Tamara Griesser-Pečar: Evropski zgodovinski spomin

33
902
Tamara Griesser-Pečar: Evropski zgodovinski spomin

Osemdeset let po začetku druge svetovne vojne je 19. septembra evropski parlament sprejel »Resolucijo o pomenu evropskega zgodovinskega spomina za prihodnost Evrope«, ki so jo na iniciativo baltskih držav in Poljakov predlagali poslanci Evropske ljudske stranke, socialdemokrati, liberalci, evropski konservativci, »ker sta spomin na žrtve totalitarnih in avtoritarnih režimov ter priznavanje in zavest o skupni evropski dediščini komunističnih, nacističnih in drugih diktatorskih zločinov osrednjega pomena za enotnost Evrope in njenih ljudi ter za krepitev odpornosti Evrope na sodobne zunanje grožnje«. Ta resolucija še nadgrajuje »Resolucijo o evropski zavesti in totalitarizmu« z dne 2. aprila 2009, ki obsoja vse totalitarne in avtoritarne režime v Evropi. Žal Slovenija na državni ravni še ni premogla toliko moralne moči, da bi obsodila  komunizem – sklep vlade Janeza Janše pa ni zavezujoča –, čeprav je ta povzročil več kot 100 miljonov smrtnih žrtev. K temu moramo prišteti še množične kršitve vseh drugih človekovih pravic (med drugim: svoboda govora in veroizpovedi, svoboda medijev, znanosti in umetnosti, enakost pred zakonom, prepoved mučenja, pravno varstvo, svoboda gibanja, nedotakljivost stanovanja, svoboda združevanja in demonstriranja). Državni zbor je resolucijo iz leta 2009 vzel zgolj na znanje, sprejem resolucije pa je že štirikrat zavrnil, kljub temu da so za njo v Evropskem parlamentu glasovali vsi slovenski poslanci.

Za letošnjo septembrsko resolucijo je glasovalo 535 vseh evropskih poslancev, 66 jih je bilo proti, 52 se jih je vzdržalo. Vsi slovenski poslanci so glasovali za, razen novinca v evropskem parlamentu, predstavnika SD Milana Brgleza, ki je svojo zadržanost opravičil s tem, da resolucija ni obsodila fašizma, predvsem pa ga je zmotilo enačenje komunizma in nacizma – in da je v njej poudarjeno nekaj, kar se ne samo v Sloveniji rado zamolči, namreč soodgovornost Sovjetske zveze za drugo svetovno vojno. Spomnimo se, da sta Nemčija in Sovjetska zveza podpisali Hitler-Stalin pakt (oz. pakt Ribbentrop-Molotov) o nenapadanju (23.8.1939), ter Mejni in prijateljski sporazum (28.9.1939). Oba sporazuma pa sta vsebovala še tajna protokola, v katerih sta si državi podpisnici razdelili del Evrope.

Tudi ne drži, da resolucija ne obsoja fašizma. V 10. točki »poziva k skupni kulturi spomina, ki bo zavračala zločine fašističnih, stalinističnih in drugih preteklih totalitarnih in avtoritarnih režimov ter tako spodbujala odpornost zoper sodobne grožnje demokraciji, predvsem med mlajšo generacijo; spodbuja države članice, naj prek večinske kulture podpirajo izobraževanje o raznovrstnosti naše družbe, naši skupni zgodovini, vključno z izobraževanjem o grozotah druge svetovne vojne, kot je holokavst, in o dolgoletnem sistematičnem razčlovečenju njegovih žrtev«. V 20. točki pa »poziva države članice, naj poskrbijo za spoštovanje določb okvirnega sklepa Sveta, tako da ukrepajo zoper organizacije, ki v javnem prostoru in na spletu širijo sovražni govor in nasilje, ter dejansko prepovejo neofašistične in neonacistične skupine ter vse druge ustanove ali združenja, ki slavijo in poveličujejo nacizem in fašizem ali katerekoli drugo obliko totalitarizma, pri čemer je treba spoštovati nacionalni pravni red in sodno oblast.« Resolucija poziva med drugim tudi, da se naj 25. maj razglasi za »mednarodni dan v počastitev junakov boja proti totalitarizmu«. To je obletnica usmrtitve konjeniškega stotnika Witodla Pileckega v Auschwitzu. Ironija je, da je komunistična Jugoslavija na ta dan praznovala Titov rojstni dan.

Spomnimo se na Brglezovo izjavo marca letos, ko je bila »Resolucija o evropski zavesti in totalitarizmu« že četrtič v Državnem zboru z večino zavrnjena: »Zagotavljamo, da se bomo vsakič znova zoperstavili zmanjševanju pomena narodnoosvobodilnega boja ter na drugi strani poskusom relativizacije nacističnih in fašističnih zločinov. Na tej točki noben kompromis, iz kakršnega se je rodila tudi sama resolucija Evropske parlamenta o evropski zavesti in totalitarizmu, za nas ni možen.« Ne samo, da s tem sugerira, da je evropska resolucija sprejeta leta 2009 nek slab kompromis, s to izjavo relativizira zločine, ki so se zgodili med revolucijo v Sloveniji, za katere je odgovorna stran NOB oz. komunisti. Čas bi končno bil, da se vse zločine, ki so se zgodili na slovenskih tleh, obravnava po enakih merilih ne glede na to kateri od treh totalitarnih režimov – fašizem, nacionalsocializem in komunizem –, ki so obvladovali slovenski prostor v dvajsetem stoletju, jih je povzročil.

Evropske mreže uradnih institucij, ki skrbijo ta varovanje in raziskovanje arhivskih zapisov nekdanjih političnih policij

Nekaj dni po sprejetju »Resolucije o pomenu evropskega zgodovinskega spomina za prihodnost Evrope« je potekalo v Bratislavi vsakoletno srečanje predstavnikov »Evropske mreže uradnih institucij, ki skrbijo za varovanje in raziskovanje arhivskih zapisov nekdanjih političnih policij«. Mreža je bila ustanovljena leta 2008. Stalne članice so Bulgarija, Češka, Nemčija, Madžarska, Poljska in Slovaška. Slovenija je s Študijskim centrom za narodno spravo in Arhivom Republike Slovenije zgolj opazovalec, podobno kot baltske države in letos tudi Albanija. Najboljše možnosti za raziskovalno delo in s tem tudi za obveščanje javnosti o delovanju tajnih služb in o kršitvah človekovih pravic, ki so jih te povzročile, imata brez dvoma Nemčija in Poljska, vendar so v večini prejšnjih komunističnih držav pogoji za raziskave veliko boljše kot v Sloveniji, ker njihova zakonodaja ne ščiti storilcev zločinov in nosilcev javnih služb. V nekaterih državah uživajo članice mreže močno podporo države, v drugih pa, kot recimo na Slovaškem, institucije lahko vsaj nemoteno delujejo in raziskujejo prav v smislu ravnokar sprejete resolucije, ki poudarja zakaj je to pomembno, namreč »ker je treba ohraniti spomin na tragično preteklost Evrope, da se počastijo žrtve, obsodijo storilci in položijo temelji za spravo, ki bo temeljila na resnici in spominu«.

