Talk:Bielski partisans

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belarus, a project to improve all Belarus-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Belarus-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Belarus To-do:

Contents

[edit] Further edit for NPOV

There may be POV problems with this article, see Talk:The Bielski Brothers. -- Ranveig 14:42, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes there will be, but I think Deborahjay will try to come with NPOV version. Right now the article is from apologetic POV and does not mention any of controversies which are with Bielski brothers. --Szopen 10:28, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I've held off on further editing till I can do some substantive library research. However, since that's being delayed by other projects' priorities, I'll at least do a rewrite to tone down the POV. Keep this one on your watchlist, please! -- Deborahjay 14:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I have bought two books about partisans in Nowogrodzkie; I think that at least one of them, by Zygmunt Boradyn has some relevant info. e mentions both Zorin and Bielski few times, though quite never in positive lights. Both books also mentions memories of Anatol Werheim (sp?), which I saw also earlier in www posts, which I think would be VERY important, but I couldn't find it anywhere to buy. I will translate some interesting parts and put them here within few weeks. Sorry it took me so long. Szopen 07:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Way to Palestine

The Bielski Brothers article contains another version.Xx236 08:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "War crimes"

These war crimes allegedly commited by the Bielski partisans actually were not commited by them, but by Soviet partisans wanting Poles from Naliboki to join them, at least according to the IPN article put in references. What the eck is that? Did the author read the article s/he put under the text? The section "War crimes" should be removed or supported with some more convincing materials. Howgh.Bianconera 19:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

No. Bielski partisans, though not sure whether Bielski were with them, were there. They participated in Naliboki massacre. Bielski partisans are also accused in all Polish books dealing with Polish-soviet partisan war in Belarus of robbing and murdering. They even are dismissed as band of common robbers, who didn't do much in terms of fighting, but rather were shooting local people and burning their houses. It's just most of info is in Polish.

Look here, if you can read Polish: http://www.ipn.gov.pl/wai.php?serwis=pl&dzial=82&id=1291&poz=2

"Wśród atakujących byli również partyzanci żydowscy z oddziału dowodzonego przez Tuwię Bielskiego." "Amongst the attackers were also the Jewish partisans from unit commanded by Tuvia Bielski"

Szopen 08:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC) http://www.forum-znak.org.pl/index-en.php?t=przeglad&id=1924 The info there is quite outdated, since IPN has already confirmed participation of Jewish partisans in Naliboki massacre, but at least this is in English. The key sentence is "The post-war testimonies of Jewish partisans show that Bielski was ordered to assign 50 armed partisans."


Right. My mistake. Bianconera 15:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

"band of common robbers, who didn't do much in terms of fighting, but rather were shooting local people and burning their houses" - yeah right, those wicked bloodthirsty Jews are nothing but robbers and cowards. Typical shameless antisemitic accusations. ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. It was long time since I was last time called anti-semite and I really needed that. However, there is a simple fact: in memories of most local Poles and in memories of most Polish partisans Bielski's brothers are noted only for robbing local population. The another fact is that they didn't do much fighting. Now, I've never said that this was because they were wicked bloodthirsty bats or whatevers. I can put you some quotes if you want. Szopen 08:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
First, let's acknowledge that those were very hard times for most people there. Second, I did not call you an antisemite, and let's try to be above a primitive strawman argument. Also let's try to avoid double standard. Back to the subject: the claims above are undeniably typical antisemitic canards. As a matter of fact, Duffy writes about the Soviet investigations that confuted these accusations. ←Humus sapiens ну? 08:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I know this were hard times. In fact, I am perfectly willing to acknowledge that Bielski's had no choice. Peasants neither could, nor they _wanted_ to share with them (this area was one of the poorest in prewar Poland). Bielski's needed their food. The only way they could get this food was by robbing the population. It's not the problem limited to Bielski'sm either - all soviet units did the same. The problem was that there were far too many partisans in the area. And in addition to that, soviet partisans in the very beginning burned many main food providers, boasting that in doing so they are sabotaging German actions.
Second, is all claim that someone did something wrong automatically anti-semitic? I tend to not agree with that. If I will say "Xski, as all Jews, was a coward" - this is clearly antisemitic. If I would say "Xski, because he was Jew, was a coward": this is also cearly antisemitic. If I would say however: "Xski is considered to be coward" then the sentence in itself is not antisemitic and in fact may be true, even if the sentence was uttered by antisemite.
In case of Bielski's we have simple and easy to verify facts: that they were "robbing the population" and that they "rarely engaged in figth with German units". Another simple fact is that they participated in Polish-Soviet partisan war on Soviet side. These are not antisemitic accusations. They can be easily verified. Szopen 09:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Excuse me: "far too many partisans in the area" is one thing, but accusing the Jews is another. I am yet to see similarly heavy accusations so easily made against any other group. Duffy talks about the investigations, and also mentions the confrontations between Jewish and other partisan groups. There was no love lost between them and the Soviets. ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
But no one is accusing exclusively Jews. You can read the discussion in Soviet partisans. Polish authors I've read are accusing most Soviet partisans for robbing population (and killing Polish partisans, and treating these areas as if they were part of USSR). And indeed, they also mention that though formally Jewish survival groups were formally under soviet umbrella, many Soviet partisans murdered Jews and antisemitism there was quite strong. Szopen 07:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

