Communist Terror in Poland under the Shield of Solidarity
By Zbigniew Wojcik, Ph.D., Dissident from the Soviet Bloc ( Poland) in 1986
Introduction. The world has a false picture of Lech Wałęsa as the hero fighting communism, who created the Solidarity Movement and brought Poles freedom. The truth is that Wałęsa was a prolific communist fighter, a mole, a traitor, and an excellent provocateur pretending to be an anti-communist activist to detect and fool Polish patriots and hand them over to communists for persecution. For these activities, he received money. The best book about Lech Wałęsa – a communist mole – was published in 2012 in Poland by a distinguished historian Sławomir Cenckiewicz. The book was entitled “Wałęsa. Człowiek z teczki” (Eng.: “Wałęsa, the Man from the Secret File.”)
My first impressions of Cenckiewicz’s book. Reading Cenckiewicz’s book about Wałęsa was an exciting adventure for me. First of all, many text fragments on most pages of the book are highlighted in bright yellow. All the books I ever read had black print on a white background. Sometimes, especially in research books, I highlighted pieces of the text for my interest to look at them again. Cenckiewicz’s book is unique in that it suggested that the yellow passages would be of interest to me! I followed this trail. On page 66, I spotted exciting information, not in yellow, however, on how Wałęsa worked as an electrician with cables. He was seen being loaded into busses and comrades affiliated with communist security forces (youth worker activists), all holding pieces of thick electrical cables to “appease” students and workers protesting against the communist regime in the City of Gdańsk.
Information in yellow on that page was concise, saying only that Wałęsa had an arduous job, installing heavy cables on ships. In contrast, from other sources, I knew that he loved his job as an electrical worker. Considering that he was loaded onto the busses together with the security forces sent to pacify the strikes, the explanation was easy to discern: Wałęsa enjoyed beating courageous, patriotic Poles with the use of electric cables!
Digging for the truth. This information forced me to go back several pages to explain how Wałęsa’s talents and enthusiasm to torture people were discovered by communist security forces and used in city protests to keep patriots under control. I was reading the black-on-white texts carefully. And page 55 explained it, not in the highlighted statements, but just in the regular print. In 1967, the communist security forces found out that Lech Wałęsa committed an electric motor’s theft from the Government Machine Center (POM) in Łochocin. Anna Walentynowicz, the true Polish patriot fighting communism in Poland, reported why Wałęsa joined the communist oppression forces; it was that theft he committed. So, I was looking for a description of this crucial fact in Cenckiewicz’s book. Despite detracting the reader from reading the key events, the relevant facts were presented. Cenckiewicz was a scrupulous and skilled historian.
Then, a question came to my mind: why not just prosecutors but communist security forces had to deal with the ordinary Wałęsa theft? Cenckiewicz writes that Wałęsa frequently volunteered with his readiness to do dirty communist work for the Soviet regime in Poland. After being caught on a crime scene, Wałęsa found a simple solution to avoid his day in court: volunteer to perform services so much needed to sustain communist power. Wałęsa also carried arms illegally, and no mention exists in the book that he was prosecuted in a court for both crimes. Instead of highlighting this particular theft, Cenckiewicz emphasizes Wanda’s romance, Wałęsa’s former paramour, with another man.
It is unclear whether a career historian, Cenckiewicz, should use a highlighting method that detracts a reader from the essential facts described in his book. This technique is very new. However, Cenckiewicz’s approach is much better than the prevalent style nowadays of ‘Fake News,’ relying on publishing utterly false information.
There is no better book about Wałęsa. On the back cover of the book, Cenckiewicz included Wałęsa’s comments about this book. Wałęsa claims that Cenckiewicz is the grandson of a high-ranking officer of Soviet security forces in Poland who severely persecuted Poles. This comment was intended to discredit the author in the eyes of the average reader. Still, Cenckiewicz was not afraid because he presented well verified and reliable facts about Wałęsa. Till today, there is no better book about this figure. Most books on this topic put Wałęsa on a pedestal, giving him the highest honors for getting rid of communism in Poland, and even in the Soviet Bloc. Post-communist forces in Poland had maintained this opinion until 2015. As a result of that free election, the non-communists, including the President and Prime Minister, came to power in Poland.