Slovenski primer

Slovenija je imela kar dober arhivski zakon, ki je  bil sprejet 2006, čeprav je potreboval določene spremembe in dopolnitve, npr. take, ki se nanašajo na elektronsko shrambo gradiva. Ni pa potreboval sprememb, ki bi omejevale dostop do arhivskega gradiva in ki bi relativirale storjene zločine. Prav to pa se je zgodilo z novelo arhivskega zakona leta 2014, ki zakonsko predpisuje anonimizacijo občutljivih podatkov, izvzeta je samo politična opredelitev, in ne razlikuje več med žrtvami in storilci, ker uvaja tudi nedostopnost občutljivih podatkov nosilcev javnih funkcij. Občutljivi osebni podatki tistih, ki še živijo, pa tudi tistih, od smrti katerih še ni poteklo deset let, oz. katerih podatki o smrti niso znani, novela za javnost zapira za 75 let. S to omejitvijo pa Slovenija dosledno in nenehno onemogoča oz. zavlačuje raziskave kršitev človekovih pravic – in s tem tudi neposredno uveljavljanje demokratičnih pravnih norm. Ironija je, da je Slovenija s tem takrat tudi zaščitila fašistične in nacistične okupatorje, ker še ni potekel rok. Čeprav raziskovalci »lahko« pridobijo dovoljenje arhivske komisije za vpogled v arhivsko gradivo, se tudi v tem primeru njihovo delo s tem zavlačuje.

V primerjavi s Slovenijo je v Nemčiji gradivo tajne policije Stasi odprto za raziskave in storilcev zakon ni nikoli ščitil. Gradivo je shranjeno v posebnem arhivu, na čelu katerega je pooblaščenec za Stasi-dokumentacijo, ki ga imenuje nemški parlament. Trenutno je to Roland Jahn. V ospredju delovanja arhiva je razkrivanje delovanja politične tajne policije Stasi, predvsem kako se je ta vmešavala v življenje ljudi in kako je njihovo življenje uničevala. Po poteku tridesetih let bo arhiv kot posebna enota priključen državnemu arhivu. Če bi se to zgodilo prej, bi bil dostop mogoč šele po tridesetih letih, prav to pa je zakonodajalec od vsega začetka želel preprečiti, ker so prebivalci vzhodne Nemčije ob prevratu preprečili uničevanje gradiva tajne policije.

Seveda pa novela arhivskega zakona ni bila edina omejitev raziskovanja preteklosti v Sloveniji. 15. decembra 2016, malo pred božičem, je bil sprejet še »Zakon o arhivskem gradivu, ki vsebuje osebne podatke o zdravljenju pacienta«. Javnost tega ni registrirala, veljati pa je začel takoj januarja 2017. Zakon zapira zdravstvene podatke kar za 150 let po nastanku, tudi za raziskovalce. Sicer lahko posameznik oz. njegov dedič da soglasje za uporabo lastnih podatkov, resna raziskava na podlagi posamičnih primerov ni mogoča. Nesporno je pri tem, da mora biti zdravstvena dokumentacijo pred javnostjo strogo zaščitena. Arhivska komisija pa za izdajo dovoljenj za uporabo zdravstvene dokumentacije ni pristojna več, kot je bil pred tem zakonom, ko je izdajala dovoljenja za raziskavo zdravstvene dokumentacije predane arhivom v času do 17.maja 1990. Dovoljenje za dokumentacijo pacientov sedaj lahko izda samo komisija za medicinsko-etična vprašanja, če je dostop »utemljen z vidika javnega interesa na področju napredka znanosti, ki prevladuje nad interesom za nedostopnost in če bi se lahko z dostopom dosegel predviden znanstveni cilj, ki ga ni mogoče doseči na drug način.« (Uradni list, št. 85/2016, 28.12.2016)

Ta zakon onemogoča tudi raziskave zlorab medicine s strani okupatorjev. Tako bi bile raziskave žrtve evtanazije v Sloveniji danes nemogoče, če že ne bi bile raziskane. Zdravstvene pole psihiatrične klinike Novo Celje in domov za onemogle bi bile danes nedostopne. Od tam so namreč nacisti med okupacijo odpeljali umsko bolne in onemogle v grad Hartheim (Zgornja Avstrija), kjer so jih usmrtili, delno pa so jih odpeljali v Feldhof na avstrijskem Štajerskem.

Namen zakona je bila seveda preprečevanje raziskav o zlorabah medicine v času komunistične oblasti (1945-1990), predvsem na področju psihiatrije.

33 KOMENTARJI

  1. Vse to znova dokazuje, da je slovenska (leva) oblast mentalno obtičala v komunističnem totalitarizmu, ki je enak in še hujši od nacional socializma in fašizma. Od tu se nikakor ne more in noče premakniti naprej. Še naprej vsak dan nova laž. Žal je pri tem “konzervatorstvu” totalitarne mentalitete in laži ter pri zaščiti zločinov in zločincev sodelovala tudi stranka, ki pravi, da je krščanska. Bolj prav bi bilo, če bi namesto krščanska imela napisano hinavska.

    Še papež Frančišek je nedavno obsojal hinavščino. Hinavščina je sicer temelj delovanja komunistični dedičev in njihovih satelitov, saj vedno vidijo samo trske v tujih očesih. Totalitarna miselnost in hinavščina sta temeljni vzrok našega vsesplošnega zaostajanja, neperspektivnosti in bega možganov.

    • Res je tako. Na žalost temelji to hinavčenje na obžalovanja vredni nestrpnosti med posamezniki na “desnici”, ki bi morali v politiki med seboj zgledno sodelovati, kar je skupen interes, pa si raje trmasto nagajajo in s tem izgubljajo v političnem boju.

  2. Brglez je bil predsednik slovenskega parlamenta, ki je opravičeval komunistične poboje kot naravno pravo.

    S takšno izjavo bi mu morala biti odvzeta ne le funkcija predsednika parlamenta, ampak tudi poslanca. pa se ni8 nič zgodilo.

    Zato pa še danes obožuje pokole ljudi – nedolžnih, brez sodnih postopkov in ugotavljanja krivde.

    Brglez je mednarodni pravnik, zato so mu znane človekove pravice, demokracija in dejstvo, da se je začela II. svetovan vojna z napadom Nemčije in Sovjetske zveze na Poljsko, torej slovansko državo.

  3. Članek je zanimiva predstavitev krčevitega brisanja sledov revolucije, še posebej pa pregled poniglavosti, ki naj bi preprečile spoznanje, da NOB ni bila osvobajanje, da je bila revolucija, da je bila zločin nad slovenskim narodom!
    Gojiti kulturo spomina o žrtvah totalitarizmov: nacizma, fašizma in komunizma in njegovo prenašanje prihodnjim rodovom je naša sveta dolžnost. Na žalost slovenska družba do tega spomina ne goji spodobnega spoznanja, neizprosno obsoja zločine nacizma, spregleda pa zločine komunizma!
    Ta slednji pa je slovenskemu narodu prizadejal najgloblje rane, brazgotine le teh so nas zaznamovale, ostajajo v naših dušah, razdvajajo slovenski narod, spreminjajo njegovo bit, razgrajujejo njegove vrednote, pohabljajo njegov narodni ponos! Tega razkroja brez priznanja zločina, njegove obsodbe in sprave ne bomo zaustavili!
    Nezaslišano, sprevrženo je skrivanje in opravičevanje zločinov revolucije z »osvobajanjem« in zavajanje mladih rodov s to pristransko »pravljico«, … Iz Svetega pisma: kdor pohujša enega od teh malih, ki verujejo vame….

    • Kako je lahko bila revolucija “zločin nad slovenskim narodom”, če je šlo za slovenca proti slovencu. Komunisti so bili Slovenci, v največjem in najpomembnejšem delu. Komunisti so izvedli revolucijo, izgnali kralja in prevzeli oblast in ustanovili novo državno ureditev. In pod to oblastjo smo spet bili Slovenci do leta 1991. Od takrat dalje pa ni več znano kakšna je državna ureditev.