"The Soviet partisans were despised by local populations, as they engaged in plunder and terrorised the inhabitants.[8] Bogdan Musial also suggests that the Soviet partisans preferred to assault the poorly armed and trained Belarussian and Polish self-defense units rather than German military and police targets (military transports, other hard targets).[2]

By the end of 1943, the Soviets could claim a significant victory in their war aganst the Poles: most large landed estates owned by the Poles had been destroyed by the Soviet partisans.[2]" The quote from Soviet partisans in Poland Szopen 07:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

You seem to engage in one-sided excuses and denial. Anti-Sovietism does not cancel antisemitism. ←Humus sapiens ну? 22:21, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Jesus H. Christ, Humus. Once again, could you point me exactly why accusing Bielski brothers about war crimes and about robbing local population as well as avoiding fight with German units is anti-semitism? I have the feeling as if I am talking to a wall. To clarify things, I do not consider myself antisemite nor I consider the historians, who worked on the topic of Polish-Soviet partisan war antisemites. I do consider some of people (in fact, majority of them) who are using the works of mentioned historians antisemites. As I wrote before, I perfectly understand _why_ Bielski's did what they did and I am not sure whether I would do better under similar conditions. I don't think that their activities are somehow tied to the fact that they were Jewish (or not). Of course, being a Pole, I am already loser in such discussions. I am Pole, so I am either antisemite or I should never touch the subject.
Similarly, when someone says that there were Polish bands which mostly robbed population and killed people (mostly unarmed, many of them Jews), I do not consider that anti-polonism, because I am perfectly aware of the fact that there were such bands (and they were actively hunted by AK).
Finally, what's the point of this discussion? Do you want to change something in the article? Say it and let's discuss it, instead of engaging in pointless discussion about whether people robbed by Bielski's were antisemites. I hope you at least noticed that the phrase "they were common bandits" is not in the article, and in fact I am not even trying to put it into the article.
BTW, Bielski's partisans participation in war crimes, including massacres of civilians, is well documented and pretty much beyond any doubt. Szopen 07:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
BTW2: Humus, you removed the sentence that "crimes against population are not discussed in Duffy's book". You mean Duffy wrote about massacre in Naliboki? If not, you should revert to the previous version of the article. Szopen 07:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
It does not matter who you are, and it does not matter who you do (or do not) consider yourself. They fought and killed the Nazis and saved Jews and tried to survive, therefore "band of common robbers, who didn't do much in terms of fighting, but rather were shooting local people and burning their houses" is a vile antisemitic accusation that you were spreading - before engaging in silly strawman argument. ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
They didn't do that much in term of fighting the Nazis, at least if one is to believe to the sources i saw. It seems that they choose to figth locals and AK. BTW, you didn't answer my question. Does Duffy write about Bielski's participation in Naliboki massacre and about robbing local population? If not, I will revert to the last version. Szopen 11:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The quotes from monography of Polish-Soviet partisan war. I've written it down some time ago for the purpose of some other discussion. The vile antisemitic lies, as you call it. The problem with them is that most of the claims from the book is quite well based on the contemporary reports nad witnesses testimonies. I will just put it here as a memento. I didn't read Duffy's book, but if he does not mention this, then his book is apologetic crap not a serious work. I guess he probably only mentioned the "gold affair" because it was, AFAIK, resolved in Bielski's favour.

Zygmunt Boradyn: Niemen, rzeka niezgody: Polsko-sowiecka wojna partyzancka na Nowogrodczyznie 1943-1944 (Niemen, the river of disagreement/conflict: Polish-Soviet partisan war on Nowogrodek region 1943-1944) Warszawa 1999, 1st edition.

Page 84-86 Quote:

The most brutal requisitions were done by Jewish units and groups. In the Baranowickie group there were two so called "siemiejne" Jewish units: of Bielski (named in the honour of Kalinin, named of Ordzonikidze) and Zorin (nr 106). In the end of June 1944 the first one fo them had 941 people, from which 162 were armed, and the second 562 (73 armed). Those units were created by Jews hiding in forest and escapees from ghettos in Minsk, Nowogrodek, Iwie and other towns and townlets. There were also numerous groups of Jews in the forest of Nacka, Lipiczanska and Bytenski woods. Those units were not included in soviet group, that why in the archives there are no documents about their activities. It was those units which were most impacting the population, since their main tasks were "economical operations"

In the raport from military operations since beginning of German occupation to the 12th 11.1943 Bielski reported that his unit killed 14 Germans, 17 policemen, 33 German spies and provocateurs, burned 5 wooden bridges, blown up 1 rail bridge, destroyed 8 state estates and one (tartak: place where wood is cut.. forgot the name.) About the requisitions there is no mentioning in the raport. And in reality in the beginning of the december this year partisans of Bielski amassed 200 tons of potatoes, 3 tons of cabbage, 5 ton of (buraki: red large vegatables), 5 tons of grain, 3 tons of meat and 1 ton of kielbasa.

