The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 306

The dossier of TW "Bolek" - Poland's IPN assisted by police enters the home of the late general Kiszczak


OP Ziemowit 13 | 4,343
22 Feb 2016 #151
Who was in charge of PAP then, I wonder?

Leading historians to the affair evoke it unanimously on TV, so there must be a some kind of trace for it somewhere. I doubt everyone of them followed the dispatches of the PAP agency at that time. A possible source for that may be the book by Cenckiewicz and Gontarczyk "Lech Wałęsa a SB" in which there can be a photo of this dispatch.
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
22 Feb 2016 #152
hey stand with Wałęsa

For the benefit of the johnny-come-latelies who have only read about all this, here is the an eye-witness historical lowdown:
**Already during the 1980-81 Solidarity carnival sporadic friction between the soft-on-commies seuclar left (mainly KOR-ites and non-gentiles) and the True Poles (patriotic, Catholic) faction;
'*Martial law vicitmised the entrie Solidarity-dissident camp and the differences temporarily all but disappeared;
''After freedom was won, in May 1990 Wałęsa declared his "war at the top" against the KOR/pro-KOR wing who felt he had done his thing, should be a good boy and run along off to Gdańsk so they could run things undisturbed;

**June 1992 and the fear of exposure (the SB files) united a motley collection odd bedfellows -- Soldiarity activists, KOR-ites, Social Democrats (still not called SLD), PSL (peasants), KPN (nationalists) and Catholic rightists (ZChN) in a parliamentary coup.

The pro- and anti-lustration battle lines drawn on that occasion 24 years ago have largely remained intact to this day. Those who themsleves have things to hide continue to defend Wałęsa and effectively want to have the dirt swept under the carpet. And that also explains why certain people are on which side of the barricade in the latest Wałęsa affair.
Harry
22 Feb 2016 #153
Those who themsleves have things to hide continue to defend Wałęsa and effectively want to have the dirt swept under the carpet.

That's not true, there are plenty of those who have things to hide who are leading the attacks on Walesa while praying that nobody looks at what they themselves were doing in the 1960s, '70s and '80s.

The right wing media seems to have gone absolutely beserk

Have you seen anything written at this dodgy dossier by that draft-dodger who spend decades shilling for Moscow?
mafketis 34 | 11,898
22 Feb 2016 #154
the soft-on-commies seuclar left (mainly KOR-ites and non-gentiles) and the True Poles (patriotic, Catholic)

Racist garbage. Adam Michnik is ten times the Pole you'll ever be.
G (undercover)
22 Feb 2016 #155
Adam Michnik

niezlomni.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/mich2.jpg
mafketis 34 | 11,898
22 Feb 2016 #156
how long were you interred for, mr bigshot?
Dougpol1 32 | 2,673
22 Feb 2016 #157
only hardcore commies defend walesa,those who were with him back then,regard him as traitor.

Walesa a traitor? Grow up boy.

All the others were cowering and frightened, while Walesa and his ilk actually acted, and acted without fear for their own skins.

And what about the Kiszcaks of this world? Him and the general were Russians in disguise. If they had been British they would have been lucky to escape execution, and that's an absolute given.
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
22 Feb 2016 #158
ten times the Pole

That's not my terminology, that's what they were called: Prawdziwi Polacy and lewica laicka. Ask anyone who was there. I interviewed Seweryn Jaworski who represneted the Polish patriotic wing of "S" at Huta Warszawa and togetehr with steelworkers workers resented the KOR-ites trying to hijack the "S" movement. So dont' kill the messenger!

Walesa a traitor?

The largest segment of Poles believe Wałęsa had been a secret police informer. When pollster IBRIS asked people about it, 38% said they believe he was, 28% ruled out that possibiltiy and over 33% didn't know or had no opinion.

zdania.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
22 Feb 2016 #159
When pollster IBRIS asked people about it, 38% said they believe he was, 28% ruled out that possibiltiy and over 33% didn't know or had no opinion.

