Hejnal silenced for the first time since WW II

 

Krakow Shooter a "far right extremist," according to reports

 Reports allege that the Krakow shooter is a "far right extremist." 

Jakub Kulik and Artur Moranski

Officers Jakub Kulik and Artur Moranski were wounded in the Krakow shooting and they need our prayers. 

More info here 

You can see Jakub Kulik take on the gunman and then fall to the ground from his own injuries. 

Krakow Mass Shooting

 

Outpost of Good Hope; Edward Bernard Raczyński in Allied London, by Michal Karski

Edward Bernard Raczynski.
Source: Embassy of the Republic of Poland in London

Ambassador Raczyński with wife Cecylia. Photo NAC

Sikorski (left) with Polish General Marian Kukiel, Clementine and Winston Churchill,
and Polish ambassador Count Edward Raczyński source: Wikpedia

Outpost of Good Hope

 

Edward Raczyński in Allied London

 

by Michal Karski

 

Why didn't the Western Allies start another war instead of handing over Poland to the Soviet sphere of influence at Yalta in 1945? The answer, of course, lies in the question.

 

For all the bitterness which has been expressed over the years in Polish and Polonian circles at what is seen by many as perfidious Allied Realpolitik, at an unforgivable reluctance on the part of the collective West to face down the regime of the USSR, and more specifically Stalin and his followers, what is frequently forgotten is that at one point, during the darkest days of World War II when it looked as if Hitler was unstoppable, Great Britain, of all the western nations, was Poland's solitary ally and refuge.

 

The ambassador to Britain of the Polish Second Republic from November 1934 - and much later president of the government-in-exile - was Count Edward Raczyński, a patriot like few others. Honoured and respected abroad, he is probably not so well known in the Polish diaspora worldwide or even in his native Poland.

 

Born in Zakopane, educated in Kraków and later in London, Raczyński was a truly remarkable and talented person. He was diplomat, writer and statesman and became someone who dedicated his entire life to the Polish cause, earning enormous respect among Poland's wartime allies.

 

After a period as Poland's representative at the League of Nations in Geneva, he was appointed ambassador to London, where his role was to prove crucial in securing the vital anti-Hitler alliance with Great Britain. He was virtually on his own representing Poland after the catastrophe of the joint Nazi-Soviet invasion and partition of the country. When the leaders of the Polish government were languishing in Romanian internment and before the newly-formed administration under Sikorski and Raczkiewicz arrived in London from Angers after the fall of France, it was up to Raczyński to look after Poland's interests as the delegate of the scattered nation whose various armed units continued to fight for the Allied cause.

 

Unlike those Polish combatants who served in various theatres of war abroad or fought in the Resistance at home, Raczyński deployed his skills in his diplomatic outpost. Having been pre-war Poland's man in London, he subsequently became a key member of the Polish wartime government-in-exile serving as both ambassador and later also as foreign minister. As a fluent English speaker, Raczyński not only frequently found himself in the role of translator but was very often the actual spokesman for Poland in the West. After the war he served the government-in-exile and the Polish cause in general for many years.

 

By all accounts a very modest man, he was a consummate diplomat and worked tirelessly for the benefit of Polish citizens. As an Anglophile, he had a good understanding of the British and the position of the British government. Although his memoirs give the impression of a rather self-effacing person who tends to downplay his own role, nevertheless his efforts were clearly instrumental in persuading Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain to pledge the all-important guarantee of British assistance to Poland in the event of an attack by Hitler. 

 

Raczyński's moderate but determined personal style is illustrated by an incident which took place immediately before the war in London and which he recounted later in an interview recorded for Radio Free Europe. At a meeting at which were present, among others, Lloyd George and the press magnate Lord Beaverbrook, neither of whom, according to Raczyński, were ever particularly favourably inclined towards Poland, the question of the Polish attitude to the real threat of German aggression was raised. One of those present asked Raczyński: "Will Poland defend its independence?" Before he could reply, Raczyński was interrupted by Beaverbrook who declared, "Why ask Raczyński? Poland will succumb to German pressure and will cave in just as the Czechs did and there will be no war." This was, of course, not only insulting to Poland and Raczyński himself but also a slight on Czechoslovakia, which would have attempted to resist Hitler, had its fate not been sealed previously at Munich. Here Raczyński in turn interrupted Beaverbrook and interposed: "You are clearly better acquainted with Poland and the Polish position than I am and it would appear that my opinion is quite unnecessary here since you have spoken on my behalf so splendidly." This was "received in the spirit in which it was intended" Raczyński recalled. Red faces can well be imagined. "Naturally", he continued in his interview, "I then replied to the question as any other Pole would have replied. Poland will not succumb to pressure. Poland will fight."

