Polish trials concerning expulsions and the excesses?

[Molobo]

Furthermore, if you look at the text you may find the sentence "in an orderly and humane manner". How could it happen that hundreds of thousand or even more than a million people died during the expulsion?

No numbers as to cause of death during population transfer are available.However as you have seen the number over a milion isn't true according to new research.Most likely people died due to disease and famine, and quite a few of these deaths were in current Germany territory after population transfer was made.

It seems like the Polish authorities could not find all Germans, either they weren't registered as Germans or could hide away when the expellers arrived the towns.

Hide ? You are speaking about over a milion of people.Probably those not involved with Nazi party or those whos movement wasn't necessery stayed.

And if Poles came under same decrees of SU or whatever country it makes the expulsion somehow right? Show me the reasonable connection. If a law is directed against a population and another law against another population BOTH laws are wrong and you don't make a law "right" in case you target another group of people. It is insane reasoning.

It isn't insane.The fact that decress nationalizing property were issued to all inhabitants of Polish territory means this wasn't an action directed against particular ethnic group but part of much wider social reform.

Are you making fun of me?

Why ?
And could you answer why the difference between Polish and German attitude towards population transfer of both nations after the war ?

Population transfer is only an euphemism.

Not really.The UN document shows that not every population transfer is considered ethnic cleansing.

Doesn't sound the word "to make room for Poles" nice? I exchange Poles and get "to make room for Germans". Doesn't ring a bell? Or the term "Lebensraum"? Hitler took your reasoning to justify the war in the east.

Wrong.And obvious rather attempt to make Poles and Nazi's equal.The Lebensraum theory doesn't fit here since in it Germans expanded their territory on their own while Poles were forced by foreign power to move from their homeland into a ruined land.German Reich also considered those affected as animals unlike Polish state.

I wrote the Poles were ethnical cleansed from todays Ukraine and Germans had the same fate in the west. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Not really, Poles were moved from Ukraine, ethnic cleansing is a lot more brutal then simple population transfer.In view of postwar situation I can hardly see such moves as wrong or right.It was necessery.

All people who took part in crimes either Germans, Poles or Americans or whatever must be brought to justice.

Another attempt to make Nazis and their victims equal.You may accuse invidual people who commited acts of criminal nature, but your sentence avoids the fact that the German Reich as a state was engaged in genocide with support of large part of its population.Neither Poland or USA engaged in state genocide aimed at exterminating another nation.You also ignore the fact that one of the reasons for population transfer of German minority was its previous patricipation(by minority organisations) in Reich conquests and atrocities.

Only this reaction shows that it is a hot potatoe for you.

Trying to present Nazis and their victims as equals(by saying "all people who took part in crimes either Germans, Poles or Americans") is going to evoke reactions.You are right in this.

I ask for legal justice

Great.I look forward to your complaints issued at USA, Grt.Britain, and Soviet Union as well as trying to get Germany pay for 650 billions of dollars of damage to Poland, as well as compensating families of all its 6 milion dead, as well as countless wounded, also I look forward for the attempt to move Poles from western Poland into former Eastern Poland as well as Ukrainians from former Polish territory
Forgetting of course the fact that Poles as well as their friends Ukrainians don't want any of this.
Of course If you want nothing so absurd as above I really don't see what stops you for issuing for persecution of people involved in excess, since you are so certain that they happened.

PS:Btw I am still waiting for your answer as to the reasons of German hostility towars Poles:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... c&start=30

Dexx you claimed German states hostility to Poles resulted from Poland taking away German lands.But during XIX century the Polish state didn't exist after Vienna Congress, nevertheless Poles were persecuted in Prussia which of course took apart Poland in Partitions in late XVIII century.Furthermore what territories do you have in mind and in what period ?

[Dexx]

Gentlemen -- The discussion is very interesting, but we don't need the personal remarks. Please avoid them.

I beg your pardon with all due respect. But Molobo doesn't take my points that challenge his arguments into account. Furthermore, he rejects to answer questions, because answering them would bring is line or arguments into trouble. How can I argue with someone who only restates his points and doesn't think about mine?

Here are examples:

1. Molobo states that population transfer and ethinc cleansing are different. I ask him to legally define both terms that is supported by views of distinguished jurists. He doesn't take my reply into account and restates: population transfer and ethnic cleansing is different.

2. Molobo says that the expulsion and the legal basis, the Bierut-Decrees, were part of a social reform. Hello social reform? expelling a population is a "social reform"? In addition, those Bierut-Decrees were aimed at one group: The Germans. I have repeatedly said this but he doesn't counter it.