So in other words, more than half of Poles don't believe that he was an informer.
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
22 Feb 2016 #160
the official party lin

Please don't confuse me with the horse-blinkered tag team who spout the same old Michnikite-Petru-KOK BS like a broken record. I call the shots as I see them and defecate on party lines on principle.

half of Poles

Must be Delphian maths in which when something increases it's in decline, and 28% is more than half. Any other pseudo-science you have created?
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
22 Feb 2016 #161
Counting isn't your strong point, is it?

28% ruled out that possibiltiy and over 33% didn't know or had no opinion.

28% + 33% = 61% of Poles don't believe that he was an informer. 38% believe that he was. So 3 out of 5 Poles surveyed don't believe that he was an informer, which shows that the government propaganda simply isn't working.
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
22 Feb 2016 #162
33%

Don't know or have no opinion = undecided. You get that in every poll. They are the opinionless ones who shrink form saying for or agaisnt, yes or now. Unless there is also a unique highly subjective Delphine version of sociology where the "don't knows" are added to the option Delph happens to support. You coudl just as well have added them to those who believe W was an informer.

more details on it?

In fact I happened to be on duty at the time and it was a big story. You don't often get the president of a country admitting something like that and then reconsidering and forcing PAP to withdraw it.

When Macierewicz had implemented a Sejm resolution to open SB files, Wałęsa sent a statement to PAP to the effect that in 1970 he had signed "three or four documetns. I probabyl would have signed everything except betraying God and homeland to get out of there and be able to fight. I was never broken and never betrayed by ideals or mates." But he quickly had the statement withdrawn, mounted a motley back-room conspiracy of strange poltical bedfellows and proceeded to overthrow the Olszewski government. The rest if history! The interesting thign is that the battle-lines drawn up at the time have survived almost intact down to the present:

wiadomosci.wp.pl/kat,1041267,title,Lech-Walesa-niewolnik-Bolka,wid,18175293,wiadomosc.html
Harry
22 Feb 2016 #163
Don't know or have no opinion = undecided.

So they have not decided that Walesa was an informer. Glad we have that sorted out.

In fact I happened to be on duty at the time and it was a big story.

Might one inquire who you were working for at the time?
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
22 Feb 2016 #164
interests dovetail

The best example was 1992 and the overthrow of the Olszewski govt. Wałęsa huddled with his Soldiarirty mates, ex-PZPR types, right-wing Catholics, Polish nationalists, Jewish agnostics from KOR and peasant activists and conspired in a backroom to overthrow the government. Those strange bedfellow all had something to hide and wanted to prevent the opening of commie-era police files at all costs.
mafketis 34 | 11,898
22 Feb 2016 #165
the overthrow of the Olszewski govt

"Overthrow" is a strong word for talking about the dissolution of a famously inept and lost minority government...
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
22 Feb 2016 #167
"Overthrow" is a strong word for talking about the dissolution of a famously inept and lost minority government...

It's also worth pointing out that the government in question only had what - 133 votes or so? It wasn't as if it was a strong government that was forced out of power - it was a weak government that simply couldn't survive.

Wałęsa huddled with his Soldiarirty mates, ex-PZPR types, right-wing Catholics, Polish nationalists, Jewish agnostics from KOR and peasant activists and conspired in a backroom to overthrow the government.

Sounds like to me that a broad selection of Polish society was against a weak and unpopular minority government.

The situation was frankly ridiculous then. The two biggest parties (Mazowiecki's Freedom Union and Kwasniewski's SLD) were openly against the government, the Sejm was forcing Olszewski to stay as Prime Minister against his will - all in all, it was a deeply unpopular and weak government.

There's a good article here that sums it all up nicely - countrystudies.us/poland/68.htm

The outgoing government launched unprecedented personal attacks on Walesa, accusing him of presiding over the recommunization of Poland.

Sound familiar?

