Talk:Lithuanian Security Police

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dealing with Jews[edit]

We have first major problem: Polish sources say Saugumas was creating lists of Jews for extermination, Bubnys (who wrote a major article on Saugumas) says Jewish questions were exceptionally in competence of German security police. According to Bubnys, Saugumas only had marginal role in dealing with Jews - i.e. sometimes Saugumas was hunting individual Jews escaped from Gethos and transfering them to the German security police. Can we investigate this further? On what primary documents are polish sites based? Sigitas 09:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I further expanded the article and took the liberty to reword some of your additions (hopefully preserving all of the facts you added, let me know if I omitted something). In the meantime I also sourced the "Jewish" thing. From a quick Google search it seems this institution is known in the English-speaking word primarily for its specifically anti-Jewish stance. This might be because of the case of its leader, who was quite recently deprived of American citizenship - and the matter was quite well publicised in the west. At the same time, in Polish books the anti-Jewish part is also mentioned, but it's generally treated as yet another collaborationist unit, aimed at all who were not to their liking, be them Poles, Russians, Jews or anyone. Too bad we don't have some Lithuanian view on the matter translated to English somewhere. I'll try to find something in the archives of Krasnogruda, as they seem to be one of the best scientific and cultural societies in the field of Polish-Lithuanian relations and the history of the region. However, I'm not sure I'll be able to find anything any time soon.. //Halibutt 13:16, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lileikis[edit]

Lileikis was only head of the Saugumas for Vilnius city and province, he never was head of Saugumas and I doubt he could shape entire Saugumas. Maybe this "Gestapo immitation" applies only to the Vilnius branch of Saugumas? Sigitas 14:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's mentioned in two separate and unrelated sources, so I doubt this was the case. I also corrected the Lileikis case recently, so no fire there :)
As to other issues, I took the liberty to revert your changes of Vilna to Vilnius. In many a discussion here at the English wiki one of the main problems in solving disputes was the name of that city. For Poles Wilno was a part of Poland until annexed by the Soviets in 1945, while for Lithuanians Vilnius has been under foreign occupation until 1991. Let's stick to the neutral contemporary English name. It redirects to the proper article anyway. How about that? Of course, I won't insist and feel free to revert back to the Lithuanian name of the town (though take note that the name is a tad anachronistic in this context). //Halibutt 16:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is still not clear to me how head of regional branch of organization could do rearrangements in the entire organization? How could Lileikis boss around his commander Matulis and head of organization Čenkus? Doesn't sound right to me. Sigitas 17:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know either. It's not in this article anyway... :) //Halibutt 17:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vilnius not Vilna[edit]

Vilnius is neutral contemporary English name. There is only one Vilna - a village in Canada. Sigitas 16:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But it wasn't used:
  1. in the city in question at that time (note the percentage of Lithuanians living there prior to 1945)
  2. in English language of the time (Vilna was the predominant name in English at least until 1980s)
  3. by the state authorities of the country to control it (Wilna was the official name in German)
  4. in the official language of the state to own the city legally (I know, I know...).

Anyway, I merely proposed a compromise, but won't insist on it. Do as you please. //Halibutt 16:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it would be the case, we should go to big lenghts creating new Wikipedia article, explaining circumstances of name Vilna use, as it is not used nowhere in Wikipedia now. Sigitas 17:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. And, to be precise, google suggests that even in modern times some 10% of links are to Vilna rather than Vilnius, so the name is not ambiguous. It's pretty well known. //Halibutt 17:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that only Jewish sources use the name Vilna, it is probably Jewish specifics. Sigitas 18:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, it was the predominant English name for centuries. Check Encyclopaedia Britannica or Catholic Encyclopedia for instance. //Halibutt 18:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Borders of Lithuania[edit]

Since 1939, when Vilnius was occupied by Soviets, formally and factually Vilnius was Lithuanian territory. Even if different views exist, it should out of scope of this article. Sigitas 16:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And then since 1941 it was German. But at the same time the Soviets declared their pacts with Germany null and void, so the city formally was back to Poland. With the difference that in the meantime it was annexed by Lithuania - and then back by the Soviet Union... For Lithuanians the Polish rule there was illegitimate and in 1939 they simply restored the land to the proper owner. For Poles the brief period of foreign occupation (Lithuanian, then Soviet, then German, then again Soviet) was just that. When judging the territorial changes from the point of view of international law, the territory did not change hands until 1945 at all, as it was not until then it was officially ceded by one side to the other (international law does not recognize unilateral annexations as binding). Get the idea? The history of that place is a complete mess and the "formal" allegiance depends solely on one's point of view. //Halibutt 17:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ypatingasis burys = Sonderkommando[edit]