      • Ali je mogoče, da Zdravko ne ve, da je zločin Slovenca nad Slovencem tudi zločin? Ali da je umor brata tudi zločin?

        Takšna moralna in miselna izprijenost ter pohabljenost res lahko vodi samo v peklenske sfere. Upanje je, da vsi Slovenci vendarle niso umsko in moralno tako zmaliceni.

        • Vaše sovraštvo in hudobija vas slepita. Vprašanje se nanaša na “zločin nad narodom”, kot sem tudi posebej citiral zgoraj. O umski in moralni izmaličenosti pa bom raje brez besed. Sami niste pohabljeni, ste pa neznansko hudobni.

          • Kdo je tu zaslepljen, bi se dalo razpravljat.
            Če že želite, lahko tudi zločin nad delom naroda.
            Nad tistim delom, ki je bil napoti revolucionarjem.
            Kakorkoli obračate, je to še vedno zločin!

          • Lucijan: “Zdravko ima spet popadke. …”
            ================
            Ne čisto tako, ampak on bi nam rad stalno dopovedoval, da se moramo zaradi tega ker so bili slovenski komunisti Slovenci vsi Slovenci sramovati tega, ker je komunistična revolucija pač stvar slovenske zgodovine.
            Glede tega, da bi se morali vsi sramovati ima prav, vendar temu ni tako ker nekateri so na to ponosni.

            Zdravko pa vedno napade posameznika v zvezi s tem, češ s tem, da napadaš revolucionarje pomeni, da se ne sramuješ slovenske zgodovine ampak se raje prepiraš.

            Ko bi se vsi sramovali slovenskih komunistov potem bi se tudi jaz kot posameznik sramoval tega dela slovenske zgodovine.
            Dokler pa je tako velik delež Slovencev ponosen na komunistično revolucijo pa se mi to kolektivistično sramovanje izmika in ga ne morem sprejeti, pač pa sem v latentni državljanski vojni s tistimi ki so na revolucionarje ponosni.

          • Riki je bil dokaj blizu. Sramovati se je treba tega, da smo poraženci komunistov. Da smo služili leta in leta temu. Sramovati se je treba forumskega junaštva, kajti poznam jih dovolj in preveč takih, ki so junaki dokler ni gospodarja zraven. Sužnji, ki lajajo ko ni gospodarja. Sramovati se je treba vsega tega.
            Nobenega junaštva ni v obsojanju zločinov ob še vedno polnih breznih in jamah, ki jih tako voljno puščamo polne kosti. Češ, na pravico čakamo. Japajade. Sramote je toliko, da bi človek umrl. Toda ne, nekateri ste tako živi.
            In Riki, državljansko vojno je treba zaključit. Komunizem je padel, toda k njegovemu porazu očitno nismo prispevali nič. In zato tudi ničesar nimamo od tega padca.

          • Na to tezo, da k njegovemu padcu nismo prispevali nič, ne pristajam.
            Ogromno je bilo žrtev med čisto navadnimi ljudmi. Če ne drugega, maltretiranj. Onemogočanj .. šikaniranj… in še mnogo mnogo tega.
            Morda pa vi Zdravko vsega tega ne veste ?
            In zato tega niti ne morete razumet ?
            In če ne razumete, zakaj toliiko trmastega vztrajanja pri vaši osebni interpretaciji ?

      • Zdravko: “Kako je lahko bila revolucija “zločin nad slovenskim narodom”, če je šlo za slovenca proti slovencu”
        ===================
        Bili so Slovenci po nacionalnosti, vendar pa so na prvo mesto postavljali to da so komunisti. Skratka:
        Bili so na prvem mestu komunisti, potem predstavniki mednarodnega delavskega razreda, posledično zavezniki ruskih boljševikov, ateisti. Nacionalnost je bila za njih nekaj nazadnjaškega, napredno, progresivno pa je bilo pripadnost mednarodnemu delavskemu razredu. Vera je bila za njih “opij za ljudstvo”.
        Zanimiva je primerjava s Poljaki:
        Poljak je najprej Poljak, potem katoličan in šele potem vse drugo.

        Če je umor Slovenca nad Slovencem zločin je tudi delovanje komunistov zločin nad slovenskim narodom. Še aprila 1941 so imeli slovenski komunisti v svojem načrtu, da bi Slovenija nekoč postala del Sovjetske zveze. Revolucijo so napovedovali. Kardelj Stalinu: “Če se bo pokazala najmanjša možnost da izvedemo revolucijo ne bomo oklevali”, zato je bila okupacija Slovenije za njih tista priložnost, ki so jo čakali, in dočakali.

        Slovenski komunisti in njihova revolucija se lahko primerjajo z delovanjem ISIS danes:
        Obojni so izkoristili okupacijo za začetek svojega delovanja:
        ISIS okupacijo Iraka, komunisti okupacijo Slovenije
        ISIS želel ustvariti kalifat, slovenski komunisti pa komunistični internacionalo in postati del SZ
        ISIS je pobijal svoje sonarodnjake, enako slovenski komunisti
        ISIS je rušil kulturne spomenike (npr. Palmira) da bi utrdil svojo islamsko ideologijo, komunisti so rušili cerkve in gradove
        ISIS-u so na pomoč prihajali s celega sveta, največ iz Evrope, slovenski komunisti so odhajali v špansko državljansko vojno s podobnimi internacionalističnimi nameni.

        Slovenski komunisti so zločinski madež v slovenski zgodovini.

  4. Zlocinov je bilo med drugo vojno in v casu po njej ogromno. Niso samo komunisti povzrocali nedolznih zrtev. Vsi zlocini zasluzijo obsodbo in vse zrtve dostojen grob in spomin.

    Revolucijo je izvedel del slovenskega naroda, ne neka visja sila iz neba in dejansko manjsina naroda. Tezko bi ocenil, da je bil zrtev narod kot celota. Neposredno v obliki ocitne represije niti ne narod kot celota. Komunizem bi prej ocenil kot zlocin proti clovecnosti, ne proti narodu. Morda recimo proti poljskemu narodu. Ne slovenskemu.

    Zlocincem je torej treba soditi moralno in pravno, ne glede ali so Slovenci ali niso. Zdravkovo “modrovanje” je tu absurdno. Kot da bi Nemci rekli, Hitlerja ne smemo obsojati, saj je bil Nemec. Ne smemo obsojati koncentracijskih taborisc in plinskih morilskih celic, saj so to delali Nemci…. Pa kaj je s tabo, Zdravko?

  5. Vsa zahvala Časniku, ker je morda edini slovenski medij, ki redno objavlja zapise poštenih in nepristranskih slovenskih zgodovinarjev.

    Tega, kar nam zgoraj sežeto popisuje dr. Tamara Griesser Pečar, ne bomo izvedeli v nobenem od prevladujočih slovenskih medijev. Ti o takem in podobnem evropskem političnem dogajanju ponavadi ne objavijo ničesar ali v najboljšem primeru le kratke notice, ki gredo popolnoma mimo širše slovenske javnosti.

    Obsodba komunizma, skupaj s fašizmom in nacizmom, dejansko predstavlja glavni tok skupne evropske politike. Medtem ko so zunaj Slovenije, v evropskem parlamentu, vsi  slovenski evropski poslanci, razen Brgleza, glasovali za enako obsodbo vseh totalitarizmov, vključno s komunizmom, pa nas v domovini Brglez in vsi njegovi politični somišljeniki (SD, LMŠ, SMC, LevIca, ZAB, Desus in še kateri) sramotno tiščijo v gnijočo in smrdljivo mrtvico branilcev in častilcev zločinskega komunističnega režima.