3. Molobo states that the expulsion was directed against Germans in Poland and Poles in the Ukraine. But I say that both expulsions were two wrongs and were not reasonable linked with eachother. He doesn't challenge my points with reasonable reasons but post his rant all over again.

4. Molobo says that there were only "few" excesses during the expulsion. If you say "few" you must logically know the overall number to come to your assumption. But he doesn't give numbers. Then he writes that most of the people died from famines without giving numbers by which you can follow what is meant by "most". He goes on that numbers aren't true according to new researches without stating the researches with the numbers of deaths and the reasoning behind it.

5. He put forward a US SC decision that did not support his reasoning. When he realized it he left it out without stating that the case wasn't applicable believing I would forget it.

6. I have constantly come up with my center point: Humanity and human dignity is inalienable without respect to nationality. I even wrote it in bold letters as a question directed at him whether he thinks the same. But he doesn't answer it and instead giving his rants all over again.

7. If you look at the wikipedia site were he is engaged in edit wars, he is accused of the same: He edits the page without supporting it with reasons in the discussion box or if he is being ask, he hides away and states it all over again (I may add that I don't contribute to wikipedia. I only read it).

I would like to ask you, David, how can you discuss with someone who doesn't address your points and only restates his own points all over again? If someone is not interested in exchangeing arguments and taking other arguments into account trying to counter them, what else is it but trolling?

[David Thompson]

Dexx -- Let me see if I can answer your questions.

The forum, and particularly its research sections, exist for the readers. For every post in a thread, there are 20-50 readers, and often more. The object of the research sections of the forum is to provide the best in information and argument on interesting or controversial historical topics. From the section rules:

The policy and general purpose of the forum is to provide for an exchange of views and facts on the topic, and to allow discussion of the different points of view. The viewpoints expressed by contributors to this forum are so divergent that general agreement on almost any aspect of the holocaust is unlikely and disagreement will be the rule.

Under these circumstances, in my opinion the best policy is to provide as many facts on the issue as possible, allow the contributors to state their point of view in a civil manner, and let the readers make up their own minds.

Where a topic is controversial, posters often take the opportunity to advance one or another political agenda. The H&WC section of the forum is particularly susceptible to this. Posters often attempt to carry on nationalist or other forms of propaganda, under the guise of a discussion of some historical topic. In addition, many posters simply have an opinion on a subject which they wish to express, whether it is well-informed or not, and whether there is any factual basis for their belief. It sometimes happens, in an attempt to bolster a weak argument or simply out of a spirit of malice, that posters will attempt to introduce goading or taunting remarks in order to carry their point, or to distract those who disagree with them.

Needless to say, this sort of behavior subverts or degrades the goal of the research sections of the forum, and most of it wastes the readers' time -- particularly when the poster provides no sources. Even the most intelligent and rational poster can be sidetracked, and forget that the purpose of the thread is to give the reader sufficient information to make up his or her mind for themselves, when the argument turns personal.

The purpose of my warnings about personal remarks was to remind the posters that the purpose of this section of the forum is to provide the readers with information, rather than to get sidetracked in unproductive discussion.

Having said that, there is nothing wrong with pointing out that another poster has failed to answer your questions. I don't have a problem with your listing the points to which a poster has failed to respond, as you have done in the post above. As the section rules put it:

If a poster raises a question about the events, other posters may answer the question with evidence. If a poster stops asking questions and begins to express a point of view, he then becomes an advocate for that viewpoint. When a person becomes an advocate, he has the burden of providing evidence for his point of view. If he has no evidence, or doesn't provide it when asked, it is reasonable for the reader to conclude that his opinion or viewpoint is uninformed and may fairly be discounted or rejected.

If you find an argument is flawed, point out the flaws and the evidence to the contrary, and leave it at that.

You said:

I would like to ask you, David, how can you discuss with someone who doesn't address your points and only restates his own points all over again?

Under those circumstances, an informed discussion is not possible. However, our readers are intelligent, and if you point out the problem, they can see it for themselves. If you give the readers the information they came here to get, they will appreciate the contribution and, more likely than not, adopt your point of view.

You also asked:

If someone is not interested in exchangeing arguments and taking other arguments into account trying to counter them, what else is it but trolling?

We get a lot of that kind of behavior here. I think the readers can spot a troll as well and as quickly as you or I. The object is to speak to the readers as well as an opponent's agument in a discussion. By doing that, the entire forum benefits.