Currently texts reads- "handed over either to the Gestapo or to another Lithuanian collaborationist force named Ypatingasis būrys, which then transported them to the mass murder site of Ponary (modern Paneriai) or to other places of mass execution[12][13][14]." "Ypatingasis burys" was unit subordinate to German Security Police and SD. So if a person was handed to Ypatingasis burys, he was handed to German security police, without "or". I propose "handed over either to the Sicherheitspolizei (German security police), or directly to subordinate police unit Ypatingasis būrys, which then transported them to the mass murder site of Ponary (modern Paneriai) or to other places of mass execution[12][13][14]". I hope it doesn't contradict to the Polish references. Sigitas 17:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sicherheitsdienst was SS' intelligence, Gestapo was its police force. These two operated separately - and were at times even conflicted with each other, just like they were at times conflicted with other German agencies. //Halibutt 18:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could write a stub on Ypatingasis Būrys? On this note, I am very impressed by the work you guys have done here!--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:52, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I remember I once had a plan to do it, but then Z. appeared and I lost all incentive to meddle in Polish-Lithuanian affairs. I'll see what I can come up with, but that article might get a little inflamatory - unless watered down like this one... //Halibutt 12:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead, having stub I could help to develop it Sigitas 12:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't get me wrong, but IMO first we should work a little bit on this article. You've done quite some work on it (which is highly appreciated), but also presented the organization in quite a positive light, definitely not impartial enough. I'd like to correct that before I read that YB was actually quite ok as the role of Armia Krajowa in fight against the Lithuanian Nazis is also disputable... //Halibutt 06:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AK in Lithuania is regarded as rogue organization. This is fact. Sigitas 09:37, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Regarded by whom? And is it any different from the Lithuanian pro-Nazi movement or is the latter commonly accepted? //Halibutt 06:53, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AK is considered rogue by Lithuanian public, historians, and government. Government refused registration of AK, General prosecutor office is investigating case of 327 people killed by AK, historians accused AK of systematic terror against non polish population. Lithuanian pronazi group was really small not popular since it was clear that Germans will not allow independent Lithuania. Lithuanians had their own agenda, aimed for independent Lithuania, and had no reason to sympathise to german occupants. Sigitas 10:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strange - Lithuanians killed much more Poles then vice-versa but Lithuanians pretend to be lily-whites. Let's check our cards.Xx236 13:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Communist - Jewish dept.[edit]

This is specially interesting. Can I have some details translated from Polish sources? It is missing in structure I have. Was it official name of department? I cannot believe it Sigitas 19:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's in the source attached to the part in question - not that one could expect anything else... And the source is in English, so no need to translate anything. Anyway, if you can't open the document, the exact citation reads like this: The Lithuanian Security Department established a highly professionalized apparatus which employed many hundreds of professional and political officials and employees in the fields of Organization (head Povilas Zickus), Economical and Financial (Pranas Nenorta), Information (Juozas Jucius), Communists, Ethnic Minorities, Jews and others.. It is also confirmed by MacQueen: Immediately on his arrival, Lileikis reorganized the Saugumas to mirror the functional divisions of the Gestapo model, with a special section for Jews and Communists (Komunistų-Žydų Skyrius).. //Halibutt 19:57, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We can dismiss claims about role of Lileikis, as he being head of branch wasn't in position to make changes in organization. It is strange that names of department directors are provided for all departments, except "Communists, Ethnic Minorities, Jews and others" department, and from that sentence it is not clear was "Communists, Ethnic Minorities, Jews and others" one department or many. Sigitas 20:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
after reading MacQueen I understand that he says only Vilnius branch of Saugumas had Communist-Jews commisariat. Sigitas 20:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can only note what I already did above: we cannot dismiss claims about the role of Lileikis as there are none in the article. //Halibutt 21:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed I found in one article of Bubnys that Communist commisariat in Vilnius Branch was called "Jewish and Communist commisariat" in some documents. This confirms that MacQueen was talking about Vilnius branch not about national organization. Sigitas 11:02, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison[edit]

Other than size, why would comparing the LSP to other nazi-collaborating police units like the Polish Blue Police, and French SOL be incorrect? Dr. Dan 15:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what is your argument, but consider also that Lithuania is of different size then Poland or France... -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any police should have its article. Why Poland and Lithuania are branded and the other countries forgotten? I'm for full comparizon of nazi-collaborating police formations:

  • How many officers did work for anti-German governments respectively?
  • How many policemen were killed by Germans?
  • How were the policemen in the West treated after the war? Names of punished ones.
  • How many cartriges had an average policeman in any country.

Xx236 13:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The edit summary of an administrator on this article on February 18, 2007, Asks: In comparison to what? Answer: nazi-Polish collaborators. You know, arithmetic, percentages, and so forth. Dr. Dan 03:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Battalions and numbers?[edit]

Did LSP have battalions, perhaps numbered 200-something? I know that 300-something battalions refer to the LVR, but in reading about Polish resistance in Vilnius region I have often stumbled upon references to 200-something numbered battalions of Lithuanian police employed by the Germans. Also, does this force has any relation to the Tautinio Darbo Apsaugos Batalionas?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lithuanian_Security_Police&oldid=1200362532"