  6. 1. septembra je Branko Grims objavil naslednji tvit:

    @BrankoGrims1
    Osrednji mediji že dva dni kritizirajo Poljsko, kako da ni povabila vseh k spominski slovesnosti na žrtve začetka II. svetovne vojne. Nobeden pa ne pove resnice, da se je II. sv. vojna začela s kolaboracijo socializma in nacizma in da so Nemci in Sovjeti skupaj napadli Poljsko.

    Ta tvit je tako zelo “razburil” ljudi pri portalu Oštro, ki je nastal pred kratkim z namenom, da cenzurira predvsem desne medije, da so se 5. septembra oglasili, na pomoč so poklicali zgodovinarja:

    “»Nobena od teh trditev ne drži,« je za Razkrinkavanje.si komentiral zgodovinar dr. Bojan Godeša z inštituta za novejšo zgodovino.

    Nemčija in Sovjetska zveza sta 23. avgusta 1939 podpisali pakt Ribbentrop-Molotov (imenovan tudi pakt Hitler-Stalin), je pojasnil Godeša. »V njem sta se zavezali, da se ne bosta napadli, vendar to ni bil sporazum med dvema ideologijama, torej nacizmom in socializmom, temveč med dvema državama.«

    Pojasnil je, da se je druga svetovna vojna začela 1. septembra 1939 z napadom Nemčije na Poljsko, dva dni pozneje pa sta ji Velika Britanija in Francija napovedali vojno.

    »Nemčija in Sovjetska zveza nista skupaj napadli Poljske. Sovjetske čete so na Poljsko vkorakale, ko so bili Poljaki že na kolenih,« je še dodal Godeša.

    Branko Grims na vprašanje Razkrinkavanja.si, na čem temelji njegova trditev, ni odgovoril.

    Druga svetovna vojna se ni začela z napadom Nemčije in Sovjetske zveze na Poljsko oziroma s kolaboracijo socializma in nacizma. Začela se je 1. septembra 1939, ko je Nemčija napadla Poljsko. Tvit poslanca Grimsa ne drži. ”

    https://www.ostro.si/si/razkrinkavanje/objave/druga-svetovna-vojna-se-ni-zacela-s-kolaboracijo-socializma-in-nacizma

    19. septembra so v evropskem parlamentu sprejeli resolucijo o pomenu evropskega zgodovinskega spomina za prihodnost Evrope, kjer so napisali tudi tole:

    “B. ker sta komunistična Sovjetska zveza in nacistična Nemčija pred 80 leti, 23. avgusta 1939, podpisali pakt o nenapadanju, znan kot pakt Molotov-Ribbentrop, in njegove tajne protokole, s čimer sta si dva totalitarna režima razdelila Evropo in ozemlja neodvisnih držav po interesnih območjih in tako utrdila pot za izbruh druge svetovne vojne;

    C. ker je bila neposredna posledica tega pakta in pogodbe o meji in prijateljstvu med nacisti in Sovjetsko zvezo z dne 28. septembra 1939 ta, da je najprej Hitler vdrl na Poljsko, dva tedna za njim pa še Stalin, s čimer sta poteptala poljsko neodvisnost in povzročila neprimerljivo tragedijo za Poljake, 30. novembra 1939 je komunistična Sovjetska unija začela agresivno vojno s Finsko, junija 1940 je okupirala in si priključila dele Romunije (nekaterih ozemelj ni nikdar vrnila) ter si nasilno prisvojila še neodvisne republike Litvo, Latvijo in Estonijo;”

    https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2019-0021_SL.html

  7. Max Parry vidi drugače, kot Tamara Griesser-Pečar : The EU Is Rewriting WWII History to Demonize Russia, October 22, 2019 na https://www.unz.com/article/the-eu-is-rewriting-wwii-history-to-demonize-russia/

    Last month, on the 80th anniversary of the start of World War II, the European Parliament voted on a resolution entitled “On the Importance of European Remembrance for the Future of Europe.” The adopted document:

    “…Stresses that the Second World War, the most devastating war in Europe’s history, was started as an immediate result of the notorious Nazi-Soviet Treaty on Non-Aggression of 23 August 1939, also known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and its secret protocols, whereby two totalitarian regimes that shared the goal of world conquest divided Europe into two zones of influence; Recalls that the Nazi and communist regimes carried out mass murders, genocide and deportations and caused a loss of life and freedom in the 20th century on a scale unseen in human history, and recalls the horrific crime of the Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazi regime; condemns in the strongest terms the acts of aggression, crimes against humanity and mass human rights violations perpetrated by the Nazi, communist and other totalitarian regimes.”

    For 75 years, we have been told that the war started on September 1st, 1939 when Germany invaded Poland, even though the Pacific Theater between Japan and China began two years earlier. Now we are to understand that it actually began eight days prior when the German foreign minister visited Moscow. Take no notice of the inherent doublespeak in the premise that a war could be the consequence of a peace agreement, which without any evidence provided is said to have contained “secret protocols”, not provisions. You see, unlike the other pacts signed between European countries and Nazi Germany — such as the Munich Betrayal of 1938 with France and Great Britain to which the Soviets were uninvited while Austria and Czechoslovakia were gifted to Hitler for the courtesy of attacking Moscow — Molotov-Ribbentrop was really a confidential agreement between Hitler and Stalin to conquer Europe and divide it between them.

    This is pure mythology. The fact of the matter is that neither the Soviets or even Germany drew the dividing line in Poland in 1939, because it was a reinstatement of the border acknowledged by the League of Nations and Poland itself as put forward by the British following WWI. Even Winston Churchill during his first wartime radio broadcast later that year admitted:

    “Russia has pursued a cold policy of self-interest. We could have wished that the Russian Armies should be standing on their present line as the friends and allies of Poland, instead of as invaders. But that the Russian Armies should stand on this line was clearly necessary for the safety of Russia against the Nazi menace.”

    Yet according to the EU, even though Moscow was the last country to agree to a peace deal with Hitler, it was all part of a hidden plot between them. In that case, why then did Germany choose to invade the USSR in 1941? The EU leaves this question unanswered. Forget about its racial policies of enslaving slavs or that Hitler openly declared in Mein Kampf that Germany needed to conquer the East to secure the Lebensraum . Nevermind that in the Spring of 1941, less than two months before Operation Barbarossa, Stalin gave a speech to the Kremlin at a state banquet for recent graduates of the Frunze Military Academy to give warning of an imminent attack:

    “War with Germany is inevitable. If comrade Molotov can manage to postpone the war for two or three months through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that will be our good fortune, but you yourselves must go off and take measures to raise the combat readiness of our forces.”

    The EU has redacted that the entire reason for the signing of the Nazi-Soviet pact in August 1939 had been to buy time for the Red Army’s attrition warfare strategy to adequately prepare its armaments against a future invasion by the Wehrmacht. The Soviet leadership well understood that Germany would eventually renege on the agreement, considering that in 1936 it had signed the Anti-Comintern Pact with Japan and Italy directed at the Communist International. For six years, the USSR was thwarted in its attempts to forge an equivalent anti-fascist coalition and to collectively defend Czechoslovakia by the British and the French, whose ruling classes were too busy courting and doing business with Germany. It had been the Soviets alone who defended the Spanish Republic from Franco in the final rehearsal before the worldwide conflict and only when all other recourses had run out did they finally agree to a deal with the Hitlerites.