[David Thompson]

Molobo -- I have already posted two warnings in this thread about avoiding personal remarks:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 800#744800
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 418#745418

It seems that you're not getting the message. Consequently, I have deleted your latest offending post. All further such posts will be deleted as well. The purpose of a research section of this forum is outlined above, at: http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 478#745478 To assure that this purpose is realized, we have rules. If you can't or won't follow the rules, posted at

H&WC Section Rules
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962

don't bother posting here.

[Molobo]

You deleted my answers to each and every one of Dexx answers sadly. I wonder how explaining the nature of decrees issued by Bierut is offending. It seems only one side is allowed to speak.

don't bother posting here.

Why ? Is the section reserved for only one kind of opinion ?

1. Molobo states that population transfer and ethinc cleansing are different. I ask him to legally define both terms that is supported by views of distinguished jurists. He doesn't take my reply into account and restates: population transfer and ethnic cleansing is different.

Both population transfer and ethnic cleansing are listed seperate from each other in UN document. I would gather that population transfer involves an orderly movement of population without the use of inproper violance, murder as part of the effort.

3. Molobo states that the expulsion was directed against Germans in Poland and Poles in the Ukraine. But I say that both expulsions were two wrongs and were not reasonable linked with eachother. He doesn't challenge my points with reasonable reasons but post his rant all over again.

A reason for Soviet and Allied decision was already given to you -Germans were moved to make place for Poles transfered from Soviet occupied territory.If there was no population transfer from Soviet territory there wouldn't be movement of German population.

Molobo says that there were only "few" excesses during the expulsion. If you say "few" you must logically know the overall number to come to your assumption. But he doesn't give numbers. Then he writes that most of the people died from famines without giving numbers by which you can follow what is meant by "most". He goes on that numbers aren't true according to new researches without stating the researches with the numbers of deaths and the reasoning behind it.

This argument is flawed at its very core.Would you use the same arguments to claim that majority of German population supported Hitler since you can't give the exact numbers ? Since Morel is only one known case of major excess we can assume they were few, if the there would be one milion victims of murder, I am sure relatives would demand presecution of much more suspects.

5. He put forward a US SC decision that did not support his reasoning. When he realized it he left it out without stating that the case wasn't applicable believing I would forget it.

Wrong on both counts.UN report gives it as example of just and orderly population transfer withing certain limits.Of course I kindly pointed out that said report is irrelevant, only if for one thing-law doesn't work backwords.

. Then he writes that most of the people died from famines without giving numbers by which you can follow what is meant by "most".

Most postwar relations point out to widespread famine and disease and death involved.It is logical to assume that they are the reason for the missing number of people.

He goes on that numbers aren't true according to new researches without stating the researches with the numbers of deaths and the reasoning behind it.

Untrue Dexx, this was posted to you.
Again:

@atkif

Not only can those numbers be grossly exagerated but as someone posted here a while before, most of these woman were actually giving it away willingly in exchange for some canned foods. :roll:
But your question is still valid, how could a feasible count be taken of such matters? The text gives also civillian casualities in the millions, how many of those were actually deported east or stood put instead of killed as this magazine claims?

I presume the passages you are referring to is the following:

How many people in total fell victim to flight and expulsion has not been clarified. In the 1950s the Federal Statistics Bureau simply estimated the number of Germans who before 1945 had lived east of the Oder and Neiße and therefrom deducted the number of those who after the war were living in the German Federal Republic, Austria or the German Democratic Republic. The difference was more than two million.

That this order of magnitude must be too high became apparent at the time already from lists of missing civilians; only about one-tenth – ca. 200,000 people – were being searched by relatives and friends. So far however only the Danube Svabians [ethnic Germans of Yugoslavia, translators’ note] made the effort to individually document all victims – and halved the estimates of the Federal Statistics Bureau for their region.

There was indeed an estimate made by the German Federal Statistics Bureau in the late 1950's that over two million ethnic Germans had perished during the flight from the Red Army at the end of the war and the postwar expulsions from Germany's former Eastern territories and various countries of Eastern Europe, mainly Poland and Czechoslovakia.

This estimate, which in the second paragraph is referred to as being well above the mark, has recently been challenged by German historians, for example by Rüdiger Overmans, author of Deutsche Militärische Verluste im Zweiten Weltkrieg. Overmans writes the following (my translation):

The deaths during flight and expulsion concerned the Germans in the immediate postwar period as much as the fate of the missing soldiers, and similar efforts were made to clarify the fate of the missing civilians or bring families together. A huge scientific project reconstructed the events historiographically, the Federal Statistics Office (Statistisches Bundesamt), the refugees’ associations and the clerical search service did a lot with the financial support of the Federal Government to quantitatively assess the fate of those expelled as accurately as possible. The result can be summarized in the conclusion that about 2 million Germans had been killed during flight and expulsion - not including those from the respective territories who had died during military service.

