Troy Davis has 1 days to live before he is executed by the State of Georgia. But 7 witnesses say Troy is innocent, and that another man committed the crime for which he will be killed. Evidence presented at Troy’s trial was considered shaky at the time. Since then, seven witnesses have recanted their testimony, many saying they were pressured by police into false testimony. There’s no physical evidence Troy committed the crime. And, according to Amnesty International, nine people have signed affidavits implicating another man. Georgia’s Board of Parole and Pardons had said there should be “no doubt” about a person’s guilt before he is executed. Today they decided that “doubt” doesn’t matter.
The history of justice in America is pocked with such deep institutional injustices that time and again we make a mockery of the word. From slavery to the War on Drugs, the powerful have trampled time and again on the weak.
Law and order masquerade as justice, and our prisons fill to the brim with young men, mostly black and Hispanic, mostly poor. Meanwhile, inner cities lie like sunken ruins across the wealthiest nation in the history of civilization, stomped upon by drug warriors and poverty and violence.
And though we accept the limitations of our government and of the good judgment of our leaders, we nevertheless believe in the infallibility of this system we call justice, but which is not justice, to hand down the most final sort of judgment a man could ever know.
Troy Davis, convicted over two decades ago of killing an off-duty cop, though much doubt has been cast upon his guilt and the methods which police and prosecutors used to secure his conviction, will be executed by the state of Georgia tomorrow. The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles has denied him clemency, and there are no other avenues left to save him.
In the end, I am not concerned so much with whether or not Davis is guilty or innocent. I am concerned with the uncertainty of his guilt. “I’m not for blood. I’m for justice,” said the mother of the slain police officer. But we extract one or the other, not both. In a case where the blood may be that of an innocent, how can we call it justice?
If Davis is not guilty and we kill him nonetheless then we have simply stacked one murder on top of another. The life of Mark MacPhail will not be avenged. If Davis is guilty, surely serving out the remainder of his life in state prison should be enough. Justice does not require retribution.
Death is tragic. The death of Mark MacPhail is a tragedy that will never be undone. Not by blood, not by prison bars, not by time, not by proof that Davis is guilty or proof that he is innocent. But if we have even a glimmer of doubt about his guilt, there will be no justice in his death…
I will not argue the death penalty here. There are times when it may be appropriate. However, a persons guilt or innocence cannot remain questionable. As long as questions persist, the course of least harm must be followed.
Poverty is on the increase, inequality — not based on personal effort — but systematically driven is on the increase. Those who have are fewer and fewer, those without are increasing, and those in the middle are on a downward spiral. What is the proper faith response? Where are the strong calls to justice and prophetic witness?
The data presented here are from the Current Population Survey (CPS), 2011 Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC), the source of official poverty estimates. The CPS ASEC is a sample survey of approximately 100,000 household nationwide. These data reflect conditions in calendar year 2010.
The official poverty rate in 2010 was 15.1 percent — up from 14.3 percent in 2009. This was the third consecutive annual increase in the poverty rate. Since 2007, the poverty rate has increased by 2.6 percentage points, from 12.5 percent to 15.1 percent.
In 2010, 46.2 million people were in poverty, up from 43.6 million in 2009—the fourth consecutive annual increase in the number of people in poverty.
Between 2009 and 2010, the poverty rate increased for non-Hispanic Whites (from 9.4 percent to 9.9 percent), for Blacks (from 25.8 percent to 27.4 percent), and for Hispanics (from 25.3 percent to 26.6 percent). For Asians, the 2010 poverty rate (12.1 percent) was not statistically different from the 2009 poverty rate.
The poverty rate in 2010 (15.1 percent) was the highest poverty rate since 1993 but was 7.3 percentage points lower than the poverty rate in 1959, the first year for which poverty estimates are available.
The number of people in poverty in 2010 (46.2 million) is the largest number in the 52 years for which poverty estimates have been published.
Between 2009 and 2010, the poverty rate increased for children under age 18 (from 20.7 percent to 22.0 percent) and people aged 18 to 64 (from 12.9 percent to 13.7 percent), but was not statistically different for people aged 65 and older (9.0 percent).
At a food pantry in a Chicago suburb, a 38-year-old mother of two breaks into tears.
