Pitesti experiment

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Piteşti Experiment ( Romanian Experimentul Piteşti , also Fenomenul Piteşti ) was a re-education measure initiated by parts of the Romanian secret service Securitate (then officially Direcția Generală a Poliției de Siguranță , DGPS) in the years 1949 to 1952, in which attempts were made to admit political prisoners to reshape communist- minded people.

Sites of the Piteşti experiment in Romania

The means of this experiment were torture and humiliation with the aim of destroying the prisoners' personality. The relevant measures were mainly carried out by fellow prisoners or had to be carried out by them. Initially only students were affected, and later other prisoners as well. The ultimate goal was to create a "new man" who would either be a staunch supporter of the communist idea or at least a willless tool of the Communist Party.

designation

The measures, now known as the Piteşti experiment, were carried out in several prisons in Romania, including Gherla , Târgu Ocna and Ocnele Mari . However, since the first and most serious incidents took place in the Piteşti detention center , the program was named this city.

Historical background

Romania under the military dictatorship of Ion Antonescu took part in the war against the Soviet Union on the side of Hitler's Germany from 1941 to 1944 . In the wake of the looming defeat, the country changed sides on August 23, 1944 ( royal coup d'état ) and fought together with the Soviet Union against Germany until the end of the Second World War . Nevertheless, Soviet troops occupied the country. The political leadership of the Soviet Union single-mindedly incorporated Romania into its sphere of influence; the Communist Party , which was numerically very weak up until then , gradually conquered all important positions of power. On December 30, 1947, King Michael I had to abdicate. The supporters of the king, the fascist legionnaires' movement (Iron Guard), but also those of the bourgeois, anti-communist parties were exposed to massive persecution.

The Communist Party also identified numerous students among the opponents of the emerging regime, whose political views were particularly suspicious of them. The party leadership under Ana Pauker decided - possibly on instructions from the Soviet Union  - to take extreme action against the actual or suspected anti-communist resistance. On the night of May 14-15, 1948 , around 1,000 students were arrested in Bucharest , Cluj and Iași , which was around 2% of the number of students at the time. Most of those arrested were sentenced to at least 5 years in prison.

It is unclear who ordered the Pitești experiment or from whom or from which body the initiative came. The historian Dennis Deletant suspects the client in the Soviet Union, possibly in the person of the MWD boss Lavrenti Beria , perhaps also in the supreme ruler Josef Stalin himself. Accordingly, the views of the Soviet educator Anton Semjonowitsch Makarenko (1888-1939) played a role propagated the method of re-education - including through hard work - in his works. However, Makarenko only envisaged these measures for ordinary criminals, not for politically dissenters.

The use of torture was a common practice during the Securitate interrogations. The idea of ​​the experiment was based in part on converting the method of torture, which is considered effective, into a permanent state by involving willing prisoners and thus exposing the people to be re-educated to permanent, practically intolerable pressure.

The secret service officer Alexandru Nicolschi (1915–1992), an assistant director of the Securitate with special responsibility for interrogating prisoners, is seen as responsible for the implementation of the program .

prehistory

Among the students arrested in May 1948 was a law student from Iași , Eugen Țurcanu, born in 1925 . In 1940 he was briefly a member of the youth organization of the Iron Guard. After the royal coup on August 23, 1944, he joined the Communist Party . He began to study law in Iași and made a career in the local party organization. According to one account, Alexandru Bogdanovici - another former supporter of the Iron Guard - reportedly denounced him as a former member. Țurcanu received a seven-year prison term and was imprisoned with Bogdanovici in Suceava Prison. It was improvised accommodation in the city's former fortress. The authorities initially tried a moderate form of re-education, in which the prisoners were to be convinced of socialism through discussions, reading communist texts and singing corresponding songs. Bogdanovici followed a suggestion made by the prison authorities to read Marxist literature to his fellow prisoners , probably in the hope of mitigating his own prison sentence of 25 years. Țurcanu attended these readings and actively participated in the propaganda efforts, which, however, showed no success among the inmates.

