Help! This guy should change his review of THE PIANIST

[Adam]

That was a stupid question on a stupid statement. Your post was full of useless statements and my reply was in the same manner.

I respectfully disagree. In my statement I have used a rethorical question. Please find out what a "rethorical question" IS before calling my statements stupid.

It the truth provokes you...your problem...dude.

Once again, in your remarks you are exposing nothing. You are providing for some comments in regards to Germany, other nationalistic Poles on this forums, and the fact that YOU do not believe that I am right...

I was reffering to some Poles in this forum which seems hard nationalists to me.

Which has nothing to do with my post. Please go away. Or provide for some additional, valid, even critical feedback ON TOPIC. Mr Michael Mills can be a good exaple of critical, yet valid feedback.

Yes, I have reasonable doubts an your statement! You bave no sources backing up your claims.

Well, please, you ARE free to prove/disprove my claims.
Since YOU have doubts in regards to my claim, the burden of providing sources claiming oterwise is on YOU.

Your attitude is very crear to me and and don't need an answer to the wealth question anymore. Also the readers of thiss forum can see what kind of man you are.

Once again I would encourage you to provide some ON TOPIC feedback disussion without personal attacks.
Regards,
Adam

Here are my sources in regards to the Yiddish:
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/yiddish.html
Please read it carefully. Word "Poland" and "Eastern Europe" is quite frequent in this article.

[POW]

Which has nothing to do with my post. Please go away. Or provide for some additional, valid, even critical feedback ON TOPIC. Mr Michael Mills can be a good exaple of critical, yet valid feedback.

First I have to tell you that I post when I like it and I post what I like. I don't need a moron telling me to go away. It was you posting all about nonsense and calling it facts. You can't forbit me to have a closer look to the crap you wrote. Beside that there is no need to act like a prima donna.

Well, please, you ARE feel free to prove/disprove my claims.
Since YOU have doubts in regards to my claim, the burden of providing sources claiming oterwise is on YOU.

When open the link you posted we can read:
"In the thirteenth century, the Jews tended to migrate eastward to escape persecution. Thus, Yiddish arrived in eastern Germany, Poland, and other eastern European territories for the first time"

Thus, Yiddish arrived in Poland and wasn't developed IN POLAND like you claim in capital letters.

[Adam]

First I have to tell you that I post when I like it and I post what I like. I don't need a moron telling me to go away. It was you posting all about nonsense and calling it facts. You can't forbit me to have a closer look to the crap you wrote. Beside that there is no need to act like a prima donna.

:roll:
Well, I have no further comments....

When open the link you posted we can read:
"In the thirteenth century, the Jews tended to migrate eastward to escape persecution. Thus, Yiddish arrived in eastern Germany, Poland, and other eastern European territories for the first time"

Thus, Yiddish arrived in Poland and wasn't developed IN POLAND like you claim in capital letters.

No, please read the article carefully.
Let me explain:
According to my link, Yiddish was developed in three stages:
Old, Middle, and Modern.
While the "Old" did not originated in Poland, Middle and Modern did.
To quote my source:

Middle Yiddish
By the sixteenth century, eastern Europe, particularly Poland, had become the center of world Jewry.Thus, the language of the Jews increasingly incorporated elements of Slavic, and the divide between the two main dialects of Yiddish grew. It was also in this period that Yiddish became a written language in addition to a spoken one. Yiddish was, and is, written using Hebrew characters.

Modern Yiddish

After about 1700, western Yiddish began a slow and inevitable decline, and the eastern dialect became the more important and widely spoken one.

It seems that Polish Jews played a crucial role in developing Yiddish because:

The attitudes of the western European Jews, who were desperate to be integrated into their surroundings, were largely informed by the non-Jewish attitude toward Yiddish. Because the language was incomprehensible to them, and because of the general hatred of Jews throughout Europe, Yiddish had long been regarded with suspicion. In the eyes of the masses, it had come to symbolize the "moral corruption" of the Jews.

And here:

However, two factors ensured that Yiddish remained central to Jewish communities in the east. Firstly, the maskilim there, knowing that they were dealing with a population that was by and large less educated and worldly than their western counterparts, were more willing to maintain Yiddish, and use it as a means of convincing the Jews that the other elements of the Haskalah should be adopted. Second, Yiddish culture was so rich in the east that the language had fewer detractors, and was seen as being more central to Jewish identity, than it was in the west.