She and her husband have been out of work for nearly two years. Their house and car are gone. So is their foothold in the middle class and, at times, their self-esteem.
“It’s like there is no way out,” says Kris Fallon.
She is trapped like so many others, destitute in the midst of America’s abundance. Last week, the Census Bureau released new figures showing that nearly one in six Americans lives in poverty — a record 46.2 million people. The poverty rate, pegged at 15.1 percent, is the highest of any major industrialized nation, and many experts believe it could get worse before it abates.
The numbers are daunting — but they also can seem abstract and numbing without names and faces.
Associated Press reporters around the country went looking for the people behind the numbers. They were not hard to find.
There’s Tim Cordova, laid off from his job as a manager at a McDonald’s in New Mexico, and now living with his wife at a homeless shelter after a stretch where they slept in their Ford Focus.
There’s Bill Ricker, a 74-year-old former repairman and pastor whose home is a dilapidated trailer in rural Maine. He scrapes by with a monthly $1,003 Social Security check. His ex-wife also is hard up; he lets her live in the other end of his trailer.
There’s Brandi Wells, a single mom in West Virginia, struggling to find a job and care for her 10-month-old son. “I didn’t realize that it could go so bad so fast,” she says.
Some were outraged by the statistics. Marian Wright Edelman of the Children’s Defense Fund called the surging child poverty rate “a national disgrace.” Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., cited evidence that poverty shortens life spans, calling it “a death sentence for tens and tens of thousands of our people.”
Overall, though, the figures seemed to be greeted with resignation, and political leaders in Washington pressed ahead with efforts to cut federal spending. The Pew Research Center said its recent polling shows that a majority of Americans — for the first time in 15 years of being surveyed on the question — oppose more government spending to help the poor.
“The news of rising poverty makes headlines one day. And the next it is forgotten,” said Los Angeles community activist and political commentator Earl Ofari Hutchinson.
Such is life in the Illinois town of Pembroke, one of the poorest in the Midwest, where schools and stores have closed. Keith Bobo, a resident trying to launch revitalization programs, likened conditions to the Third World.
“A lot of the people here just feel like they are on an island, like no one even knows that they exist,” he said…
We’re on the cusp of the 2012 election. What will it be about? It seems reasonably certain President Obama will be confronted by a putative Republican candidate who:
Believes corporations are people, wants to cut the top corporate rate to 25% (from the current 35%) and no longer require they pay tax on foreign income, who will eliminate capital gains and dividend taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 a year, raise the retirement age for Social Security and turn Medicaid into block grants to states, seek a balanced-budged amendment to the Constitution, require any regulatory agency issuing a new regulation repeal another regulation of equal cost (regardless of the benefits), and seek repeal of Obama’s healthcare plan.
Or one who:
Believes the Federal Reserve is treasonous when it expands the money supply, doubts human beings evolved from more primitive forms of life, seeks to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and shift most public services to the states, thinks Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, while governor took a meat axe to public education and presided over an economy that generated large numbers of near-minimum-wage jobs, and who will shut down most federal regulatory agencies, cut corporate taxes, and seek repeal of Obama’s healthcare plan.
Whether it’s Romney or Perry, he’s sure to attack everything Obama has done or proposed. And Obama, for his part, will have to defend his positions and look for ways to counterpunch.
Hence, the parameters of public debate for the next fourteen months.
Within these narrow confines progressive ideas won’t get an airing. Even though poverty and unemployment will almost surely stay sky-high, wages will stagnate or continue to fall, inequality will widen, and deficit hawks will create an indelible (and false) impression that the nation can’t afford to do much about any of it – proposals to reverse these trends are unlikely to be heard.
Neither party’s presidential candidate will propose to tame CEO pay, create more tax brackets at the top and raise the highest marginal rates back to their levels in the 1950s and 1960s (that is, 70 to 90 percent), and match the capital-gains rate with ordinary income.
You won’t hear a call to strengthen labor unions and increase the bargaining power of ordinary workers.
Don’t expect an argument for resurrecting the Glass-Steagall Act, thereby separating commercial from investment banking and stopping Wall Street’s most lucrative and dangerous practices.
You won’t hear there’s no reason to cut Medicare and Medicaid – that a better means of taming health-care costs is to use these programs’ bargaining clout with drug companies and hospitals to obtain better deals and to shift from fee-for-services to fee for healthy outcomes.
