitoes, Rachel Carson and PETA* excluded? Now consider that other obscure species, while far less annoying, are also quite useless in regards to the economy and the betterment of human lives.

The only marine life of the Baltic that I particularly care for, is the kind that can be fished en masse. And maybe some dolphins.
Pan Kazimierz   
8 Aug 2009
History / Does Poland deserve credit for the 1989 Revolution? [87]

Well, I of course exclude the common citizen of Europe/US, since they have little say in what goes on in the world, anyway. Heads of state around the world probably don't (yet) see Poland as powerless or useless... just extremely annoying.
Pan Kazimierz   
7 Aug 2009
History / Does Poland deserve credit for the 1989 Revolution? [87]

It backfires...that's for sure!

No, it works pretty well. Like the poodle dog, Poland is acquiring the association with being powerless, completely useless, and extremely annoying.
Pan Kazimierz   
7 Aug 2009
History / Does Poland deserve credit for the 1989 Revolution? [87]

But it is in no way true that the Germans or the german government had any influence about that.

Hell, I'm not blaming Germans... I, personally, blame the US education system.

I don't think so..we can actually communicate with each knowledge etc.

I don't, either. I don't think I'm typical of much of anything.

Borrka has only anti-german platitudes for himself...

It's in my view again a very polish thing to blame Germany for everything...THAT is typical polish!

I do, however, think my father's pretty typical, politically, as those who grew up in Warsaw in the 50's and 60's go, and he spends significant time complaining about how Poland should be more like Germany.

Who is obsessed here?

Yeah, well. The people running the country right now are not very smart and have not yet realized that, for Poland, any publicity is good publicity except for self-induced publicity. They got it backwards, and are trying their hardest to ensure that Poland brings up the image of a harmless, innocent, extremely yappy and brain-dead Poodle dog.
Pan Kazimierz   
7 Aug 2009
History / Does Poland deserve credit for the 1989 Revolution? [87]

You are a typical Pole Borrka

Am I a typical Pole, BB?

I recall that it did appear in the States (everyone knows, I think how wonderful their primary schooling is), people seemed to think the Berlin Wall falling was the single event that led to the downfall of the USSR or something. All kinds of strange and ridiculous notions about the whole deal, from my (superior, and better-educated) perspective.

But I do also recall a dinner-table conversation with the father of a Brazilian friend of mine (all immigrants, they liked to speak Portugese around the house), who actually knew a great deal about Wałesa and Solidarity and the like. He even mentioned that as a youth, they held Solidarity marches throughout the streets of Brazil (for they had their own dictatorship to protest at the time), complete with Polish flags!

Quite intelligent folks, too (the man's son could beat me in chess... that is -highly- unusual... we had the same mentor), yet, thoroughly surprised and skeptical when I informed them that I was not, in fact, Jewish. =/
Pan Kazimierz   
7 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

Tell your father that the Nazis were a dead end for everybody (hindsight).
It was a "damned if you do/damned if you don't" situation more or less (hindsight of course).

Man, I tell him all this... he insists that together, our two countries could have conquered the world... without the Enigma thing and the resistance and the British suck and all that.

I suppose it's quite fair to say I get my stubbornness from him. =/
Also, he's quite the germanophile/russophobe...

Okay....but I rarely see a honest debate about the not-so-cool points in polish history (or if than not without much white washing).

I try. Except when it comes to the thing with 'Germany couldn't have trashed Poland by herself' thing; then, I just be obnoxious enough to turn nearby Germans/psuedo-Germans (lots of those in the States; call themselves German, but never been, and don't speak the language, dine on the cuisine, etc.) from smug to angry.

Whereas nearly no week goes by without some thread about WWII and how saintly Poland was betrayed by everybody and his grandmom..

I'm actually no happier about that than you are. I came here for the modern-day politics, not the ancient history. I figure I already know about as much about the history as I'll ever feel a need to.

Not "they managed to pay them back not quite three years ago": "which it was agreed that they would pay back over a 50-year period which ended in 2005". Although at least your latest version is an improvement on your first version....

Both are correct.

No they didn't.

Yes they did. When they invaded and took Cieszyn some time back. If we're going to bring forth such an effort to point out the darker side of Polish history, we can at least hold everyone else to the same standards. The Czechs are no victims here, and they certainly were not betrayed. One can only betray an ally.
Pan Kazimierz   
6 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

Read a little about the death camps, you may learn something.

I probably would. Such tends to happen when I read things.
The subject does not particularly interest me, however.

