Showing posts with label East Prussia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label East Prussia. Show all posts

Friday, March 14, 2014

The Reincarnation of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth & Eastern Germany


http://www.electricpolitics.com/media/mp3/EP2014.02.24.mp3

Also at http://prorevnews.blogspot.com/2014/02/we-interrupt-ukraine-news-with-some.html

Very interesting interview.

George Kenney interviews Russian scholar Stephen F Cohen about Ukraine

See it especially at 17:00-22:00 and 35:00-42:00

Suggests allowing Kiev-Ukraine to join as a junior partner with Lithuania and Poland, in order to preserve Russian oriented southern and eastern areas of Ukraine for Russia.  Lithuania and Poland are here identified as the two countries at the forefront of pushing EU regime change in Ukraine, with the support of Germany.
19:10  They would as you say draw a red line on say Sevastopol, and so for Washington to think they we can wrest these territories from Russian orbit is extremely dangerous, and its not going to happen.

And its not going to happen.

Russia is not going to let eastern Ukraine go.

Actually, If Putin asked my opinion

If I were a patriotic Russian citizen instead of a patriotic American citizen as I am

I would say to Putin what do you want western Ukraine for anyway its nothing but trouble? I they want to go and be a junior poor partner with Lithuania and Poland and oh by the way it is Poland and Lithuania that have been driving this EU march on Ukraine, let them go. They are not Russian … western Ukraine was part of the polish empire, part of the Austrian empire; it has few affinities with Russia, whereas eastern Ukraine is Russian essentially. Let them go. And what do you get? You get the most populous part of Ukraine, that’s eastern and southern Ukraine. You preserve your naval base. … you won’t have the basket-case of western Ukraine
Mentions 'sidebar' story of Germany to become more assertive, with the need for Polish compensation to the east.
36:20 You mentioned Poland and Lithuania pushing for some change in Ukraine… What is your sense of the German role in all of this?

Well that’s the sidebar story but an important one. I can’t claim expertise on it but I looked into it asked people, and it appears to have this pre-history. Poland is very nervous about Germany’s growing role in Europe. So Poland wanted some empire of its own, like it …[once had]. It wanted Ukraine … to offset German economic and political influence. Meanwhile Germans has been talking about a more assertive foreign policy- taking more leadership. Now you got to remember that the wounds of WW2 are not completely healed; so when you tell a Polish citizen of a certain generation that Germany’s going to get more assertive, they get a little worried. So they wanted to enhance their sphere of influence economically and politically, and Poland was the ticket.
Ghosts of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2013/12/ukraine-split-ghosts-of-polish.html

Sunday, March 9, 2014

Gorbachev Offered Riga Line to Poland & 'Kalingrad Oblast' to Germany in 1990

'Riga Line' the pre-WW2 Polish eastern border with the U.S.S.R.
mutually agreed upon March 18, 1921;
plus 'Kalingrad Oblast' Sold to Germany for 48 Billion DM



Found this on a facebook page
In 1989, Mikhail Gorbachev suggested meeting in Moscow G-Dragon, the return of the Eastern Lands in two versions.

First: the return of Vilnius, Lviv and Kremenets;
 

The second arrondissement of Grodno from the wilderness Belovezhskaya Pushcha and the former province. The Lviv Centre for petroleum. The reason for this proposal was the cancellation of the jałtańskich agreements and mutual waiver of claims for compensation.
 

Soon, Jaruzelski has adopted proposals for Gorbachev on behalf of Polish. When the case came to Warsaw, Mr Geremek, Michnik, Kuroń and Mazowiecki went in haste to Moscow and almost kneel wybłagali Gorbachev not to do. What kind of influence they used no one knows, in the end

Gorbachev przystal on their requests. Consul General in Krakow, p. Serdaczuk was talking about in the presence of Prof. Edward Prus. Also confirmed is the Member of Lithuania to the USSR Jan Ciechanowicz in an interview with Stanislaw Sadowskim from Toronto. It also said the New York press. It was published in the National No 4 (2) (2006).

 Apparently the same Gorbachev did with Kohl by Wrocław and Szczecin during talks about zjednoczenkiu Germany, but Kohl said he would wait for the traffic to the poles. Source: Helmut Kohl said a German journalist Dieter Shmitzke on June 1, 2005 and published in the newspaper "Bayerische Fulle" Nr. 2.

As for 'Kalingrad Oblast' - the northern portion of pre-1945 German East Prussia:

see page 12 at http://www.russian-lawyer.co.uk/Kaliningrad_Integration.pdf
Seemingly, the Society of East Prussia expects a change in the status of Kaliningrad to occur sooner or later. In his address to the 2000 national meeting of the Eastern Prussians, the speaker of the SEP, Wilhelm von Gottberg, pointed out that it will be impossible to preserve the present status of the “Königsberg region” permanently. He gave expression to his hope that someone will take a chance to change its status and that the opportunity will not be lost, as was the case when Gorbachev offered to sell Kaliningrad to Germany and the German government rejected the offer.
17
In his later interview “The Königsberg region and its perspectives”18 he even mentioned a concrete purchase price estimated of 48 billion DM. Kohl and Genscher rejected the offer and the major Genscher reason was that he did not want to have “Königsberg as a gift”.

If I recall correctly, I have seen an account of this with Kohl turning down the offer as if it were premature, with words to the effect of East Prussia having to return to Germany under the proper set of circumstances, as if already predetermined.

 

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

Polish Kresy Re-Annexation Now Discussed As Possible



Polish Re-annexation of Eastern Lands - Kresy - Now Discussed as Possible - December 2013 -
as Wlodimir Putin's Achilles Heal...

An intelligent proposal for an ethnically inclusive, outright encouraging people from today's Belorussia and Ukraine to declare themselves as Polish via a green card program for those migrating to the current Poland.   Ethnic Russians would be welcome to declare Polish nationality, even if lacking any paperwork showing say a Polish/Polonized grand-parent- all ethnic groups so invited. 

This matches the logical model of the traditional Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as a pro-Polish multi-ethnic state started with Casmir III, so refined by the Treaty of Haidych proposal for a Polish-Lithuanian-Rutheniun Commonwealth- elevating the Ruthenians to co-equal status with Poles and Lithuanians.


