On the anniversary of the end of the Warsaw Uprising 2.10.1944

But not everyone connects. There are politicians and commentators and their hearers who deny the sense of the Uprising. At the same time, they argue that the cost of the Uprising was unmercifully high, about 16 1000 insurgents died, Germans murdered about 150 1000 civilians of the city, and Warsaw was completely ruined.
It is crucial to remind those who ignore these facts that from the German assault on Poland on 1 September 1939 until the day of the Warsaw Uprising on 1 August 1944 The Germans murdered, as estimated, 450 1000 or even 500 1000 inhabitants of Warsaw, destroyed and destroyed nearly 50% of the buildings of the Polish capital. Only in September 1939, about 50,000 Warsawians were killed and another nearly 100 1000 were deported to extermination camps and forced labour, which besides led to their death. On February 6, 1940, Germany approved the urban plan "Die Neue Deutsche Stadt Warschau", which is known as the Pabsta Plan. It assumed the demolition of most of Warsaw's buildings and the creation of a regional communication hub. In the left-hand part of the town, about 130-thousand German people were to live, while on the Prague side the Polish population was to be reduced to a maximum of 30 thousand.
The decision about the Uprising was so made with the awareness of the extermination that Warsaw experienced since the beginning of the war and with full awareness of German plans for the city. The insurgents preferred to catch weapons and even fly in conflict alternatively than die in further mass grabs and street executions.
The creation of alleged alternate stories, if at all justified, must be based on the military and political realities of a given period. The hypothesis that if the Uprising had not erupted, nearly 2 100 1000 victims of the Uprising would have survived the war, Warsaw would not have been destroyed by the Germans a 4th after a 4th and so "saved" would have become the capital of liberated and full sovereign Poland - is simply a hypothesis of dreams that have no real support. It is much more likely that Germany would have carried out further mass executions and slaughters before withdrawing from Warsaw, and that the infrastructure of the city would have been utilized by the Germans as defensive fences against the invading Red Army. The russian Union, as it was in the lands east of the Bug, after taking Warsaw would have incorporated Poland as another republic into the structure of the russian state. It is besides highly likely that the Red Army would not halt in Berlin in the face of the Western counter-offensive yet unprepared by the Allies, but would "save" further capitals all the way to Paris, bringing another Western European countries into its sphere of influence.
This was the political situation in Europe in the second half of 1944, and this was the situation on the fronts of planet War II. In this context, the assessment of the causes of the Warsaw Uprising should not rise disputes and should not lead to opposing assessments. The Uprising was decided by the commanders of the National Army, which was a military formation of the underground Polish State, not a spontaneous guerrilla movement. They had higher education and officers and general military degrees, and had cognition of developments on the key fronts of planet War II. The question of how to end the Warsaw Uprising is simply a historical fact, which cannot be interpreted. The promoters of the pedagogy of shame are trying to convince us that the Uprising capitulated. It is simply a cruel lie. Although the Warsaw Uprising did not end with the expected victory, it did not bring Poland's liberation and independency at the time, but it did not end with the surrender only by signing on 2 October 1944 at the Reicher Dwork in Ożarów at Poniatowskiego Street “The Agreement on the cessation of war activities in Warsaw”.
“The agreement on the cessation of war in Warsaw” from the German side was signed by SS-Obergruppenführer und General der Polizei von dem Bach, and on the Polish side, on the basis of a written mandate of the commander of the AK General Komorowski (Bora), the agreement was signed by the diplomat Colonel Kazimierz Iranek-Osmecki (Jarecki) and the lieutenant colonel-in-chief Zygmunt Dobrowolski (Zyndram). Among the dozens of circumstantial points of the Pact were, among others, the following provisions relating to the Polish army:
• Officers have the right to hold white side arms
• AK troops go outside the Polish weapon line, but without ammunition
• The following AK forces stay in the city:
(a) For order operations – 3 infantry companies armed with guns, guns
device tools and handguns.
(b) For the protection and transfer of 3 regimental magazines with ammunition and equipment – thirty
Men armed as above.
(c) Sanitary units for care and transport of injured and evacuation of the infirmary – not armed.
Even these mentioned provisions of the Agreement already show that this was not, as we are being told, a unilateral surrender. This historical fact cannot be lied to either by respect for the Insurgents or for the civilian population of Warsaw, as well as by memory for the thought of the Warsaw Uprising and its message to subsequent generations.
There are known cases of introduction of historical lies in the legal regulations of various countries, including Poland, as an example of the “Oświęcim lie”. In this text, I do not ask for the penalisation of a lie that speaks of the surrender of the Warsaw Uprising, but I ask that all specified voices be branded to argue the spreading of this lie in order to care about historical fact and to pass on the fact about it to the next generations of the Warsaw Uprising ethos. So let no 1 always dare talk lies in public space about the alleged surrender of the Warsaw Uprising.

Hail and glory to the Insurgents! Hello and glory to the Heroes!

Watch out for religion and keep your ears open!

Mr Bogdan


Photo:
Sign the agreement on the cessation of war in Warsaw. Ożarów Mazowiecki, 02.10.1944.