Nor will you hear why we must move toward Medicare for all.
Nor why the best approach to assuring Social Security’s long-term solvency is to lift the ceiling on income subject to Social Security payroll taxes.
Don’t expect any reference to the absurdity of spending more on the military than do all other countries put together, and the waste and futility of an unending and undeclared war against Islamic extremism – especially when we have so much to do at home.
Nor are you likely to hear proposals for ending the corruption of our democracy by big money.
Although proposals like these are more important and relevant than ever, they won’t be part of the upcoming presidential election.
But they should be part of the public debate nonetheless.
That’s why I urge you to speak out about them – at town halls, candidate forums, and public events. Continue to mobilize and organize around them. Talk with your local media about them. Use social media to get the truth out…
Karl Marx may have been wrong about communism but he was right about much of capitalism, John Gray writes.
As a side-effect of the financial crisis, more and more people are starting to think Karl Marx was right. The great 19th Century German philosopher, economist and revolutionary believed that capitalism was radically unstable.
It had a built-in tendency to produce ever larger booms and busts, and over the longer term it was bound to destroy itself.
Marx welcomed capitalism’s self-destruction. He was confident that a popular revolution would occur and bring a communist system into being that would be more productive and far more humane.
Marx was wrong about communism. Where he was prophetically right was in his grasp of the revolution of capitalism. It’s not just capitalism’s endemic instability that he understood, though in this regard he was far more perceptive than most economists in his day and ours.
More profoundly, Marx understood how capitalism destroys its own social base – the middle-class way of life. The Marxist terminology of bourgeois and proletarian has an archaic ring.
But when he argued that capitalism would plunge the middle classes into something like the precarious existence of the hard-pressed workers of his time, Marx anticipated a change in the way we live that we’re only now struggling to cope with…
Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, Unknown Artist from the Codex Aureus Epternacensis, 11th Century
“For the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard. And going out about the third hour he saw others standing idle in the market place; and to them he said, `You go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right I will give you.’ So they went. Going out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour, he did the same. And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing; and he said to them, `Why do you stand here idle all day?’ They said to him, `Because no one has hired us.’ He said to them, `You go into the vineyard too.’ And when evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his steward, `Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last, up to the first.’ And when those hired about the eleventh hour came, each of them received a denarius. Now when the first came, they thought they would receive more; but each of them also received a denarius.
[11] And on receiving it they grumbled at the householder, saying, `These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.’ But he replied to one of them, `Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what belongs to you, and go; I choose to give to this last as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?’ So the last will be first, and the first last.”
So she set out from the place where she was, with her two daughters-in-law, and they went on the way to return to the land of Judah. But Na’omi said to her two daughters-in-law, “Go, return each of you to her mother’s house. May the LORD deal kindly with you, as you have dealt with the dead and with me. The LORD grant that you may find a home, each of you in the house of her husband!” Then she kissed them, and they lifted up their voices and wept. And they said to her, “No, we will return with you to your people.” But Na’omi said, “Turn back, my daughters, why will you go with me? Have I yet sons in my womb that they may become your husbands? Turn back, my daughters, go your way, for I am too old to have a husband. If I should say I have hope, even if I should have a husband this night and should bear sons, would you therefore wait till they were grown? Would you therefore refrain from marrying? No, my daughters, for it is exceedingly bitter to me for your sake that the hand of the LORD has gone forth against me.” Then they lifted up their voices and wept again; and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth clung to her. And she said, “See, your sister-in-law has gone back to her people and to her gods; return after your sister-in-law.” But Ruth said, “Entreat me not to leave you or to return from following you; for where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God; where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the LORD do so to me and more also if even death parts me from you.” And when Na’omi saw that she was determined to go with her, she said no more. — Ruth 1:7-18
On the third day Esther put on her royal robes and stood in the inner court of the king’s palace, opposite the king’s hall. The king was sitting on his royal throne inside the palace opposite the entrance to the palace; and when the king saw Queen Esther standing in the court, she found favor in his sight and he held out to Esther the golden scepter that was in his hand. — Esther 5:1-2
Just What Is It that Makes Today’s Homes So Different, So Appealing?, Richard Hamilton, 1956
From the NY Times: ‘Father of Pop Art’ Richard Hamilton Dies at 89
LONDON (Reuters) – British artist Richard Hamilton, regarded by many as the father of pop art, died on Tuesday. He was 89.