Also unit of Zorin was not suffering the hunger. Ex chief of HQ of this unit (AD: Anatol Werthejm, "Jewish partisans on Belarus", "Zeszyty Historyczne", Paryz 1986, z.86 page 144) wrote: ".. The food was in the abundance, we have even gathered the surplus. In the day of joining with the Red Army we took from the lake sunked few hundred of bags with wheat (...) The food surplus was even sent to Moscow. Once a week a plane landed in field air landing in the forest- it brought newspapers, propaganda materials and took back the alcohol, (slonina) and kielbasa which we were making in the camp (...)". In Jewish camps there were manufactures for making weapons, boots, clothes, mills, bakeries, hospitals, which were working for neighbouring soviet brigades.

The commanders of mentioned units received from their work material gains. Bielski was getting rich at the cost of his compatriots, from whom he took the money on the pretext of buying the weapons. In this case Stiepan Szupienia wrote the letter to gen. "Platon": ".. Bielski is not concerned with military actions, he was speculating in units. He was taking the gold from his partisans for buying the weapons and then he was keeping it for himself, while he had not giving any weapons. I would sugest to propose Bielski to giving the gold to the state (he has few kilos of tsarist golden coins) and then arrest this Bielski and put on trial...".

The greedy nature of Bielski is underlined in his memories Jozef Marchwinski (AD: Polish communist which was temporarily in the camp): "... Bielski loved the money and good life more from his compatriots, whom he govern in the camp. Lusting for power, and even more for money, he was robbing his compatrios without any scrupples for all small savings they have when coming to the camp ... this money were getting to the private pocket of Tewje Bielski and his company... " From the words of Anatol Werthejm describing the "breakfasts" and "weddings" of commander it seems that Zorin also lived quite well (AD: weddings according to the once read interview in newspaper were the raids to neighbouring villages, were ZOrin picked up the prettiest girl, "married" her and lived with her for few days before returning to the camp).

The behaviour of Jewish groups in the terrain was creating the dislike not only from local population, but also amongst other soviet partisans. Cpt Kowalow, sent from Moscow, in June 1944 reported to Czernyszow: "...Population does not like the Jews. When Jewish group passes the Niemen there were accidents of disarming them by our partisans, who were giving the taken weapons to the peasants and they are beating the Jews screaming >>Beat the Jews - save the Russia!<<"

Describing the attitude of commanders of soviets partisans from southern part of Nowogrodek region to the Jews, author of the "Partisans. General overview" writes, that in some units they are accepting Jews, while in other they are expelling them or even shooting.

After capturing again Icek Rubiezewski from unit of Bielski after robbery, commander of Frunze brigade, (some soviet military rank: st. lejt.) Kluczko wrote a letter to Tewje, threating him with shooting in place bandits and robbers if they will appear again on the territory controlled by his unit. Sometimes there were even armed conflics. When June the 1st 1943 accidentaly partisan from diversion group from Zukow brigade was killed by Jew from unit "for soviet Belarus" from Nalibocka forest, in revenge there was raid to Jewish camp, during which it was burned and 7 people were killed.

The commanders of Baranowicka group many times tried to regulate the methods of providing the foods to their units. Regions of supplies were appointed to brigaes and units. In case of proper attitued to local population gen. "Platon" 20 June 1943 issued an order, and March 6th 1944 order of (pplk of national security?) "Donskoj", in which there were warnings of most severe punishments for robberies, rapes and drinking. It seems however that this was carried on only on paper. The behaviour of soviet partisans had not changed. But the situation of inhabitants of Nowogrodek region was steadily worsening. The number of Soviet partisans, the amount and the method of taken food threatened the biological existence of the peasants living in territories controlled by Soviet units. Local peasants had to working the miracles, so for example in winter 1944 hide the pork from the robbing partisans. Helena Kapciuk living in village of Olchowka (county of Lida) brings back the memories of how she was hiding the pork behind the wood. To not allow the animal to be summoned by Soviet partisans, the hand-made stoppers were put into the ears of the pork. (The author continues with the examples of the robberies and rapes of soviet partisans)


