Russians did not kill Poles in Katyn

"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
om...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
om...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
om...


what do you mean collusion?

Look the word up in a dictionary Michael

And what the actual basis to believe
that is right interpretation of the actual history.


The treaties signed between the USSR and Nazi Germany in 1939,
specifcally the secret protocols

So what? Standard practice for anyone. For istance
on 25.08.39 Britain signed agreement of mutual assitance
with Poland, so called Galifax-Rachinsky pact, which also
included a secret protocol defining who is "european state"
against which it is directed and what to do if there will
be need to change that "europen state" to another
"european state". It is defensive pact without secret
protocol and cab be aggresive with one. Ever heard about this?


Nope cause it doesnt exist, the Anglo Polish mutual assistance treaty
of 25th August 1939 was signed by HALIFAX and RACZYNSKI
and was far from secret. In fact the British PM wrote to Hitler on the
28th August specifically to inform him of its content so that there
would be no confusion, he then went on to make a public speech
in the house of commons about the subject. There was no doubt at
the time in anyones mind about the British position.

Existence of Secret Protocols for HALIFAX-RACZYNSKI pact is
secret perhaps only for you, Keith. Anyone else can read the
pact and its secret protocol in many places including:

http://2ndww.tripod.com/Germany/390825.html
http://history.dodnetwork.com/index.....php&art_id=90

it says:

"...SECRET PROTOCOL

The Polish Government and the Government of the United Kingdom and
Northern Ireland are agreed upon the following interpretation of the
Agreement of Mutual Assistance signed this day as alone authentic and
binding.

1. (a) By the expression "a European Power" employed in the Agreement
is to be understood Germany.
(b) In the event of action within the meaning of Article 1 or 2 of the
Agreement by a European Power other than Germany, the Contracting
Parties will consult together on the measures to be taken in common.

-----------------
My comment:

So not only Germany, Keith? And who else?


A European power perhaps

Article 2 of the HALIFAX-RACZYNSKI pact says that:

(1) The provisions of Article 1 will also apply in the event of any
action by a European Power which clearly threatened, directly or
indirectly, the independence of one of the Contracting Parties, and
was of such a nature that the Party in question considered it vital to
resist it with its armed forces.

How do you like this ANY ACTION, Keith?


Its entirely consistent with the treaty.

(2) Should one of the Contracting Powers become engaged in hostilities
with a European Power in consequence of action by that Power which
threatened the independence or neutrality of another European State in
such a way as to constitute a clear menace to the security of that
Contracting Party, the provisions of Article 1 will apply, without
prejudice, however, to the rights of the other European State
concerned.

WOW! "another European State" now.
------------------


Irony Mode On
Gee what a surprise when the original treaty referred to
'a European State' it really meant 'a European State'

Wow

Irony Mode Off

2. (a) The two Governments will from time to time determine by mutual
agreement the hypothetical cases of action by Germany coming within
the ambit of Article 2 of the Agreement.
(b) Until such time as the two Governments have agreed to modify the
following provisions of this paragraph, they will consider: that the
case contemplated by paragraph (1) of the Article 2 of the Agreement
is that of the Free City of Danzig; and that the cases contemplated by
paragraph (2) of Article 2 are Belgium, Holland, Lithuania.
(c) Latvia and Estonia shall be regarded by the two Governments as
included in the list of countries contemplated by paragraph (2) of
Article 2 from the moment that an undertaking of mutual assistance
between the United Kingdom and a third State covering those two
countries enters into force.
(d) As regards Roumania, the Government of the United Kingdom refers
to the guarantee which it has given to that country; and the Polish
Government refers to the reciprocial undertakings of the
Roumano-Polish alliance which Poland has never regarded as
incompatible with her traditional friendship for Hungary.
3. The undertakings mentioned in Article 6 of the Agreement, should
they be entered into by one of the Contracting Parties with a third
State, would of necessity be so framed that their execution should at
no time prejudice either the sovereignty or territorial inviolability
of the other Contracting Party.
4. The present protocol constitutes an integral part of the Agreement
signed this day, the scope of which it does not exceed.
In faith whereof the undersigned, being duly authorized, have signed
the present Protocol.
Done in English in duplicate, at London, the 25th August 1939. A
Polish text shall subsequently be agreed upon between the Contracting
Parties and both texts will then be authentic. "

So was the text of that Secret Protocol made public in august 1939?
You could know better history of your own country, Keith.


Which is essentially the same clarification of the treaty as was included
in Chamberlains letter to Hitler.

It was a Protocol to be sure but assuredly not a secret one
or are you suggesting Hitler didnt know the UK had offered
terrotorial gurantees to Poland



Keith I do not quite understand you. what you want to prove?


That the Soviet Government colluded with the Nazis to carve up
Poland between them.

How? documents do not say a word about carving up.

It uses diplomatic language (spheres of influence) for
the same thing. Note that the agrreements regarding
post war Germany also used similar language.

Actual history events also do not. After all Stalin restored
Poland although in a bit different borders.

Well now he was pressed rather hard on that matter at
Yalta and gain at Potsdam.

Why
he did not took it all? Who could stop him in 45?


He agreed to it long before 1945 and he was assuredly concerned
to get the Western Allies to demobilise, especially knowing
as he did through Klaus Fuchs and others just how close the
USA was to achieving nuclear weapons


The Polish officer corps represented a
possible threat to Soviet hegemony and Stalin dealt with it
the same way he dealt with the officer corps of the Red Army in
1939, mass executions and deportations to Siberia.

Note this is based on wrong assumption that Polish
officers were killed by NKVD. What if Germans did that?


The evidence of many sources including Soviet
and Russian governments suggests they did not


Around 1 million Poles were sent to Soviet prison camps in
1940/41 and the Soviets forcibly imposed their own education
and governmental institutions in Eastern Poland. This was no
liberation, it was Empire building.

Keith you clearly do not like other Empire buildings.
British Empire building is Ok of course.


No it was immoral.

I see.


I fear you dont.

Keith