Did “Bolek” overthrow communism, or did the CIA? Poland’s actual transition from communism to capitalism is described in the 2019 book by Zbigniew Wojcik, “Slaying the Soviet Beast.” 
The US Intelligence played the undercover role in winning the Cold War, searching for genuine dissidents from the Soviet Bloc who could be interested in sharing strategic information about weaknesses on the Berlin Wall’s east side. Cenckiewicz does not focus on this possibility.
Could “Bolek” be motivated to fight communism in Poland? Cenckiewicz proved that Wałęsa could not have been the individual who would intentionally fight communism in Poland: Wałęsa was the cutting-edge communist fighter sustaining his power enthusiastically as much as he could and as much as he was allowed by his progressive supervisors. Soviets hated patriots, who fought the communist regime in Poland. The facts presented in the book need intellectual abilities to ask the right questions and to come up with the answers. The book presents Wałęsa playing an anti-communist hero, as an actor in the political communist theater, with directors, other actors, scenes, and audiences. Wałęsa believed it would never be uncovered that he was a mole, and so, he decided to play his role to the very end! Considering that Poland’s court system was left untouched after the so-called collapse of communism, with communist judges still adjudicating, Wałęsa could sue anybody for spreading information about his collaboration as “Bolek” with the communists. Accordingly, essential facts are presented in this book, but conclusions are frequently not found there.
How transition into capitalism was possible without a civil war. During the transition into capitalism, the communists would not accept genuine anti-communists to govern them but would quickly approve their comrades pretending to be anti-communists. The timing was right for the changes in Poland after Gorbachev’s perestroika. The trick was to use the fake opposition, Wałęsa-like moles and traitors who would hunt for true patriots. So, they continued to pretend to be anti-communists and claim they favored democracy with free elections. A new generation of Poles would grow in the atmosphere of so-called democracy, and after some time, they would outnumber the communists. The fake opposition knew the rules of democracy and supported both – the genuine patriotic opposition and the communists. This way, the economy would function, bloodshed would be averted, and communist terror would stop. Cenckiewicz is not aware of this transition concept, presented in greater detail in Wojcik’s book. However, traces of this transition strategy are all over Cenckiewicz’s book.
During the transitional period into capitalism, the fake opposition people were capable of governing Poland as a team. Because of their strong ties with the communists, they were better positioned to govern than the loyal opposition with little managing experience. The process of controlling always and everywhere operates through networking. So, the objective was not to destroy it. The fake opposition was available to govern Poland when the Soviet Bloc collapsed, as they were in touch with communists who were controlling through their networks. The question is whether Wałęsa was capable of governing. The answer is no. When he was the President of Poland, Wałęsa was under the control of the previous communist President, General Wojciech Jaruzelski – all the time. Wałęsa was a terrible president. Even communists did not support him for the second term, as evidenced by free voting at the end of his first term. At that moment, Wałęsa lost his game.
How communists agreed with the anti-communists. The Round-Table Agreement in Poland, i.e., a 1989 meeting of communists with fake anti-communists debating how to transition into capitalism when the Soviet Bloc was collapsing, is the evidence of this game, during which there were also players hardly visible, who made sure that the transition into capitalism would go smoothly, without a civil war.
Could Cenckiewicz realize these stakes in the game against communism, and who else was involved? No visible trace of consideration for the possibility of civil war exists in his book. Cenckiewicz does not explain why Wałęsa still keeps his card in hand though his card becomes very visible now. Raising stakes in the game to win with communism is described in Wojcik’s book, which is missing in Cenckiewicz’s book. Most likely, Cenckiewicz did not know and did not search for foreign intelligence involvement from the outside. It is a mistake: an operation of this scale would not proceed without invisible and powerful forces. The US Intelligence people were playing with Wałęsa and his comrades. Wałęsa has not publicly admitted his double role, and he is only losing now. “Bolek” still believes that his card, known today as the mole, is winning politically.