Just found this cracking little statement.

books.google.pl/books?id=4NRV6PHi7ogC&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=olszewski+government&source=bl&ots=iLu5J0lUPg&sig=Ls5dGh_cKjEU_n4Bi3aMgT-Tnfw&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=olszewski%20government&f=false

Although Olszewski was a PC member, with his Premiership and fight with Wałęsa engineered by the party leader, Kaczyński, in practice, the party had little influence over him and frequently criticized and distanced itself from the government

As I've said before, Kaczyński was playing all sorts of games then. He pretends to be a huge supporter of Olszewski's government, but in reality, he wasn't. If he genuinely was supported by Kaczyński, then he wouldn't have left PC (Centre Agreement) after the fall of his government.
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
22 Feb 2016 #168
recommunization of Poland.

Not a broad section fo society but a motley collection of tinhorn politicians sh*itting bricks in fear of what the police files would expose them for.

Recommunsation? Indeed, that's what happened next. The ex-commies created a govt the following year and in 1995 a PZPR Central Committee member became president. People around the globe thought Poles should have their heads examined. Voting commies into office a mere four years after toppling communism!?
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
22 Feb 2016 #169
Quite understandable. The SLD had worked quietly and efficiently throughout the centre-right mess of 1991-1993, and unlike other parties (including Mazowiecki's Freedom Union) - they hadn't suffered defections and splits in the party. They took advantage of the in-fighting with the right wing parties to win the 1993 election, and then Kwasniewski simply outworked Wałęsa in 1995.

The Polish right wing's obsession with historical injustices is what causes it to enjoy brief successes followed by everyone remembering exactly why they voted them out last time.
dolnoslask
22 Feb 2016 #170
" sh*itting bricks in fear of what the police files would l expose" I **** bricks for the fear of the harm that these selective outings of people who were forced into a hard place , to have to sign the piece of paper otherwise you and your family will suffer, the legacy of this soviet tyranny is going to hang over Poland for years, many will use these expose's to harm their own brothers, I hate it with all my heart, enough of this horrible legacy.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
22 Feb 2016 #171
Couldn't agree more. It's heartbreaking to watch Poland tear itself apart over this stuff - instead of treating Wałęsa as a national treasure that the world knows and respects, we're hell bent on finishing the job for the Soviets instead. Putin must be laughing his head off.
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
22 Feb 2016 #172
Kaczyński

The Kaczyńskis masterminded the Wałęsa presidency. It was Wałęsa's 1992 folly that caused the estrangement. Too bad because if Wałęsa had fessed up and others did as well, Poland might have had genuine lustration and be done with it. Instead we've got the anomaly of a Polish Catholic trade-union activist in bed with agnostic, non-gentile big city intellectuals, bankers and foreign-interest groups. The only cement holding that motley gang together is fear of exposure and hatred towards those demanding historical truth. A very sick situation to say the least!
dolnoslask
22 Feb 2016 #173
Delp " hell bent on finishing the job for the Soviets instead. Putin must be laughing his head off." on this I completely agree with you.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
22 Feb 2016 #174
It was Wałęsa's 1992 folly that caused the estrangement

Blimey, that's a nice bit of revisionism. Actually, the twins were thrown out of Wałęsa's chancellery a few months after the 1990 Presidential election for their behaviour. Jarosław was playing games as soon as he got a taste of power under Wałęsa, and he was dismissed as Wałesa's Chief of Staff at the end of October 1991. Furthermore, Lech Kaczyński was removed as Minister of State at the same time.

Olszewski didn't become Prime Minister until December 1991, and lost the vote of confidence in June 1992. Both these events date from after Jaroslaw's removal as Chief of Staff.

The real question is : why was Jarosław playing games with Olszewski's government? Was it solely because, just like Marcinkiewicz, he refused to accept Jaroslaw holding all the real power?
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
22 Feb 2016 #175
revisionism

Your revisionism is glossing over the May 1992 coup, the only such assault in free Poland. It was then that the final battle lines were drawn up with true patriots the Kacyzńskis, Macierewicz, Gwiazda, Walentynowicz, Wyszkowski and others on the patriotic side of the barricade opposed by Wałęsa's nocturnal plotters. Normayll Catholic patriot Wałęsa had far more in common with the first group than with ex-commies and leftist Jewish agnostics but for one thing: fear of exposure. That wholly extraneous factor has skewed the Polish political scene ever since.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
22 Feb 2016 #176
Your revisonism is glossing over the May 1992 coup, the only such assault in free Poland.