Eugen Țurcanu founded an association called Organizația Deținuților cu Convigeri Comuniste (ODCC, "Organization of Prisoners of Communist Beliefs"). He, Bogdanovici and several other prisoners were taken by Suceava to Jilava prison near Bucharest shortly afterwards . It was probably during this time that Nicolschi contacted Țurcanu. He instructed him to recruit a group from among his fellow prisoners who would be ready to carry out the assigned tasks.

The prisoners, who originally came from Suceava, were transferred to Piteşti in April 1949 .

The Pitesti prison

Entrance to the Pitesti prison

The prison in Pitesti was chosen to carry out the re-education experiment. There were several reasons for this: It was very safe to break out by the standards of the time; In addition, it was outside (northwest) of the city and away from other dwellings, so that it was ensured that no cries of torture could be heard from passers-by. It was built at the beginning of the 20th century. It was intended for male students. Almost all of the inmates were of Romanian nationality; almost no one belonged to one of the national minorities. Most of the students were accused of their former membership in the Iron Guard, the Peasant Party , the National Liberal Party or allegiance to the monarchy. The prison was officially called the Student Re-education Center.

Courtyard of the prison

There were about 1,000 inmates in the prison. These were divided into four categories:

  • I: without trial, imprisoned solely on the basis of their political views, some of whom had been in prison for several years
  • II: those sentenced to smaller sentences (3–5 years), e. B. because of help for political opponents of the communist regime
  • III: those sentenced to 8-15 years imprisonment for "conspiracy against social order" (this was the largest group)
  • IV: the leaders of oppositional student organizations sentenced to 10 to 25 years in prison

The four groups were isolated from one another, in particular to prevent former opposition student leaders from influencing their former followers. Initially, the members of categories I to III were allowed to maintain censored correspondence with their relatives; they were also allowed to have food parcels sent to them. At the beginning of 1949, the prison administration forbade inmates from correspondence with relatives; The purchase of food parcels was also prohibited.

Course of the experiment in the Piteşti prison

The experiment began on December 6, 1949. It was triggered by an apparently staged incident. In mid-November 1949, about 15 of the students sentenced to long prison terms were moved to another building. There they met the group of around 15 people put together by Țurcanu. Both groups became friends. On December 6th, without further explanation, one of the guards asked a student named Sandu Anghelescu to hand over his sweater. Anghelescu, who had been left in his undershirt in an unheated room in the middle of winter, cursed the guard after he had left. Țurcanu then slapped Anghelescu in the face without warning and reprimanded him for cursing. This was the signal for the Țurcanu group to hit their “friends”. A general brawl broke out, which was interrupted by the appearance of several guards and the prison director, Alexandru Dumitrescu. Anghelescu gave his view of things. Țurcanu, on the other hand, claimed that he and his friends had been attacked by Anghelescu and his supporters for refusing to join the ODCC group he - Țurcanu - led. Anghelescu and his friends had to strip naked and lay them on the concrete floor. There they were beaten with iron bars by the guards for 30 minutes. In the days that followed, the blows were repeated, this time carried out by Țurcanu and his group.

Between the beating, Țurcanu began using his re-education program - presumably coordinated with the secret service. This comprised four sections. In the first ("external unmasking" [ demascarea externă ]), the prisoners had to prove their loyalty to the ODCC by revealing everything they had concealed from the secret service during the interrogations. In doing so, they had to report all crimes that had ever been committed, even if they were not carried out but only intended. Țurcanu made protocols of the results of these interrogations, which the prisoner had to sign and which Țurcanu then sent to the Ministry of the Interior via Securitate officers. In the second step (“inner unmasking” [ demascarea internă ]) the prisoner had to denounce those inmates and prison staff who had been kind or indulgent to him. In the further steps the personality of the prisoner and his moral framework should be destroyed. In the third stage (“unmasking public morality” [ demascarea morală publică ]) the prisoner had to renounce everything that had meant something to him up to now: his family, his faith, his friends and finally himself. The denial of his own identity was to be achieved by forcing the inmates to write an autobiography in which they accused themselves of various sexual deviations. This should create a feeling of moral decadence in the prisoner and destroy his value system. In his autobiography, the inmate had a “lack of inner character” to describe moral perversions and mental illnesses that would have made him insensitive to the ideas of communism. Morally depraved parents and reactionary teachers would have exerted further unfavorable influences on their own personality.