How “Bolek” becomes the fake anti-communist hero. Cenckiewicz covers the issue of stealing documents about Wałęsa’s communist activities from the governmental archives when Wałęsa was the President of Poland. Wałęsa should be sued for that obstruction of justice. Cenckiewicz wrote that the facts of destroying evidence about Wałęsa’s communist past had been well documented.
Cenckiewicz also well documents monetary income Wałęsa had been receiving from communist security forces for his cooperation with communists against Polish patriots. The biggest reward Wałęsa received for denouncing loyal Solidarity members was an apartment in Gdańsk. To own an apartment was the most significant benefit in socialist Poland for most people. Because of pervading socialist poverty, nobody could afford to buy an apartment for a regular salary received through a regular job. For powerful political connections attained thanks to the services as a mole, the apartment was available for Wałęsa’s family. Communism appreciates devoted people. Colleagues at work asked Wałęsa for explanations on where his significant income came from. He answered: from winning the “Totolotek” lottery!
Cenckiewicz criticizes Wałęsa’s wife, Danuta, the First Lady of post-communist Poland, for repeating her husband’s lies about the lottery as the source of their unexpectedly high incomes during the communist times, and her coldness towards spouses and children of their colleagues suffering because of persecutions by communist security as a result of “Bolek’s” denunciations. Danuta never asked for any sort of compensation for families needing food when communists imprisoned their fathers because of “Bolek’s” duties. Cenckiewicz finds valid explanations for it: Danuta was demoralized due to her own family’s criminal past where she grew up. Her father was a multiple felon with a sentence for collaboration in a murder. I would expect further conclusions on this point – that typically, communism needs criminals to govern to be indifferent towards people suffering misery.
The growth of the beast is covered with great details. Wałęsa wanted money so much that he also resorted to delivering his denunciations of no operational value, for which he also requested payments. At about the same time, Wałęsa wanted to be trusted by workers as their anti-communist leader. For that purpose, he frequently gave public speeches against his workplace’s communist management in the workers’ favor. He became an excellent communist provocateur. Wałęsa was officially warned a few times for acting against the management, but he did not listen and was fired from the shipyard job. Thanks to this move, he gained more trust and a higher reputation as an anti-communist activist in Gdańsk. Wałęsa found another job very quickly, probably thanks to his fruitful collaboration with communist security forces. He was also receiving a new apartment from the workplace where he was fired, and this process was not stopped.
In December 1970, massive anti-communist riots in the Gdańsk shipyard started after significant food price hikes in Poland. At that time, Wałęsa was selected by communist security forces to lead anti-communist protests.
The first important text which presents Wałęsa as a chief informer/snitch is highlighted in yellow on page 107. It says that Wałęsa gave a speech from the window of the security forces building asking workers to stop violent protests. Cenckiewicz highlights the text about calls from the crowd calling Wałęsa a pig, a traitor, and a mole, together with rocks and bricks thrown at the windows. Fantastic is Wałęsa’s explanation that the security building’s revolving doors grabbed him off the street into the security building and out of the riot. The point is that the revolving doors never existed there – an important detail captured well in the book.
Wałęsa – “Bolek” grew fast in action. Wałęsa volunteered to be the mediator between the protesting workers from the shipyard and the communist security apparatus. The military surrounded the shipyard and started shooting at workers to threaten them. Two workers were killed. Then Wałęsa volunteered to join the Protest Committee of shipyard workers and was approved. With the assistance of Wałęsa, the Committee decided quickly to give up and end the protest. About 3,300 workers were identified as taking part in the protest. They were later subjected to severe persecution. All Committee members were asked to become informers/snitches, but only Wałęsa accepted the offer. However, he already was the mole, becoming again “Bolek.” Nobody among the leaders of these workers, except for Wałęsa, wanted to be a traitor, even after being caught red-handed, knowing of immediate persecution with the possibility of being killed. It was verified that among the Protest Committee members, only Wałęsa supported the communist regime.