If you bothered learning a little about history you would look less foolish: the loans were supposed to have been paid back over a 50-year period starting in 1945. With mutually accepted deferment, the final payment of $83.3 million (£42.5 million) due on 31 December 2006, it was made on 29 December 2006, i.e. ahead of schedule.

Right, so as I said... they managed to pay them back not quite three years ago. I did not say that they were behind schedule, or less than two whole days ahead of schedule.

The rest are all "what if's" again! :)

I don't see it as a 'what if' that Poland trashed the Red Army. :)

Noped...nothing was carved in stone.
Foolish polish diplomacy is much to blame for Polands fate.

We can say this with the benefit of hindsight (or, in the case of WWII, we can't say this at all, not even with hindsight).

As a side note, my father agrees with you. If someone mentions WWII (for his neighbors in the States are Germans), he launches into a tirade on how Poland should have joined Hitler and trashed the Soviets again and whatnot (oh, wait... on second thought, I'm not sure that he mentions this around the neighbors so much...). So that much for children voting as their parents... but, wait! My views of the States politics while studying there more or less equated his. Whoops.

You only whine if Poland is on the receiving end. Your country wasn't always a blessing to it's neighbours either...get a grip man!

I never said it was. However, we are here discussing WWII.
Also, why would I whine about my country not being on the receiving end? That doesn't even make sense! :)

Poland was a small bully (who greatly overestimated itself) who got trashed by a bigger bully...nothing what not had happened to most countries now and then in the past too.

I maintain that it was trashed not by a bigger bully but by multiple smaller bullies. Hah!

Your "terrible neighbor" was also often enough weak and only the battlefield for foreign armies in it's history.

At which time it was still not much beneficial to Poland, so...

Ever heard of the thirty years war in Germany?


We lost percentual more people than Poland during WWII.


And weren't Poles with Napoleons army invading Russia ???

Indeed (officer who's name and rank I have no rememberence of because he was French) even ordered his sentinels to borrow the uniforms of sleeping Polish soldiers "to keep the Cossaks at a safe distance". :)

That's Europe...get over it!

I am not complaining. Merely noting disagreement with your points.

Ask the Czechs: Poland invaded them when they failed at diplomacy.

They started it.
Pan Kazimierz   
6 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

It was never about you as the people but about the power structure in Europe.
Just a pawn...

Just a pawn... which defeated the Red Army and hounded them back into Russia where they belong. Which also quite rightly should have just gone ahead and slammed the Great and Glorious nation of Germany (around which political Europe wholly revolves) when they had finished the same, instead of waiting for confirmation that it was beyond doubt the right thing to do.

Perhaps you'd like to talk about how that was Poland's mistake? Instead of it being 'not sucking up to Germany or Russia', it was 'not just booting the Germans in the rear while they had the chance'? What do you think Germany would have been able to do about it, say, 1934?

Poland was doomed to be the battlefield (since they didn't ally with either of them)...

Poland was always doomed to the battlefield: it contains little in terms of geographical barriers, it's in the geographical center of Europe, and, not of little importance, terrible neighbors.
Pan Kazimierz   
6 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

That wasn't the question.
The "What if" you brought on was if Germany could have gotten away with it if they had been content with Poland, not about their economy.

We moved on to 'you think Germany would have won the war if not for invading the USSR?', to which you replied, enthusiastically, that of course it would. Since they'd already been at war for so long then, and with nobody on the other side showing any signs of backing down while Germany's money, which makes war and troops and the like a possibility, went to the incinerators, the question becomes 'could Germany, economy failing and troops and people exhausted, have defeated Great Britain and the US, with only the help of Japan?' your "What if" there would be no further war..not with GB nor with Russia and everything points to that if Germany had sat quietly on Poland alone and had left the other powers to their own nothing else would had happened than just lot's of exchange of diplomatical niceties.

Because they saw Germany as the one real threat to their european balance?
Why do you think Britain didn't declare war to the Russians too (who also invaded Poland)?

Face it, this all has nothing to do with the cuddly Poles but everything with tough european power games.

You'll note that GB entered a state of war with Germany because of and immediately after they invaded Poland???
I mean, come on, it's kind of hard to see how you don't realize that this sort of blows your whole argument straight out of the water.

No they wouldn't have if GB hadn't lobbied for years...

Which A) GB certainly would have, since they were at war and needed/wanted help, B) they would have anyway, after having been provoked by Japan blowing up almost all of their entire navy.

The death camps were not slave labour camps and always cost money.

Sadder yet is that they couldn't get camps that exercised both slave labor and mass killings to still be able to support themselves economically.