These casualty figures, however, which for decades have been an integral part of the respective serious literature, are the result not of a counting of death records or similar concrete data, but of a population balance which concluded that the fate of about 2 million inhabitants of the expulsion territories could not be clarified and that it must therefore be assumed that they had lost their lives in the course of these events. In the last years, however, these statements have been increasingly questioned, as the studies about the sum of reported deaths showed that the number of victims can hardly have been higher than 500,000 persons - which is also an unimaginable number of victims, but nevertheless only a quarter of the previous data. In favor of the hitherto assumed numbers it could always be said, however, that the balance didn’t say that the death of these people had been proven, but only that their fate could not be clarified.

As also pointed out in the Spiegel article, the ethnic Germans of Yugoslavia have been the only ones so far to prepare a detailed documentation of their losses during the war and postwar period, resulting in a figure half the estimate of the Federal Statistics Bureau. According to another article published in the same feature, a total of 48,447 ethnic Germans in Yugoslavia lost their lives to privation, disease and violence between 1944 and 1948.

Emphasis is mine.

Humanity and human dignity is inalienable without respect to nationality

Fine words, but ignoring reality of life.You forget that people were murdered like animals for past 6 years in the name of German nation by (like it or not) Germans(I mean not all but those responsible) and without any visisble resitance to it from German society.So it is naive to argue that they should coexist peacefully after such events.Allies realised that, hence one part of motivation behind the population transfer. Another was the overwhelming support of German minority organisation towards Reich takeover of Czechoslovakia and Poland.

7. If you look at the wikipedia site were he is engaged in edit wars, he is accused of the same: He edits the page without supporting it with reasons in the discussion box or if he is being ask, he hides away and states it all over again (I may add that I don't contribute to wikipedia. I only read it).

This is a lie Dexx.I give reasons, and take this kindly to wiki.

David, how can you discuss with someone who doesn't address your points and only restates his own points all over again? If someone is not interested in exchangeing arguments and taking other arguments into account trying to counter them, what else is it but trolling?

Dexx how can I discuss with someone who lacks basic historic knowledge that Poland didn't exist in XIX century when Poles were persecuted by Prussia or that in contrast to French people were classified as subhuman ?

[David Thompson]

Molobo -- You said:

I wonder how explaining the nature of decrees issued by Bierut is offending.

If you had restricted yourself to that, your post would not have been deleted. Instead, you engaged in a series of personal remarks about another poster, following two warnings and a lengthy post about why those warnings were made.

You also said:

It seems only one side is allowed to speak.

That's right -- the "side" which follows the section rules and whose posts don't violate those rules. Other, noncomplying posts will be deleted.

And you asked:

Is the section reserved for only one kind of opinion ?

Yes -- the kind which comply with the section rules for informed and civil discussions. Those which don't comply get deleted.

This thread is locked for 24 hours to allow the posters to cool off.

[David Thompson]

This thread is re-opened for civil, sourced discussion of the topic.

[Molobo]

The decree dividing private possesion of land was directed at all citizens, they didn't target only Germans :
htttp://www.ipn.gov.pl/biuletyn1_02.pdf

Wydany 6 września 1944 r. dekret PKWN o przeprowadzeniu reformy rolnej przewidywał,
że parcelacji będą podlegać ziemie Niemców, zdrajców narodu, a także prywatne
polskie majątki ziemskie, których powierzchnia przekraczała 50 hektarów (100 hektarów
na Ziemiach Odzyskanych). Z reformy mieli prawo skorzystać nie posiadający
własnej ziemi, a także małorolni chłopi, zwłaszcza obarczeni liczną rodziną.

"Given out on 6 September 1944 decree of PKWN about agriculture reform had forseen, that lands belonging to German, traitors of the nation, and private polish land, that exceeded 50 acres(100 acres on Regained Territories).Peasants that didn't posses any land and small land peasants, that had large families were allowed to benefit from the law."

[boobazzz]

sorry to break into the discussion, but I have just quick answer to Dexx for his question: the trials in Poland obviously were on the agenda at least to comparable extend as in Germany, taking for example Warsaw Uprising and the casus of Von dem Bach and Reinefarth
cheers.
b.