What are you talking about? There was no coup. The government of the time was heavily in minority (circa 130 seats out of 460) and Olszewski's government wasn't even supported properly by the leader of his own party! The idea of a "coup" suggests that things weren't done in a democratic way. The opposition called for a vote of confidence and Olszewski lost it. If he won the vote of confidence and was removed regardless, that would be a coup.

Bear in mind that Pawlak lost a vote of confidence in the Sejm, as did Suchocka.

It was then that the final battle lines were drawn up with true patriots the Kacyzńskis, Macierewicz, Gwiazda, Walentynowicz, Wyszkowski and others on the patriotic side of the barricade

You really seem to be trying to rewrite history here. Macierewicz joined Olszewski in his new party after the fall of the Olszewski government, only for him to be expelled over his role in the downfall of the Olszewski government.

The real story is that even Kaczyński didn't support Olszewski, despite what has been later portrayed.
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
22 Feb 2016 #177
no cou

You haven't watched "Nocna zmiana" then. Get a native speaker to translate it for you. It'll be a real eye-opener how such unlikely bedfellows met in a backroom to prevent the publication of the files and save their behinds.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
22 Feb 2016 #178
I've watched it. You've forgotten to mention how the film was edited in a very certain way to avoid showing the real story - that Olszewski didn't even have the support of his own party. You've also forgotten to mention that Jacek Kurski, now head of TVP, made the film.

Seriously, Polonius, you seem to be excelling in rewriting history today.

While we're at it, why don't you talk about how Olszewski was begging for powers to rule by decree? The situation in 1992 was nowhere near as clear cut as you make it out to be, as witnessed by the surreal way that Jarosław refused to support his own Prime Minister.
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
23 Feb 2016 #179
You've also forgotten to mention

You've forgotten to mention that in a short time the Olszwewski govt had stabilised finances, stopped robber-privatisation, prepared a reprivatisation, desovietised the Polish armed forces, sent the Soviet occupation army home and wanted to build a healthy free Poland based on people free of Soviet-era, secret-police connections. The key players of "Nocna zmiana", the roundtable mafia, trembled in fear that they stood to lose their undeserved power, perks and privileges and moved to protect them. The rest is history.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
23 Feb 2016 #180
You've forgotten to mention that in a short time the Olszwewski govt had stabilised finances

Still rewriting history, are we? Actually, Olszewski tried to loosen the previous Bielecki era austerity - articles.latimes.com/1992-03-28/news/mn-4301_1_polish-government explains it nicely. He then tried to impose further austerity, but was defeated again in the Sejm.

stopped robber-privatisation

There wasn't much privatisation during that time anyway, so I'm not sure what he's supposed to have stopped.

You really seem to be buying the PiS line that Olszewski's government was somehow an amazing government that was brought down by evil conspiring external forces. The reality is that he led a very weak government, he was unable to build a coalition that could govern, his own party leader (Kaczyński) was playing some stupid game where he was criticising his own Prime Minister, others were acting completely wrecklessly (Macierewicz).

Olszewski simply wasn't good enough to run a government in a parliament that was completely divided. He had Kwasniewski and Mazowiecki as an effective opposition, he had minority parties going against him for political purposes and his own party leader was playing stupid games in the background. He had little control over some of his ministers, especially Macierewicz and Parys. It's no surprise that his government fell, as he was also trying to win control of the Centre Agreement from Kaczyński.

Just remember : if the Olszewski government was really so great, why did Jarosław agitate so often against it?


Home / News / The dossier of TW "Bolek" - Poland's IPN assisted by police enters the home of the late general Kiszczak
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.