It would be a continued via Joseph Pilsudski and his alliance with Symon Petlura, followed by the subsequent Volhynia Experiment.
from wikipedia:

The Volhynia Experiment was a cultural and political program by the interwar Polish government in the province of Volhynia whose purpose was the create a Ukrainian identity that was also loyal to the Polish state. It was hoped that this program would furthermore lead to pro-Polish sympathies in Soviet Ukraine and serve as a possible aide in Polish plans concerning the Soviet Union.[1] The Volhynian Experiment was opposed by both Ukrainian nationalists from neighboring Galicia and by pro-Soviet communists.

In 1928 Henryk Józewski, the former deputy minister for internal affairs in the Ukrainian government of Symon Petliura, was nominated the voivode, or governor, of Volhynia, to carry out the program of cultural and religious autonomy for Ukrainians in that region. Józewski, a Pole from Kiev (where, unlike in Galicia, Poles and Ukrainians had a history of cooperating with one another),[2] was a Ukrainophile who felt that the Polish and Ukrainian nations were deeply connected and that Ukraine might one day become a "Second fatherland" for Poles. [3] Like many Poles from Kiev, he was bilingual in the Ukrainian and Polish languages. [4]

Józewski brought Ukrainian followers of Symon Petliura, including former officers in Petliura's army, to his capital of Lutsk in order to help in his Volhynian administration. He hung portraits of Petliura alongside those of Pilsudski in public places, [3] founded the Institute for the Study of Nationality Affairs and educational society for the Orthodox (which expanded to 870 chapters in Volhynia), subsidized Ukrainian reading societies (by 1937, it had 5,000 chapters), and sponsored Ukrainian Theater. The use of Ukrainian language, instead of Russian, during church sermons was encouraged.

A loyal Ukrainian political party, the Volhynian Ukrainian Alliance, was created. .[5] This party was the only Ukrainian political party allowed to freely function in Volhynia.[3] Its programme called for democracy, a separation of church and state, and equality for all citizens. Although many of its supporters, former officers of Symon Petliura, had committed anti-Jewish pogroms in Volhynia during the period the Revolution, under Jozewski's influence antisemitism was not tolerated. [3]
Two groups competed with Jozewski and his pro-Polish Ukrainian allies for the allegiance of the Volhynian Ukrainians: the Communists and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), based in Galicia. The Communists referred to the Volhynian Experiment as a "Petliurite Occupation", and set up a front party, the Peasant Worker Alliance. The Peasant Worker Alliance, whose affiliation with the Communist party was unknown by most of its supporters, grew to be the most popular party in Volhynia, until it was banned by Jozewski in 1932. Soviet-based partisans fought Jozewski's police in the marshes of northern Volhynia. [3]

While the Communists were coming to Volhynia from the East, Ukrainian nationalists entered from the South. The OUN saw Volhynia as fertile ground for the expansion of its Ukrainian nationalist ideal. By 1935 it was reported that 800 OUN members were operating in Volhynia; they had penetrated many of the Ukrainian institutions that Jozewski had created. According to Jozewski's rivals in the Polish military, the pro-Polish Petliurite Ukrainians in Volhynia failed to match the OUN in terms of organization and numbers.[3]

During the period of his governance, Józewski was the object of two assassination attempts: by Soviet agents in 1932 and by Ukrainian nationalists in 1934.[6]

Cancellation of the Volhynia Experiment

After his sponsor Pilsudski's death in 1935, Józewski's Ukrainian programme was cancelled. The anti-Ukrainian Polish elements in the Polish military took control over policies in Volhynia. Józewski was criticized for allowing Ukrainians to buy land from Poles, Orthodox churches were demolished or converted to Catholic use during the "revindication" campaign, and by 1938 Józewski himself lost his post.[1][7] Under his successor, all state support for Ukrainian institutions was eliminated, and it was recommended that Polish officials cease using the words "Ukraine" or "Ukrainian." [8] The Polish army Generals believed that filling all state offices in Volhynia with ethnic Poles would ensure fast mobilization and prevent sabotage in case of a Soviet attack on Poland.[9] Ukrainians were systematically denied the opportunity to obtain government jobs.[10] Although the majority of the local population was Ukrainian, virtually all government official positions were assigned to Poles. Land reform designed to favour the Poles[11] brought further alienation of the Ukrainian population..[12]

Military colonists were settled in Volhynia to defend the border against Soviet intervention.[9] Despite the ethnic Ukrainian lands being overpopulated and Ukrainian farmers being in need of land, the Polish government's land reforms gave land from large Polish estates not to local villagers but to Polish colonists.[10] This number was estimated at 300,000 in both Galicia and Volhynia by Ukrainian sources and less than 100,000 by Polish sources (see osadnik) [13]

Plans were made for a new round of colonization of Volhynia by Polish military veterans and Polish civilians and hundreds of new Roman Catholic churches were planned for the new colonists and for converts from Orthodoxy.[8]

Volhynia after the Experiment

The ultimate result of Polish policies in Volhynia was that a sense of Ukrainian patriotism was created; however this patriotism was not tied to the Polish state.[1] As a result of the anti-Ukrainian Polish policies that followed the Polish government's cancellation of the Volhynian Experiment, both Ukrainian nationalists and Communists found fertile ground for their ideas among the Volhynian Ukrainian population.[8] Eventually, the Polish population of the area would be destroyed in the Massacres of Poles in Volhynia.
That Massacre of Polish peoples - whether Polish speaking or simply even Polish appearing thus representing a predatory form of nationalism disregarding the individual's right to chose a national affiliation -- followed those earlier throughout the Ukraine against the "KulAK's", and such was a logical component of a grand strategy of wars of religion resulting in Poland's 'cleansing' and shiftward west.



Monday, September 12, 2011

Terrible & Premeditated CENSORED





Facebook page East Prussia - East Prussian Movement (Freedom for East Prussia) LOCKED and Administrator List Hidden

https://www.facebook.com/pages/East-Prussia-Prussian-Movement-Freedom-for-East-Prussia/142612635778809

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/09/terrible-premeditated.html

A revenge more terrible then commonly acknowledged.

The idea of setting up Germany to start and loose a brutal war with severe consequences eastward undeniably dovetails with the Jesuit Order's major goal of recapturing lands previously lost to “heretics” such as Lutherans, notably the post WW2 partition of East Prussia, historically the 1st Lutheran state in 1525.