[Babar]

This argument is flawed at its very core.Would you use the same arguments to claim that majority of German population supported Hitler since you can't give the exact numbers ? Since Morel is only one known case of major excess we can assume they were few, if the there would be one million victims of murder, I am sure relatives would demand prosecution of much more suspects.

No it doesn't mean "they were few", it can mean a multitude of things, among which is that no one cares, or that no one wants it to come to light. You're using fallacy to support your argument. This is one of my biggest problems with the Holocaust, which is the atmosphere regarding the widespread atrocities committed against Germans since day one. Crimes depicted in startling detail by many. Crimes and Mercies, A Terrible Revenge and an Eye for an Eye, are three notables.

This is absolutely a double standard, that is, grossly underestimating crimes against Germans, an act which is a crime when against Jewish people. Do they not deserve sympathy? Just because they were swept under the rug doesn't mean they didn't suffer, they did indeed, en masse, and there is plenty of evidence to support it.

This is a chart depicting James Bacque's estimates of German deaths of the epoch, in the book "crimes and mercies".
TOTALS OF DEATHS

Minimum Maximum

Expellees (1945-50) 2,100,000 6,000,000
Prisoners (1941-50) 1,500,000 2,000,000
Residents (1946-50) 5,700,000 5,700,000
_________ __________

Totals 9,300,000 13,700,000

[Molobo]

Minimum Maximum

Expellees (1945-50) 2,100,000 6,000,000
Prisoners (1941-50) 1,500,000 2,000,000
Residents (1946-50) 5,700,000 5,700,000
_________ __________

Totals 9,300,000 13,700,000

Can you provide numbers as to how many of those were Waffen SS members, followers of Hitler, members of Selbschutz, Gestapo, turned out Jews, voted for NSDAP, been members of Werewolf, members of military, or died during Nazi death marches, or were murdered by Reich authorities for desertations or other things ? How many died due to famine ? How many died in disease ? How many died in military operations ? How many of the prisoners died during attempts to escape ? How How many waren't really dead but simply were missing and registered as dead ?

Anyway this post belongs in "Debate about number of German Dead" not about population transfer and trials.
The number of two milion dead resulting from population transfer in Soviet zone of control is not the number of dead but the number of people who went missing.
Again(emphasis is mine):

Roberto wrote:
Ebusitanus wrote:
@atkif

Not only can those numbers be grossly exagerated but as someone posted here a while before, most of these woman were actually giving it away willingly in exchange for some canned foods. Rolling Eyes
But your question is still valid, how could a feasible count be taken of such matters? The text gives also civillian casualities in the millions, how many of those were actually deported east or stood put instead of killed as this magazine claims?


I presume the passages you are referring to is the following:

How many people in total fell victim to flight and expulsion has not been clarified. In the 1950s the Federal Statistics Bureau simply estimated the number of Germans who before 1945 had lived east of the Oder and Neiße and therefrom deducted the number of those who after the war were living in the German Federal Republic, Austria or the German Democratic Republic. The difference was more than two million.

That this order of magnitude must be too high became apparent at the time already from lists of missing civilians; only about one-tenth – ca. 200,000 people – were being searched by relatives and friends. So far however only the Danube Svabians [ethnic Germans of Yugoslavia, translators’ note] made the effort to individually document all victims – and halved the estimates of the Federal Statistics Bureau for their region.


There was indeed an estimate made by the German Federal Statistics Bureau in the late 1950's that over two million ethnic Germans had perished during the flight from the Red Army at the end of the war and the postwar expulsions from Germany's former Eastern territories and various countries of Eastern Europe, mainly Poland and Czechoslovakia.

This estimate, which in the second paragraph is referred to as being well above the mark, has recently been challenged by German historians, for example by Rüdiger Overmans, author of Deutsche Militärische Verluste im Zweiten Weltkrieg. Overmans writes the following (my translation):

The deaths during flight and expulsion concerned the Germans in the immediate postwar period as much as the fate of the missing soldiers, and similar efforts were made to clarify the fate of the missing civilians or bring families together. A huge scientific project reconstructed the events historiographically, the Federal Statistics Office (Statistisches Bundesamt), the refugees’ associations and the clerical search service did a lot with the financial support of the Federal Government to quantitatively assess the fate of those expelled as accurately as possible. The result can be summarized in the conclusion that about 2 million Germans had been killed during flight and expulsion - not including those from the respective territories who had died during military service.