Yes they have.

Oh, excuse me. "Which, incidentally, they just managed to pay back not quite three years ago."
Pan Kazimierz   
6 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

Many soviets have died defending Poland from fascists.

Defending, indeed.
How does 'joining the fascists in invading Poland after an agreement to divide the country between them and not to attack each other' count as 'defending Poland from the fascists', again?

Shame more of them didn't die during the course of this highly benevolent and unselfish defense of their neighbor!
Pan Kazimierz   
6 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]


Ridiculous. German economy, at first thriving from temporary morale vibe/work ethic renewal, was burned just as fast by silly Nazis who thought that their economy, and their army, was quite as invincible as DC Superman. Hell, they even stopped turning profits in their death camps! How does one lose money on slave labor???

The British, on the other hand, were happily enjoying plentiful hand-outs from the US long before 1942. Which, incidentally, they still haven't paid back...

The phony war of the Frenchies and the Brits would had gone on for veeeeery long.

Only as long as the German economy could sustain it. In this case, not very long at all.

Maybe some years later after Germany had reincorporated the disputed territories back into Germany (plus some more) Berlin would had come to an agreement with London and Paris (maybe that Hitler had promised not to attack them)

I think perhaps your timeline is a little... different... from the rest of ours. What year, again, did Germany attack the USSR? After invading France, wasn't it? Which they did after France attacked them, didn't they?

or such but I'm fairly sure that nobody else would had risked anything just for Poland...history proves me right....

History proves no such thing. If you were even remotely correct, why did Hitler's attempts to negotiate with Britain fail in 1940? Why did Britain even enter the war in the first place?!

PS: Japan would had nothing to do with the european theater

This doesn't exactly help your point any. very probably wouldn't had the US (as GB wouldn't bring them in)

They would, and they did. Japan's attacking them was all that was needed to tip the scales and send them in all the way.

Note that the US at this time was not a military power by any stretch... they basically built a military from the ground-up (as did Britain) and still clobbered Nazi Germany and her ally Japan at the same time with it! I think perhaps Germany was not quite so strong as they at first thought (and apparently as you still do...).

Please list the help which Britain could have provided and failed to provide.

Ugh... no...
I was referring to Bratwurst's statement.
I, on the other hand, claimed no such thing.

Poland was foolish in believing that the help Britain could provide would have been enough to enable Poland to fight off the Germans.

Arguably not. I still like to poke fun at the Germans by claiming that they could have, but for the Russians...

Pilsudzki had one thing in common with Hitler - camps.

One camp, actually.
Pan Kazimierz   
6 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

Please list the help which was promised in the relevant treaty and was not provided by Britain.

I cannot and will not do that. Nor was I implying (this time) that Britain did not provide all required help to the best of her ability. This was a response to BB's "fully trusting far away countries to pull their nuts out of the fire if pushes came to shove" quote outlining how what happened to Poland in WWII was her fault, and implying that Poland was foolish in believing that Britain would provide Poland with all the help within their power.

But Germany would had gotten away with it if they had been content with Poland.

Oh, you think so?
You really think that Germany, with the help of mini-island-nation-Japan-that-couldn't-take-on-half-of-the-US-navy-aft er-almost-all-of-it-was-destroyed-by-a-single-air-strike would have won the war if not for having attacked the USSR?

It's 60+ years now, most of Europe has moved on and reconciliated and nobody owes Poland a thing!

I agree, and also that Poland owes nobody a thing. Except for rightful heirs to lost property which may indeed obtain it after going through the courts to prove right of inheritance, no matter how difficult and paper-choked that trail may be.
Pan Kazimierz   
6 Aug 2009
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]

Although the backstab of your southern neighbours was also a good one (joining in the 1938 invasion of Czechoslovakia).

That may not be justified because of the small portion of lands took that were not part of Cieszyn, but I still wouldn't call it a backstab. More like a back-bite.

Poland made a grave error and they paid dearly for it.
Spitting at their big, angry neighbours, fully trusting far away countries to pull their nuts out of the fire if pushes came to shove...that's all to it, really!

Oh, so now you're going to be self-righteous about WWII, because Poland didn't treat you right! This gave me a good laugh, indeed.

You are correct: Poland did not follow the policy of appeasement which had already been known to fail with (the nutcase) Hitler.
And this fully justifies the actions of your country gone mad in killing over five million Polish residents in a most brutal fashion. Wholesale slaughter of civilians and destruction of civilian property is quite okay for members of a country that wasn't given by its neighbor all the land they demanded from it first.