Page 89 (Naliboki massacre is mentioned twice in the book. This is first mention, second, more detailed is given later..) Quote:

one must be warned that statistics given by gen. Platon (AD: about the numbers of killed Germans - supposedly 70.000 Germans were killed by soviet partisans in his region) must be treated with care. The example may be Soviet action in Naliboki. The destruction of local "samoochowa" (AD: Belarusian word for self-defense units?) armed with 26 rifles and two automatic rigles, joined with murdering of 128 civilians, was presented by commande of Iwienieckie group like a great military operation, in which 250 "samoochowcy" were killed, four heavy machine guns and 13 automatic rifles, 4 grenade rifles 260 rifles and 20.000 of ammo. In the memories of Czernyszew the garrison of "Samoochowa" counted already 500 people, and amongst the spoilts he enumerats 8 heavy machine guns, 6 smaller artilery pieces, 23 automatic rifles, 40 automatic hand pistols and 100 rifles.


Page 223: (AD: author gives one of examples of local negotiations between AK and soviets) Quote:

As it is reported by ex-commander of the "druzyna" (AD: no idea how to translate it. I think it is the smallest part or one of the smallest parts of a military unit either below or just above the platoon level.) from this unit (AD:5th batallion of 77 pp of AK) Ryszard Kiersnowski, soviet units which were garrisoned there (AD:in Rudnicka forest) were organising raids for robbing the north-western part of the county Lida, which was controlled by batallion of cpt. Stanislaw Truszkowski "Sztremer". During those raids they robbed and burned villages of Koniuchy and Niewoniance, murdering part of their inhabitants. As a revenge Poles (AD: AK soldiers) have organised the raid to the forest and burned the settlement of Wisincza. (AD: later author discusses the agreement according to which Poles were giving the food for 2500 soviet and Jewish partisans in exchange for stopping the robberies and giving some ammo and weapons)


Page 58: Quote:

First partisan groups appeared in summer and autumn 1941. One of the first partisan units, which were acting on the territory of Nowogrodzkie voivodship during German occupation, was Jewish unit of Tewje Bielski. Bielski reported, that in July 1941 already, he together with his family members and collegues organised the 20-people strong group, with which he went to forests near Nowogrodek.


Page 60: Quote:

Small units of "okruzhency" and "wostoczniki" (..) thought rather about the survival than about militaru actions. It is clearly stated in quoted already history of brigade of Lenin Komsomol: In the period from November 1941 to November 1942 all groups basing in forests were not carrying any military or diversion activity". Similarly the situation was also in the unit of Bielski.


Page 72: Quote:

Unfortunately we have no full informations about the nationality of the members of Baranowickie group. Only the mentioned data from May the 15th 1944, according to which there were 11185 partisans, from which 6732 were Belarussians, 2552 Russians, 988 Jews, 556 Ukrainians, 150 Poles, 217 others. Belarussian historian Jaugien Siamaszka stated, that in whole group of gen. "Platon" there were 500 POles. There were just 2% of soviet partisans acting in Nowogrodek region. (AD: in the region Poles were from 40 to 50% of population; and majority of Belarussians in Soviet units came from eastern Belarussia, not from local population)


Page 100: (AD: earlier author gives numerous example of murdering AK members and their whole families, as well as common Polish civilians by Soviet units) Quote:

The greatest tragedy in Nowogrodek region was May the 9th 1943 in Naliboki, when partisans from Brigade of Stalin and from unit of Bielski, under the pretext of liquidation of local self-defense forcefully created by Germans, murdered 128 person, mainly men. It must be stressed that Soviets were perfectly oriented that large part of so called self-defense was part of Polish conspiration and was preparing to leaving with gun in hand into the forest. From the discussion, which Waclaw Nowicki carried with one of commanders of Naliboki "samochowa", Eugeniusz Klimowski, it seems that in half of April 1943 there were negotations between that self-defense unit and Soviet partisans. Soviets proposed the posored destruction of the self-defense, and then, after taking the oath, incorporation of its members into partisan soviet units (AD: common way to protect the families of partisans. Sometimes for example the volunteers were beaten in front of whole village to create impression they were no volunteers, but forcefully drafted, so Germans or Soviets would not execute their families). Poles accepted first condition, proposing carrying the action May the 3rd, But they refused taking the oath and starting the open fight with Germans. So massacre in Naliboki may be treated as activity of Soviet partisans openly directed at destruction of local AK conspiration. (Later description as Polish AK finally organised units and started to kill or disarm Soviet robbing bands)


Page 152 Quote:

In October-November 1943 actions of AK were more often, because more often were "economical actions" of Soviet partisans, which were nothing more short of robbery. In those actions especially were active the Jewish units of Bielski and Zorin. Poles were disarming the robbing groups and giving them to Soviet HQs. But this, just as giving the informations about the incidents of robbing the population, was bringing no effects. (...)

Page 166 (AD: Mentioning, that some of Polish AK soldiers from destructed group of Milaszewski were forced to join Bielski unit.)