“This is a very sad day for all of us and our thoughts are with Richard’s family, particularly his wife Rita and his son Rod,” art dealer and gallery owner Larry Gagosian said.
A statement from the gallery called Hamilton the “father of pop art” and a “pioneering artist of unparalleled skill, invention and lasting authority.
“His influence on subsequent generations of artists continues to be immeasurable.”
Nicholas Serota, director of London’s Tate gallery, added: “Greatly admired by his peers, including (Andy) Warhol and (Joseph) Beuys, Hamilton produced a series of exquisite paintings, drawings, prints and multiples dealing with themes of glamour, consumption, commodity and popular culture.”
Despite his age, Hamilton had been working until just a few days ago on a major museum retrospective of his work scheduled to travel to Los Angeles, Philadelphia, London and Madrid in 2013/14.
Gagosian did not say how Hamilton died or where, although he was in Britain.
Hamilton’s best known work was his 1956 collage “Just what is it that makes today’s homes so different, so appealing?,” considered by some historians to mark the birth of the pop art movement.
Hamilton is also credited with coining the phrase “pop art” itself, in a note to some architects who were considering putting on an exhibition with him along similar lines to the 1956 “This Is Tomorrow” show.
In words dating from 1957 that are seen as prescient of the likes of Warhol and, more recently, Damien Hirst, he wrote:
“Pop art is popular (designed for a mass audience), transient (short term solution), expendable (easily forgotten), low cost, mass produced, young (aimed at youth), witty, sexy, gimmicky, glamorous, big business.”
Hamilton is often associated with the swinging 60s, including for his painting of Mick Jagger and art dealer Robert Fraser in handcuffs following a drugs raid.
He also designed the sleeve of the Beatles’ “White Album,” consisting of a plain white sleeve with the band’s name embossed on it.
Hamilton is remembered for his modesty and sense of humor as well as his artistic talent.
Asked about people’s perception of “Just what is it that makes today’s homes so different, so appealing?,” he said in a recent newspaper interview: “I’m rather bored with it but it’s a nice little earner!”
The Royal Academy of Arts in London opens a new exhibition featuring the work of Edgar Degas at the weekend. It focuses on Degas’ fascination with ballet. The exhibition will feature about 85 paintings, sculptures, pastels, drawings, prints and photographs by the renowned French impressionist and sculptor. Born in Paris in 1834, more than half of [Degas’] life’s work depicts dancers.
The lecture notes of University of Kansas Professor Anna M. Cienciala: Nationalism and Communism in East Central Europe. The notes cover the history of East Central Europe from the partitions of Poland beginning in 1772 through to the post-Communiest period.
Protestant kids from rural Kansas, discovered a Polish Catholic woman who saved Jewish children. Irena Sendler and these students have chosen to repair the world. This web site shares the legacy and life of Irena Sendler, plus her ‘discovery’ for the world.
Editions Bibliotekos announced that Dr. John Guzlowski will participate in a series sponsored by the English Department of St. Francis College on October 11th from 4–6 pm. John’s reading and discussion, entitled War Remembered – Lightning and Ashes: Two Lives Shaped by World War II, will be the third such event initiated by Editions Bibliotekos and hosted by St. Francis. The event will be held in Founders Hall, 180 Remsen St., Brooklyn Heights, NY, and is free and open to the public.
Through interviews and in-depth coverage, get an up-close look at the country in an international context on TV and online.
In 1989, Poland became the first member of the Soviet bloc to establish a non-Communist government.
Since then it has run headlong into the western world with one of the fastest-growing economies in Europe. The CIA World Factbook calls Poland a regional success story…
Poland’s multiethnic past is remembered in A Commonwealth of Diverse Cultures. Highlights include the contributions of Poles whose heritage is Jewish or is from the Ruthenian/Byzantine East, Lithuania, Italy, France, Germany, Armenia, the Islamic southeast. This history of Scotts in Poland is not covered, but is also interesting.