 

Raczyński's account of the war years, based on his diaries, 'W Sojuszniczym Londynie' ('In Allied London') is a fascinating chronicle of his activity on behalf of the Polish cause and of the political atmosphere of the time. The signing of the Sikorski-Mayski Pact of 1941, for instance, which followed Hitler's attack on the Soviet Union, and which enabled the liberation from the gulags of thousands of Polish citizens, most of whom went on to join the Anders Army, was not greeted with enthusiasm by everyone in the Polish exile camp. Sikorski came in for criticism from some of his political opponents for being far too conciliatory. Nevertheless, it was to Sikorski's great credit – and to the personal efforts of General Władysław Anders – that so many thousands were saved from what would otherwise have been certain death in the inhuman conditions of the mines and the frozen wastes of the labour camps.

 

Considering the frequency with which Poland as a nation has been accused of endemic anti-Semitism over recent years – indeed recent decades - it is instructive to read Raczyński's comments about his attempts to find homes among the western nations for those Polish citizens, predominantly Jewish, from eastern Poland, who were hoping to get to safety in the West. Raczyński notes: "it is precisely the British dominions which are most energetic and unceremonious in closing their gates against the Jews" ("…właśnie dominiony brytyjskie najenergiczniej i najbezceremonialniej zamykają wrota przed żydami" – 'W Sojuszniczum Londynie' p. 106). He writes about appealing on behalf of the refugees to a High Commissioner and a Prime Minister. These British Empire politicians earn no plaudits from him in his memoir.

 

On an even more sombre note, it was Raczyński who was primarily responsible for publishing a warning to the Allies on behalf of the Polish government about the annihilation of Jews by the Nazis in a booklet of December 1942 entitled The Mass Extermination of Jews in German Occupied Poland.

 

The information contained in the pamphlet was based on reliable reports which had been obtained by the Polish Resistance, very often at great personal risk by heroic individuals such as the famous courier Jan Karski, whom the government-in-exile introduced to key personages in the British establishment and who went on to meet Roosevelt in the USA. The reports of Nazi German genocide were brought to the attention of the western world not only in print but also by way of radio broadcasts read out on the BBC by Raczyński himself. The shocking facts, however, were destined to be largely marginalised by influential western power brokers. The apparent lack of any immediate and direct response by the Allies to compelling evidence of the Holocaust has been the subject of recent scholarship which examines the overall context of war aims, priorities and censorship.

 

Raczyński's book includes accounts of the inevitable clashes of personalities between people who had been on opposing sides in the pre-war political scene in Poland.  He generally writes his observations like someone who prefers to remain outside the cut and thrust of party politics, of someone who sees both sides of every argument and is by nature a mediator. His assessments are usually fair and extremely perceptive and when he does offer a mistaken analysis he admits this in a later note. There are candid and revealing sketches of the leading figures of the day, both Polish and British. Churchill, for instance, appears very resolutely pro-Polish in the immediate prelude to the war, which makes his subsequent stance at Yalta and his later self-exculpatory accusations that the Polish government-in-exile 'lacked a sense of realism' all the more galling for Raczyński, even though he understood that the British were in a virtually impossible position faced with Stalin's occupation of Poland. The tone of the memoir, however, is usually measured and largely free of bitterness, considering the tragic fate of his country, but there are exceptions. He is clearly angry, for instance, at the anti-Polish tone taken at one stage of the war by some British newspapers, which effectively accused the exiled Poles of conducting a private campaign against the Soviet Union to the detriment of the Alliance. The notes chronicling his role in the exiled government's desperate efforts to persuade the Allies to send assistance to the Warsaw Uprising speak for themselves.