    Just a week prior to the signing of the neutrality treaty, Stalin gave a secret speech to the Politburo where he explained:

    “The question of war or peace has entered a critical phase for us. If we conclude a mutual assistance treaty with France and Great Britain, Germany will back off of Poland and seek a modus vivendi with the Western Powers. War would thus be prevented but future events could take a serious turn for the USSR. If we accept Germany’s proposal to conclude with it a non-aggression pact, Germany will then attack Poland and Europe will be thrown into serious acts of unrest and disorder. Under these circumstances we will have many chances of remaining out of the conflict while being able to hope for our own timely entrance into war.”

    This latest resolution is part of a long pattern of misrepresentation of WWII by the Anglo-Saxon empire, but is perhaps its most egregious falsification that truly desecrates the graves of the 27 million Soviet citizens who were 80% of the total Allied death toll. Earlier this year, for the commemoration on the 75th anniversary of the Normandy landings, Russia and its head of state were excluded from the events in Portsmouth, England. As if the ongoing absence of Western European leaders from the May 9th Victory Day ceremonies held annually in Russia weren’t insulting enough, while it’s true that the Eastern Front was not involved in Operation Overlord, Russian President Vladimir Putin had previously been in attendance at the 70th anniversary D-Day events in 2014. No doubt the increase in geopolitical tensions between the West and Moscow in the years since has given the EU license to write out Russia’s role in the Allied victory entirely with little public disapproval, though many of the families of those who volunteered in the International Brigades were rightly insulted by this tampering of history and voiced their objection.

    The EU motion‘s real purpose is to fabricate the war’s history by giving credit to the United States for the liberation of Europe while absolving the Western democracies that opened the door for the rise of fascism and tried to use Germany to annihilate the USSR. History itself should always be open to debate and subject to study and revision, but the Atlanticists have made this formal change without any evidence to support it and entirely for political purposes. Like the founding of the EU project itself, the declared aim of the proposal is supposedly to prevent future atrocities from taking place, even though the superstate was designed by former Nazis like Walter Hallstein, the first President of the European Commission, who was a German lawyer in several Nazi Party law organizations and fought for the Wehrmacht in France until his capture as a POW after the invasion of Normandy.

    Rather than preventing future crimes, the EU has committed one itself by deceptively modifying the historical record of communism to be parallel with that of the Third Reich. Even further, that they were two sides of the same coin of ‘totalitarianism’ and that for all the barbarity committed during the war, the Soviets were equally culpable — or judging by the amount of times the text cites the USSR versus Germany, even more so. It remains unclear whether we are now to completely disregard the previous conclusions reached by the military tribunals held by the Allies under international law at Nuremberg of which all 12 war criminals sentenced to death in 1946 were German, not Soviet. The document doesn’t even attempt to hide its politicized direction at the current government in Moscow, stating that:

    “Russia remains the greatest victim of communist totalitarianism and that its development into a democratic state will be impeded as long as the government, the political elite and political propaganda continue to whitewash communist crimes and glorify the Soviet totalitarian regime.”

    This accusation does not stand up to critical observation, as Russia has since erected official memorials to those executed and politically persecuted during the so-called ‘Great Terror.’ However, the stark difference between the EU resolution and the Wall of Grief in Moscow is that the latter is based on evidence from the Soviet archives. It has become a widespread and ridiculous belief in the West that Stalin somehow killed as much as five times as many people as Hitler, an absurdity not reflected in the now disclosed and once highly secretive Soviet archives, which after two decades of examination show that over a period of three decades from the early 1920s to his death in 1953, the total recorded number of Soviet citizens executed by the state was slightly less than 800,000. While that is certainly a horrid number, how does it even begin to compare to an industrial scale extermination based on the race theory?

    How can anyone believe Stalin killed tens of millions of people when even the most simple analysis of a population demographics chart shows that the Soviet population rate consistently increased each decade with the only reduction taking place during WWII as a result of their casualties? Socialists, who perhaps more than any other political tendency seem to suffer from autophobia, should defend their own history from such falsification. It is only when flaws occur under communist states that the entire political and economic system is to be denounced outright, but never capitalism which for five centuries has colonized half the world while enslaving and killing entire nations.

    Most of the wildly exaggerated death figures stem from falsities written in The Black Book of Communism by a group of right-wing French academics in 1997 ,who did not conceal their apologism for the Nazi collaborationist self-proclaimed Russian Liberation Army (ROA) commanded by Gen. Andrey Vlasov who defected to Germany during the war:

    “A singular fate was reserved for the Vlasovtsy, the Soviet soldiers who had fought under the Soviet general Andrei Vlasov. Vlasov was the commander of the Second Army who had been taken prisoner by the Germans in July 1942. On the basis of his anti-Stalinist convictions, General Vlasov agreed to collaborate with the Nazis to free his country from the tyranny of the Bolsheviks.”

    The other highly cited work by the West for its overestimated portrayal of Soviet repression is the equally unreliable The Gulag Archipelago volumes by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who as historian Ludo Martens noted also attempted to provide justification for Vlasov’s treason in his best-selling 1973 work:

    “And so it was that Vlasov’s Second Shock Army perished, literally recapitulating the fate of Samsonov’s Russian Second Army in World War I, having been just as insanely thrown into encirclement. Now this, of course, was treason to the Motherland! This, of course, was vicious, self-obsessed betrayal! But it was Stalin’s. Treason does not necessarily involve selling out for money. It can include ignorance and carelessness in the preparations for war, confusion and cowardice at its very start, the meaningless sacrifice of armies and corps solely for the sake of saving one’s own marshal’s uniform. Indeed, what more bitter treason is there on the part of a Supreme Commander in Chief?”

    The truth is located in the Soviet archives which indicate that Stalin’s successor, the Ukrainian-born Nikita Khrushchev, was as intent on absolving the entirety of the Soviet leadership as himself from any culpability in the purges of the 1930s so that blame for its excesses were placed squarely on his predecessor. In succession, Western historians like the British Foreign Office propagandist Robert Conquest followed his example and this account quickly became official doctrine. In hindsight, Khrushchev’s infamous 1956 secret speech, “On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences”, was what planted the seeds of self-doubt in the Soviet system that would eventually lead to its undoing decades later. To the contrary, what the historical records show is most of those who were purged in that period were not necessarily perceived as political threats to Stalin himself, but were targeted because of an overall systemic paranoia held by the entire Soviet government regarding internal sabotage and counter-revolutionary activity by a real fifth column getting inspiration from a certain traitorous former Bolshevik in exile and a potential invasion originating from outside the country.