De Zayes book focuses exclusively upon the expulsion of the ethnic Germans as a terrible revenge for the crimes of the 3rd Reich; it overlooks the broader picture of a continuing counter reformation directed by a man born into a prestigious Polish ‘Noble’ family – so-known for their devotion to the Vatican – who was only about 8 years old when his uncle Mieczyslaw was imprisoned by Otto Von Bismarck, leader of the predominantly Protestant state of Prussia that would prominently defy the Vatican with its KULTURKAMPF.





Wlodimir (Vladimir) Ledochowski's Goal Predicted by Maximillian Kolbe in 1938?



Rome's planned theft of the predominately Protestant areas of East Prussia, Pomerania, Silesia, etc to the north, came as the cap stone of an agenda of bloody religious war for the gain of the Roman Catholic Church Empire: a 20th century continuation of the counter reformation....

Ledochowski Religious War CENSORED at now defunct East Prussia BB
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2008/11/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowski-cover-up.html


PREMEDITATED & CENSORED: on the annihilation of the first Protestant-Lutheran state in the world [moved from ABE blog]

http://avles-theamberpath.blogspot.com/2011/09/premeditated-censored-on-annihilation.html

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Terrible & PREMEDITATED

excerpted from: http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2009/07/wlodimir-ledochowski-kulturkampf_17.html

A revenge more terrible then commonly acknowledged.

The idea of setting up Germany to start and loose a brutal war with severe consequences eastward undeniably dovetails with the Jesuit Order's major goal of recapturing lands previously lost to “heretics” such as Lutherans, notably the post WW2 partition of East Prussia, historically the 1st Lutheran state in 1525.

De Zayes book focuses exclusively upon the expulsion of the ethnic Germans as a terrible revenge for the crimes of the 3rd Reich; it overlooks the broader picture of a continuing counter reformation directed by a man born into a prestigious Polish ‘Noble’ family – so-known for their devotion to the Vatican – who was only about 8 years old when his uncle Mieczyslaw was imprisoned by Otto Von Bismarck, leader of the predominantly Protestant state of Prussia that would prominently defy the Vatican with its KULTURKAMPF.





Wlodimir (Vladimir) Ledochowski's Goal Predicted by Maximillian Kolbe in 1938?

Rome's planned theft of the predominately Protestant areas of East Prussia, Pomerania, Silesia, etc to the north, came as the cap stone of an agenda of bloody religious war for the gain of the Roman Catholic Church Empire: a 20th century continuation of the counter reformation.



Crafted by the Jesuit Superior General, who was only 8 years old when Protestant Prussia imprisoned his Cardinal Uncle Mieczyslaw Ledochowski, as a most plausible childhood revenge vow.

Wlodimir Ledochowski 1872

about when Bismarck’s Prussia expelled the Jesuit Order

from united Germany

Baltimore newspaper April 17, 1915


When the new Black Pope was yet a lad he witnessed the persecution and imprisonment of his uncle, the late Cardinal Ledochowski , who had estates in German Poland, and whom Bismarck regarded with mingled fear and hatred of the persecuted Poles in Germany


Cardinal Mieczyslaw Ledochowski

b. October 29, 1822 – d. July 22, 1902


1871-1918 German 2nd Reich, with Polish majority Posen/Poznan


Cardinal Miecczyslaw Ledochowski
was a key figure in the Prussian-Vatican conflict.

From The Washington Post, January 15, 1913

The Washington Post on Cardinal Mieczyslaw Ledochowski

“He spent two full years in prison before being liberated and sentence to exile, and he then proceeded to Rome where he lived as the honored guest, first of Pius IX and then of Leo XIII, exercising a potent influence at the Vatican. So much so, indeed, that before Bismarck would consent to a cessation of the so-called Culterkampf, he insisted that Cardinal Count Ledochowski should leave Rome and cease to be a member of the Pope’s immediate entourage.”
Miesczyslaw Ledochowski was a Vatican official representing a nexus of power higher then the Pope, who, vengeful for Prussia's Kulturkampf, was desirous of future war.

This is what the NY Times published in 1892: The New York Times On the Papacy and Cardinal Mieczyslaw Ledochowski

It is very well understood, however, that Monaco is entirely under the control of Ledochowski, that proud, imperious, and able Pole who made Bismarck such worlds of trouble in the old Kulterkampf day and who has been able to impose his will very often upon even the present Pope. This powerful man was in a German prison when Pius IX created him a Cardinal in 1875. Next year he was released and banished, and he has since lived in Rome, devoting his great wealth and talents to building up a militant Ultramontagne party about him. His wrath at the treatment he received at the hands of Bismarck has colored all his political views. He has hated both Germany and Italy and has looked unceasingly forward to the time when French bayonets should restore the temporal power of the Vatican in the old Roman States.

If we assume that this spirited and resolute prelate will shortly be ruling the Church through its nominal head, it becomes a most anxious question how he will accept the existing political conditions of Europe which have so radically changed since 1875. The new rulers of the Germans have been at pains to show their desire to abolish the last traces of the Kulterkampf. When the pending Prussian Education bill is passed, the German Catholics will be actually stronger than they were before the May laws. During the last half year these dispatches have frequently reflected the new interest which William and his immediate entourage are displaying in the Polish question. Of course a good deal of this has arisen naturally from the contemplation of the necessity of sooner or later fighting Russia: but even more it represents the effort to allure Ledochowski into friendship with Germany by an appeal to his national sentiment. How far this has successor will be, as has been said, a most anxious question.


In any event under this new regime there would be an abrupt cessation of pastorals on Socialistic and labor problems and of poems about St. Thomas Aquinas. We should instead see the Vatican boldly embark upon the troubled waters of European diplomacy, seeking alliances and taking desperate risks upon the fortune in the next war.


So, apparently, was the Pope (with his doctrine of 'papal infallibility"):

On January 18th, 1874 -- thus on the anniversary of the founding of the German Reich -- he declared at an assembly of international pilgrims that Bismarck was the serpent in the paradise of mankind. This serpent seduced Germans into wishing to be more than god himself. Such an overextension of the human self would be followed by a humiliation such as no people had ever before tasted!

