1jola: Besides, I have not heard that PO allowed "PiS supporters" to physically assault the POlice and get away with it.
What, you mean you didn't watch the assaults on the police outside the Presidential Palace? Are you really so out of touch?
1jola: If they did, than you are supporting some weak government that is not fit to have the responsibility to protect its citizens when the ones who are tasked with that job (the POlice)cannot protect themselves.
Whoever said I was a PO supporter? It's not looking particularly likely that they'll get my vote next month...
And yes, I think the government was weak over the cross issue. It said quite clearly that anyone wishing to cause similar trouble just has to violently resist the police and they'll back down. Certainly, it encourages the Solidarity thugs next time they want to protest about having to actually work for a living.
1jola: I'm not even going to touch that nonsense and will excuse you as I sometimes post after a few.
Well, the propoganda said that Walesa and Solidarity were nothing but criminals and thugs. We can now see that both sides - Walesa and Kaczynski have both indulged in thuggery of varying degree - both written and physical. Funny how they were proved right, isn't it? Makes me wonder just who the real bad guys were - and confirms that neither Walesa nor Kaczynski ever wanted real freedom. Heck, Walesa's actions as President plus Jarek's actions as Prime Minister suggest that both of them very much were in the same vein as the Communists.
1jola: I simply cannot be proud of him after I carefully reviewed all available information. My shock goes back at least ten years. It is now well documented and in Poland he has very little support, as you know.
The thing I can't understand is why people are so hung up about what he might or might not have done. He lost his support because he was a dreadful President - apart from ensuring that Poland didn't go back to Communism (though all fears of that went after August 24th 1991), he was really a poor President - and there were some very real fears in the Western media that he was going to seize power in Poland.
Even respectable authors have pointed out that his behaviour in Solidarity was nothing short of dictatorial - and this is why I cannot for the life of me understand why his opponents are choosing an alleged collaboration (that cannot be proved one way or another) to beat him with when there's much more verifiable information to use against him.
1jola: Communism did not fall, but agreed to share power, and boy, was is ever profitable for the communists.
Of course. I don't think anyone actually denies that the Communists managed to exit with a very good deal. But at the time, what was on the table? The vast majority of Solidarity members supported it, the people supported it - it was a damn good deal given the circumstances.
We know now that it was foolish to share power when they could simply have waited a few more months for it all to collapse, but at the same time - no-one died, no-one was hurt - power was transferred peacefully and decisively. Would you really have wanted a Romanian solution?
|