If Țurcanu had the impression that the moral collapse of his counterpart was complete, the fourth and final stage was applied: the inmate had to apply the previous steps even to his fellow inmates who had not yet been “transformed”; usually with his best friend among the prisoners. If the “transformed” did not have a close relationship with other inmates, he first had to make a pretense of friendship with the chosen victim. At a signal agreed with Țurcanu - supported by Țurcanu and his followers - he suddenly hit his "friend", which started the program for him.

The re-education program lasted from a few days to four months, depending on the “cooperation” of the inmate concerned and the will of Țurcanus and his ODCC colleagues.

Robbed of his real, personal identity, the prisoner was “unmasked”, “re-educated” after the program he had run through, a colleague of Țurcanus, but a completely dependent tool in his hand. If Țurcanu had the impression that the “reformed” was too indulgent in his new role or showed too little zeal, he had to complete the entire program a second time.

The "unmasking" and torture were complemented by continued humiliation. The tortured inmate had to B. clean the cell floors with a cloth clamped between the teeth while a fellow Țurcanus rode on his back. They also had the task of sitting at the foot of the plank bed at night and violently hitting an inmate who was still to be reformed on the feet with a rubber hose every time he fell asleep. The inmates tried to keep from falling asleep, which quickly made them weak, helpless, and desperate. If the person being reformed was allowed to sleep, then only in a prescribed position: stretched out, lying on his back, hands on his chest. An "uneducated" man had the task of punching his fellow inmate vigorously on the elbow every time he changed his sleeping position. Another means was the intention to make food intake as painful as possible for those to be tortured and thus to condition it negatively . Detainees were made to kneel on the floor with their hands behind their backs and lick boiling hot food from a bowl as quickly as possible. Sometimes they had to eat their own excrement from these bowls. Țurcanu was particularly sadistic towards theology students . They and other active Christians were forced by Țurcanu to deny their faith by speaking blasphemously about the Lord's Supper and by singing hymns with prescribed, obscene content. Some were "baptized" by dipping their heads in a urine-filled bucket in the morning while others sang chants by bystanders. On Easter morning 1950, a prisoner was forced to play a priest. He was dressed in a bed sheet smeared with dirt and had to hold a phallus- like object that other prisoners had to kiss.

Part of the psychological terror consisted in the fact that detainees who were not involved had to watch their comrades being tortured, in the expectation that one day it would be their turn too.

Many of the humiliated and tortured sought an opportunity to commit suicide, but this was mostly prevented. Only "transformed" inmates received cutlery; the inmates were also constantly monitored. One prisoner committed suicide by throwing himself on the stairs from the fifth floor. Another cut his veins with the help of a stolen and sharpened spoon. Unsuccessful suicide attempts were punished with further torture.

Țurcanu himself personally tortured Alexandru Bogdanovici, his former confidante and possible informer, several times. In March 1950 he subjected him to three days of continuous torture, including jumping on his stomach and chest. Due to the injury to internal organs, Bogdanovici fell into a coma and died on Maundy Thursday. Țurcanu later tried to justify the murder by saying that Bogdanovici was a member of the Romanian secret service during the time of the Antonescu regime . Besides Bogdanovici, at least 14 other prisoners died in Pitesti as a result of the “re-education program”.