Poland made a choice between an ally they knew would rob them and an ally they could be confident would not. They chose the latter.

To any naiive enough to believe that Poland would have been better off giving Hitler what he wanted and joining his cause, my father included, I laugh. See how that worked for the USSR.

Poland had every reason to believe France and Britain would help them in event of an invasion. Treaties were signed to quite that effect, with no unambiguous terms.

One bully invading another country about disputed lands.
The bigger bully get's away with it usually..

In principle, it's very different to that. 'Disputed lands' did not include the whole of pre-1939 Poland. And -none of- those lands that were 'disputed', were not taken by Poland militarily while Germany was busy at war with the Red Army.

Would diplomacy had worked? Why not.

Because it had been well shown that diplomacy would not work with Hitler, who had already been given much land by the Powers in exchange for the promise that his attempts at expansion would cease completely. They didn't, so diplomacy was abandoned.

Ever heard of the polish-soviet war before? Of the invasion of Czechoslovakia??? How do you think the Poles did it???

Vodka. XD
Pan Kazimierz   
12 Jul 2009
History / Polish hatred towards Jews... [1290]

I met poles everywhere us,uk, germany, sweden, austria, iceland, singapore, poland everywhere and I had bad experience with the poles. There are other east europeans also but I must say that Poles are the worst people I ever met in my life.I think this has something to do with their culture and education. They are taught to hate non whites and jews. Polish should respect jews, they have given a lot to the mankind.
A community of 14 million that has won 180 nobel prizes. Great. I salute this jewish community. May God bless the jews . What have the poles achieved apart from Madam Curie?Poles should be shameful. They are always spreading the hate message against jews and hating them.

Hmm. Well, I guess - if only all ignorant, bigoted, hypocritical racist twits were as easy to cure as that. Good for you, I suppose?
Pan Kazimierz   
12 Jul 2009
History / Polish weapons and militaria - got any? [153]

A friend of mine has a beautiful Polish army rifle from 1939.

Like many weapons of the type, it has never been fired but was dropped once.

You sure you're thinking 'Polish'? Sounds Western to me. Because, y'know, I don't recall having heard much about Poland's unwillingness to fight.

My father's got my great-grandfather's old saber apparently from the Polish-Soviet war in his basement... or rather, the blade, since it was broken off at the hilt during use.

Not sure if it counts, but I've been trying to obtain a 1996 Mini-Beryl, for... sporting purposes. Legally, which is the hard part. =/
Pan Kazimierz   
12 Jul 2009

Without german help it wouldn't had been published in the first place...

Should've seen that coming. The question in question (lolz) was in response to another statement... ah, f*ck, another question, implying that if Poland wants to claim that Copernicus was Polish, they should take responsibility for the 'outrageous way he was treated', or something like that. This is my way of showing that original said question makes a poor argument, since it's never been applied the other way around, either, and makes certain connections that should not exist, besides the lack of existence of said 'outrageous treatment'.
Pan Kazimierz   
12 Jul 2009

Why did the German ruling class not protect his work? How does this constitute 'outrageous treatment of Copernicus', especially given that it happened sixty years after the man's death? Why should Poland accept responsibility?
Pan Kazimierz   
6 Jul 2009
History / Polish hatred towards Jews... [1290]

Apologies, I thought you were referring to a Jewish born Catholic woman who certain Poles like to talk about murdering Catholics.

Oh. Excuse my conduct, then. I'd understood that you were ducking, which ticked me off somewhat. Let us continue as gentlemen, then.

Yawn. My point was that it is not correct to call her a Jew. She had a Jewish father but herself was a Catholic.

And my point was that she was an atheist during the span of her... controversial career. I only mentioned this to point out that it was not correct to make this point, with which I agree, that she was not a Jew, by insisting that she was instead a Catholic.

If you would like to claim that all claims by Jewish Poles are for property which did not belong to them, please do so. It’ll no doubt help your acceptance by the rabidly Teraz Polska crew here for you to be seen telling obviously anti-semitic lies here. Alternatively you could try not posting lies.

I'll not try to turn the game around with the obvious "if you'd like to claim that all claims by Jews for property in Poland are made by the legal heirs" question. Instead:

In my mind, the distinction 'those Jews' implies 'Jews that are not Polish', and by extension have no claim to any aforementioned property. Otherwise, I'd describe them as and promote their indiscriminate treatment as 'those Poles', instead.

No. Cohen is British, Jewish, a polonophobe and a moron. I’m none of those things. And yes I did write to the Times to complain about that article.