 

Raczyński foresaw the British government's volte-face towards the Polish allies in the context of the ruthless politics of the time and did everything in his power to forestall the inevitable. When the fateful day came in July 1945 and the Allies withdrew their recognition of the government-in-exile in favour of the USSR's satellite regime, he could do little else but issue a formal note of protest in the name of the government at the "fifth partition of Poland, now accomplished by her Allies." Great Britain and other western countries offered what compensation they could by offering sanctuary to all those citizens who could not or would not go back to communist Poland. Here Raczyński was instrumental in the process of helping Polish military personnel adapt to civilian life. Unwilling, like so many of his fellow Poles, to go back to a homeland under communist rule, he remained in Great Britain and devoted his efforts and diplomatic skills as well as his considerable intellect unswervingly to the cause of a free Poland.

 

Although initially associated with the pre-war administration, Raczyński's subsequent career had lifted him above party faction. He was first and foremost an ardent patriot, serving the interests of his beloved Poland and those of all Polish citizens, but he was also a committed European and saw the future of Poland at the heart of Europe. By the time he died in London in 1993, at the grand old age of 101, a figure of enormous stature in both Polish and British circles, his homeland was completely independent and had once again joined the community of western nations.

 

Written above Raczyński's tomb in the chapel of Rogalin is the statesman's final admonition to his compatriots: "Nie zmarnujcie niepodległości" - "Don't let your independence go to waste." 

 

Further Reading:

 

Adam Zamoyski's obituary of Edward Raczyński at the Independent:  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-count-edward-raczynski-1488283.html

 

Raczyński's memoir: 'W Sojuszniczym Londynie' – London 1960, (English translation 'In Allied London' – 1962)

 

The above article first appeared in the Krakow Post (print edition) in June 2016

 

M Karski website: https://michalkarski2023.wixsite.com/mysite

lll

Sarcophagus of President Edward Raczyński in Rogalin

"Don't let your independence go to waste." 

By Sylwia Ufnalska - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=47212256

Kosciuszko! A new, short film. Wonderful!

 

Hey, MAGA! You're supporting WHAT now???

 

MAGA, you're supporting WHAT now? Seriously?

 It's a week before the 2026 midterm elections. And you're now supporting THIS?

 

Seriously?

 

You?

 

You're my friend. I like you. How could you? How?

 

Before we talk about what you are NOW supporting, let's talk about what you've supported in the past.

 

Ten years ago, you shocked us.

 

How could you vote for HIM?

 

1.) The stupidity.

 

He's an idiot. The part of your brain that believed that he is a business mastermind was blinded by bling. Admit that on this one you played his dupe, like that guy who thinks he can beat the Times Square sidewalk shell game.  

 

He inherited all that wealth from his father. If he had just plowed his inheritance into a conventional investment plan, he'd be richer today than he is now – sorry – richer than he was before he turned our White House into his crooked cash grab.

 

The bankruptcies. The businesses as rotten as a termite-chewed foundation. Trump university? Steaks? Water? Airlines? Casinos?

 

2.) The betrayal of America.

 

Is he a Russian asset? Doesn't matter. He acts like a Russian asset. Sabotaging American interests around the world. Betraying the Founding Fathers. Tearing down the White House.

 

3.) The indecency.

 

This is the big one for me. I know you. I've seen you do good things. How can someone like you embrace and actively support an adjudicated rapist? A con artist who ripped off countless contractors? Who humiliated naïve working class dreamers who emptied out their life savings for fake Trump University?

 

So, yeah. Ten years ago, your support for the stupidity, the betrayal of America, the indecency shocked us all.

 

But now this.

 

Child _ _ _ _.

 

That's how bad this is. I can't even type the word.

 

You

 

actively support

 

with your vote

 

with your donations

 

with your social media endorsements

 

child _ _ _ _.

 

Here's the facts.

 

When Amy was three years old, her biological parents divorced.

 

Her mother, Donna Arthur, remarried a man named Cledith Arthur. Cledith Arthur had already been accused of _ _ _ ing his own biological daughter. Donna married him anyway.

 

Donna and Cledith Arthur abused Donna's two children, Amy and her brother Philip Stearns.

 

The family moved frequently. At one point, they lived in a tent.

