Posted on 05/18/2014 1:42:51 PM PDT by Tzvi INN.com
Slawomir Kopycinski is not the exception in Poland, he’s the rule. And we should not tell any more lies about it.
Either there's a mistranslation somewhere, or the guy doesn't know his own history.
There were three partitions of Poland in the 18th century, and the Nazis and Soviets split it up again in 1939.
Which would seem to make the process he was complaining about the 5th.
FWIW: Jewish Press Fires Online Editor Yori Yanover for Criticizing Ultra-Orthodox Anti-Draft Rally
Doesn't give much background, but apparently some Polish pol doesn't want to give back some property to the heirs of those the Nazis stole it from back in the day.
Since this theft took place 75 years ago, all the actual participants are dead.
I don't know how Kopycinski came into possession of this property, but it would likely be an injustice for it to be taken from him and returned to the heirs of the original owners. It is unlikely he had anything to do personally with the original property, and may in fact have acquired it in perfectly good faith. Quite possibly with no awareness of is history.
The answer, of course, is for the government to compensate either the heirs of the original owners or Mr. Kopycinski. Possibly some or all of this money should come from the descendants of the states responsible for the original theft and murder, the Germans or Russians.
I found the general tone of the article more than a little disturbing.
I mean, listen to this bastard, Kopycinski, he’s actually complaining about giving back property his family and his neighbors have stolen almost 70 years ago.
The author provides no evidence that Kopycinski, his family or his neighbors were personally involved in the theft of this property. Apparently they are to be standins for all Poles, who must suffer now because some other Poles in the past did bad things.
You'd think a Jew would have the common sense to reject this POV, as it was the one used for centuries to target Jews.
If we apply this principle comprehensively, a whole bunch of Americans are going to have to give the land they live on back to the Indians. Possibly all of us.
“You’d think a Jew would have the common sense to reject this POV, as it was the one used for centuries to target Jews.”
What percentage of the American Jewish population voted for Obama?
Heck one I know even rationalized Soros helping the Nazi’s killing other Jews in WWII, as “he did what he had to do”.
I'm sure he made the day of people that owned the property. I wonder how title insurance is/was handled in post-war Europe?
Well, the US is still paying for slavery in only half the states from 150 years ago.
If the Poles, or the Germans, of today can be blamed and personally punished for the murders and thefts committed 75 years ago, then it is merely an extension of the same principle to blame and punish the Jews for the killing of Christ 2000 years ago.
(Leaving aside some of the valid questions about which group or groups were personally responsible for the murder of Jesus.)
Send the bill to Germany and Russia, they started it.
Agree. And there are some innocent ethnic Germans from parts of Eastern Europe who could be making the same claims, but don’t, even though they grew up in camps.
The author could have at least recognized that as many or more Polish Christians were murdered by the Nazis as Polish Jews.
Good point. And, coincidentally, I was just reading this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3zef_Kowalski_(priest)
So? My family had land before the Russian Revolution. Some of that was on natural gas fields now. We never thought that we had any claim on it because we didn’t go through the intervening 75 years of Hell.
Not to take anything away from Kowalski, but the author of this piece is quite correct that many Poles did participate in betrayal of their Jewish compatriots and even in their murder, often with great enthusiasm.
I don’t doubt it. Not everyone was innocent. But, acknowledging that, treating everyone as guilty, including people not yet even born, isn’t right either.
Absolutely.
Any large group of people will have those who behave under great stress with heroism and others with cowardice or villainy.
When Franco won the civil war in Spain in 1939, he declared all property titles issued after July 18, 1936 (the start of the war - and wealth re-distirbution by the Reds) null and void. Easy enough (since much less time had elapsed).
If you buy stolen goods, if it can be proven,
you DON’T get to keep it weather you knew or not.
At least not here.
How far back does that principle go?
The USA violated just about every treaty it ever signed with the Indians. Do they get the land back?
I'll guess that he would not be as enthusiastic an advocate of returning Brooklyn to the descendants of its native inhabitants.
He seems ignorant of history in general.
If foreign invaders (Wehrmacht) steal property and then another set of foreign invaders (Red Army) take it from them, and then the new foreign proprietors forcibly resettle new inabitants where the old ones used to live, and the old inhabitants have either been murdered or have fled to safety, and the property was then abandoned 60 years later by the invaders leaving the property to maybe a third or fourth generation of new inhabitants, what do you do?
Turn the new people out in the street, apparently, and call them murderers.
How about this, instead: let the Russians and Germans pay reparations for what they stole and destroyed to the descendants of the original injured parties.
Is the author going to move to the property and take up residence among people whom he hates in a land he clearly despises?
Hardly. What he wants is the value of his inheritance.
Germany is paying substantial reparations, perhaps "The New Russia" should use its oil wealth to pay some of its own historical debts.
What the author clearly wants is to rip open old wounds and commit new injustices because he is a nasty person who enjoys conflict and bitterness.
I agree. Well put.
If you go back far enough, every single property in the world changed hands, usually many, many times, by conquest.
Which of those conquests do we decide is valid, and date legal title from, with all subsequent transfers “illegal?”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.