Threfore, based on the material I am quoting, I am positive that I am still entilted to the statment:
Yiddish was developed in Poland.
Well, IT WAS being further develped in Poland.
It seems that the "Middle Yiddish" was not only being cultivated in Poland through the literature, community life, and plays, but it also originated in Poland, which became a "center of the world Jewry".
This is not too bad for a small, chauvinistic country full of stupid people and countless porgoms....

[michael mills]

PolAntek asked:

michael mills wrote:

It was also the Polish Government that conceived the idea of a forced emigration of Jews to Madagascar. The German Government merely borrowed the concept.

In September 1938, the Polish Ambassador in Berlin, Jozef Lipski, promised Hitler that if he, Hitler, succeeded in solving the Jewish problem in Poland, the Polish people would in gratitude erect a memorial to him in the most beautiful part of Warsaw! I note that, although Hitler fulfilled his side of the deal, the Poles have yet to fulfil theirs.




What is your source for this?

My source is the book "Diplomat in Berlin", by Jedrzejewicz.

The bbok is an edited collection of despatches by the Polish Ambassador in Berlin, Jozef Lipski, and also other papers by Lipski.

The quotation I used occurs in Document 99 in the book, printed on pages 408-412. The document is a report to Beck , the Polish Foreign Minister, dated 20 September 1938, and concerns a meeting on that day between Amabssador Lipski and Chancellor Hitler. The purpose of that meeting was primarily to discuss co-operation between Germany and Poland in the carve-up of Czechoslovakia, which was an issue at that time; Germany was to get the Sudetenland and Poland was to get Teschen.

On page 411 we find the following:

From other long deliberations of the Chancellor the following results were clear:

a) that he does not intend to go beyond the Sudetenland territory; naturally with armed forces he would go deeper, especially since, in my opinion, he would then be under pressure from the military elements who for strategic reasons push toward the subjugation of the whole of ethnographic Czechoslovakia to Germany;

b) that besides a certain line of German interests we [my comment: that is, the Poles] have a totally free hand;

c) that he sees great difficulties in reaching a Rumanian-Humgarian agreement (I think the chancellor is under Horthy's influence, as I reported to you verbally);

d) that the cost of the Sudetenland operation, including fortifications and armaments, adds up to the sum of 18 billion RM;

e) that upon the settlelment of the Sudetenland question he would present the problem of colonies;

d) that he has in mind an idea for settling the Jewish problem by way of emigration to the colonies in accordance with an understanding with Poland, Hungary, and possibly also Rumania (at which point I told him that if he finds such a solution we will erect him a beautiful monument in Warsaw).

So, PolAntek, my question remains. Where is the beautiful monument?

Jedrzejewicz provides the following exculpatory note to the above statement by Lipski:

Lest Lipski's words be misinterpreted, we give the following facts:

In 1937 there were about 3,350,000 Jews in Poland: most of them were concentrated in cities (Bialystok, 43 percent Jewish; Stanislawow, 41.4 percent; Warsaw, 30.1 percent) and small towns. The Jews living in rural areas made their living as agricultural brokers. However, as agricultural cooperatives developed in Poland, these middlemen were no longer needed and the Jews were deprived of this means of livelihood; they were left destitute and with no means of support. This had nothing to do with anti-Semitism; it was solely a natural economic development. The Jews in Poland, with their traditional clannishness, posed a serious problem in the overpopulated Polish state. The POlish government felt that a partian solution to this problem would be for them to emigrate, principally to Palestine.

The matter was considered so serious that Polish delegates to the League of Nations, in October, 1936, insisted that some immediate solution would have to be found, one possibility being the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine as a natural home for Jewish emigres. The Plish government further stressed that additional territories for emifres would have to be found to house the large number of Jews. Polish ambassadors discussed this matter with Paris, London and Washington.

It should be noted that during this same time the Polish government was giving financial aid to the Zionist organisation of Vladimir Zabotynski; also, with the approval of Minister Beck and marshal Smigly-Rydz, the Jewish Military Organisation (Irgun Tsevai Leumi) was training several hundreds of its instructors as secret military courses in Poland. (See Pobog-Malinowsli, II, 614-29).

So it appears that the Polish government saw the large number of Jews in Poland as a problem that needed to be solved by reducing that number, preferably by emigration.

No doubt at this point the supporters of Poland will jump in and say that this was the difference between Poland and Germany; that Poland merely wanted to expel its Jews, and did not want to kill them.

