Who should resign in Canada over the Waffen SS standing ovation?

[lfromnj]

Ideally it would be option 5. Realistically at most it will be just 1. I don't think Trudeau is much more guilty than most of Parliament but Freeland creeps me out. She did a lot of research on Ukraine and WW2 in college and her grandpa may have worked with the Nazis. She had to know what was up.

Edit:Rota has resigned.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I vacillate between 1 and NOTA. In the end, the Speaker almost immediately apologized and there's more evidence to suggest lazy staff doing insufficient vetting is to blame for this as opposed to Rota loving people who fight for the SS, but there would be some benefit in aggregate from just one person resigning from a post and politicians getting the warning to be more discrete and mindful of the history. Also, the Speaker talking at length before Parliament about the evils of Generalplan Ost and promising to be more careful about history relating to the Jewish community would speak far more powerfully than any of these poll options excepting 5, but 5 is also utterly needless and overly disruptive when something smaller could do.
It's actually too early to say, because the depth of historical ignorance on this is too deep for us to expect politicians to have it any better than the Average Joe. Both don't know much on this topic, if we're being honest to ourselves.

[Oryxslayer]

Well option 1 came true

[Cashew]

Freeland creeps me out. She did a lot of research on Ukraine and WW2 in college and her grandpa may have worked with the Nazis. She had to know what was up.

Yep, just as guilty as the speaker if not more.

[OSR stands with Israel]

If everyone resigned , it would trigger a general election so voted for that.

In All seriousness, just the speaker and Freeland

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Rota (and I'm glad he has) and Freeland, who has a legitimately disturbing background in this issue area, both personally and professionally. I can't believe she hasn't gotten more scrutiny on this before; at any time before February of last year it would have been an easy layup for Tory or Dipper attacks on the government.

[Benjamin Frank]

The original poster here who clearly knows nothing of the history of the lose lose position effecting people in Poland, Ukraine, the Baltics, Belarussia and Finland between the two evils of Hitler and Stalin and is posting for cheap grandstanding/virtue signalling purposes.

I appreciate there are claims this guy was essentially fighting/killing the Poles as part of the historic emnity between Poles and Ukrainians but there is reason to believe these claims may not be accurate as the documentation, not surprisingly, isn't certain.

However, if we're all anti Nazi now, can America finally take down the bust of Nazi party and SS member Werhner Von Braun that's outside the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center?

I'd say that's at least as bad as a standing ovation to a Nazi.

It would be nice if this bust would roll, and not just heads.



Look at the size of that thing to this f-ing Nazi.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

You don't have to defend literally everything someone from your country does, Frank, even if it's Americans who are criticizing the person.

[Benjamin Frank]

You don't have to defend literally everything someone from your country does, Frank, even if it's Americans who are criticizing the person.

I'm not defending anybody,

1.I'm pointing out the irony of the original poster criticizing people for not knowing history when they themsevles are trying to simplify history into some false binary in a clearly ignorant fashion.

2.I'm pointing out that if you're genuine about being anti Nazi, that Americans have skeletons in their own back yard that could be/should be addressed right now as well.

In regards to Chrystia Freeland, she has been one of the most consistent voices and thinkers in favor of democracy and against authoritarian regimes. I have no idea what the concern with her supposedly is.

I hope as part of this simplification of history that we aren't going to whitewash the mass murder if not genocide that Stalin inflicted on Ukraine prior to World War II so that it made a great deal of sense for Ukrainians (and the others I mentioned previously) to initially side with Hitler over Stalin, especially since none of these people had any reason to know about the atrocities Hitler was committing.

How Joseph Stalin Starved Millions in the Ukrainian Famine
Cruel efforts under Stalin to impose collectivism and tamp down Ukrainian nationalism left an estimated 3.9 million dead.
https://www.history.com/news/ukrainian-famine-stalin

If people here think they would have responded any differently, they are lying to themselves.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Whataboutism and counteraccusations are a form of defense.

I don't think anyone thinks the Canadian government's commitment to democracy in the here and now is dubious. This is an issue of historical memory. Freeland's track record of lying about her Nazi grandpa is absolutely relevant on that level.

[Benjamin Frank]

Whataboutism and counteraccusations are a form of defense.