 

In 1978, when she was twelve years old, Amy and Philip were removed by the state from Donna and Cledith. Cledith was charged with _ _ _ ing Amy. Cledith posted bail. He then fled. He became a fugitive from justice. Donna stayed with Cledith until his death as a fugitive from justice in 2004.

 

Amy had little to no contact with her mother since the removal in 1978.

 

In October, 2026, MAGA candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, running against Amy Acton to be Ohio's next governor, published an ad featuring Donna Arthur.

 

In this ad, Donna Arthur looks haggard and demented. She rants that her daughter, Amy Acton, is a liar and mentally ill.

 

Donna says that Amy never lived in a tent. Donna says that Amy was not abused. Donna doesn't use the word _ _ _ _, but the ad suggests that Amy Acton falsely accused Donna's husband Cledith of child _ _ _ _.

 

Here's what's true.

 

Every detail of Amy Acton's childhood abuse is supported by facts.

 

Hey, MAGA, remember facts? Objective truths? Those things that you rejected? In favor of conspiracy theories, social media tribal groupthink, the slop your MAGA talk radio controllers dump into your feeding trough, and ravings from the cult leader you mindlessly worship?

 

Contemporaneous newspaper accounts, court records, and testimony from eyewitnesses, including Philip Stearns, support Amy Acton's bio, and refute MAGA's sick, child-_ _ _ _-supporting lies.

 

Yes, Cledith Arthur was charged with child _ _ _ _. Yes, his own biological daughter, as well as Amy, were his victims. Yes, campground employees report that Cledith Arthur lived in a tent at a campground and used that campground as his address. Yes, Donna and Cledith abused little Amy and little Philip. Yes, authorities had to remove the children from the abuse.

 

Yes. Yes. Yes. Facts, MAGA. Facts.

 

And there's more.

 

Donna Arthur has repeatedly been legally charged with abusing animals. She tortured kittens.

 

This is the slop you support, MAGA. Not just someone who, according to court documents, facilitated the _ _ _ _ of her own daughter. You support a kitten torturer.

 

Donna Arthur pleaded guilty to "Theft by Deception / False Impression." She was repeatedly charged with this crime.

 

This is what you support, MAGA. Not just the big, fat criminal in the White House. You support this nasty, child-_ _ _ _-facilitator, who served up her own daughter to the evil POS she married.

 

Is it wrong to associate you, MAGA voter, MAGA donator, MAGA endorser on social media, with child _ _ _ _?

 

Are you serious?

 

The Epstein Files coverup was not enough to get you to wash your hands of this filth forever?

 

Donald Trump and JD Vance both explicitly endorsed the ad alleging that Amy Acton lied about having been abused, about living in a tent, about being removed by the state from her demented mother and _ _ _ ist stepfather.  

 

Let me spell this out for you.

 

When an adult man _ _ _ _ s a child, he is in the stronger position. The child is in the weaker position. He has physical strength. The little girl lacks commensurate physical strength.

 

The _ _ _ ist also possesses greater social strength. The little girl might not even understand what's happening. The adult man may have groomed her. He may use threats as part of grooming. Some of the _ _ _ ists, for example, threaten to hurt the child's loved ones if the child speaks up.

 

Too many surrounding adults don't want to deal with child _ _ _ _. They close their eyes. They say, "Oh, the girl is making stuff up." What they really mean is, "If I confront this guy, he might hurt me. The girl can just endure it. She'll grow up and leave home soon enough and be okay."

 

How do I know that this is what happens? I'm a teacher. I've worked with girls to whom this happened. I know the barriers to belief and salvation that victims face.

 

One of those barriers is when people choose to side with the _ _ _ ist, rather than the child.

 

MAGA, if you continue to vote MAGA, to donate to MAGA, to endorse MAGA on social media, that's who you are. You are the person who is using their personal power to crush a victim of child _ _ _ _, and to protect _ _ _ ists.

 

Your guy, the leader of your movement, Donald J. Trump, your guy, the second-in-command of your movement, JD Vance, have actively, overtly, explicitly, called a victim of child _ _ _ _ a liar, thus facilitating child _ _ _ _. If no one believes the victim, if everyone believes the perpetrator, the child is stuck in the hell of _ _ _ _ _ _ abuse.

 

It's a binary choice. Either you are on team anti-child-_ _ _ _, or  you are on team pro-child _ _ _ _.