But the answer to that is that from 1933 to at least 1941, the preferred German solution for the "Jewish Problem" in Germany and the whole of Europe was likewise forced emigration to some colony outside Europe, eg Madagascar. Germany only resorted to mass killing of Jews when all other options became infeasible. It may well be that an independent Poland in the same position as Germany, with no possibility of getting rid of its Jews by expulsion, would likewise have resorted to a solution of deportation and extermination (as Romania did to a certain extent), although it would be safe to say that any extermination resorted to ny the Polish government would not be nearly as efficient and effective as that implemented by Germany.

Contemporary observers also thought the Poles quite capable of killing off their Jews if it came to the crunch.

In the essay "Lucien Wolf and the Making of Poland: Paris 1919", by Eugene C. Black, in the book "Polin", we find the following note 33, on page 292-3:

Sir Stuart Samuel had learned wisdom. At the Consistoire conference, he had not opposed the Jewish Nationalist, but by this point he had shifted 'to deprecate any Jewish political separatism in Poland'. Wolf's Peace Conference Diary, 11 April 1919. So had Headlam-Morley [my comment: a leading member of the British Delegation to the paris Peace Conference] who, in utter frustration, asked Wolf what Polish jewish Nationalist actually wanted. When Wolf told him that Jewish extremists were as mad as as Polish extremists and that there was nothing to choose between Dmowski and Ussishkin, Headlam-Morley said, 'Well, they will all be murdered'. Peace Conference Diary, 14 April 1919.

(For the information of readers, Lucien Wolf was a leader of British Jewry, and had gone to the Paris Peace Conference to help represent Jewish interests in Eastern Europe).

Now, when Headlam-Morley predicted that the Polish Jews would all be murdered, who did he think would do the murdering? The answer is obvious from the context; he thought it would be the Polish extrmeists, ie the national Democrats led by Roman Dmowski, who would kill the Polish Jews.

But note that Headlam-Morley did not attribute the future mass-murder solely to Polish extremism. He saw it as an outcome of a clash between mad Polish extremists and mad Jewish extremists, ie it would be just as much the fault of the Jewish extremists as of the Polish extremists. In that clash, the Jews would inevitably lose out as they were the weaker party.

[David Thompson]

The posts on the "Madagascar Plan" now have a thread of their own, at:

http://www.thirdreichforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=27282

[Adam]

Thank you David, good job...

[PolAntek]

Michael – sorry for the late reply (been away):

Re the “carve up” of Czechoslovakia, the Poles were being opportunistic in order to reclaim Teschin (Cieszyn) - a relatively small, yet very contentious piece of land that they claimed back to WW1 boundary establishment times as being Polish territory. In my view (and you’ll no doubt agree) – this was a very shortsighted move by the Poles. Although it was understandable to a degree considering past events . You may recall that the Czechs refused passage of critical arms shipments from France to Poland during the Soviet-Polish war of 1920 which almost proved disastrous for the Poles. Now that their old foe was down the opportunity was at hand to get back their pound of flesh.

Lastly, for the record. the ceding of the piece of territory by the Czechs to Poland was done so independently of Germany –although the matter was obviously discussed with the Germans. Despite this, many erroneously believed that the Poles were working in concert with the Germans as they marched through Europe.

Re the “beautiful monument to Hilter” – first – it would be hard to take this statement as nothing more than a humorous aside to the discussions underway between Lipski and Hitler. I’m hard pressed to read anything more into this comment than that. Again, I never doubted that tensions between the Polish and Jewish population existed, as they did all over Europe.

Now, where is the monument? – As we enter deeper into the realm of pure speculation one has to assume that the monument was actually seriously intended in the first place. If it was, and keeping inmind that WW2 would not have taken place, then I would suggest that it would not have been built due to overwhelming protest of the population – many of which were part Jews. And in Poland there were many who assimilated into the population (while many did not). I too, a Canadian born son of Polish parents, have a Jewish ancestor on my mothers side – my great grandfather who converted to Roman Catholicism. Could the government get rid of these part Jews as well in the mass deportation / resettlement? Secondly, the Soviet government that remained in control of Poland after WW2 would not let it be built as a result of the protest of the many Jews in the ranks of the Communists in power. Anyway, enough of that.

Re: “Contemporary observers also thought the Poles quite capable of killing off their Jews if it came to the crunch”

Huh? Based on what? Hysteria possibly generated in part by the articles of Israel Cohen in the Western press mentioned in my earlier post. This seems like a post WW2 deduction – one conjured up after the reality of the ‘Holocaust’ actually happened. What precedent in the activities of the Polish state up to that time would have created the fear the Poles would launch a Jewish ethnic cleansing program??