Only the Eternal one knew whether or not the grain of sand on the mountains of eternal retribution had already been released.

This retribution was growing to avalanche proportions and it would rush in a few years at the clay feet of this Reich and transform it into ruins. This Reich, which, like the tower of Babel, had been erected in defiance of god, would pass away to the glory of god.

Pope Pius IX (May 13, 1792February 7, 1878),

born Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti,
Pope, elected June 16, 1846, served 31+ years until his death in 1878.



Wlodimir (Vladimir) Ledochowski's Goal Predicted by Maximillian Kolbe in 1938?
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/06/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowskis-goal.html

Wlodimir (Vladimir) Ledochowski: War Culpability Admission – Oder Neisse Line/Destruction of Prussia the ‘aim’ of the counter reformation
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/08/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowski-war.html

Wlodimir Ledochowski Goal Via Goals
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/06/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowskis-goal-via.html

Maximilian Kolbe- "'God' is Cleansing Poland"
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/08/from-man-for-others-maximilian-kolbe.html

Wlodimir Ledochowski's Deranged Polish Religious Visions?
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/07/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowskis-deranged.html

Wlodimir Ledochowski: Mission, Motivation, Geopolitical Chessboard
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/06/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowski-mission.html

Wlodimir Ledochowski: Kulturkampf Revenge Last of the Great Roman Generals- Malachi Martin
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2009/11/along-amber-path-7_7355.html

Wlodimir Ledochowski: Last of the Great Roman Generals- Series

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/search/label/Great%20Roman%20General

Wlodimir Ledochowski Ignored Even By the Jesuits
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2008/05/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowski-usually.html

Sunday, August 21, 2011

EJP's Jesuitical Racist Subversion of Protestantism & Prussia

I encounter and uncover this- Up Front & Hidden in Plain Site

So I figure, go beyond Washington, D.C. planning, and look at foreign policy and WW2

And I figure out this- Wlodimir Leochwoski Kulturkampf Revenge

So look for plausible allies to help spread the word

And what do I find? The Subversion of the Reformation by attaching to it a heavy weight of Eric Jon Phelps Jesuitical Racism- Apartheid
Blatant Strategic Blunder- ignore Prussia, the worlds first Lutheran State murdered by the counter reformation, and prime candidate for new reformation state against the ancient regime, for the sake of needless race-baiting and a needlessly white only apartheid ‘ProBaptiCal’ in Eric Jon Phelp’s home state of Pennsylvania.




Flashback to the end of 1942.

Wlodimir Ledochowski is dead, reportedly from gastro-intestinal problems.

The tide of the war has just turned against the 3rd Reich at Stalingrad.

A group of men from Germany and elsewhere sought to stop the madness. End the war. Kill [s]hitler. Do it now (1943). Keep the USSR forces out of Central Europe, best within their pre-WW2 borders.

But FDR would say no to stopping the madness- let it go on for two more years against any semblance of common senses on the surface, just as let refused to allow the St Louis to disembark let along the US have a few hundred addition German-Jewish immigrants.

It HAD to go on- the USSR pushing the 3rd Reich forces back long enough to drive deep outside of the pre start of the war border, deep into Poland and beyond into Berlin with massive costs of human lives in military and in civilian population. It could not end at some intermediate area, within the western USSR or eastern Poland. It had to do so, rolling over the objections and ultimately the life of U.S. General George S. Patton.

It had to go on for the occult agenda- to facilitate the aim of the counter reformation along with numerous other aims to the aim of the counter reformations revenge against the state that stood up to the Vatican during Wlodimir Ledochowski’s childhood, Europe’s first protestant Lutheran state- Prussia.

Naturally in seeking to expose this, I sought and contacted the most prominent figure on the internet search of potential anti Vatican allies- aka Eric Jon Phelps.

EJP after all appeared to be the most prominent anti Vatican entity upon the internet with his web site, and his book by the name, Vatican Assassins of some 700+ pages, and 2 or 3 editions: about the Vatican’s political maneuvering-manipulations of history such as plotting wars to further its self, of which most are unaware because of the Jesuit Order’s prioritization of EDUCATION.

Hence, this book’s coverage includes that of what Phelps terms as Europe’s 2nd Great 30 Years War of Religion (1914-1945). The first was that of 1618-1648- which writers selected by The New York Times will insist was Europe’s LAST great religious war! That which people know as World War One and World War Two are but the two main parts of the latter- as a series of events designed to advance the rule of the ancient regime of the Roman Catholic Church.

On June 10, 2007 I posted my first block of articles about this focusing upon the leadership at the Jesuit Order at that time- of Wlodimir Ledochowski- 26th Superior General of the Jesuit Order.

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007_06_01_archive.html

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/08/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowski-war.html

Phelps replied positively to my contacting him about my blog Continuing Counter Reformation back in June 2007:

“A great site! The pre and post WWII boundaries have never been analyzed until now. I mentioned the necessity of this important analysis in Vatican Assassins. The result would evidence the benefit of the Papacy and this the Vatican being the real culprit behind the Second Thirty Years War (1914-1945).

>Has anyone else placed W Ledochowski with the Oder-Neisse line?

I don’t know of that line, but Ledochowski was of noble blood”

>and the apparently religious based expulsions (AFAIK of those Germans in Catholic majority Upper Silesia given the option while the others were not)




I hope I provided EJP with some inspiration- knowing of his interest in military strategy from portions of his Vatican Assassins:

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/07/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowski-world-war.html

So I figure, that an excellent way to demolish Rome is to expose its culpability for WW2; and that Phelps, being the author of Vatican Assassins, and by implication, having some handle upon military and by extension political strategy, would see not only that, but also the potential of this mass revelations of Rome’s crimes plausibly sparking an interest in re-addressing the culmination of WW2 status quo- particularly the Oder-Neisse line.

So there, I could see the need and the solution of a new republic as infinitely a more workable solution then attempting to turn back the clock to the pre WW2 borders, and especially practical in what was Europe’s FIRST Protestant State?

It only seems logical for Vatican Assassins with its creators already evident preferences and interests to have an interest in this blacked out history hence largely unknown and forgotten land of the protestant reformation – Europe, indeed the world’s FIRST PROTESTANT STATE.