“Bolek’s” role volunteering to represent workers during riots in Gdańsk is well described: he “was ruthless concerning his colleagues, whom he denounced. He watched them, listened secretly, delivered to communist security their written notes so that they could compare the character of their writing with leaflets distributed, and if he did not know their names, he described in detail their silhouettes.. .” Wałęsa reported even on the management of the shipyard.
We must admire Cenckiewicz for his courage to publish the truth about Wałęsa. Inaccuracy exists in Cenckiewicz’s presentation of the December 1970 spontaneous workers’ riot in Poland’s northern cities: over 1,000 were wounded and around 40 killed,  whereas Cenckiewicz reports three dead and a few wounded. And first of all, machine guns were used against civilians whose intention was to be at work on time, the evidence that communists treated people as the deadly enemy, even those who did not intend to protest. This disparity with the truth is apparent and was done by Cenckiewicz, probably on purpose. He wrote the book during the transition into capitalism when most, if not all, the bureaucracy was still in communist hands. Cenckiewicz was lucky he was not killed for the publication of the truth about Wałęsa-“Bolek.” This indicates that the transition of Poland into capitalism was making some progress. We must admire Cenckiewicz for his courage, for the successful attempts to publicly reveal the character and role of Wałęsa – “Bolek,” a very prolific communist fighter pretending to be an anti-communist activist, provoking true patriots to burst out against terror, this way identifying people for persecution, beatings, imprisonments, and even killings. My book “Slaying the Soviet Beast…” describes many communist provocations I was subjected to by communists in Poland during that time.
Wałęsa “borrowed” from governmental archives and then destroyed thousands of documents against him when he was the President of Poland. The quest for the complete set of evidence of Wałęsa’s activities as a mole and traitor continues, and from time to time, new facts come to light. Some microfilms were discovered and given to “Bolek” – the President. The quests for microfilms after the hero lost power continues. The list of communist crimes the Nobel Prize Winner and President of Poland Lech Wałęsa committed, the fear and panicky blurring of “Bolek’s” traces, all these facts are enough to make the book very exciting.
Cenckiewicz describes Wałęsa’s reaction after his collaborations with communist security became well-known. Terrified is “Bolek’s” explanation that communists set him up for his anti-communist activities. If so, Wałęsa should not destroy evidence about “Bolek.” This issue is not presented well in the book, though a sufficient amount of facts are listed.
Wałęsa does not want to be called “Bolek.” The quest for Wałęsa’s personal file, Wałęsa’s work folder, Wałęsa’s money receipts for denunciations – continues. An exciting interview is presented with Edward Graczyk, the former agent of communist security services supervising Wałęsa-the mole. Wałęsa claims that he is not “Bolek” and sues Krzysztof Wyszkowski in court for naming him “Bolek.” Fearing more embarrassment, “Bolek” withdrew his claim from the court when Wyszkowski took Graczyk as the witness. Interviews with witnesses continue, attempting to solve the problem of Wałęsa being “Bolek,” while evidence proves beyond any doubt that Wałęsa is “Bolek.” All these actions are supposed to confuse the public and blur the traces, a good mirror of reality played by the mole, traitor, and pig in one human, who used to appear everywhere with the emblem of Our Lady / the “Black Madonna” attached to his jacket. Wałęsa once said: “Yes, I was the agent; they took it as my confession.”
On “Bolek” becoming a world leader. The way Wałęsa grew to the role of a world leader is captured accurately. In 1978, Wałęsa started membership in the Free Trade Union (WZZ), an illegal organization but opened for membership to the public, which existed despite communist terror. The WZZ immediately recognized him as a communist provocateur because he advocated for an armed fight against communists, including the use of explosives. Simultaneously, he formally refused further collaboration with communist security, which gave the expected result: he finally was admitted to WZZ. Bogdan Borusewicz, an activist with WZZ, was sympathetic to Wałęsa. At the WZZ meetings, Bolek talked about his denunciations. He revealed that he was used to identifying his colleagues on photos made by security forces during riots. He justified his dirty service, saying that the “authority must know everything to govern.” The recording of that statement was made but later was lost, of course. However, many witnesses heard Wałęsa’s confession. “Bolek” confessed more than once, most likely to threaten his colleagues and demonstrate who has the power.