The reliability of this "memento" is questionable. Most of the testimonies would be self-serving. "Beat the Jews - save the Russia!" is an infamous pre-1917 antisemitic rallying cry. Your POV seems to be that the populations lived in perfect tranquility - until cowardly and lazy Jewish robbers came out of the woods (where they lived to fatten up) to murder Polish civilians. BTW, who decides what is "The greatest tragedy in Nowogrodek region"? ←Humus sapiens ну? 21:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
It's not _my_ POV. My POV is that Jews lived more or less peacefully amongst mildly antisemitic population. The antisemitism was strengthened by the actions of the very few renegades during both Polish-Bolshevik war and Soviet occupation. The already antisemitic population exxagerated the extent of the collaboration, and, what's worse, attributed the actions of the few to the whole group (which was _bad_). When Germans came, the sympathy to Jews and Soviets was almost non-existent (which was _bad_). When Jewish hided in the forests, only few people (probably) were willing to help. As I wrote earlier, I am quite sure that I perfectly understand Bielski and that I myself in such situation would probably start to take food by force. There are few facts here:
  1. there were far too many partisans in the forests
  2. Germans took already a lot of food
  3. Population was already mildly antisemitic
  4. Population didn't have much food to share
  5. Bielski's needed their food

The effect is that Bielski's (as well as other soviet partisan units) started armed robbery. And then they started to kill anyone who tried to oppose them, no matter whether he was collaboteur or not.

As for greatest tragedy, it was obvious from the context in the book, which maybe is missing in the passage. The few pages in the book treated about fate of Polish peasants, and Naliboki was the greatest massacre of Polish peasants in the region.
It seems to me, on the other hand, that your POV however is, that the Bielski's were saints and should be free from critic and any peasant who tried to hide the food for his own family was vicious antisemite. Szopen 06:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Here's that strawman again. My POV is that nobody's an angel. I may agree with your 5 premises, but it is wrong to deduce from them accusations promoting typical medieval antisemitic stereotypes such as Jews are murderers, cowards and robbers. ←Humus sapiens ну? 07:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
The problem is that nobody claimed Jews are murderers, cowards and robbers. Such accusation appeared only in your imagination, it seems. I am personally accusing Bielski's partisans (not sure about the Bielski's themselves) about murdering civilians and committing robberies. I do not consider them cowards, nor I am not accusing them because they are Jewish. It's you who constantly try to prove, that saying that Bielski's partisans were "cowards, murderers and robbers" is the same as typical antisemitic stereotype that "Jews are murderers, cowards and robbers". Szopen 07:57, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I wish. It wasn't I who accused them of being "band of common robbers, who didn't do much in terms of fighting, but rather were shooting local people and burning their houses". ←Humus sapiens ну? 08:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
You miss the point. If you will call me stupid, it's just personal attack against me, but not antipolonism. If you will say "as all Poles, you are stupid" or "You exhibit typical Polish trait of stupidity" then it would be antipolonism. Similarly, if you will say "NSZ band murdered ZOB partisan group" it's not antipolonism. If you say "As typical for Polish partisans, NSZ band murdered ZOB partisan group", then it's antipolonism. So, saying "Bielski's partisans are considered by some people band of common robbers etc" can not be considered antisemitic in itself. On the other hand, if someone would say "typically for Jews... Bielski's were common robbers", then it would be antisemites. I don't know what's your opinion, but I refuse to judge people basing on their nationality or religion. That's why, if I write that Bielski's partisans (not sure about Bielski's brothers itself) committed the crimes, I do not care whether they were Polish, Jewish or Tamils.
But you are still trying to draw a connection between labelling Bielski's criminals and antisemitism Szopen 09:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
And my question reiterated: does P.Duffy mention Naliboki massacre and robbing local population, e.g. reports of AK which had to turn soviet partisans (amongst them also people from Bielski's unit) to their commanders with threat that next time they will shoot them? If not, I will reinsert the sentence that "P.Duffy book does not deal with alleged war crimes committed by Bielski's partisans". I don't want to revert before I will get clear answer, but I am starting to feel tired of you trying to avoid that question. Szopen 09:07, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Last example. Kuras "Ogien", "fire". He fought against both Germans and Soviets. His family was burned alive, hence his nickname. He saved few Jews, and he supposedly murdered few. Is saying "Some say that Kuras murdered few Jews" an example of typical antipolonism? Is he hero, or a criminal? Szopen 09:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Duffy describes many engagements and conflicts by and within the group, and deals with war crimes accusations. I don't know whether he lists them all or not and right now I don't have a book with me to cite it, but the sentence is simply untrue.
I didn't miss it. What you are doing is spreading typical antisemitic canards about a Jewish group, then you pretend that it's dandy because the words "typically for Jews" are not there. Do not expect to be able to use WP to continue to spread hatred. ←Humus sapiens ну? 00:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
HUmus, you are oversensitive. Also, you continue to accuse me about doing something, which only you see. You are either deliberately missing the point, or maybe you were too much discussing with someone else. I will repeat several points again:
  1. Bielski were not heroes.
  2. I am not trying to change the article as current version is fine
  3. I will defend the mentioning of war crimes, since WP is NPOV and pretending Bielski's were saints is not POV
  4. Do not push a baby into my belly. I am refusing to prove that I am not a camel.
  5. If saying someone, who happens to be Jew, is bastard, is antisemitic, then call me antisemite. I was for years engaged with many kinds of fundamentalist - Polish nationalists, German nazis, Jewish fundamentalists and I am quite used to such calls. Again, I refuse to judge Bielski's on the basis of their nationality or religion. I am presenting sources which saying that they commit war crimes.