This was of course essentially the original territory of Prussia later know as East Prussia, wiped off the map in 1945 and partitioned north-south respectively between the U.S.S.R. and Poland.

The very name of Prussia originates with the Prus- a Baltic people. Many were murdered by the Teutonic Knights German Roman Catholic military order that invaded Prussia in the 1200s. Others were eventually absorbed into the immigrant and successively landed Germans, resulting in their descendants being Germans who were partially Prus.

After 1525 Prussia grew, encompassing the lands around Berlin of Brandenburg.

During the 1700s, Prussia defeated Austria, gaining Silesia- the province that, unlike Bavaria and Poland had largely withstood the Counter Reformation, remaining Lutheran.

By the 1800s, the State of Prussia included lands bordering Holland and Belgium, and during the 1860s gained Hannover.

Maps of Prussia's Growth
http://www.rollintl.com/roll/prussia.htm


By 1871, Prussia united the various German states, excluding Austria, into the Deutsches Reich under the leadership of Otto Von Bismarck.

As readers of this blog are aware, this was the area of the Kulturkampf of Bismarck's Prussian led Deutsches Reich -- otherwise known as the 2nd Reich, with [s]hitler's being the 3rd Reich and the 1st being the "Holy Roman Empire" -- and of the Kulturkampf Revenge -- Revenge for Bismarcks' anti-Clerical Kulturkampf -- of Wlodimir Ledochowski: 26th Superior General of the Jesuit Order (the so-called "Society of Jesus") from February 11, 1915 to his death December 13, 1942.

Starting my posts about this forbidden history in June 2007, I followed with more:

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/07/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowskis-deranged.html

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/07/holocaust-denial-via-new-york-times-in.html

It only seems logical for Vatican Assassins to have a strong interest in thrusting this blacked out history hence largely unknown and forgotten land of the protestant reformation – Europe, indeed the world’s FIRST PROTESTANT STATE.

This is especially so considering Eric Jon Phelps's tastes in what he loves, not only Protestant Christianity, but also the Celtic, German and Slavic peoples of northern Europe -- Phelps himself being self described as Irish and a little Pawnee Indian, and residing in the U.S.A. in Pennsylvania- a land with quite a few people of German ancestry, plus generally those Polish, Czech, European Jewish (generally part German and/or Eastern Europe)) and Black (sub-Saharan African ancestry). Indeed, within the U.S., Pennsylvania is frequently refereed to as "Dutch" Country- a mistranslation and understanding of the term "Deutsche" (German rather then Dutch).

Yet instead he embarks upon this "ProBaptiCal" apartheid state excluding Blacks, turning his back on the land of Europe's 1st Protestant (Lutheran) State of the European White peoples such as Slavs and Germans, instead ignoring Prussia, for the sake of something instead within his currently home state that would force out the Blacks- disregarding that a reincarnated Prussia would not be forcing out any ethnicity (and likely has few Blacks). Phelps could have a new republic upon Protestant Christina principles free of the planet's luciferian romish-masonic shadow government, without his embarrassing hang up regarding Black people thrust forth as an agent provacator, marked by his ridiculous obsessive use of his crackpot sloganeering of "Majority Blacks Savages".

Phelp’s racism is something like a speck of rust or cancer, appearing small before spreading, with the term appearing with greater and greater frequency, as Phelps increasing favorite term– “Majority Black Savages”. By 2007 his writings had already included more frequent use of the terms “civil blacks” and “savage blacks”- with his BS conclusion that a majority were savage- with the word ‘majority’ appearing before the words ‘savage black’.

However in latter 2008 there’s an evident shift, with Phelp’s massive highlighting of that concocted term “Majority Black Savages”. A google search shows him first using that term in August 2008, and two more times that year. Concern over this spurred an email conversation on matters of “race”, including my November 1, 2008 admonishment to EJP “how dare anyone other than God presume a majority of Blacks or any other whole people are “savages”.

Reading him defend it let me with little doubt that he was displaying a prideful arrogance unfitting a Christian, like he was projecting some early negative experiences of his, projected out upon an entire people within the U.S.A. if not the planet, along with a convenient disregard of such matters as the Jesuits creating the problems promoting ‘savagery’- Phelps was placing the blame upon the proverbial ‘low man on the totem pole’ literally sticking that pole up their a-----. Unlike a scholar, and very much like a Jesuit, Phelps was promoting a highly generalized set of thought processes against Blacks as a group saying that a MAJORITY were savages and that they thus had to be separated from others by this presumption- a quite jesuitical set of through processes seen with so many other topics when the ancient regime seeks to demonify a person, people nation, thing, or commodity.

While only highlighting that obnoxious slogan in latter 2008, Phelps has since sprinkled it quite liberally through his writings- polluting the later edition of Vatican Assassins with this claptrap – as if this was somehow a strategy to undermine Rome, instead of undermining Rome’s opposition!

Indeed, Phelps’ use of the term can not be seen as a means to hurt the Vatican. Rather its something to hurt those opposing the Vatican, both theologically and politically – including myself with pushing the envelope in exposing the Vatican’s power over the U.S. Capitol regarding the aborted Extending the Legacy South Capitol Mall, and with the grossly under-appreciated role of Wlodimr Ledochowski, which Phelps devotes strangely little attention to and knowledge of – not even knowing what the Oder-Neisse line was (the aim of the counter reformation) after writing Vatican Assassins – let alone Prussia's Reincarnation- something to think about if knowledge of the Vatican’s culpability for the World Wars became an object of mass consciousness. Hence be sure to try to pollute this consciousness – polluting the reputation (hopefully from a Vatican-Masonic ancient regime continuation perspective) of making the anti Vatican movement look stupid.

Akin to the ancient regime’s tools extended WW2 for two years in order to bring about the aims of the counter reformation, such as invading Italy by wasting time in Sicily and slowly up the boot rather then straight from the coast to Rome, EJP’s pathological attitudes towards Blacks would be like circling Sicily in boats made proverbially weaker and weaker by his constant screaming over and over ‘majority black savages’ majority black savages’.

For someone aware of military and political strategies and their importance to insist upon affixing this racial bunk upon the anti-Vatican political movement, Eric Jon Phelps is ultimately loyal to Rome.