Wałęsa crawled his way up over dead bodies. Tragic are the reports on unexplained deaths of young people active in WZZ who were contacted by Wałęsa, for example, Tadeusz Szczepański. As Wałęsa infiltrated WZZ, then all true patriots were detected there. Cenckiewicz strongly suggests that Szczepański was imprisoned, investigated, and then murdered by communist oppressors because of “Bolek’s” infiltration and rebuke. Communist security tightly watched his family and friends, who requested subsequent investigations to find the murderers. All inquiries were stopped or blocked.
At the beginning of Wałęsa’s political career, after he contacted communist security forces when he was caught with the theft, his first child, Grzegorz, was found drowned in a pond. At the time of his death, the boy was just four years old. Wałęsa’s love, Wanda, got pregnant with Wałęsa, but he did not marry her -this is how he treated her and her son Grzegorz. Wałęsa never looked back; Grzegorz’s grave was never visited, and the security people did not allow people even to talk about Wałęsa’s child. Cenckiewicz dedicated his book to little Grzegorz to show how Wałęsa built his political career. The author depicted how the communists found a highly talented and immoral communist, helped him get rid of his unwanted family, transformed him into “Bolek,” and obligated him to unconditional service for them in Gdańsk.
Communist security’s support for “Solidarity” by way of “Bolek.” It is clear from Cenckiewicz’s book that the communist security treated WZZ as the place to attract and identify Polish patriots, to isolate them, persecute them, and even kill them. The WZZ was necessary for communism to function undisturbed, for early detection of individuals who would demonstrate unwanted behavior against their power. Szczepanski’s murder is known because his family and friends were doing everything they could to reveal that communists murdered him. How many others perished the same way as he did? Infiltration by Wałęsa explains why WZZ was able to function despite its formal illegality. The activists of WZZ, including Borusewicz and Walentynowicz, knew Wałęsa was “Bolek”-the-mole, and they had to accept him in WZZ! They immediately recognized “Bolek”-the-mole and could do nothing. During one of the meetings, Wałęsa said publicly that he was “Bolek”-the-mole, and they could do nothing! It is exciting and sad at the same time to read this story in Cenckiewicz’s book. Perhaps these true patriots could warn Tadeusz Szczepanski, but could they save the brave young patriot from an unexpected one-on-one meeting with “Bolek” and his henchmen?
Riots in the Gdańsk shipyard were planned by WZZ to erupt in August 1980, after Anna Walentynowicz was fired, to bring her job back. Besides, people wanted to make their Trade Union legal despite communist prohibition. Borusewicz, who was influential in WZZ, asked Wałęsa for assistance, knowing his role as “Bolek”; he had to inform the communist security. They, in turn, had to coordinate actions with the shipyard. The issue was that Wałęsa was expected to arrive illegally at the shipyard, as he no longer worked there, and the shipyard security services blocked the gates. It is quite apparent how “Bolek” finally arrived there to start the riot as the Protest Committee leader. The whole riot was a setup made by the communists. For this riot, “Bolek,” representing the Free Trade Union WZZ, was necessary. It is essential to understand that the shipyard management knew about preparations for this provocation on a massive scale because “Bolek” was the key figure.
Exciting is the sequence of events described by Cenckiewicz. The shipyard was doing everything they could to prevent the riot from starting. The shipyard could prevent the riot by stopping “Bolek” from entering the shipyard area. This is why Cenckiewicz dedicated several pages of his book to picture the critical battle at the shipyard fence: Bolek boasting how he jumped over a very tall wall – over 3 meters high. Another version of this event was provided by a security agent named Kozlowski, who claimed that he attempted to assist Bolek. Yet, another version says that the military navy had to deliver Bolek by boat from the seashore. Anna Walentynowicz supported this version. The shipyard management’s resistance explains why only the military navy could effectively deliver Bolek to the shipyard.