Szopen 08:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

All I ask for is to be careful about making sweeping accusations that have long and sad history. We are not discussing whether 1000+ of Holocaust survivors - against all odds - were heroes or not, and I do not think you or I are qualified to judge. When it comes to Jews, so many fearless critics and brave judges appear suddenly.
Finally, we are not talking about "someone, who happens to be Jew" - see strawman argument. BTW, I did not see similar accusations in Talk:Soviet partisans. Genocide is a sensitive matter, and some tolerance would go a long way. ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
So, because they were Jews, they couldn't kill the children? The fact is is that children died in Naliboki, though majority of killed were males shot in cold blooded executions, only because they were suspected of beingpart of Polish self-defense or even suspected of sympathize with self-defense. You stand here, if I understand you correctly, is that this massacre didn't happened and Bielski's partisans weren't robbing local populations, because Bielski's were Jewish and to claim otherwise is antisemitic canard. I find it extremely offensive, just as your earlier remarks that i am "continuing to spread hatred". Bielski were not saints, period. Their partisans were robbing population. Whether they had any other choice, is totally different thing.
Also, you didn;t look hard enough. Some quotes from archive: "Why nobody disputes that Germans murdered milions. But this doesn't mean that the fact that Soviet partisants persecuted Poles and turned to robbing and murdering civilians should be deleted. --Molobo 15:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)"
I am not sure what we are discussing right now. Strawman argument is to fight against deliberately twisted someone's else opinion. For example, your behaviour. You presumed I am guilty and put some other meaning into what I've said, and then you continued to fight against supposed "antisemitism". E.g. you accused me about "spreading hatred", added "typical antisemitic canard" and remarks about "bloodthirsty Jews", none of which can apply to my sentence that "Bielski's are sometimes even deferred as band of common robbers" (which isn't even in article).
Similarly, if I understand correctly "antisemitic canard" is spreading of false facts about events which never happened. But Bielski's partisans did robbed the population and they did participated in massacre in Naliboki (not sure about Bielski's themselves). What's more, I stated repeatedly that I don't give a zilch about their nationality of religion. I do not think their behaviour was exceptional and resulted from them being Jews. I gave you a comparison which you ignored: Kuras "Ogien" is commonly called a hero by many. But some accuse him about spreading anti-semitic pamflets and killing innocent Jews. This accusations are being refuted and none can really say whether they are true or not. Those accusation are also quite typical for Soviet propaganda which presented most NSZ and AK fighter as antisemites and bandits. Is the sentence "Some consider Kuras simple robber and antisemite, whose main task was killing Jews" anti-Polish? I may consider it blatantly POVed and unjustified, but I would never claim it's anti-Polish.
Similarly, is sentence "main task of NSZ was killing the Jews" anti-Polish? This accusations are very typical in many Jewish sites teaching about the shoah. Is this sentence sign of polonophobia and anti-Polish feelings? I do not think so. I may say the claims are sometimes exxagerated and POVed, but I would never claim they are anti-Polish (even if sometimes person distributing such claims may or may not has serious problems with Poles in general).
Humus, I spent a lot of time here. And I still don't know even why. You have simply enfuriated me by suggesting that I am dishonest, spreading hatred and typical antisemitic canards, while at the same time accusing me about doing exactly the thing YOU ARE doing. My questions is will you continue to put into my mouth something that I didn't said? Are you arguing about some change into the article? If so, suggest concrete change. If not, let's move this discussion into our user talk pages or even better to private email exchange. But I warn you that I won't write anything more to prove that I am not a camel. 10:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Killed enemy fighters