Note the irony of what the NY Times obituary gives Wlodimir Ledochowski credit:
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/05/wlodimir-ledochowskis-various-nytimes.html

Friday, December 11, 2009

Along The Amber Path 10 - What About Prussia?


http://carlosquiles.com/indo-european-language-blog/2009/02/konigsberg-aka-kaliningrad-under-international-law-russian-german-polish-lithuanian-or-simply-prussian/

Königsberg (AKA Kaliningrad) under international law: Russian, German, Polish, Lithuanian, or simply Prussian?

February 24, 2009 by Indo-European

The progress of the ’star wars’ (AKA missile shield) affair, which Russia seemed willing to aggravate by talking about plans to station missiles in Kaliningrad, without any concerns whatsoever for the welfare of Kaliningraders and Europeans, should make the European Union reexamine its current policy under the Kaliningrad Strategy, of collaborating with Russia by facilitating the transit of goods and persons and helping its socio-economic development.

Instead of just hearing what Russians have to claim before the international community, the EU should ask the international community by which right keeps the Russian Federation hold on Königsberg territory, and should demand from Russia a date for devolution, no matter how hard Russian media propaganda tries to avoid the question:

Although disputes over the status of Russia’s westernmost exclave of Kaliningrad have practically ceased, this should be regarded as a signal that all the parties concerned are aware of the serious repercussions that instability in that region could cause.

Geopolitical Stability has been by far the most repeated pro-Russian argument since the 90’s, also in official European Union forums (see Freedom to Kaliningrad thread); it is easily summed up into a “let’s maintain the statu quo to avoid destabilizing the region”. The murmuring of those plans to use Kaliningrad as missile base made by Russian military officials to the press, to escalate tensions in the missile shield affair, has shown how the Russian Federation respects the will of Europeans for stability in the region. Not to talk about Russia’s lack of respect for the lives of thousands of European citizens in this winter’s gas disputes, or its lack of respect for Estonian democratic decisions, or its support for the authoritarian Belarusian regime of Lukashenko

Other great arguments made by pro-Russians include “Nazi Germany”, “World War II” and “Mother Russia”, and are easily read elsewhere in Russian media and blogs when the Kaliningrad question is mentioned. Nevertheless, most Kaliningraders – whether ethnic Russians or not – show often an open mind about the return options. And even official Russian media like Russia Today recognize still in 2009 (only in English texts for outsiders) the Lithuanian claims to the territory and its return; East German rights are still taboo in Russian ‘free’ media, while Polish claims are probably too weak to be worth mentioning:

The region became an administrative unit of Russia [sic] in 1946 after the Potsdam conference and the partition of Germany. Although it solidified as an administrative entity, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the issue of reassimilating the Kaliningrad region into its historic entity of Lithuania arose.

According to a thorough study on the question (The Kaliningrad Challenge, 2003) Russia has been always concerned about the risk of separatism in Kaliningrad, which might be greater than expected if the European Report The EU and Kaliningrad (2002) is correct in assessing that Kaliningrad’s level of development is closer to Lithuania and Latvia than previously thought. In that sense, ethnic Russian Kaliningraders see Kaliningrad in the future as another Baltic Republic, either still somehow federated to Russia with great autonomy or fully independent. Moreover,

There are opinion polls – now more frequently held within blogs and forums – which show that Kaliningraders occasionally imagine their future not so much as a fourth Baltic Republic, but as part of a return to Germany

As it has been already argued on the situation of Königsberg/Kaliningrad region and the Northern Territories/Southern Kuril Islands under international law:

In a similar way, the Soviets also refused to discuss the final peace settlement in Europe after the Second World War. It is important to emphasize that neither the United States nor Britain agreed at Potsdam or anywhere else to the transfer of East Prussia or part of the Königsberg Region to the Soviet Union. Thus, although the Kaliningrad Region is currently administered by Russia, it is not a legal part of Russia.

Stalin was seeking a deal on East Prussia at the Tehran conference in 1943, drawing a line in red pencil on the map “to illustrate the fact that, if part of eastern Prussia, including the ports of Könisberg and Tilsit, were given to the Soviet Union, he would be prepared to accept the Curzon line [...] as the frontier between the Soviet Union and Poland.”

This line goes roughly along the current border between the Kaliningrad Region and Poland, but Stalin’s red line on the map went virtually through the cities of Königsberg and Insterburg (see the Map). Charles E. Bolen, the interpreter for the American delegation, says in his memoirs that during their discussion, Stalin and Churchill virtually agreed on the future borders of Poland, but the official American record of the conversation says that “although nothing was stated, it was apparent that the British were going to take this suggestion back to London to the Poles.”

On February 11, 1945, at the Crimea (Yalta) Conference, the Big Three agreed on the Curzon Line as the boundary between Poland and the USSR. However, the archival material clearly shows that there had not been any legally binding agreement made between the allies about the transfer of the Königsberg Region to the Soviet Union at any of the Second World War conferences. This is why Stalin attempted to secure his gains at the Potsdam conference in Berlin, which took place from July 17 to August 2, 1945.

After the end of the Second World War, the Kaliningrad question began by Stalin’s personal will of revenge against Germany:

Königsberg was neither appended outright to the Soviet Union nor was it to be considered part of the Soviet zone of occupation, which had been outlined earlier in the agreement.

[The Soviet Union] acted decisively to completely eradicate the German presence in Königsberg and replace it with Soviet presence. This began even before the end of hostilities with the Reich:

Königsberg was destroyed in the last weeks of the war when there was no real reason to assault it. When the soldiers of the Byelorussian front were dying in its streets in the first week of April, 1945, the rest of the Red Army was already besieging Berlin. Seven centuries of history went up in smoke in one week of shelling and bombing. By then, the decision to annihilate East Prussia and grant Königsberg to the Soviet Union had already been taken, so the reason for its destruction remains a mystery. Did Stalin take the decision in a fit of war revenge? Did he think that the setting of an ancient bourgeois city would hamper the development of the new Soviet city he wanted to build in its place? Or did he fear that, unless turned into a pile of ruins, Königsberg might not be conceded to him by the Allies after all? Pictures and models in the bunker-cum-museum where the capitulation of the city was signed are revealing. Most of the destruction was done after-wards, when the victors took to the task of building a new city on the ruins of the old…

While the destruction of the city’s infrastructure was underway, an equally brutal purge of its population through gang rapes and indiscriminate crimes was carried out:

The demography of that part of Lithuania Minor which is under direct Soviet administration, the “Oblast,” has changed in the most radical way in all its history. The original population of the area — German as well as Lithuanian — has disappeared completely. Many had fled before the Soviet armed forces invaded the area in 1945; those who remained — several hundred thousand — either perished from hunger or disease or were deported to Siberia; the others were expelled to Germany in 1949. They all — about 1,200,000 before World War II — were replaced by about 600,000 settlers from the northern and central parts of Russia. The administration and economy of the “Oblast” has been reorganized to conform with Soviet models and practices. It has been fortified to serve the strategic aims of the Soviet Union.