The tensions among shipyard workers grew upon “Bolek’s” arrival, but everything with the protest went as planned, and we should accept Cenckiewicz’s version in full. “Bolek” agreed to end the protest fast. The management decided to pay extra bonuses to workers and satisfy a few other minor requests so that the shipyard could resume work quickly. Because the authorities did not agree to legalize the “Solidarność” Free Trade Union (WZZ), when Wałęsa announced victory on behalf of the protestors, the workers called him a mole and a traitor. The workers counted on “Bolek” because they accepted him to represent them, and they knew of Wałęsa – “Bolek.” Unfortunately, “Bolek” followed his supervisors’ orders from the security services and not from the workers.
This set up organized by the communist security is presented by Cenckiewicz very well. Though many left the shipyard early, workers disagreed with the initial deal and decided to continue the protest. After some hesitation, Wałęsa agreed to be in charge of the riot and asked workers for their support.
Cenckiewicz claims that the communist security managed to set up the riot to make their man, Wałęsa, the national hero, and then even become a world-known leader. In situations like the one in the Gdańsk shipyard, a group of a few disciplined people is sufficient to control a large crowd’s emotions. Since then, “Wałęsa felt like the leader” and was subsequently treated as a prominent world leader. Communists achieved their goal!
Cenckiewicz wrote that Wałęsa created “Solidarity.” However, I had heard this catchphrase “Solidarity” and encouragements to join the Solidarity Movement for the first time from Pope John Paul II in 1979 when he spoke to the crowd at the St. Anne’s Church in the Old Town in Warsaw. The KOR (Workers’ Defense Committee) and others were not in favor of creating the new movement “Solidarity” under Wałęsa’s leadership, mostly because he was under the supervision of the communists. They strongly supported Wałęsa and were informing Wałęsa of everything that was needed for his job as a mole. Security forces hated KOR, and for that purpose, Wałęsa, together with his “Solidarity,” could be used against KOR. As KOR indicates, the organization was to defend workers because of growing poverty and persecution under real communism.
Wałęsa always wins. There were also tensions within the Solidarity Movement, in which communist security always strongly sided with Wałęsa, mostly when “Bolek” was eliminating his opponents. The competition between the true opposition KOR and the fake one is crucial and had to be addressed by Cenckiewicz to show how the communists in Poland gained total political control over people for decades to come after the collapse of communism.
Poland’s communist security apparatus’s political victory started to be visible when Wałęsa joined the “Solidarity” Free Trade Union (WZZ), which Cenckiewicz noticed. For complete success, “Bolek” had to defeat Anna Walentynowicz, a knowledgeable, tough, simple worker and unbroken patriot. “Bolek” fought against her using dirty tricks and ridicules, e.g., by telling her that she was a little crazy. At some point, only she remained as the last opponent inside the “Solidarity” movement fighting “Bolek,” who was backed by the communist security forces. It is essential to read about Anna Walentynowicz and her heroic fight! Only because of her heroism the strikes in the Gdańsk shipyard erupted in August 1980. “Bolek” liked to abuse women in general and her in particular. He threw out one activist Ms. Maryla Płońska from the “Solidarity” office by tweaking her hair. Maryla never returned to Solidarity…
Marshall Law in Poland. It seems reasonable without going into greater detail to assume that because “Bolek” cooperated closely with communist security, Wałęsa should not have been interned when Marshall Law was imposed in Poland in December 1981. This issue should be explained in Cenckiewicz’s book because the reader may think that Wałęsa did not work for communist security and that he was a real anti-communist fighter for what he was punished. Cenckiewicz wrote that Wałęsa was not interned but was transported to a governmental palace in Chylice near Warsaw. This is true, but Wałęsa was not entirely free in the palace, and he was interned later. Explanatory here is that the First Secretary of the Polish Communist Party, Edward Gierek, was removed from power by force through a military coup. The new communist dictatorship did not need the “Solidarity” movement. Finally, in Cenckiewicz’s book: the “Solidarity”, Free Trade Union was delegalized in December 1981, and later, a new type of trade union was introduced in Poland.