Re: the Headlam-Morley statement: In a similar vein to Hitler’s Warsaw monument statement by Lipski– not much here to hang a hat on. It seems a bit of a stretch to suggest that this statement from 1919 somehow predicted the Polish mass murder of Jews at a later date.

Nonetheless Michael, thanks for the info. In particular I will seek out Jedrzejewicz’s “Diplomat in Berlin"

Regards,

[michael mills]

PolAntek,

Here is another bit of "pole-bashing", from the article I mentioned before,
Lucien Wolf and the making of Poland: Paris 1919".

It is note 51 to the article:

When Margolin [a Jewish member of the Ukrainian Government] was lobbying for his Ukrainian cause, he called Clemenceau's attention to the 'rabid anti-Semitism of the Polish Government. "Yes, I know", said Clemenceau, "they are all reactionaries and anti-Semites, but they are going to get an ultimatum from us" '. Wolf's Peace Conference Diary, 26 May 1919.

Clemenceau's remark is noteworthy, given that France was the main supporter of a resurrected and enlarged Poland. It demonstrates the view that Western statesmen had of Polish-Jewish relations.

In all of this, I am not calling for excessive criticism of the Poles. My point is that Poles, who tend to see themselves overwhelmingly as victims, of the Germans, of the Ukrainians, of the Soviets, need to take a more balanced view and acknowledge the extent to which they have also been perpetrators. And I would say the same thing to Jews who see themselves exclusively as victims; or to members of any ethnic group that has the same self-image.

As to Lipski's monument, I confess that I was being entirely tongue in cheek. I do not really expect the Poles to erect a monument to Hitler after all that they suffered at his hands. But what I would like to see is an acknowledgement by Poles that in the lead-up to the Second World War, there was a wide-spread desire in a large part of the Polish population to get rid of the Jews somehow, preferably by a mass emigration, and that that popular desire was reflected in Lipski's words, which expressed his support for Hitler's aim to solve the Jewish Problem.

[PolAntek]

Hi Michael,

I appreciate the tone of your reply, and I understand and respect your motives in ‘placing a mirror’ in front of those wallowing in self pity without understanding that they may have played a part in their own misfortune. No problem with that.

Yet I still feel that the general bad rap the “anti-Semite” Poles have received in light of comparably minimal fall out from the ethnic tension between these groups is disproportionate, to say the least. A lot of this alleged pre-war anti-Semitism amounts to nothing more than hot air. Of the discriminatory ideas conjured up by a few whacko extremists, how many were actually realized? I do not agree that there was a widespread movement afoot to expel the Jews from the country – the evidence just does not support this. What could have happened in Poland will never be known (and theories need not necessarily be patterned on an extrapolation of the German “Final Solution” approach), but I choose not to dwell on the hypothetical.

Instead, my sympathies are with the millions of common folk - like my grandparents, aunts and uncles and others who perished in those years, or were imprisoned, or deported for forced and slave labour, etc. Those people who inherited a bankrupt and destitute country after WW1 and managed to accomplish a lot of good against heavy odds through 20’s and through the depression years of the ‘30’s – only to see Hitler and Stalin destroy it. Enough said.

Thanks again for your input and the interesting information you shared.

Regards

[Adam]

PolAntek, thanks again for your support.
Your input helped a lot when responding to Michael's criticism.
Well done...

Now Michael:

In all of this, I am not calling for excessive criticism of the Poles. My point is that Poles, who tend to see themselves overwhelmingly as victims, of the Germans, of the Ukrainians, of the Soviets, need to take a more balanced view and acknowledge the extent to which they have also been perpetrators. And I would say the same thing to Jews who see themselves exclusively as victims; or to members of any ethnic group that has the same self-image.

Once again, no one is claiming here that the Polish nation is a nation of saints. They had and have plenty of right-wing bigots, just as every other society does, but once again the Polish history IS bitter especially in the 20th century. The "reviews" and altitude of people like this Phillip Hall guy doesn't help either. You would feel bitter too if someone would write a "story" like his review about Your country.
And the problem is that durring the last fourty + years there were many other "stories" similar to the one proclaimed by Mr. "histrical genius" Hall.
A quick example?
Enigma.
It is not a commonly known fact (for some odd reason) that the Poles had a crucial role in cracking the enigma codes. Polish intelligence services were working on the enigma since the 20's.
While I agree that Poles can not get all the credit, without Polish contribution, British, French, and American intelligence services would have to spend few more years trying to break the code. Few more years which they really DID NOT have.
Yet it took many "zealot" Polaks like me many years to straighten the Enigma story out. According to the "official" version majority of the work was done by the British. That was the official story for about 40 years.
BBC article here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1287669.stm

Post-war histories of how the Enigma system was cracked have tended to focus on the work of wartime staff at Britain's secret eavesdropping headquarters at Bletchley Park

NOW THIS IS BITTER ISN'T IT?
The biggest "stupid nation" Polish contribution to the WWII, which was crucial to Allies victory, was almost forgotten for some reason .
To find out about the extend of the Polish research go here:
http://home.us.net/~encore/Enigma/enigma.html
Few years ago British made and released movie called "the Enigma" in which the ONLY POLISH character in the movie is a German (sic! ) spy .