Events outside of Pitesti

In the spring of 1951, practically all prisoners in Piteşti were "re-educated". The Securitate decided to extend the experiment to other prisons and camps by moving almost all of the students from Pitesti.

The most reliable “transformatives” - including Țurcanu and his closest followers - were chosen to be transferred to the prison in the Transylvanian city ​​of Gherla . Students with a lung disease (usually tuberculosis) were sent to Târgu Ocna near Bacău , a "prison sanatorium" which, however, was practically no different from a normal prison for Romania and to which tuberculosis sufferers were transferred from all prisons in the country. Students considered trustworthy who had not received a court judgment were transferred to Ocnele Mari prison in Oltenia ; inmates there were also often held without trial or judgment simply because they had served in pre-war and wartime governments. The students recognized as "transformed", who were physically in a comparatively good condition and who were not expected to have special skills for "special tasks", were sent to the labor camps on the Danube-Black Sea Canal .

After most of the students were transferred, the institution in Piteşti was dissolved as a "re-education facility" in August 1951 and then served as a normal prison until 1977.

Târgu Ocna

The students sent to the “prison sanatorium” of Târgu Ocna, led by Nuți Pătrăşcanu, a medical student from Bucharest, put the inmates under mainly psychological pressure for the “unmasking”. Direct physical violence was generally not used. Those prisoners who refused to cooperate were, however, transferred to dark cells without fresh air, their food rations were reduced and the drugs (which were of course questionable in their effectiveness) were withdrawn. The students among the “old inmates”, some of whom had already had experience with the local re-education program in Piteşti, threatened to go on hunger strike against the prison administration; one tried to take his own life. All of this was initially ignored by those responsible.

When football was being played on a Sunday next to the “sanatorium” and a large number of spectators had gathered, the prisoners shouted for help in an agreed-upon action. The calls were heard by the audience and then caused unrest in the city. The local secret service chief, who was not privy to the events, wanted to open an investigation. The experiment was ended in Târgu Ocna, but the "re-educators" were not punished. They stayed in prison, secured the best positions there, and tried other ways to harass their fellow inmates.

Ocnele Mari

The prison of Ocnele Mari was filled with many prominent inmates, but also with convicts whose offenses were only marginally "political" (e.g. illegal possession of weapons, attempted escape from the country). Many were of an advanced age; the prison regime was comparatively relaxed. A good number of the prisoners were allowed to work together in a larger workshop.

With the arrival of the "re-educators" everyday life in prison changed suddenly. The students secured the best positions within the prisoner hierarchy, spied on the previous inmates and severely restricted their freedom of movement. They soon started the torture. Compared to Piteşti, however, the organizational processes in the prison were different, and so all prisoners soon learned of the measures that had already taken place and were ultimately planned for all. They turned to the prison administration and threatened with mass suicide by going on hunger strike. In addition, there was still traffic in the prison and it was feared that details of the program could leak out. The violent re-education attempt was therefore also ended in Ocnele Mari.

Danube-Black Sea Canal

About 300 students from Pitești were sent to the labor camp on the Danube-Black Sea Canal (Valea Neagră peninsula). The camp, which opened in autumn 1950, was based on the Soviet Gulag model and served to exploit political prisoners to the maximum, although their deaths were accepted approvingly. When the students arrived, the camp had around 3,500 prisoners housed in 20 barracks. Two of the barracks were cleared for the students. Its leader was a medical student from Cluj, Ion Bogdănescu.

Some students were appointed brigade leaders and were directly responsible for compliance with labor standards. They were so ruthless in doing this that many forced laborers died of exhaustion. Her other task was to continue the re-education program applied in Piteşti in the camp. This was done by students going to the other barracks after the evening roll call, speaking to one of the inmates there and asking them to go to the barracks and then dragging them to one of their own barracks. After the evening roll call, any movement outside the barracks was actually forbidden; The heavily armed guards had orders to “overlook” the events. The usual torture followed in the student accommodation. The barracks, which were quite close together, made it necessary for some of the students to sing loudly to drown out the screams of their victims.