    Many forget that during the Russian Civil War, exactly such a scenario had occurred when the Allies of World War I, including the United States, collectively intervened on the side of the Whites only to be driven out by the Red Army, making such fearful instincts not entirely unreasonable. Not to mention, the rapid industrialization of the entire nation in a single decade while in preparation for the growing threat of war with Germany. When Hitler began his Masterplan for the East, their worst fears came to fruition when tens of thousands of Banderite turncoats enlisted in the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician) in Ukraine to collaborate with the German occupiers in the slaughter of their fellow countrymen and after the war ended, continued their treasonous struggle during the 1950s with assistance from the CIA. So the saying goes, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you…

    As for the accusation of “whitewashing”, it is true that recent polls indicate that 70% of Russians today hold a favorable view of Stalin — but just as many are nostalgic for communism itself and regret the breakup of the USSR on the basis that the socialist system ‘took care of ordinary people.’ Putin did once remark that despite Stalin’s legacy of repression, he doubted that the native Georgian statesman would have been willing to drop two atomic bombs on Japan like the United States, an atrocity that killed 225,000 innocent civilians (most of them instantly) which is more than a quarter of those capitally punished during the entire Stalin era. Was he wrong to say so? A significant amount of deaths also occurred in the Soviet-wide famines of the 1930s, but there is significantly more evidence to suggest that the British deliberately starved 3 million Bengalis to death then there is to support the Holodomor fraud concocted by the Ukrainian nationalist diaspora. If the West wants to talk about deliberate starvation, it should take a look at what the U.S. did with its economic sanctions in the 1990s killing half a million Iraqi children which former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright famously described as “worth it.”

    This isn’t the first time the Anglosphere has historically omitted the Soviet role in the Allied victory or conflated the USSR with the Third Reich. On previous occasions the European Parliament has issued resolutions declaring August 23rd “a European day of remembrance of the victims of the Nazi-Soviet alliance.” This is all an attempt by the Atlanticists to depict communism as somehow worse than fascism while disconnecting the Nazis from the lineage of European settler colonialism whose racism was its source of inspiration. Why is that which befell the Jews not considered an extension of what was already done to the Herero-Nama tribes for which Namibia is now suing Germany a century later?

    The neoliberal political establishment in Europe and its anti-EU populist opponents are fond of appearing dead-set against one another, but it seems they share the same fairytale beliefs about WWII that the Nazis and Soviets were equivalent evils as inscribed in this latest decree. It has always been ironic that the liberal billionaire “philanthropist” and currency manipulator George Soros is so derided by right-wing populists when it was his Open Society Institute NGOs which engineered the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe. Soros may be averse to the anti-immigrant brand of right-wing nationalism currently on the rise in Western Europe, but as a fanatical Russophobe he is willing to make strange bedfellows with ultra-nationalists in Kiev to undermine Moscow’s sphere of influence and that includes revising WWII history to a version favored by the Banderites which took power during the pro-EU 2014 coup d’etat in Ukraine.

    The Nazi junta regime in Kiev has since instituted Russophobic ‘de-communization’ laws erasing the remaining traces of Ukraine’s Soviet past while replacing them with memorials to their wartime foes. A recent example was the city of Vinnitsa renaming a street that paid tribute to the Soviet spy and war hero Richard Sorge to that after Omelyan Hrabetsk, a commander of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army which cooperated with Germany during the war and killed thousands of Poles and Jews. Sorge posed as a German journalist in Tokyo and famously provided timely intelligence to Moscow that Japan did not plan to attack the USSR, allowing Stalin to transfer essential reinforcements to the Battle of Moscow which proved to be a major turning point in the war. He was executed by the Japanese in 1944 and posthumously awarded the Hero of the Soviet Union.

    Now the EU is ‘decommunizing’ history in its own legislation. Meanwhile, Soros’s influence over the EU cannot be overstated as his lobbying power has enabled him to provide direct council to its executive branch more than any official head of state in the political and economic union. The hedge fund tycoon made a fortune as an investor during Russia’s mass privatization in the 1990s after enlisting Jeffrey Sachs and the IMF to apply ‘shock therapy’ to its economy as it did in Poland and his native Hungary. Under Putin, however, Soros’s NGOs have since been barred from Russia. Perhaps the reason he can so cynically provide support to fascist elements in Ukraine to undercut Moscow is that he did so personally in his upbringing in Hungary.

    Born Gyorgy Schwartz, during WWII he was a teenager from an affluent Jewish family which survived the Axis occupation by using their wealth to bribe a government official from the collaborationist Arrow Cross government who provided the Soros’s forged documents identifying them as Christians, while the adolescent by his own admission delivered deportation notices to other Jews. A short time later, the young Soros impersonated the adopted gentile son of an official who inventoried the stolen valuables and property from Jewish estates and even accompanied him during his work. One would assume as a Jew he would have been haunted by these experiences, but Soros has repeatedly stated he has no regrets and even disturbingly compared it to his future work as an investor.

    SHOCKING: George Soros, a chief financial supporter of Antifa, was himself a Nazi collaborator and to this day has no regrets

    Like Soros, the EU has no ideology except an unquenchable thirst for greed and is fond of Nazis when they are the kind that hate Russia. For its own political interests, it is willing to dangerously foster a version of history invented by a rebranded far right where the quislings who collaborated with the Axis powers elude guilt and the Soviets who courageously defeated them are maliciously slandered. Fascism was never fully eradicated only because the West continued to nurture it during the Cold War and even now that capitalism has been reinstated in Eurasia, it continues to do so to undermine a resurgent Moscow on the world stage.

    As the world appears increasingly on the brink of WWIII, one is reminded of the expression by Karl Marx who famously stated that “history repeats itself…first as tragedy, then as farce” in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon, when comparing Napoleon Bonaparte’s seizure of power in the French Revolution with the coup by his nephew half a century later which brought an end to the French Revolution. Equally fitting is the humorous line by the legendary writer and noted anti-imperialist Mark Twain who reputedly said, “history doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.” Both are applicable to the unquestionable tragedy of WWII and the farcical mockery of its history by the EU whose policies continue to make another global conflict that much more likely.”

    Max Parry is an independent journalist and geopolitical analyst. His work has appeared in Counterpunch, Global Research, Dissident Voice, Greanville Post, OffGuardian, American Herald Tribune and more. Max may be reached atmaxrparry@live.com

    Potrebno dodati, da s PRAVILNIM sklepanjem pri NAPAČNIH informacijah pridemo do NAPAČNEGA sklepa, kot pravi matematična logika – implikacija. Vsi arhivi še vedno niso odprti!
    Prevečkrat se uporablja tudi tavtologija – absolutna resnica tudi s strani avtorice in drugih. Na objekt obravnave je potrebno gledati s filozofske distance brez predsodnkov in emocij.

  8. The History of World War II: The War Started in October 1938 Ivan Daraktchiev na Global Research, October 02, 2019.
    Celoten članek s slikami in viri na https://www.globalresearch.ca/truth-80-years-beginning-wwii-october-1938/5690808

    Historians, media pundits and politicians have managed to postulate, and impose it into the history annals, encyclopedias and school books that the Second World War was started in September 1939 by Nazi Germany’s invasion [1] and prompt defeat[2] of Poland.

    This version is definitely appealing to several generations of Western leaders in their ongoing anti-Russian paranoia, insinuating an implicit guilt – or at least a degree of complicity – by the Soviet Union, which, in compliance with its treaty with the Germans[3], a few weeks later[4] proceeded to advance to the agreed upon common border with the Third Reich, thus recovering the lands of the Russian Empire that were lost 20 years prior to that during the tumultuous years of WWI, the Russian Revolution and the Civil war.

    The fact that Japan, a key participant in the war had started its military campaigns in 1937 and through 1938 had conquered parts of China, Manchuria, and fought the Soviet Union, is typically discarded, either because the conflicts have been fought 1:1 or because this was Asia[5]. We could argue either way but for now let’s close our eyes to that and focus on Europe, center stage of homo sapiens thus far greatest man-made disaster, which we denote as WWII, wherein at least 70 million people from no less than 30 nationalities lost their lives.