Does the number of 300+ enemy fighters includes 128 civilians killed in Naliboki? Szopen 11:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The citation was referenced, and the source points to archives. Civilians are not fighters and vice versa. ←Humus sapiens ну? 22:05, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Civilians are nto fighters, but they were counted as fighters in reports of Soviet partisans. As in report of gen. Platon, who reported that in Naliboki in fierce battler partisans killed 250 fighters. Similarly, in Koniuchy they reported fierce battle and a lot of killed enemy fighters (some of which were small children) - even in books published in the west, as I've heard, still massacres in Naliboki and Koniuchy are presented as battles. That's why I ask. Szopen 06:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I do not know. Jews were accused in killing small children for centuries. ←Humus sapiens ну? 00:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
The problem with you that once again you are hardly trying to make me angry without answering the question. Murdering of people in Naliboki and Koniuchy happened. Those were massacres, not battles. Nevertheless, Soviet commanders reported both massacres as fierce battles and reported hundreds of killed enemy "fighters". What's more, I've heard that memories of some partisans, which were published in the west, openly boast with participation in those massacres, presenting them as great victories. The question about the number presented here is then completely valid.
I have the feeling that I face the wall now. The only option for me is probably back out and pretend I didn't read anything about Bielski's - no matter what source I will present, I will be accused once again about spreading antisemitic lies. Humus, is accusing Poles about Jedwabne "antipolonism"? Is researching the Kielce pogrom antipolonism? Why then accusing one of the many Jewish partisans, Bielski, about committing war crimes, "antisemitism"? Can you explain that to me? i don't care whether Bielski's were Jews, Poles, Russians or Marsians. I don't know why you are so obsesses with that. I care about the sources, witnesses testimonies, documents etc. The ones i've read uniformly accused Bielski's (and other Soviet partisans, but in this case we discuss just Bielski's) about participation in robbery and massacres. Explain to me, in simple words, why criticism of Bielski's is antisemitism and how it compares to blood libel. (I wish some of my ancestors would be Jewish. At least I could have some chance in such kind of discussions) Szopen 08:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
To clarify, Soviets pacified Naliboki village when local villagers decided to form self-defense unit. After first negotiations, Soviets entered village and shot most of the people suspected of being members of self-defense. Few in fact were, and few in fact had arms - but most of people were simply shot without any investigation in executions in cold blood, and between victims were also three women and several kids. According to witnesses, most of the killed were murdered by partisans from Bielski's group. Were those killed "enemy figthers", "nazi collaborators" ? Szopen 09:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
The Jews are very predictable and defenseless target for such atrocious accusations. Nobody's saying they are all angels, of course, but "Jews murdered children"? Please, don't make it difficult to assume good faith.
You chose a curious place to express your grievances against Soviet partisans. ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:32, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
As far as I can see, you didn't assume good faith but from the very beginning started an attack which recently turned into personal attack. Also, for God's sake, first I explain that I am not targeting Bielski's but this was typical for all Soviet partisans (and Bielski's were Soviet partisans), and now you are suprised?

[edit] The situation in Nowogrodek area

A quote from a webpage I have archived on my HD:

"This was not the case with the Jewish fugitives. The latter found themselves in the most tragic predicament of all the ethnic groups under the Nazi occupation. First of all, the Nazi policy of extermination liquidated practically every Jewish support center, including the ghettos, where the fugitives could have counted on aid. So Jewish fugitives were unable to rely on “their own” as far as their supplies were concerned. Jews attempted to deal with this challenge in a variety of ways. Their activities to procure supplies usually reflected the profile of the fugitive group individual Jews were involved with. There were at least four distinct categories of Jewish fugitives who escaped extermination and strove to survive in hiding.49"

"First, there was a handful of Polonized Jews and assimilated Poles of Jewish origin in the Wilno region. These persons were mostly passing as Polish Christians. Their supply problems were practically akin to those of an average Polish Christian. At least in some instances these fugitives had links to the Polish underground. They took advantage of its protection and a few of them even fought in its ranks in the forest.50"

"Second, young, athletic people fled the ghettos in organized groups, often equipped with arms they were able to acquire through various channels. Some of them quickly formed separate Jewish partisan outfits in the forest. Their leaders were usually involved with some segment of the Zionist movement: from the extreme left to the far right. It seems certain that almost from the very beginning these Jewish fighters used force to capture food, clothes, and weapons from the peasants. It cannot be excluded however that they also paid or even begged for the supplies in some instances. After a while, almost all Jewish units became tactically subordinated to the Soviet partisan movement, which already earlier had incorporated some Jewish Communists into its ranks."

"Initially, at least some of the Jewish partisans, particularly the largest outfit, Tuwia Bielski’s Brigade from the Naliboki Forest, enjoyed proper and even cordial relations with individual units of the Home Army. The underground Poles sometimes saved Jews and later escorted them to the Jewish partisan camps. Both sides also cooperated against the Germans, for example during the great Nazi pacification action in the Naliboki Forest in the summer of 1943. Unfortunately, mutual relations kept deteriorating because of the increasingly frequent and brutal supply raids of the Jewish partisans which prompted the AK to intervene at the request of the desperate local peasants who were being robbed mercilessly.51 The increasingly fierce brutality and radicalization of the Jewish partisans stemmed mainly from the fact that their families had been murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators, and they had escaped from the ghettos with the thought of revenge. Jews were sentenced to death; they had nothing to lose. This attitude manifested itself, among other things, in “open hate and hostility towards the local population,” according to Dov Levin.52 The principal reason for the flare-up in the mutual relations between the Jewish partisans and the Home Army however was the conflict of the Polish independentists with the Soviet partisans who tactically controlled the Jewish partisan units. The Soviets were physically destroying Polish partisan outfits and also strove to provoke Nazi wrath toward the civilian Polish population of the Wilno region. Thus, by the fall of 1943 the struggle for supplies and political supremacy in the Borderlands pitted the Jewish partisans squarely against the Home Army.53"