In this labor camp, too, the education program came to an unexpected end. In July 1951, the noted surgeon Ion Simionescu provoked his death by moving towards the surrounding line of guards while he was working; he was shot. Previously, he had been severely tortured several times by the students. The widow received information about the circumstances surrounding her husband's death. She protested at the Home Office and passed her information on to foreign radio stations ( BBC , Voice of America , Radio Free Europe ). Their reports forced the Minister of the Interior to investigate the incidents in the camps on the Danube-Black Sea Canal. As a result, the brutal camp manager Georgescu was replaced. His successor had an equally bad reputation; However, he behaved very humanely within the framework of the circumstances, improved working conditions, the food supply and the hygienic conditions. Above all, however, the students were divided among the other barracks, where they were hopelessly outnumbered and no longer had the opportunity to implement the program assigned to them.

Gherla

While the re-education program was canceled at the other locations, the experiment in Gherla continued. First of all, Țurcanu and his closest confidante were asked to get an idea of ​​the structure of the prison and its operations. The group was later expanded to include more students from Piteşti. The prison authorities carefully prepared the arrival of the students: an entire floor was made available for Țurcanu and his team - several hundred men strong. They set up a room specifically as a torture chamber. After a few months, during which most of the students were completely isolated from the rest of the prison population, the torture began. According to statements from those involved, the unmasking had less and less to do with the alleged goal of re-education; Torture became more and more evident out of sheer sadism.

One day a senior Securitate officer - possibly Nicolschi himself - visited the prison. One inmate complained to him about the conditions. The prison director denied knowledge of the experiment, and the detainee was subsequently tortured by Țurcanu.

The end of the experiment

At the turn of the year 1951/1952 the experiment was also ended in Gherla. Țurcanu and his most important companions were brought to Jilava.

The reasons for terminating the experiment are unknown. The time after the disempowerment of the previous party leadership around Ana Pauker , Vasile Luca and Teohari Georgescu suggests that the new ruler Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej wanted to demonstrate a change of course in domestic politics. This is also supported by the fact that one of the people primarily responsible for the experiment in the Ministry of the Interior, Ludovic Zeller, committed suicide immediately after Pauker resigned. Romania's efforts to join the UN may also have played a role.

Legal processing

Monument in Piteşti

What happened to Țurcanu and his helpers after they were brought to Jilava near Bucharest is not known for certain. It was rumored that they had to write a report on the experiment. When asked to sign a statement stating that state authorities, including the prison administration, had no involvement with the program, they initially refused and were apparently subsequently tortured themselves.

The new Romanian party leadership planned a severe punishment only for the torturing inmates. The process has been in preparation for more than two years. Two of the accused ultimately refused to sign the required declaration; they were later tried. One of the two was Gheorghe Calciu-Dumitreasa , a later dissident.

In order to absolve the Communist Party and the Securitate of all responsibility, the defendants were portrayed as agents of Horia Sima , the former Iron Guard leader who lived in exile in Spain . This scenario required that only those torturers whose previous ties to the Iron Guard were established should be brought into trial. Besides Eugen Țurcanu, this affected 21 other defendants.

The trial was held in camera in the fall of 1954. The indictment dated September 20, 1954 alleged that in 1949 Horia Sima ordered Eugen urcanu to carry out the re-education program in prison in order to discredit the Communist Party. In total, the 22 people, led by Țurcanu, killed more than 30 prisoners and tortured 780 prisoners, 100 of whom were seriously injured. The group was responsible for the suicide of several inmates; many suffered psychological damage. Of course there was no mention of the involvement of Soviet agencies or General Nicolschi. The existence of the ODCC was also kept secret. The indictment, however, recognized the involvement of prison staff. In addition to the prison director Alexandru Dumitrescu, four other members of the staff were charged with supporting unterstützturcanu and his group.

