The intrusion into the Polish airspace of Russian drones raised legitimate concerns. However, the deficiency of effective consequence by the Polish government and border protection forces was understood and justified in the social reception. After all, the border wall does not scope that high, the boundaries of airspace, although clearly defined, are in a sense fleeting. There are no designated border crossing points at which papers must be presented and the destination explained. In addition, firing on drones with air-to-air rockets resembles firing from cannon to mosquito and can end up just like in Wyryka, where it is not a Russian drone but our rocket destroyed a residential building whose residents miraculously escaped with their lives. Public opinion someway understood that.
In the case of diversion on the railway and blowing up a section of the tracks in the Lublin region, this public knowing was no longer there. The outrage was not so much caused by the fact that the tracks were blown up, but by the information that the divers entered Poland legally through the border crossing, legitimizing real documents, and after the explosives were planted and detonated by no 1 stopped Poland besides legally by the border crossing with Belarus. In addition, it was announced that the perpetrators were cooperating with the Russian FSB Ukrainians, convicted earlier for acts of diversion in their country, who are listed in the bases of wanted persons available to the Polish services.
All commentators agreed that allowing the situation to happen was a scandal. But I guess no 1 asked if the information provided was actual and whether the series of events described was based on facts. The question here is, how do we know all this? Is it the consequence of a journalistic investigation, or have the perpetrators or the services or diversion groups behind them admitted to carrying out the action and revealed its circumstances? No, we know all this from the authoritative speeches of representatives of the Polish government, including Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who presented detailed information on the substance at the open session of the Sejm. It is surprising, due to the fact that in the case of specified a act of sabotage and so compromising Polish services circumstances, this information should be classified, not only from the public, but above all from the anticipation of being recognized by abroad intelligence. Prime Minister Tusk, who late asked for the secretation of the parliamentary debate on the President's veto to the Act on the crypto-activism market, announced the act of diversion to everyone and to the fact that the perpetrators entered and left Poland legally, utilizing authentic documents. Where's the logic?
Reflecting on the answer to this question, consideration should be given to the forthcoming possible of a second reset in the European Union's relations with Russia, more specifically in Germany's bilateral relations with Russia. In order to implement a full-scale reset, it is essential to specify shore conditions in the relations of both parties, readiness for common concessions and principles of future relations. The key to the beginning of the German-Russian reset is, as has happened many times in history, Poland. The key is whether Poland will be an obstacle in this essay, or a free associate and besides a victim. Therefore, Poland's position had to be passed on to Russia, to Putin. However, while during the first reset period, between 2007 and 2015, Tusk could meet Putin and in talks face to face could be a Polish position, or alternatively a position of his own and his government, it is not possible to communicate. It is even impossible for Tusk to call Putin and give specified information by telephone. All planet powers usage modern technologies, usage decryptive Pegasus programs, so specified a communication road is impossible, even excluded. How, then, can Tusk, in the shadow of Pegasus, safely communicate with Putin? The simplest way to do this is through public media. Messages that the average citizen cannot full understand, and to the actual recipient are a clear and understandable message.
Is it not so that the publically transmitted information about the fact that agents cooperating with the FSB carried out a diversion act in Poland, entering and leaving Poland legally, by no 1 was detained “encrypted” information for Putin? The information that, after the “discryption” is: denied by the governments of the United Right and revealed by Marius Błaszczak, the doctrine of defence on the Vistula Rivers again applies. You can freely cross the Polish east border, you can execute acts of diversion and violence, you will not be detained or controlled by anyone. The land east of the Vistula will be in your sphere of influence. But there's 1 condition. Any effort to cross the Vistula border will be considered hostile to Germany.
Was that true? We don't know that. But what another intent could it have been to publicize specified information from the Sejm’s mouthpiece? Information impossible to verify, information that for a grey citizen has the appearance of fact revealed and for a real recipient may be the signal he was waiting for. A signal like a tissue dropped on the street. Passersby will think, but clumsy, dropped a white handkerchief in the mud. And the chained aggressor will give the order:
Mr Bogdan
If you are curious in having a book, delight make a voluntary payment for the statutory purposes of the Solidarni2010 Association and place an order to the address Last [email protected], giving at the same time the address to which the consignment is to be sent. In case of receipt in the package, delight enter the telephone number and the place of receipt.
Here's the account number:
67 2490 0005 0000 4520 4582 2486
The book was published by the efforts and means of members of the 2010 Solidarity Association as part of statutory activities.
