 |
|
Geronimo
|
|
st cloud USA
Jan 1970
time: 05:23
|
|
I am trying in vain to see how the 'secret' portions of the agreement became public. Do you know any links discussing that?
edit - nm, your second link makes the question of when the secret portion came out fairly irrelevant.-
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:23
|
|
1)This secret protocol was "slightly edited" when Soviet Geubels- Yakovlev found it in times of perestroika. What drives attention first is that it is called "secret protocol". When you deal with secret document, you know that it contains secret information and you do not need to name it "secret document", instead you should make stamp- "top secret" or "absolutely secret" or alike stamp to determine the level of secrecy of this document. When you deal with secret document it's the first thing you should do- you make label "Top secret" to show that contains of this document is classified information and demand proper access level from reader. After you make such label you can name your document anyhow. An axample of proper secret protocal- in first page or right upper orner, there is a label- "Calssified information, for members of Soviet governmnet only". Then the name of the documet- Protocol of German-Soviet non-agression pact, date, contains of protocol.
IT'S A WORLDWIDE PRACTICE.
If you do not label a secret documet like this, and simply name it "secret protocol", in this case the level of secrecy determinated in name of the document, but this name of the document is part of the classified information!
And unauthorized reader should not know the name of the secret document. So when you determine the level of secrecy in name of the secret documet, instead of determination in special label on first page of the document or right upper corner- it means you are incompetent moron, who doesn't know how to deal with secret information.
Now you tries to convince me, that Ribbentrop and Molotov were incompetent morons who were not in aware of this practice and just named thier protocol "the secret protocol " without any stamps to determine the level of secrecy of this protocol?
2) Nobody, ever seen THE ORIGINAL of this secret protocol, only "copies" which were found and edited by Yakovlev and his gang of so-called historians.
3) Even if we assume that significant parts of this protocol weren't removed by Yakovlev's "historians" (which is certanly not true) when they found it, WHERE the hell in this protocol parts about division of Poland or joint military action against it? Where is part about annexation of Baltic states by Soviet Union? WHERE? Give me the exact quote.
Last edited by Serb on 19-09-2004 at 10:28
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:23
|
|
And you tells me about propaganda when you can't deny facts and to back your claims you brings this crappy piece of poorly made anti-soviet propaganda?
This speech never existed. Stalin didn't say so at August 19 1939. FYI, all meetings of Politburo were always shorthanded. Any word, said by anybody during such meetings was always writen and later those protocols were brought to archive.
Also archives contain list of ALL sessions of Poluitburo (planned or emergency sessions, it doesn't matter) and complete protocols of those sessions. Planned sessions ussualy happened at Thursday. The August 19 of 1939 was Saturday. And NO reports about this emeregency or planned session of Politburo exist. This session never happened.
In November 1939, French agency Gavas (sp?) said about speech of Stalin on Politburo's meeting where he supposedly said that war should continue the longer the better to exhaust both combantants.
Stalin reacted immdiently- "This information of Gavas agency, as well as many other of its statements, is lie. Sure I can't know in which exactly French cafe they cooked up this lie. "
What you brought here is PROOVED, many times prooved, poorly made FAKE, made by Yakovlev's re-visionist "historian" and anti-Soviet b!tch T.S. Bushueva.
She is the author of this speech not Stalin.
And she was so stupid, that even was unable to copy Stalin's style of making speeches.
Stalin speaking about worldwide revolution?
In 1994 she recalled about Gavas statement of 1939 and accidentally "found" in "archives" the "document" (piece of paper) on FRENCH, which she believes is translation of Stalin's speech made by SOMEBODY from Commintern whom she believes participated in this meeting.
And you think I should believe that Stalin said this?
1) No mention about this session of Politburo.
2) No protocol of this meeting.
3) Soviets never used FRENCH language to shorthand contains of their disscussions.
4) In protocols of Politburo, first mention about questions regarding Soviet-German non-agression pact, dated August 24, 1939, when dessision about emeregency session of High Concil of USSR for ratification of this pact was made.
5) Foreign representatives of Comminter NEVER participated in meetings of Politburo. NEVER. So, "nodody from Commintern could make this translation of Stalin's speech to French as Bushueva" says.
6) Dimitrov and other leaders of Commintern untill September were not in aware of Stalin's directives regarding current and incoming wars.
7) The real Stalin's directives to Commintern he experesed in talks with Dimitrov COMPLETELY contradict with this Bushueva's fake.
And eight, the most important one- Stalin hid his intentions even from Politburo. Politburo was not in aware about incoming pact with Germany untill last moment. Stalin told them about the visit of Ribbentrop to Moscow, at August 22, less than 24 hours before Ribbentrop's plane arrived in Moscow. Members of Politburo gathered in Stalin's dacha where he anonced that tommorow German foreign minister will be in Moscow. It was a real shock for Poltburo. You can read about that in memoirs of members of Politburo, such as Khrushev for example. He was there then.
So, Stalin couldn't say this 4 days earlier.
Conclusion:
1) It's a poorly made, stupid FAKE.
2) Heresson loves fakes and prefers poorly made, stupid propaganda to sence of logic.
3) Heresson don't want to know truth, he is happy with version of history based on such sources as this Bushueva's fake.
If you prefer to believe in peice of crap writen on French language, which one stupid anti-soviet b!tch sold as speech of Stalin on meeting of Politburo which never happened, then for me this case is closed. I don't want to waste my time in attempts to proove you something. It's simply impossible.
Last edited by Serb on 19-09-2004 at 10:06
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:23
|
|
Ok. Poland is indirectly responsible for start of WW2.
Sounds better now?
btw, Poland declared mobilization way earlier than Germans did.
Last edited by Serb on 19-09-2004 at 10:08
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-09-2004 00:56
that sucked. and i was bogged down with class for awhile before that. i had some pretty cool vacations over my summer break to make up for my bad semester last time and my lack of internet over the summer, i think. i put up some pics in the picture thread when i was at charleston AFB in south carolina 
|