The tribunal made no distinction between the “primary” torturers around Țurcanu and those who only became perpetrators through the program and the torture associated with it. On November 10, 1954, all 22 accused were sentenced to death. The execution of Țurcanu and 15 other convicts took place on December 17, 1954. The death sentence was not carried out on six convicts because they were to be charged with other offenses in connection with the experiment. Another man sentenced to death was executed in June 1955. The others and those whose involvement in the events was not discussed at the official hearing for political reasons remained initially detained. In 1955, they benefited from an amnesty that turned all death sentences into life-long forced labor. Most of them were released a few years later.

In 1957 other torturing inmates were tried in a second trial. Among them was Gheorghe Calciu-Dumitreasa, who, before the first trial in 1954, had refused to make the requested statements and was therefore not charged at the time. In the 1957 trial, he is said to have accused the real people primarily responsible from the secret service and the Ministry of the Interior. Of the eight accused, three were sentenced to death, the rest to long years of forced labor (15–22 years). The death sentences were not carried out, but were also turned into forced labor. The defendants did not have to serve their sentences in full; Calciu, for example, was released in 1963.

The prison and secret service officers responsible at the lower level were arrested in 1953, initially not charged in the 1954 trial, only their "criminal lack of attention and concern" mentioned. On April 16, 1957, a military tribunal of the Ministry of the Interior sentenced the following officials to several years of forced labor in connection with the Piteşti experiment:

  • Tudor Sepeanu, Head of the Inspection Office in the General Directorate for Prisons in the Ministry of the Interior, 8 years old
  • Alexandru Dumitrescu, prison director in Piteşti, 7 years
  • Gheorghe Sucigan, Head of the Inspection Bureau at Gherla Prison, 7 years old
  • Constantin Avădanei, information officer at Gherla Prison, 6 years
  • Viorel Bărbos, prison doctor in Gherla, 5 years
  • Mihai Mircea, information officer in Piteşti prison, 5 years
  • Ioan Marina, head of the Piteşti Prison Inspection Office, 5 years old

The entire group was released on November 13, 1957.

The guilt of the higher intelligence officers such as that of the Securitate boss Gheorghe Pintilie or the allegedly chief responsible Alexandru Nicolschi has never been legally examined.

Reception and consequences for those affected

Cross at the memorial: În amintirea deţinuţilor politici anticomunişti ucişi în timpul reeducării prin tortură în perioada 1949-1952 ( In memory of the anti-communist political prisoners who were killed by torture between 1949 and 1952 during reeducation )

Initially, very little was known about the experiment in Romania. Apart from the fact that the state imposed strict secrecy on the events, it also played a role that the type of experiment had made the prison inmates - at least in their own perception - accomplices and therefore hardly reported about their experiences. Nevertheless, the first rumors about the events in the prison of Piteşti were circulating in Romania as early as the 1950s. Dumitru Bacu, himself a former political prisoner, published a book in the USA in 1963 based on his own experiences and the statements of other prisoners, initially in Romanian, later as an English translation. The exiled dissident Virgil Ierunca broadcast excerpts from Bacu's book on Radio Free Europe shortly after its publication . The continued existence of the repressive political system in Romania until 1989 made a scientific analysis practically impossible. Those witnesses who were able to report on the event were predominantly exiled supporters of the legionnaires' movement , who showed a "tendency towards metaphysical exaggeration and absolutization of the cruel event". Only since the Romanian Revolution in 1989 have these representations been supplemented by a more objective analysis. In addition, several contemporary witnesses published further experience reports; Among them was a work by Aristide Ionescu, who was an inmate of the Gherla prison.

The poet Paul Goma called the Piteşti experiment a “special Romanian contribution” to the great horrors of the 20th century, the Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn called “one of the most cruel crimes of our time”.