James Conroyd Martin recently finished his manuscript focusing on the Polish Insurrection of 1830. He has posted lines from the manuscript on Facebook. Also, check out Morgen Bailey’s interview with James Martin at Morgen Bailey’s Writing Blog
Kanonia Square below was aglow with torches borne by people streaming towards Długa Street. Events had moved fast, much faster than Viktor had imagined. The people had joined the cadets’ insurgency with unexpected enthusiasm and resolve. Russians had always underrated the Poles, just as the Turks had at the Battle of Vienna. Here was more modern proof.
From 1943 to 1946, Colonia Santa Rosa in Guanajuato, Mexico was the site of a US-government sponsored home for Polish refugees. About 240 miles northwest of Mexico City and “10 minutes’ ride by mule-drawn tram from the Leon railway station,” the hacienda included a 39-room ranch house, a flour mill, ten wheat storage warehouses, a chapel and other buildings, as well as several acres for growing crops. By October 1943, almost 1,500 Poles were sheltered at Colonia Santa Rosa.
Their path to Mexico was an unlikely one. Having been removed from their communities by the Soviet military in 1939, they first were put to work in Russia and Siberia. They were resettled in Iran by the Russians, and fell into the care of the British government. The British relocated them to camps in Karachi, then still a part of India, and sought US assistance for their support. An agreement was reached between the British, US and Mexican governments with the provisional Polish government in London to relocate these refugees to Mexico…
Martin Stepek seeks to understand and pass on what he has learned about his family’s life in Poland, and their odyssey to find refuge in Polish Legacy. His grandmother and grandfather died in Poland during World War Two, and his father and two aunts narrowly avoided the same fate.
Two 90-minute film adaptations of Alan Furst’s acclaimed novels will bring to BBC Four a combination of historically located, intelligent narratives, interlaced with flawed, romantic and utterly compelling characters. Furst, widely recognised as the current master of the historical spy novel, evokes a Europe stumbling into a Second World War, his taut and richly atmospheric thrillers grace the bestseller lists right around the globe. They have been described as “Casablanca meets John le Carre”.
Richard Klein, Controller, BBC Four, says: “Alan Furst is one of the world’s finest writers on war and the costs of war on human relationships. It is with great pleasure that I can confirm that BBC Four will be dramatising for television one of his best known novels, Spies Of Warsaw. Furst and Four are a very good fit and I hope our audiences will enjoy the result of this collaboration.”
The characters of Alan Furst’s best-selling spy novels roam the foggy nights and steal across the rainy, cobbled streets of Prague, Berlin, Warsaw, Rome, and Paris. Furst’s protagonists join the ranks of the Resistance in one way or another. They include faded nobility, b-movie filmmakers, newspapermen, ship’s captains and compromised businessmen as well as waiters, shopkeepers, jaded intellectuals, tarnished grand dames, and boozy British secret agents. Together they march in the underground army that seeks to fight back against the Nazi occupiers.
Spanning the decade from 1933 to 1943, as the Germans slowly consolidate their political stranglehold on Europe, Furst’s stories are portraits of subjugated peoples who try to resist the suffocating inevitability of Hitler’s regime. They show the potency and the importance of espionage and pure intelligence in the run up to the war…
Mr. Alda, who has written five screenplays and a carton-full of television scripts, said on Monday that “Radiance: The Passion of Marie Curie,” is his first attempt at playwriting. The idea struck him about three years ago when he was planning to organize a reading of excerpts from Curie’s letters for the World Science Festival. “Then I found out her letters were all still radioactive and I switched to Albert Einstein,” said Mr. Alda, who has a passion for science. “But I love Marie Curie and I think her story is so important and dramatic, I wanted to explore it and write a play about it.”
Curie was the first woman to win a Nobel Prize in 1902 – for the theory of radioactivity that she developed with her husband, Pierre – and the first person to receive the award twice. She was awarded her second Nobel in chemistry in 1911 for her discovery of two elements, radium and polonium. There have been several renditions of Curie’s life on stage, television and film, including the 1943 drama starring Greer Garson. Without giving too much of the plot away, Mr. Alda said his play focuses on the period between her first Nobel Prize and her second nine years later. The Nobel committee did not originally want to include Curie in the award and only backed down after pressure from her husband. “But they wouldn’t let her get up and accept the award,” Mr. Alda said. “She had to sit in the audience.” In the intervening years, Pierre Curie died and Marie had to run a gauntlet of setbacks and obstacles, but by 1911, Mr. Alda said, “her work is finally recognized, and she takes full credit for it, even though by now she’s weakened by radiation poisoning.”