I don't think anyone thinks the Canadian government's commitment to democracy in the here and now is dubious. This is an issue of historical memory. Freeland's track record of lying about her Nazi grandpa is absolutely relevant on that level.

How is this 'whataboutism' as opposed to a similar precedent in the case of Von Braun? What counteraccusations are you referring to?

The issue of historical memory is what this is about for me, and the historical memory is:
1.Being greatly oversimplified to fit into some stupid binary.
2.Being whitewashed with a bust to the Nazi Von Braun.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Whataboutism and counteraccusations are a form of defense.

I don't think anyone thinks the Canadian government's commitment to democracy in the here and now is dubious. This is an issue of historical memory. Freeland's track record of lying about her Nazi grandpa is absolutely relevant on that level.

How is this 'whataboutism' as opposed to a similar precedent? What counteraccusations are you referring to?

The issue of historical memory is what this is about for me, and the historical memory is:
1.Being greatly oversimplified to fit into some stupid binary.
2.Being whitewashed with a bust to the Nazi Von Braun.

It's whataboutism because nobody in this thread has defended Wernher von Braun.

[Benjamin Frank]

Whataboutism and counteraccusations are a form of defense.

I don't think anyone thinks the Canadian government's commitment to democracy in the here and now is dubious. This is an issue of historical memory. Freeland's track record of lying about her Nazi grandpa is absolutely relevant on that level.

How is this 'whataboutism' as opposed to a similar precedent? What counteraccusations are you referring to?

The issue of historical memory is what this is about for me, and the historical memory is:
1.Being greatly oversimplified to fit into some stupid binary.
2.Being whitewashed with a bust to the Nazi Von Braun.

It's whataboutism because nobody in this thread has defended Wernher von Braun.

But, there is still a bust to him outside of the NASA Space Center, and if you're going to grandstand about this guy being given a standing ovation, maybe you should do something about that bust.

If you don't have a problem with the bust, while not an implicit defence of Von Braun, it certainly shows the 'concern' here is nothing but insincere and/or cynical grandstanding, which is very common in politics.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I thank Frank for providing perspective that can get lost in outrages of the moment. As someone who finds our actions to scoop up Nazi talent completely correct in context, I think that, well, a lot of people are operating on basis of standards they would in practice fight like hell to avoid themselves, if the shoe was on the other foot.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Whataboutism and counteraccusations are a form of defense.

I don't think anyone thinks the Canadian government's commitment to democracy in the here and now is dubious. This is an issue of historical memory. Freeland's track record of lying about her Nazi grandpa is absolutely relevant on that level.

How is this 'whataboutism' as opposed to a similar precedent? What counteraccusations are you referring to?

The issue of historical memory is what this is about for me, and the historical memory is:
1.Being greatly oversimplified to fit into some stupid binary.
2.Being whitewashed with a bust to the Nazi Von Braun.

It's whataboutism because nobody in this thread has defended Wernher von Braun.

But, there is still a bust to him outside of the NASA Space Center, and if you're going to grandstand about this guy being given a standing ovation, maybe you should do something about that bust.

If you don't have a problem with the bust, while not an implicit defence of Von Braun, it certainly shows the 'concern' here is nothing but insincere and/or cynical grandstanding, which is very common in politics.

What in the world has anyone in this thread, except Tim just now, said or done to make you think we don't have a problem with it? You've said quite a bit to make me think you don't have a problem with Yaroslav Hunka or Michael Chomiak.

[Benjamin Frank]

Whataboutism and counteraccusations are a form of defense.

I don't think anyone thinks the Canadian government's commitment to democracy in the here and now is dubious. This is an issue of historical memory. Freeland's track record of lying about her Nazi grandpa is absolutely relevant on that level.

How is this 'whataboutism' as opposed to a similar precedent? What counteraccusations are you referring to?

The issue of historical memory is what this is about for me, and the historical memory is:
1.Being greatly oversimplified to fit into some stupid binary.
2.Being whitewashed with a bust to the Nazi Von Braun.

It's whataboutism because nobody in this thread has defended Wernher von Braun.

But, there is still a bust to him outside of the NASA Space Center, and if you're going to grandstand about this guy being given a standing ovation, maybe you should do something about that bust.

If you don't have a problem with the bust, while not an implicit defence of Von Braun, it certainly shows the 'concern' here is nothing but insincere and/or cynical grandstanding, which is very common in politics.