Apologies, then. Obviously, you're not who I'd thought you were. Suppose I've been reading a small portion of your posts not representative of the whole, all of those being anti-Pole pretty much pro-everything else.

Perhaps it doesn't help that I think of that guy every time I see 'Kielce'.

I see. So all of the participants in the Kielce pogrom were actually Russians (or at least from the USSR). OK, keep believing in your revisionist version of history. Got any comments about the Krakow pogrom or the 118 Jews murdered in the Lublin district between the summer of 1944 and the fall of 1946? All the staged by the Soviets?

definition: pogrom:

organized persecution of an ethnic group

By said definition, Kielce was a Russian pogrom. Who organized?
Kraków: wasn't familiar with it before, but one death and four injured hardly sounds like a world-beater of anti-Semitism. Same said for Lublin... sorta. Can't seem to find evidence of organized anti-Semitism there? If your argument stops at 'There are and were people in Poland who are/were raging anti-Semitics', let me know so we can just agree, note the regrettability of this fact, and move on. If you're trying to suggest that levels of anti-Semitism in Poland are/were not only not comparatively low keeping in mind context and time but in fact unusually high, on the other hand...

You seem to have a very deep-seated desire to want to believe that all Poles are angels and never did anything wrong (apart from the Jews, and they aren’t real Poles to you anyway).

I never suggested any such thing. I am in fact entirely for the view that Polish Jews should be treated exactly as other Poles... no worse, no better, no such special significance attached to the distinction.

Rough translation: you can’t answer the question so you instead ask another question. Good debating skills there!

Rough translation: you did exactly what I did in the post you quoted. Compliment.

You name them, and I’ll find out about their tax status.

All right, let's start with the government of Israel, since they're the main ones pushing the transfer of heirless property to Jewish organizations.

You are going to fit in here! You manage to interpret armed guards taking people out of the country as a “hard military escort” and the process of stealing a person’s possessions as “financial aid”. And then you manage to describe deportations which took place in 1968 as “Stalin’s”, despite the bloke having died some 15 years previously. A stroke of sheer genius!

I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about here? I've seen nothing in my (brief) search of the topic following your assertations indicating forced exhile, or 1968 deportations. What I have seen is 'mass emigration' - not to be confused, if that's what you were referring to.

I understand that you know nothing at all about me and have been wrong in every one of your guesses so far.

Apologies, then. I seem to have remembered reading that about you somewhere, but can no see no such thing. A grave mistake on my part, sorry.

You make David Irving look like a serious respectable historian (and no doubt you think that he is one too).

Personally, the only thing I like about that clown is the fact that he served a prison sentence for his writings. Justice served well, in my opinion.

Would you mind if I answered your question with a question (bad form I know but indulge me): is that really the best you’ve got?

I'll humor the question: though I enjoy History, 'the best I've got' will more likely emerge in a topic more closely related to Political Science, a personal favorite, if you're honestly asking about my best.
Pan Kazimierz   
6 Jul 2009
History / Polish hatred towards Jews... [1290]


Perhaps you could be so kind as to provide some proof that Ms Albright murdered anybody?

Who is this Ms. Albright character? I was quite clearly referring to a Ms. Julia Brystiger:

One of her victims was a man named Szafarzynski, of the Olsztyn office of the Polish People's Party, who died after interrogation carried out by Brystygier.

Cited from source: [A. Rószkiewicz-Litwinowiczowa "Trudne decyzje. Kontrwywiad Okregu Warszawa AK 1943-1944, wiezienie 1949-1954", Panstwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, Warszawa 1991, page 106]

I didn't respond because I didn't bother reading past the first sentence. This forum already one drooling moron banging on and on and on about Serbia (and more than one who do the same about Jews): so you are not needed here. Goodbye.

This is to what is referred to as 'Ad Hominem', of which you've been accussed a number of times here. Very nice, Harry, very strong response. 'When logic and reason fail', eh?

So, I've countered a number your arguments, givin them quite the sound beating about the ears, and exposed how nonfunctional they really are in a single post. You've responded pretending not to know their content, which shows you most likely a coward, or just intellectually lazy at best, and continued with your stall with what appeared to be an attempt to change the subject. Do you really think personal insults are the best way to finish off, Harry? Do you really think you're looking any more respectable in the eyes of the other forum members after this exchange? Because you've done nothing whatsoever to counter my arguments, and I think people can see that. And calling me a moron (without even bothering to try to back the statement up, in the manner of a five-year-old child) and bringing attention to the fact that I'm new here really doesn't help as much as I think you'd like it to. Is that really the best you've got?