Numerous prisoners who survived the Piteşti experiment largely unharmed, carried themselves with self-reproach because they had been forced to participate as “perpetrators” in the “re-education program”, although the torture program was so intensive that there was no escape practically everyone affected - unless they died as a result of the abuse or could commit suicide - sooner or later had to give up their resistance.

The Pitesti experiment was also unprecedented within the repressive system of the Eastern bloc states . Some opponents of the communist system in Romania are of the opinion that the Piteşti experiment was later extended to the entire Romanian society in a different form; Fear and denial of one's own personality have become essential elements of everyday life.

To commemorate this event, a memorial was erected in Piteşti and a plaque was attached to the prison in Piteşti.

Memorial plaque on the prison in Piteşti

Memorial plaque on the prison in Piteşti

În perioada 1945-1964 în actuala clădire a fost puşcărie de deţinuţi politici anticomunişti.
Aici sa aplicat pentru prima dată în lume, la 6 decembrie 1949.

"EXPERIMENTUL Pitesti - REEDUCAREA PRIN Tortura" care apoi sa şi la extins old puşcării de deţinuţi politici din România, până a sfârşitul anului 1952.

Prin experiment au trecut mii de tineri din care aproape o sută au murit în torturi, iar ceilalţi au rămas cu grave traume fizice şi psihice.

Between 1945 and 1964 the current building served as a prison for anti-communist political prisoners.
On December 6, 1949, the

“PITEȘTI EXPERIMENT - RE-EDUCATION THROUGH TORTURE” was carried out for the first time in the world and was then extended to other prisons for political prisoners in Romania by the end of 1952.

Thousands of young people went through the experiment, nearly a hundred of whom died under torture, and the others suffered severe physical and mental trauma.

literature

Web links

Commons : Pitești experiment  - collection of images, videos and audio files

Government documents:

  • Final report . (PDF; 5.6 MB) presidency.ro, section: Reeducarea prin tortură ( German  reeducation through torture ); Retrieved September 13, 2011

Press:

Video documentation, film:

  • Experimentul Pitești - The Gulag of Pitești, Romania , in English - Part 1 (9:02 min) • Part 2 (7:44 min) • Part 3 (9:32 min) • Part 4 (6:46 min), Retrieved May 19, 2011.
  • Nicolae Mărgineanu, Alin Mureşan: Demascarea ( German  The Unmasking ), Festivalului Internaţional de Film Transilvania 2011, trailer (1:42 min),