    Until recently I have been satisfied by above version as I, too, did not know better. Until the moment publications have surfaced about the actual course of events triggering hostilities, including simultaneous[6] armed conflicts and land invasion followed by occupation, between several states[7]. Regardless who wanted to cover for whom, my conclusion was that:

    World War II started in October of 1938 by Germany, with the support of Poland and Hungary attacking, invading, and eventually annihilating the sovereign republic of Czechoslovakia!

    The Munich Agreement is signed[14] by Chamberlain, Daladier, Mussolini and Hitler, which stipulates that the European Powers agree to break up Czechoslovakia of which Sudetenland is to be annexed by Germany starting on Oct. 1st and to be completed by Oct. 10th; within 3 months Czechoslovakia is to give up its lands on which claims are laid by Poland and Hungary

    Here is the sequence of events

    A) Preparatory phase

    1934 = Mutually assured Non-Aggression Pact Germany-Poland is signed for 10 year period.
    1935 = During a visit to Warsaw H. Goering, appointed by Hitler to lead and groom a warming German-Polish relationship, proposes to his hosts to join in a “probable” future expansion to the East promising them a part of Soviet Ukraine as a war trophy /1/.
    1938 = March 13th: Austria ceases to exist, and without any objections whatsoever the Austrians become citizens of the Third Reich– a post factum plebiscite is carried out as well.
    1938 = March 17th: Encouraged by the success of its ally, Poland presents Lithuania with an ultimatum, demanding that it (i) enacts a change in its constitution wherein Vilnius, occupied by the Poles since 1922, is still mentioned as its capital city, and (ii) gives up that territory. Unless within 24 hours the Lithuanians accept these demands, Poland threatens to attack Kaunas and occupy the remainder of the tiny country.
    1938 = Sept. 19th: The Polish Government expresses its agreement with Hitler’s opinion that Czechoslovakia is an artificial creature. Poland also expresses support to Hungary’s claims in its territorial dispute with Czechoslovakia.
    1938 = Sept. 20th: Hitler gives official guarantees to Jozef Lipski, Polish Ambassador in Berlin, that in a “probable” Polish-Czechoslovakian military conflict over Czech Teshin region[8] Germany will support the Polish side. Full agreement is reached about coordinated German-Polish military action against Czechoslovakia.
    1938 = Sept. 21st:
    Large border conflict is provoked in the early morning hours at the German-Czech border.
    Poland presents Czechoslovakia with a note demanding solution of the problem with Polish national minority in Czech Teshin, Silesia.
    1938 = Sept. 22nd: Polish Government issues an express announcement by which it denounces Polish-Czechoslovakian Treaty about the national minorities. Later that same day Poland presents Czechoslovakia with an ultimatum about annexation of its territories hosting Polish inhabitants.[9]
    1938 = Sept. 25th: Various attacks take place in the Teshin region:
    At Konska, near Trshinec, the Poles attack (by gunfire and grenades) the barracks of the Czechoslovakian border garrison, as a result of which two buildings are burnt out; after a couple of hours gunfight the attackers withdraw back to Polish inland.
    Polish band attacks by gunfire and grenades the railway station of Frystat.
    1938 = Sept. 27th: Poland issues a second demand for “return” of Teshin region. During that night the whole of the Teshin region is pierced by the sound of gunfire, including that by machine guns. The official Polish news agency reports that the most bloody confrontations took place in the vicinity of Bohumin, Teshin and Jablunkov, in Bystrica, Konska, Skrshechon. Armed groups of “rebels”[10] repeatedly attack Czechoslovak army’s gun and ammunition depots and Polish airplane routinely violate Czechoslovak air space. The real news is scarcely reported abroad, except for “Pravda” in the Soviet Union /2/11.
    1938 = Sept. 29th:
    1. The infamous Munich conference begins, in rather peculiar manner: the high representatives of the four Central European Powers deliberate, in the presence of other nations’ observers, but the party whose fate is being discussed and decided upon – and by whose authorization this whole thing proceeds is not questioned at all – is not allowed in; it awaits the news about the verdict in a separate room…
    2. Polish diplomats in Paris and London insist on equal approach to the “solution” of Sudeten- and Tesh-in-“problems.” Separately, Polish and German officers conclude agreement on the demarcation line between their respective armies, in case of invasion.
    3. German and Polish newspapers report touching scenes of “comrades in arms”-type brotherhood in meetings between Nazis and Polish fascists.[12]
    4. A Czechoslovakian border post near Grgava is attacked by a 20 member gang armed with automatic weapons. The attack fails, attackers are repelled and flee to Poland, except a captured wounded man, testifying that the group included many Germans living in Poland…

    B. The phase of real actions:[13]

    1938 = Sept. 30th:

    1. By 01:00h the Munich Agreement is signed[14] by Chamberlain, Daladier, Mussolini and Hitler (see image below), which stipulates that the European Powers agree to break up Czechoslovakia of which Sudetenland is to be annexed by Germany starting on Oct. 1st and to be completed by Oct. 10th; within 3 months Czechoslovakia is to give up its lands on which claims are laid by Poland and Hungary, and to submit to their demands for annexation; all in exchange for guaranteed peaceful coexistence from then on /3, 4/. At 02:45h the representatives of Czechoslovakia Masaryk and Mostny are given to sign the contract of cession of Sudetenland to Germany. Formal notification to the Czech authorities in Prague is given at 06:20h /5/.

    2. Polish government issues an ultimatum to the Czechoslovak government with the demand to evacuate within 24 hours its military troops and police units from the disputed Teshin area.
    1938 = Oct. 1st:
    1. German occupation of Sudetenland begins.
    2. Polish occupation of the Czechoslovak Teshin Silesia begins /6-8/.
    1938 = Oct. 5th: Regular Hungarian troops cross the border and attack Czechoslovak positions near Jesenske but are forced to withdraw leaving several casualties and prisoners.
    1938 = Oct. 6th: Hungarian paramilitary infiltrate Carpathian Ruthenia with the task of sabotage and terror acts to provoke armed conflict.
    1938 = Oct. 7th: Hungarian troops attempt to cross Danube near Shturovo, and fail again.
    1938 = Oct. 8th: Hungarian paramilitary blow up a bridge over Borozhava River in Ruthenia.
    1938 = Oct. 10th:
    1. German occupation of Sudetenland completed /9/.
    2. Hungarian troops damage railway facilities and murder a railway officer in Borozhava.
    1938 = Nov. 2nd:
    1. Vienna arbitration: Germany and Italy arbitrate between Czechoslovakia and Hungary; the result is award to Hungary of Czechoslovak lands.
    2. Immediate invasion by Hungarian army and occupation of Czechoslovak territories /10, 11/.
    1938 = Dec. 1st: Hungary annexes further Czechoslovak lands.
    1939 = March 13th: Hungarian army begins occupation of Carpathian Ukraine (Ruthenia).
    1939 = March 14th-15th: German army occupies the rest of Czechoslovakia. Very low level of resistance by local troops exhibited occasionally, yet the operation is not entirely bloodless /12/.
    1939 = March 16th:
    1. Slovakia is created as a German client state. The remainder of once independent Czechoslovakia is split into two German Protectorates: Bohemia and Moravia. (see map below)
    2. Hungarian army attacks and captures Khust in Carpathian Ukraine /13/. (see map below)

    C. Phase I of World War II completed: Czechoslovakian land is conquered, the state annihilated, its gold reserves transferred into the coffers of Nazi Germany, leader of the never-spelled-out-in-the-open “coalition of the willing trio”

    ***

    Question time:

    Every schooled person has heard the story of how Neville Chamberlain was ridiculed for his piece of white paper waived at the airport, of which paper he claimed that it has bought peace (for the British, if anyone) yet a year later upon the invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany, the UK declared war on Germany.[16]

    But being aware of the Munich conference does not absolve us from the obligation to think straight: What happened next? What does it mean that three neighbors send troops to attack and occupy their neighbor’s lands, take possession of its assets, subdue its population, call parts of its territory theirs?