Modern Claims in Europe

After the fall of the Soviet Union, there were 4 main alternatives for the future of Kaliningrad, following Raymond A. Smith’s article The Status of The Kaliningrad Oblast Under International Law (1992), which argues in favour of the Lithuanian claim, but which also addresses some historical and political questions:

From the historical [point of view] sovereignty over the territory of the Kaliningrad Oblast passed over the course of centuries from the the indigenous Old Prussian population, to the Teutonic Order, to the Kingdom of Poland, to the Kingdom of Prussia (later the German Empire) and finally, perhaps, to the USSR/RSFSR. It is not surprising, then, to find that each of these entities (with the exception, of course, of the Teutonic Order) has a conceivable claim to this territory. This section examines the legal basis, or lack thereof, of the actual or potential claim of each entity, as well as the potential claim of the indigenous population.

  • The German Claim: Some Germans challenge the validity of both the Final Settlement and the original “dismemberment” of the German Reich.
    Their arguments are complex but can be reduced in essence to two claims:
    1. the Allies had no power to allow German territory to be annexed by other countries
    2. the West Germany and even the modern Federal Republic of Germany are not coextensive with the German Reich and are therefore not competent to speak for it in its entirety

    The first proposition is supported by numerous charges: that the guarantees of self-determination in the Atlantic Charter, the UN Charter, and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties were ignored; that the Ancient Roman principle of ex injuria non oritur jus prohibits punishing Germany by unilateral confiscation of its territory; that the powers of the Allies as occupiers were strictly curtailed by the Hague Laws of War of 1907; that use of German lands as “compensation” to Poland for lands lost to the Soviet Union has no basis in international law; and many others.

  • The Russian Claim: As the historical overview recounted, the working premise of the Potsdam Conference was that the Soviets would receive the Oblast at the final peace conference. The Allies specifically committed themselves to supporting the Soviet claim in the Final Settlement, but when that settlement was finally signed in 1990, specific title was not transferred. Why the Final Settlement did not include a specific statement of transfer is unclear. The seemingly most probable reason is that the transfer of Kaliningrad to the Soviet Union is considered a fait accompli and that the legal niceties of including a specific mention of transfer were outweighed by potential political embarassment such a mention might have caused the Kohl government. Such a position assumes that the tranfer has already taken place, an assertion which rests on shaky ground.

    Similarly, the Act of Military Surrender specifically indicates that the occupation itself did not effect the annexation of Germany. Thus, although Germany surrendered unconditionally, none of its territories were automatically annexed to any other state. Such annexation would have to be made explicit in a legally binding document. Only “administration” was established by the Potsdam Agreement, however, and “administration” is definitely not the same as “annexation” under international law.

    Rather than present arguments based on international law, Stalin advanced the law of revenge. ‘The Russians had suffered so much and lost so much blood, they were anxious to have some small satisfaction to [sic] tens of millions of their inhabitants who had suffered in the war,” Stalin said at Potsdam.

    In the absence of ethnic and historical claims to shore up their questionable legal claim, then, the only argument which the Soviet Union can depend upon is the principle of prescriptive claim. This principle transfers title to land when a country has held it for a long period of time without protest by the land’s original owners or by the international community at large. No specific time frame is suggested for the acquisition of prescriptive claim. Grotius suggested 100 years, a figure which the Permanent Court of International Justice endorsed in 1933. The International Court of Justice, on the other hand, said that fifty years had been long enough for a boundary between Venezuela and British Guiana to have legal effect.

  • The Polish Claim: Poland has no ethnic claim to the Oblast. Although the southern half of East Prussia was occupied mainly by Polish Masurians, they had almost no presence in the northern part.

    Poland’s historic claim is only marginally stronger. For some two centuries, Prussia was a fief of the Polish King, but during that period the area remained firmly under German control. In any case, title was decisively transferred by the Treaty of Wehlau in 1657. During World War II many Poles operated under the belief that all of East Prussia would become theirs, but they were never legally promised the territory in its entirety.

  • Lithuanian Claim: The claim of the Lithuanian state could rely upon both ethnic and historical grounds.
    1. The Lithuanians may argue that
      the first peoples to hold sovereignty over the region were ethnic Lithuanians and closely related Old Prussians, and
    2. the pre-1945 population outside the cities of the Oblast was largely of Lithuanian origin. If the status of the Oblast were to be altered in the future, then, the Lithuanian state could have a strong argument for assimilating this remainder of Lithuania Minor.

    The idea of unifying the Oblast with the rest of Lithuania has strong historical precedents. Lithuanian assemblies met in Chicago and New York in 1914, The Hague in 1916 and Berne in 1917 to demand an independent Lithuania including all of Lithuania Minor. An assembly in Vilnius in 1917 restated the problem to define the new Lithuania within its “ethnographic borders,” a concept endorsed by a later assembly in Voronezh the same year.
    Finally, on November 30, 1918, the National Council of Prussian Lithuania issued the Declaration of Tilsit:

    Taking into account that everything that exists has a right to continue existing and that we, Lithuanians who live here in Prussian Lithuania, are the majority of the population of this land, we demand, on the basis of Wilson’s right of national self-determination, that Lithuania Minor be joined to Lithuania Major

    The clearest catch here is that any annexation of the Oblast by Lithuania might hinge upon the democratic decision of an indigenous Lithuanian majority to authorize such an annexation. And, as we have seen, virtually none of the indigenous Lithuanian population remains in the Oblast, having fled or been killed or exiled after World War II. This raises the final claim to be discussed — that of the indigenous population.