The West understood that a genuinely Free Trade Union was delegalized in communist Poland. Still, the truth is: Solidarity was never free; it was under communist control through Wałęsa-the-mole and was infiltrated from within by the communist security apparatus. The new regime decided to control its new labor unions differently, and perhaps more elegantly, by introducing new rules that activists had to follow. I signed up to join “Solidarity” at the desk serviced by communist security agents, and then I realized I made a mistake, but it was too late. I was faced with many communist provocations; hence I had first-hand knowledge to share with US Intelligence when I traveled to Kansas in 1986. This provocation-type communist terror method truly impressed American security services! Could Cenckiewicz imagine how the “Bolek”-type game alarmed the West and mobilized the USA to get involved in dragging Poland into capitalism?
Receipts for denunciations. Shocking is a copy of Wałęsa’s denunciation, hand-written by him, with money receipts signed by “Bolek” attached, and copies of both available in Cenckiewicz’s book. This time the document is highlighted in yellow. For better conspiracy, “Bolek” demanded that the communists issue an official summons for him to show up at their security offices. As his colleagues denounced by him were interrogated, people could suspect him. This demand shows “Bolek’s” professional skills as a security agent, not just a mole. After receiving this summons, the invigilation by security services intensified without negatively affecting Wałęsa. “Bolek” played a crucial role in tightening the grip of communist terror in Poland.
The communist security apparatus always requested receipts for denunciation payments. All receipts had to be written by hand, not just signed, for a stronger association. Wałęsa was associated for sure!
Unexplained in the book are motivations and attempts to falsify Wałęsa’s documents by the communist security forces when Wałęsa was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Cenckiewicz wrote that communist security forces tried to prevent giving the Noble Peace Prize to Wałęsa. Cenckiewicz describes these efforts without clarifying why their communist man, “Bolek,” would be deprived of such a high reward in politics. The first case I know is quite an achievement when a mole, a pig, a liar, and a traitor received and collected a Nobel Peace Prize. In my opinion, if the security services truly intended to stop the nomination process, they had at their disposal plenty of pieces of evidence, including microfilms. They could simply have sent them to the Nobel Prize Committee along with all the documents they had in their possession.
Embarrassment vs. communist activities. Embarrassment is the motivation not discussed openly by Cenckiewicz. The security services understood that it would be impossible to keep the documents about “Bolek” in total secrecy forever. Too many of such papers were stored in too many locations, with too many people involved, all becoming potential witnesses. All attempts to forge Wałęsa’s hand-writing failed. Documents written by “Bolek” could not be falsified. This is what has been proven: the security services did not fabricate evidence against Wałęsa, as he frequently claimed. The security agents expected that evidence would come to light in the future, as they were professionals in carrying out investigations. Documents signed by “Bolek” are authentic; they are concrete evidence against Wałęsa. “Bolek” is Wałęsa, beyond any doubt. This is the real face of Wałęsa, who denounced his colleagues, the real Polish patriots. This is Wałęsa, who was setting up traps detecting Polish patriots during anti-communist actions, producing factual evidence of their guilt. All this was done by “Bolek,” pretending to be an anti-communist hero. The security could then persecute the Polish patriots, beat them, make life miserable for their families, and when their bosses considered it necessary, even murder them. “Bolek” was anchored to the communist power structure by producing hard evidence of his collaboration. Highly embarrassed and ashamed, he never admitted publicly that he was “Bolek.”
I, Zbigniew Wojcik, was personally caught during such a provocation when communist security agents pretending to be “Solidarity” activists encouraged me to sign up to become a member of “Solidarity.”
I was caught. Wałęsa becomes the top organizer of this grubby fight against patriots in Poland.