    Why nobody calls military occupation of a country that has neither called in foreign troops nor agreed with invasion through its borders a war? Aren’t coercion, provocation, serving ultimatums and the like tools of war[17]? Why nobody calls a war a war?

    I’d leave you to ponder over these questions, and will just answer a few more myself: Can leaders of the most powerful country in the world have the prerogative to judge, to dictate, to meddle in other countries’ affairs? No!

    Can we call Nazi Germany a pariah state for conducting a dozen of European states to join it in its war for USSR’s resources?

    Yes, we can!

    Can we call USA a pariah state for conducing even more states from around the world to join it in its countless aggressive, unjustified, illegal wars ever since 1991 – 18? Yes, without a shred of doubt!

    Can we call Nazi Germany a pariah state for their genocidal racism (against Russians – claiming they are all members of an Untermensch society – and other Slavs, such as Poles and Czechs; against Jews and Gypsies, etc.)? Yes!

    Can we call Israel a pariah state for their genocidal racism (against Palestinians: their own cousins, and autochthonous owners of the major part of the land called Palestine for more than 2000 years), and for their aggressive wars against their neighbors, at least during the last 40 years? Yes!…

    Happy Anniversary! And please remember the lessons of history – and learn them, if you haven’t yet!

    Too many humans have died in senseless wars, only because their “leaders” have not learned the history lessons.

    Today the problem is compounded by: (i) lack of knowledge; (ii) wrong perception of the world (and respectively “the enemy”), due to near perfect brainwashing; (iii) enormous pressure by the financial capital (stirred by the ubiquitous “deep state”); (iv) growing pressure by the MIC; (v) incessantly escalating economic pressure as an intrinsic feature of the prevailing socio-political arrangement, whereby “free market” economy is the norm /17/.

    Above considerations call for periodic inquisitive examination and reassessment of all “given truths”, and that means asking questions, first quietly to ourselves, and then to the outside world, loud.

    Back to basics: Why 1939 and not 1938?

    I don’t think we need to go too far to search for an answer:

    On September 29th-30th, 1938 a conference was held in Munich, which resulted in signing a document whereby the four major European states, Germany, Great Britain, Italy and France agreed that Germany should obtain from Czechoslovakia the region of Sudetenland.

    Now, did the four doctors ask the patient whether or not he agrees that a couple of limbs should be amputated from his body? No, the representatives of Czechoslovakia were not even in the conference room during the discussion: they were made to wait in one of the next chambers of the infamous building, just to be handed the verdict[19] after the leaders of the quartet had all signed the document[20]. Who has authorized the perpetrators to such diktat?

    Nobody: they had simply assumed the prerogative to dictate. Germany and Italy because of their respective Nazi- and Fascist ideology, while France and UK for the most idiotic pretext of them all: to avoid another world war[21] (despite the commitments made earlier to the Czechs and Slovaks to defend their state’s sovereignty, if need be).

    The British and French leaders’ idiocy became a common reason for their ridicule by just everybody ever since, given only a year later they were at war anyway. And was it not for the defeat of the Wehrmacht by the Soviet troops, France of today would still be centered at Vichy, while the British Empire would certainly have shrunk significantly, having had sequestered everything save for Albion[22].

    In conclusion, the main perpetrators, Germany, Poland and Hungary, had three accomplices, in this international crime: Italy, Great Britain and France.

    The first three started WWII in October of 1938 with the conscious assistance by the other trio.

    The political correctness and the games of politicking by the winners may have imposed onto historians, journalists, writers and intellectuals the version all of us who belong to the during- and postwar-generations have been taught at school, but it ain’t the whole truth!

    And this can not and should not continue any longer as those of us who do not like to live in a world based on lies or partial truths are silently becoming the majority. And silent we can not and should not remain. Here is one voice, for those who care:

    We need the truth! If not, mankind will soon degenerate….

    • Začetek 2. svetovne vojne so določili umetno in spretno. Z napadom Nemčije na Poljsko. Sovražnosti pa so se začele že zdavnaj preje. Takoj po znamenju na nebu, kot ga je napovedala Sveta mati v Fatimi. Ja, lahko rečemo, da se je že takrat pričelo metanje Boga iz Evrope.

      Tako je bil 25. januarja 1938 polarni sij viden na območju polovice Evrope. https://www.casnik.si/polarni-sij-viden-po-evropi/

      Anschluss (tudi Anschluß ali poslovenjeno anšlus) je nemški izraz za aneksijo, s katerim konkretno označujemo priključitev Avstrije Tretjemu rajhu dne 13. marca 1938. Pozneje so v Avstriji razpisali referendum, na katerem je za priključitev glasovalo 99 % volivcev. Poštena in svobodna izvedba referenduma je vprašljiva. https://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anschluss

      Skratka! Za Boga se je 2. svetovne vojne začela takrat, ko je Hitler pričel zbirati vojake za Anschluss.

  9. Prebral sem ta angleški tekst. Opravičevanje komunizma. In relativiziranje s tem, kaj so počenjali takoimenovani kapitalisti. Če pogledamo, kako je bilo pri nas, zlasti med vojno, potem je jasno, kaj so komunisti. Tisoče nedolžnih žrtev, tudi med otroki.
    In še DANES ljubljanske mestne oblasti (janković!) v Ljubljani ne dovolijo krščanskega pogreba po nedolžnem pobitih Ciganov, med katerimi so bili tudi dojenčki. To je vzorec komunizma. Še vedno!

    • To je ta “analiza po dejstvih”, ki vedno konča kvečjemu v smislu “vsi so krivi”, “za prepir sta potrebna dva” in podobno. Čeprav v Sloveniji bi imeli prav. Tu so res vsi v sporu z vsemi. Tako na primer pri tolikih žrtvah, ki bi jih morali pokopat, so našli ravno neke Cigane, ki jih nikoli ni bilo v Ljubljani, če sem prav razumel.
      Ne opravičujem Jankovića kar tako, ker je že povedal, da za domobrance ni prostora v Ljubljani, vendar bi to le malo težje izpeljal kot tole.

      • Zdravko: “…, vendar bi to le malo težje izpeljal kot tole.”
        ===================
        Kaj je “to”.
        Kaj je “tole”.

        Kako bi izpeljal “to”?
        Kako bi izpeljal “tole”

        Za koliko težje je “malo težje” od “težkega”?

        Zaenkrat vemo, da bi Zdravko “to” izpeljal malo težje kot pa “tole”.

        • Tvoji sovražni komentarji so čisto odveč, čeprav so tako slovenski.
          Torej janković bi tole z domobranci težje izpeljal kot s cigani. ok? Kako je lepo biti glup. Poznaš to pesem. Preberi si jo. Kajti komiji vam pustijo se delati glupe in porečejo, če se delajo glupi naj plačajo davek na neumnost.

      • Cilj je relativiziranje, kot je napisal ortikon.
        Cilj komunistov ni ugotavljanje dejstev, ampak relativiziranje, to je izničevanje dejstev, ki pa govorijo sama zase.
        Po kakšni logiki bi Jankovič težje izpeljal, če bi bilo govora o domobrancih?
        Prej bi rekla da še lažje!!

Prijava

Za komentiranje se prijavite