  • The Claim of the Native Population: The right to national self-determination is one of the main cornerstones of the contemporary international legal order. Eight of Wilson’s Fourteen Points refer to such concerns. The Atlantic Charter’s third and fourth principles call for self-determination in matters of both boundaries and choice of government. The Charter of the United Nations calls for colonial powers to foster self-determination in “non-self governing territories”. That right might be interpreted as concerning:
    1. The Oblast’s postwar ethnic Russian settlers – as opposed to central Soviet or Russian authorities.
    2. the traditional population which was decimated or expelled en masse after World War II, which is defended on the grounds that forcible deportations of native populations is clearly in violation of international law – native Königsbergers expelled after World War II, then, have a right under international law to choose to return to their native land.

    On that question, there is the precedent of United Nations action regarding the settlement of Gibraltar:

    As in the case of the Oblast, the key issue was whether the rightful native population of the Rock should be considered to be the contemporary residents or an earlier population who had been compelled to depart in 1704. The British argued that over the centuries since 1704 a permanent and authentic population had been developed on the Rock, which now had the right to determine their own fate. The Spanish countered that the post-1704 population were “pseudo-Gibraltarians” and that the rightful rulers of Gibraltar Rock were the descendants of Spaniards who had resettled, for the most part, in the nearby city of San Roque.

    Under pressure from the United Nations to end its colonial occupation of Gibraltar and in an attempt to settle the status of the Rock once and for all, the British government conducted a plebiscite in 1967. The choices were stark — full political affiliation with either Great Britain or with Spain — and the result was unequivocal: 12,138 to 44 in favor of Great Britain. Nonetheless, the U.N. General Assembly once again condemned British occupation of Gibraltar, this time in the strongest language yet. It, in essence, declared the plebiscite null, accused the British of resisting decolonization, and called once again for immediate negotiations between Great Britain and Spain for a transfer of sovereignty.

    Whatever the merits of the Gibraltar case, the precedent for the Oblast is clear. If the rights of native populations can stretch back to 1704, then surely the postwar expellees from the Oblast would have an unambiguous right to return to their homeland and choose its political fate — be that choice in-dependence or association with another state. The current population of the Oblast would presumably have no say in the territory’s political future.

    The key difference between Gibraltar and the Oblast is that in the former case, there actually is a population in San Roque able and willing to resettle the Rock. No analagous “population-in-exile” exists in the case of the Oblast. Rather, much of the population of Königsberg was killed or died in exile. Those who were deported to Germany (and their descendants) in all likelihood now enjoy a standard of living which is, at least quantitatively, many times better than any which would be possible in the backward conditions of the Oblast. Further, most — although far from all — Germans seem to have accepted the loss of the prewar lands; the idea of reclaiming part of East Prussia would not necessarily resonate with much of the population. It seems extremely unlikely, then, that more than a handful of such native German Königsbergers would wish to uproot and resettle in the Oblast.

Even with German and Lithuanian strong claims about the Soviet colony of Königsberg opposing the legality of Stalin’s annexation, Russia did in the 90’s what it was used to in such cases when the Soviet Union was still a Great Power: they took the easy way, and annexed the territory to Russia, expecting the international community to accept it. Which is nice, because the EU as a Great Power will therefore be entitled to follow the same principle in the future…

In my personal opinion, the European Union faces today 3 alternatives, given Russia’s will to retain Stalin’s European exclave no matter how illegal or illegitimate it is from an international point of view:

  1. Support modern Kaliningraders in their demands of greater autonomy within the Russian Federation – and maybe a future separation from it -, which is the fairest position under modern international law, which demands non-belligerant positions (against Russia in this case) and respect for human rights – Russian settlers and their families. This is certainly the option of most Kaliningraders of Russian ethnicity, as well as most EU-politicians.
  2. Support Germany’s or Lithuania’s claims (or both), seeking to integrate Kaliningrad within the European Union, maybe as a sort of a Baltic territory co-administered by both Germany and Lithuania, financing the return of (families of) expellees to Königsberg, and the return of (willing) families of Russian settlers to Russia. This is the option preferred by many Germans and (I guess) most Lithuanians.
  3. Support the creation of a modern Baltic Prussian State (Prusa), which could help unite the Pro-Baltic (and Pro-European) attitude of Russian Kaliningraders, the will of native peoples and their families to return to East Prussia, as well as claims of EU member states to integrate Königsberg in Europe, by embracing Old Prussian history of the territory and its peoples. Modern organizations supporting the revival of the Old Prussian language would probably support its revitalization in Königsberg include the future Research Institute of Prussology and the Prussian language organization in Poland.

The third is my preferred option, not because I am some kind of language revival freak (what I possibly am, given that I also support Old Prussian language revival), but because what many (want to) regard simply as ethnic German and ethnic Lithuanian inhabitants of East Prussia in 1945 were in fact descendants of Old Prussians who had lost their language in favour of either German or Lithuanian languages, depending on the territories they dwelled when they ceased to speak Prussian. Given that historical, cultural and linguistic background of the Königsberg (or East Prussian) territory, the European Union should take action supporting the return of those expelled peoples and their families to their ancient territory, which they were forced to leave half a century ago.

There is therefore no need to support the adscription of East Prussia to modern countries or peoples, be it Russia, Germany, Poland or Lithuania. And the only alternative to modern peoples, cultures and states is to support a linguistic and cultural revival of a Prussian people and language that should have never disappeared.

Popularity: 50% [?]

Posted in Europe, European Union, History, Indo-European language, Linguistics, Politics | 5

Comments 5

With many of the expelled self-identified Germans of East Prussia being partially genetically descendants of the area's earlier inhabitants, their return and even the re-Germanization of some of its cities names, particularly the capital city Kalingrad back to Konigsberg, need not neccessarily be steered to the idea of simply returning Kalingrad Oblast as the northern part of the easternmost province of Germany, but alternatively as a revived nation, not simply one that is mon0-nationalist insofar to ethnicity, but rather multi-ethnic, with names reflecting history.

Logically, any such deal for Prussia independence could and should include keeping a permanent enclave for Russia wihin Prussia of a new waterfront city connected to Russia proper via an extra-territorial railway/highway.