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d Gheorghe Boldur-Lățescu: The communist genocide in Romania. Nova Science Publishers, New York 2005, ISBN 1-59454-251-1 , p. 21.
  2. ^ A b c d Dennis Deletant : Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965-1989. Publisher ME Sharpe, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , p. 29.
  3. ↑ Alexandru Daniel Popescu: Petre Țuțea: between sacrifice and suicide. Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot 2004, ISBN 0-7546-5006-5 , p. 69.
  4. ↑ a b c d e f Dennis Deletant: Communist terror in Romania: Gheorghiu-Dej and the Police State, 1948-1965. C. Hurst & Co., London 1999, ISBN 1-85065-386-0 , pp. 200 f.
  5. ^ A b c Dennis Deletant: Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965-1989. Publisher ME Sharpe, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , p. 30.
  6. ↑ a b Virgil Ierunca: Fenomenul Piteşti. Humanitas Publishing House, Bucharest 1990, p. 23 f.
  7. ↑ a b Dennis Deletant: Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965–1989. Publisher ME Sharpe, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , p. 32.
  8. ↑ Revista de cercetări sociale . Institutul de Marketing și Sondaje, Bucharest 1994. Volume 2, p. 54.
  9. ↑ a b c d e f Dennis Deletant: Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965-1989. Publisher ME Sharpe, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , p. 34.
  10. ^ A b c d Dennis Deletant: Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965-1989. Publisher ME Sharpe, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , p. 36.
  11. ↑ Virgil Ierunca: Fenomenul Pitesti. Humanitas Publishing House, Bucharest 1990, p. 33.
  12. ^ A b c d Dennis Deletant: Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965-1989. Publisher ME Sharpe, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , p. 37.
  13. ↑ Virgil Ierunca: Fenomenul Pitesti. Humanitas Publishing House, Bucharest 1990, p. 34.
  14. ^ A b c d Dennis Deletant: Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965-1989. Publisher ME Sharpe, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , p. 35.
  15. ^ A b Gheorghe Boldur-Lățescu: The communist genocide in Romania. Nova Science Publishers, New York 2005, ISBN 1-59454-251-1 , p. 24.
  16. ↑ Virgil Ierunca: Fenomenul Pitesti. Humanitas Publishing House, Bucharest 1990, p. 40 f.
  17. ↑ a b c Dennis Deletant: Communist terror in Romania: Gheorghiu-Dej and the Police State, 1948-1965. C. Hurst & Co., London 1999, ISBN 1-85065-386-0 , pp. 206 f.
  18. ↑ fenomenulpitesti.org accessed on May 18, 2011.
  19. ↑ a b c d Virgil Ierunca: Fenomenul Piteşti. Humanitas Publishing House, Bucharest 1990, p. 53 f.
  20. ↑ Virgil Ierunca: Fenomenul Pitesti. Humanitas Publishing House, Bucharest 1990, p. 63.
  21. ↑ Virgil Ierunca: Fenomenul Pitesti. Humanitas Publishing House, Bucharest 1990, p. 57.
  22. ^ A b c Dennis Deletant: Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965-1989. Publisher ME Sharpe, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , p. 40.
  23. ↑ Dennis Deletant: Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965–1989. ME Sharpe Verlag, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , pp. 40-43.
  24. ↑ Dennis Deletant: Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965–1989. Publisher ME Sharpe, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , p. 41.
  25. ^ A b c Dennis Deletant: Ceaușescu and the Securitate: coercion and dissent in Romania, 1965-1989. Publisher ME Sharpe, New York 1995, ISBN 1-56324-633-3 , p. 42.
  26. ↑ Dennis Deletant: Romania under communist rule. Center for Romanian Studies in cooperation with the Civic Academy Foundation, 1999, ISBN 973-98392-8-2 , p. 81.
  27. ↑ Dennis Deletant: Communist terror in Romania: Gheorghiu-Dej and the Police State, 1948-1965. C. Hurst & Co., London 1999, ISBN 1-85065-386-0 , p. 210.
  28. ↑ Cicerone Ionițoiu. Genocidul din România , p. 107
  29. ↑ Cicerone Ionițoiu. Genocidul din România , p. 4 f.
  30. ↑ editurachristiana.ro accessed on May 14, 2011.
  31. ↑ Cicerone Ionițoiu: Genocidul din România . P. 87.
  32. ↑ Cicerone Ionițoiu: Genocidul din România . P. 108.
  33. ^ Memorial Sighet , accessed May 14, 2011.
  34. ↑ NZZ Online, July 1, 2011, accessed on July 2, 2011.
  35. ↑ Gheorghe Boldur-Lăţescu: The communist genocide in Romania. Nova Science Publishers, New York 2005, ISBN 1-59454-251-1 , p. 22.
  36. ↑ experimentulpitesti.org accessed on May 18, 2011.
  37. ↑ Virgil Ierunca: Fenomenul Pitesti. Humanitas Publishing House, Bucharest 1990, p. 19.
  38. ↑ Alexandru Daniel Popescu: Petre Țuțea: between sacrifice and suicide. Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot 2004, ISBN 0-7546-5006-5 , p. 65.
  39. ↑ cf. Piteşti: istorie, civilizaţie, cultură (V) (Anatol Petrencu) & Commons photo
  40. ↑ Fenomenul Piteşti . fenomenulpitesti.ro, May 13, 2011; Retrieved May 19, 2011.