Communist security forces’ failed attempts to falsify Wałęsa’s writing also proved that many security people were more decent than “Bolek.” They preserved the truth. Their witnesses testified that Wałęsa was “Bolek.” Evidence shows that Wałęsa completely lacks simple human decency because he was too prolific in his denunciations and producing evidence on his grubby work, as receipts were required for each payment. “Bolek” exceeded security expectations, as documented, e.g., by his demand to summon him to the security office to produce the fake evidence that he was an anti-communist fighter.
Why did Cenckiewicz present the motivation concerning the Nobel Prize that does not make much sense? Again, he published his book when communists were still in power in Poland, i.e., when a political book with little explanations could be allowed. He published sufficient evidence in his book before all originals and their copies would be destroyed, and all witnesses die of natural causes. It is worth recalling the catastrophe in Smolensk when Polish patriots were killed. This catastrophe happened when the communists were still in power in Poland. Despite the real threat of being murdered, Dr. Cenckiewicz did more than could be expected from a brave historian-patriot at that time!
All the evidence of “Bolek’s” denunciations was never formally used against Wałęsa because the court protected him. Over time, the “Solidarity” movement was expanded by many communist activists from the Stalinist times joining,  creating a new political structure responsible for the Round-Table deal between the fake anti-communists and accomplished communists transition into capitalism. Finally, Jacek Kuroń and not Wałęsa received the privilege of representing the new “opposition” and deciding who will be influential in the peaceful transition into capitalism. Formally only, because the real power still rested with General Jaruzelski, the Polish Communist Party’s First Secretary. The fact was proven in the book.
Money for promoting “Bolek” as a hero. The entire industry was built to promote Wałęsa as a hero. Andrzej Wajda, famous movie director in communist Poland, produced the infamous motion picture “Wałęsa, the Man of Hope,” described by Cenckiewicz as “an obvious, shameless, astonishing and brazen lie.”
What else is important about “Bolek” / Wałęsa? It would be essential to add a few additional documents to Cenckiewicz’s book, including the following two:
- The folder of documents that Maria Kiszczak, the widow of Prime Minister General Czesław Kiszczak, attempted to sell shortly after her husband’s death, proving once again that Wałęsa was a mole. The critical evidence here is the following signature of our communist hero on one of the documents:
Lech Wałęsa, “Bolek”
Kiszczak kept strategic documents in his house, anchoring “Bolek” to his communist decisions until his death. Wałęsa’s numerous claims that he was never “Bolek” were once again proven to be a blatant lie. “Bolek” had to always listen to the communist figures in Poland. “Bolek” trusted his communist bosses: as the President of Poland, he had the power to inspect Kiszczak’s house without asking anybody for permission, but he never tried. His dedication to Kiszczak’s orders lasted until the general’s death.
- The document hand-written by Wałęsa – “Bolek” in Polish and signed by him on December 21, 1970, accepting the collaboration with the communist security in Poland is worth noting:
“I fully commit myself to collaborate with the (communist) political secret security services in revealing and eliminating the enemies of the Polish People’s Republic.”
Note about the author of this article. Zbigniew Wojcik received his Ph.D. from the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw in pattern recognition. Invited to the United States in 1986 by the Wichita State University in Kansas, he took a visiting professor’s position. He shared his expertise in Soviet Bloc communism with American Intelligence. His book “Slaying the Soviet Beast. True Story about How the Cold War was Won. What Next?” pictures his interviews with American intelligence agents who gathered the information from him swiftly through a series of cultural interviews against the communists in the Soviet Bloc. The section “How communists agreed with anti-communists” presented above sketches of Wojcik’s idea of making a peaceful transition in Poland into capitalism, revealed by him and discussed with US Intelligence.
 Sławomir Cenckiewicz has an academic title of “doktor habilitowany” in history, which is an equivalent of a professor of history.
 Zbigniew Wojcik, “Slaying the Soviet Beast, True Story how the Cold War was Won. What next?” Liberty Hill, 2019.
 Wojcik, “Slaying the Soviet Beast……”
 Cenckiewicz, “Wałęsa. Człowiek z teczki,” p. 324.