Now that IS BITTER.

Anohter example:
Everyone knows the story of Oscar Schindler who rescued 1100 Jews.
There was an Oscar winning movie about him.
But who knows the story of Irena Sendler?
http://www.irenasendler.org/thestory.asp
?


And actually these two characters can not really be compared. Mr. Schindler didn't really risk a lot by helping out the Jews.
Mrs. Sendler could die any minute yet there is no movie about her.
In contrast, there is plenty of stories about Polish anti-semitism..
Now THIS IS BITTER.....

Contemporary observers also thought the Poles quite capable of killing off their Jews if it came to the crunch

I agree, people like :roll: Irena Sendler.... :roll:
Now THIS IS BITTER.
WTF?
Source?
I think you should take this comment out.
Throughout the centuries Poland, Polish people, and Polish theritory were crucial to the survival and growth of Jewish people and their culture period (see my Yiddish example).
OK. Poland was no picnic for Jews. I agree. But Poland was no picnic for the Poles too you know.....


An so on, and so on...
I could name few other examples, but I think that you will get my point now...

Regards,
Adam

[PolAntek]

Adam, at risk of sounding like we're patting each other on the back - damn...that last post of yours was a good one!

[ChristopherPerrien]

Although you are right about the Poles breaking Enigma first.

The original enigma machine was nothing more than a circus gimmick which was "broken" when it was created. I believe the Polish (Secret Service?) used the original "carny" method to do so. At this time I am not sure where or which Circus invented or started this machine and coding system on its amazing life..

The bigger question is why the hell the Germans thought by making it "electrical" instead of "mechanical" that that would make the machine and the code unbreakable?

[Penn44]

Would some please refresh my memory, wasn't it a Polish community who murdered several hundred years during the Nazi occupation, an event that for years was blamed on the Germans until it was finally exposed the local Poles had committed the murders?

[Adam]

Would some please refresh my memory, wasn't it a Polish community who murdered several hundred years during the Nazi occupation, an event that for years was blamed on the Germans until it was finally exposed the local Poles had committed the murders?

?
What do you mean?
Your post is very hard to understand.
I tam guessing that you mean Jedwabne.
And, yes in this particular case, Polish peasants murdered about ~ 350 Jewish people. But the murder was inspired by the German police and Gestapo units present in the area..
Still, even the shamefull incident like this should NOT label the entire nation.
To evaluate Polish-Jewish relationship you HAVE to look at the entire history.
Also, look here:
http://www.yad-vashem.org.il/righteous/ ... teous.html
Which nation is on the TOP?

[Penn44]

Would some please refresh my memory, wasn't it a Polish community who murdered several hundred years during the Nazi occupation, an event that for years was blamed on the Germans until it was finally exposed the local Poles had committed the murders?

?
What do you mean?
Your post is very hard to understand.
I tam guessing that you mean Jedwabne.
And, yes in this particular case, Polish peasants murdered about ~ 350 Jewish people. But the murder was inspired by the German police and Gestapo units present in the area..
Still, even the shamefull incident like this should NOT label the entire nation.
To evaluate Polish-Jewish relationship you HAVE to look at the entire history.
Also, look here:
http://www.yad-vashem.org.il/righteous/ ... teous.html
Which nation is on the TOP?

1) I think my post was quite clear.
2) The Poles, as a nation, have a reputation of being anti-Semitic. If you are trying to prove otherwise, I think you have an uphill battle and need more evidence.
3) The number of Righteous Gentiles among the Poles is not a definite/clear indicator that they were less anti-Semitic than other nations.

I think that Polansky, whether intentionally or not, protrayed the Poles rather negatively regarding their relations towards the Jews (and I am not just referring to the blonde woman in the apartment building screaming, "Jew, Jew, Jew." I am speaking about the indifference the Poles have the Jewish slave workers on the street.

I think you're fighting a losing battle if you intend to convince the reviewer that he is wrong. You can and should give your two cents worth to him, but don't get your hopes up.