"Aside from the organized Jewish partisan units, so-called “wild” groups appeared in the forest. Making up the third kind of Jewish fugitives, these groups consisted of persons of diverse ages, both male and female, including children, the elderly, and often entire families. The “wild” groups were the least organized entities. At least initially, they lacked any funds and arms. Therefore they were rarely admitted into the affiliated Jewish or Soviet partisan units. Members of the “wild” groups were forced to beg or steal food from the peasants, some of whom they had been acquainted with already before the war. Sometimes the fugitives would force the farmers to surrender their hidden weapons to them. The “wild” groups lacked military discipline. They treated matters of security with insufficient vigilance. Encumbered by the elderly, women, and children, they were unable to change their whereabouts frequently, and often lived in dugouts in one location for extended periods of time. These features of the “wild” groups – in conjunction with the expropriation actions they carried out, which prompted the peasants to denounce them – resulted in those Jewish fugitives most frequently of all falling victim to German expeditions, village self-defense, and AK retaliation. Further, the “wild” groups were targeted by common bandits and Soviet partisans (it was often difficult to tell these two apart). Next, Jewish girls and women hiding in the dugouts fell prey to the sexual appetites of degenerate Soviet predators. The Soviet aggression against the “wild” groups also stemmed from the paranoid suspicion that Jews who were able to escape to the forest were agents of the Nazi police. Moreover, the Soviets resented the fact that the “wild” groups, through their carelessness, revealed the whereabouts of the Soviet partisan bases, did not fight the Germans, and supplied themselves from the same meager sources that the Communist partisans did, and additionally antagonized the local population. Thus, the “wild” groups of Jewish fugitives were in the most precarious situation and were practically besieged from all sides."

"Fourth, a much more lucky category, some Jewish fugitives, both individuals and groups, found shelter with the local Christian population in the countryside.54 Thus, they solved the problem of supplies. Those Jews were usually well heeled. They did not only have reliable Christian acquaintances, but also the funds to maintain themselves and, at times, even to buy the good will of their hosts. Sometimes Jews in hiding robbed the peasants in remote localities, returned to their shelter, and shared the loot with their Christian hosts in lieu of payment for their upkeep. Of course, such activities exposed those in hiding to denunciations to the Nazis or the retaliation by the peasant self-defense, Polish underground, or Soviet partisans – depending on who had fallen victim to the Jewish supply raids."

"It has to be stressed that, because the Soviet partisans were most numerous in the Wilno region, they were also responsible for the greatest number of acts of violence perpetrated in the course of the expropriation and other actions directed against the civilian population. In any event, the expropriation actions of the common criminals, Soviets, and Jewish fugitives were facilitated by the fact that the Nazi authorities often ignored banditry so long as it was aimed at the non-German civilian population. Sometimes the Germans punished the usually innocent locals for the acts of banditry (or resistance) carried out by their antagonists from other local groups. It was safer and more convenient to “pacify” a Belorussian village or a Polish gentry hamlet than to chase armed bandits, Soviet partisans, or Jewish fugitives around the sylvan wilderness and swamps. This attitude stemmed in part from the indifference of the Germans to the plight of the local population and other groups.55 It was also attributable to the lack of sufficient security forces to patrol the area and conduct massive anti-bandit sweeps. The efficiency of the Nazi security force was also conditioned by its ethnic make-up (for example, Lithuanian auxiliary policemen were rather unwilling to risk their lives to defend Polish or Belorussian peasants). Nonetheless, the indifference of the German authorities toward the predicament of the locals was tempered by the prerogatives of the Nazi economic policy of total exploitation of the Wilno region. After all, the success of the policy required the maintenance of order if, for no other reason, than to ensure the steady delivery of agricultural products." Szopen 09:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

So? ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:32, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Accusation of kidnappings

One thing is, what do the accusation of kidnapping in 2007 have to do with the artcile about partisans in 1944? Second thing is beware, by quoting such article you will be soon accused by some special "assuming good faith" guy to be be typical antisemite Szopen 11:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

At the very least, the heading needs to be changed if that kidnapping thing, which is barely relevant, is to be included. It comes right under the topic of "war crimes" and a simple glance would have one thinking that kidnapping was something the group participated in regularly-SF —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.237.201.106 (talk) 01:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)