Translated by Ollie Richardson for Fort Russ
27th May, 2016
I'm so fed up of this hypocritical whining by the West and its puppets about the poor Poles who were separated as a result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
Well, firstly, there was no "Pact". It was a "Treaty". A non-aggression Treaty.
Secondly, this Treaty was preceded by some other "covenants".
To begin with, who signed a Treaty with Hitler and Mussolini long before Stalin? Oh, all of a sudden! 30 September 1938 the so-called Munich agreement was signed, under which Britain and France gave the Third Reich the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia. The representatives of the Soviet Union, by the way, were denied participation in the negotiations.
"The Pact" about flushing the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia to the Nazis was signed by Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, French Prime Minister Edouard Daladier, Germany's Chancellor Adolf Hitler, and Prime Minister of Italy Benito Mussolini.
Two years ago, in 2014, "the non-aggression Pact" between Yanukovych and the Maidan opposition was signed by the Ministers of France and Germany. Analogies and parallels do not rise?
In fact, here is a photo of the whole party, impossible to deny (from left to right as listed above).
But back to history. In the spring of 1939, Czechoslovakia was invaded by Nazi troops. The Soviet Union, which Czechoslovakia had a mutual assistance agreement with, was ready to intervene and request from Poland a corridor for the Soviet troops to defend Czechoslovakia from the Nazis.
By the way, of all participating countries of the League of Nations, only the Soviet Union tried in March of 1938 to protest against the annexation of Austria, but the UK again suddenly lashed out against Soviet efforts.
And it was specifically the Soviet representative who stated at the Plenum of the Council of the League of Nations on the need for urgent action in support of Czechoslovakia, and also expressed their demands to consider in the League of Nations the question of German aggression. This was ignored by Britain and France (remind us of anything?).
Moreover, the Soviet government made a statement to the Polish government that any attempt of the latter to occupy a part of Czechoslovakia automatically cancels the non-aggression Treaty between the USSR and Poland.
And then Poland refused the Soviet Union the right of passage for the Soviet army. So much so, that the Polish Ambassador in Paris, Lukasiewicz, assured the US Ambassador to France - Bullitt - that Poland would immediately declare war on the USSR if she tries to send troops through Polish territory to aid Czechoslovakia, and if Soviet planes appear over Poland on the way into Czechoslovakia, they will immediately be attacked by Polish aviation.
Instead of helping the Czechs, Poland invaded Czechoslovakia and captured the Cieszyn region (the Soviet Union then had all rights to declare war on Poland). In fact, Poland divided Czechoslovakia with the Third Reich, in what was a preliminary agreement between the Polish Foreign Minister Jozef Beck and Foreign Minister of the Third Reich - the notorious Ribbentrop.
The so-called "Covenant of Beck-Ribbentrop Pact". What happened? Pilsudski is worse than Hitler?
Here he is, by the way, together with Goebbels.
And in the third photo, there is Polish Minister Beck. Oh, who is he with? Is it Adolf? Can't be! This is a photoshop! The Kremlin's propaganda!
So what is it, citizens? Is the head of Poland Mościcki is the same as Hitler? Is the British Prime Minister Chamberlain the same as Hitler? Is Prime Minister of France the same as Hitler? Or all of them are even worse than Hitler, as liberals broadcast to us about Stalin (Poland, too, by the way, had their own concentration camps, for example in Bereza Kartuska)?
Isn't it Horace Wilson - the adviser to the British Prime Minister - who said that "Germany and England are the two pillars that support the world order against the destructive pressure of Bolshevism"? And they and Hitler were kissing each other on the lips? And with smooching!
It turns out that capitalist ideology (liberal, democratic, whatever) is equal to Nazism? You need to strongly condemn the British monarchy for cooperating with the Nazis? Where are the democratic public looking? It's time to hold the damned hypocrites accountable for concluding the contract with Hitler!
Do you want me to buy a mirror for you, "Democratic" gentlemen?
P.S. I must admit that in this situation Winston Churchill, who specifically on this occasion said "England was offered a choice between war and dishonor. She chose dishonor and will got war", looks dignified.
Follow us on Facebook! 
Follow us on Twitter! 
Donate!