“I think she had a kind of cognitive dissonance about it,” Mr. Alda said of the damaging fallout from her experiments. “She didn’t want to believe it was sickening her,” he added. “It’s part of the heroism of science itself. We as a species are just so interested in understanding things that might be dangerous to mess with, but nothing stops us.”
Mr. Alda, a voracious reader of nonfiction, said he did his own research. “All I read is science,” he said, though confessed that the math and chemistry involved still elude him…
A grim-looking farmer with a pitchfork and communist-era industrial cityscapes – such are the images of Poland often presented in modern-day history books in Western Europe, finds a new report.
The backward image of Poland so often presented in history books has been tackled in a report issued on behalf of the Foreign Affairs Ministry by historian Professor Adam Suchoński from Opole University, who looked into the history textbooks used in high schools throughout Europe.
…
“These textbooks are still very much in use. Reprinted every couple of years, reinforcing negative stereotype of Poles and their country,” says Professor Suchoński, adding that “[Poles] are depicted as fighters, victims of war, persecution and failed national uprisings.”
…
The historian suggests that Poland should prepare an extensive overview of its history, which it should forward to the Georg Eckert Institute, an acclaimed reference center for textbook research in Germany and a Mecca for authors of history books.
Helena Modjeska was born in Krakow, Poland, on October 12, 1840. She received her only formal education while attending the convent run by the Order of the Presentation Sisters. She was seduced at a young age by one of the family guardians, Gustave Sinnmayer. He later fathered her two children, Rudolph and her daughter Marylka, who died in infancy. As the couple traveled with their acting troupe around the provincial towns of Galicia, Gustave used the stage name “Modrzejewski” while Helena adopted the feminine version “Modrzejewska”. Later, when performing abroad, she anglicized her name to “Modjeska”.
Realizing that her impresario could no longer advance her career, Helena left Sinnmayer, taking their son Rudolf, and returned to Krakow. While engaged in the Krakow theatre, she met the Polish nobleman, Karol Bozenta Chlapowski. They married in 1868 and left for Warsaw where she became the most celebrated actress of the Polish national theatre. Her brothers Jozef and Feliks Benda were also respected actors in Poland. The Chlapowski home became the center of the artistic and literary world. Yet, due to the political situation in Poland and its influence on her work, Helena’s life became unbearable.
In 1876, for personal and political reasons, Modjeska and her family emigrated to the United States with a small group of friends. They purchased a ranch in Anaheim, California, forming a Polish colony of intellectuals. The colonists knew very little about farming and the utopian experiment eventually failed.
Modjeska returned to the stage, debuting in San Francisco with an English version of Adrienne Lecouvreur and reprising the Shakespearean roles that she had performed in Poland. Despite her accent and imperfect command of English, Modjeska achieved great success in her thirty-year career in the United States and abroad.
In 1893 Modjeska was invited to speak in a women’s conference at the Chicago World’s Fair. She described the hardships of Polish women in the Russian and Prussian-ruled parts of Poland. The Russian tsar banned her from traveling or performing in Russian territory.
Modjeska became known for her support of charitable causes. She had ignited and influenced the careers of many international artists, such as Sienkiewicz and Paderewski. She advanced and uplifted the profession of acting for women…
The battle in the Polish Corridor was especially intense. It was here that the myth of the Polish cavalry charging German tanks was born. As Gen. Heinz Guderian’s panzer and motorized forces pressed the weaker Polish forces back, a unit of Pomorska Cavalry Brigade slipped through German lines late in the day on Sept. 1 in an effort to counterattack and slow the German advance. The unit happened on a German infantry battalion making camp. The Polish cavalry mounted a saber charge, sending the Germans fleeing at that moment, a group of German armored cars arrived on the scene and opened fire on the cavalry, killing several troopers and forcing the rest to retreat. Nazi propagandists made this into “cavalry charging tanks” and even made a movie to embellish their claims. While historians remembered the propaganda, they forgot that on September 1, Gen. Guderian had to personally intervene to stop the German 20th motorized division from retreating under what it described as “intense cavalry pressure.” This pressure was being applied by the Polish 18th Lancer Regiment, a unit one tenth its size.
