Talk:Prussian Claims Society
|
|
and initiated by the Landsmannschaft Ostpreußen and Landsmannschaft Schlesien Is it real fact? I heard that the organisations stated it is private business of its members?Cautious 08:41, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- The GMBH name would suggest it... Halibutt 12:13, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
for Prussian property as far as I am concerned, they try to claim private not Prussian propertyCautious 08:41, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
from Eastern Germany the legal basis for the claims is setup on top of recongnizing existing borders. (if the area belongs to Germany, they should sue German government). Putting territorial revisionism in such a context makes no sense Cautious 08:41, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Yup, from what I see at their page they propose some sort of restitution on a legal basis, so speaking of Eastern Germany is out of the question. Halibutt 12:13, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
According to their website they don't seek financial "compensation" but will only accept the return of their indiviudal property.
Dispute
Article is clearly pro-PCS. POV prevailing propably even in Germany is its claims are quite ridiculous and extreme, and that has to be addresed. And not this way: "red chancellor" - he is communist? Does any signifficant party stated it would support PCS? And more - IMHO Schröder not only stated government would not support PCS claims, but actively form Polish-German team of lawyers to tear apart PCS claims.
"from Germans expelled from Eastern Germany, after it was occupied by Stalin and transferred to Poland, Czechoslovakia and other states."
Either nonsense or quite extreme POV (Lebensraum). Exactly what part of Bohemia is Eastern Germany? What was occupied by Stalin? Did the parts of Poland occupied by Soviets belonged to Eastern Germany?
"However, German politicans stated that the Polish claim was ridiculous and had no legal basis." "Also, German claims against Poland would be much larger than Polish claims against Germany."
Any evidence? --Wikimol 08:56, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Am I reading the article wrong? In my understanding it is rather clear, that the claims of the Treuhand are generally thought to be irrevelant and its activities unwelcome. Must this be formulated even more clear, or why is there a NPOV warning? --Pjacobi 11:04, 2005 May 9 (UTC)