These casualty figures, however, which for decades have been an integral part of the respective serious literature, are the result not of a counting of death records or similar concrete data, but of a population balance which concluded that the fate of about 2 million inhabitants of the expulsion territories could not be clarified and that it must therefore be assumed that they had lost their lives in the course of these events. In the last years, however, these statements have been increasingly questioned, as the studies about the sum of reported deaths showed that the number of victims can hardly have been higher than 500,000 persons - which is also an unimaginable number of victims, but nevertheless only a quarter of the previous data. In favor of the hitherto assumed numbers it could always be said, however, that the balance didn’t say that the death of these people had been proven, but only that their fate could not be clarified.


As also pointed out in the Spiegel article, the ethnic Germans of Yugoslavia have been the only ones so far to prepare a detailed documentation of their losses during the war and postwar period, resulting in a figure half the estimate of the Federal Statistics Bureau. According to another article published in the same feature, a total of 48,447 ethnic Germans in Yugoslavia lost their lives to privation, disease and violence between 1944 and 1948.

This is absolutely a double standard, that is, grossly underestimating crimes against Germans,

I am afraid you are mistaken, there never was plan of mass extermination against Germans, nor were they ever classified as animals.Their deaths are sad nature of the war and its consequences, not result of deliberate policy of mass extermination.Mind you, a war started by government that got power by being elected by German people and forging a coalition with political group in German Parliament.

[Molobo]

This is a chart depicting James Bacque'

Hmm...He doesn't seem credible :
http://www.fixedearth.com/HISTREV.HTM

This conclusion of James Bacque in his Crimes and Mercies is supported by 300 pages of evidence (and other Revisionist writer’s investigations). This is a major “holocaust” cover-up which has no reparations, no TV documentaries and movies, no memorial museums. Why? 3) On another tack, some efforts are being made to expose the civilization-destroying Pornography industry, now at full gallop on the Net. Clearly, this is not a phenomenon advocated in the Christian Bible. Yet the basis for approval of all-out sexuality--the kinkier and more perverse, the better--is sanctioned in the Talmud. Go HERE and draw your own conclusions.

That will do. There is one more brief statement of fact that belongs here before concluding with a proposed new emphasis in Historical Revisionism.

First the statement of fact: As many outspoken Jews themselves agree, Zionism is the controlling force behind every hidden agenda listed above

It seems James Bacque is involved with revisionism and antisemitism ?

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... glance&st=*

By the end of the book, however, my opinion of it had diminished considerably. Bacque tosses a lot of numbers around, but if he's employing some sort of systematic methodology, I wasn't able to detect what it was. Comparing population figure A from source B with population figure C from source D and drawing extreme conclusions from the discrepancy between A and C without taking into account basic notions like random variation and limited precision or the different techniques B and D used to arrive at their figures is not, in my opinion, the way to make a convincing argument.

Bacque's case is not helped by a rambling 5-page appendix in which he presents his suspicions that he's being spied on

My emphasis.
Is it true ?
Add to that he is a very poor historian at all:
http://www.historiography-project.org/m ... etter.html

Let me also remind Keegan that the Poles long accused the Soviets of massacring some 14,000 officers at Katyn, but that the Soviet archives reveal that the true total was around 21,000

Sorry for this large offtopic but Bacques at that moment has no credibility as historian.The 21.000 number is well known.Such is the number of killed, but only 14.000 were killed in Katyn fores.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4060479.stm

But more than 21,000 army officers and intellectuals were executed in Katyn and other parts of the USSR.

Concluding I would advise you to search for more credible authors.
Btw-I searched on the forum and found this topic:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=79743
I would recommend you reading it.

[Babar]

...

[David Thompson]

Babar and Molobo -- This forum exists for the readers. They come here to get the best of facts and argument on the topic of the thread. Instead of that, the readers are getting poorly thought-out, off-topic, third rate agitprop posts -- in other words, you are offering the readers a lot of rubbish.

This thread is closed for twenty-four hours. This is the second time in two weeks I've had to lock it for poster misconduct. Both incidents have involved you, Molobo. The thread will be re-opened for informed on-topic discussion tomorrow evening, PCT. In the meantime, I suggest that both of you re-read the forum and section rules, especially the parts pertaining to the goals and purpose of the research sections of the forum. If this exchange represents the best you can do in the way of fact-based discourse, it's an embarrassment to both of you. I have no interest in this thread becoming a further embarrassment to the forum.

H&WC Section Rules
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962

[David Thompson]

This thread is re-opened for civil, on-topic, fact-based and sourced discussion.