What in the world has anyone in this thread, except Tim just now, said or done to make you think we don't have a problem with it? You've said quite a bit to make me think you don't have a problem with Yaroslav Hunka or Michael Chomiak.

It isn't clear what Hunka did or did not do, which I have said here. If he killed Poles, he's a horrible person.

Chomiak was a horrible person, I don't believe in guilt by association in regards to Chrystia Freeland. I have to assume that Freeland lied about what her grandfather did knowing that the comments here are the sort of simplistic grandstanding she'd have to face.

I think it's fair to argue that if people have a problem with the bust of Von Braun that there should be at least one thread on this board on it. I'm not aware of a single thread. I think it's fair to believe that either people don't care about it or don't have a problem with it.

What evidence do you have that anybody besides yourself is troubled by this bust? Or was troubled by this bust prior to grandstanding against Nazis because they don't like Trudeau and/or the Liberals?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Whataboutism and counteraccusations are a form of defense.

I don't think anyone thinks the Canadian government's commitment to democracy in the here and now is dubious. This is an issue of historical memory. Freeland's track record of lying about her Nazi grandpa is absolutely relevant on that level.

How is this 'whataboutism' as opposed to a similar precedent? What counteraccusations are you referring to?

The issue of historical memory is what this is about for me, and the historical memory is:
1.Being greatly oversimplified to fit into some stupid binary.
2.Being whitewashed with a bust to the Nazi Von Braun.

It's whataboutism because nobody in this thread has defended Wernher von Braun.

But, there is still a bust to him outside of the NASA Space Center, and if you're going to grandstand about this guy being given a standing ovation, maybe you should do something about that bust.

If you don't have a problem with the bust, while not an implicit defence of Von Braun, it certainly shows the 'concern' here is nothing but insincere and/or cynical grandstanding, which is very common in politics.

What in the world has anyone in this thread, except Tim just now, said or done to make you think we don't have a problem with it? You've said quite a bit to make me think you don't have a problem with Yaroslav Hunka or Michael Chomiak.

It isn't clear what Hunka did or did not do, which I have said here. If he killed Poles, he's a horrible person.

Chomiak was a horrible person, I don't believe in guilt by association in regards to Chrystia Freeland. I have to assume that Freeland lied about what her grandfather did knowing that the comments here are the sort of simplistic grandstanding she'd have to face.

I think it's fair to argue that if people have a problem with the bust of Von Braun that there should be at least one thread on this board on it. I'm not aware of a single thread. I think it's fair to believe that either people don't care about it or don't have a problem with it.

Or possibly we didn't know about it, because it's not widely discussed in the US, which is a historical memory problem in itself and no mistake. Did that occur to you?

[Benjamin Frank]

Whataboutism and counteraccusations are a form of defense.

I don't think anyone thinks the Canadian government's commitment to democracy in the here and now is dubious. This is an issue of historical memory. Freeland's track record of lying about her Nazi grandpa is absolutely relevant on that level.

How is this 'whataboutism' as opposed to a similar precedent? What counteraccusations are you referring to?

The issue of historical memory is what this is about for me, and the historical memory is:
1.Being greatly oversimplified to fit into some stupid binary.
2.Being whitewashed with a bust to the Nazi Von Braun.

It's whataboutism because nobody in this thread has defended Wernher von Braun.

But, there is still a bust to him outside of the NASA Space Center, and if you're going to grandstand about this guy being given a standing ovation, maybe you should do something about that bust.

If you don't have a problem with the bust, while not an implicit defence of Von Braun, it certainly shows the 'concern' here is nothing but insincere and/or cynical grandstanding, which is very common in politics.

What in the world has anyone in this thread, except Tim just now, said or done to make you think we don't have a problem with it? You've said quite a bit to make me think you don't have a problem with Yaroslav Hunka or Michael Chomiak.

It isn't clear what Hunka did or did not do, which I have said here. If he killed Poles, he's a horrible person.

Chomiak was a horrible person, I don't believe in guilt by association in regards to Chrystia Freeland. I have to assume that Freeland lied about what her grandfather did knowing that the comments here are the sort of simplistic grandstanding she'd have to face.

I think it's fair to argue that if people have a problem with the bust of Von Braun that there should be at least one thread on this board on it. I'm not aware of a single thread. I think it's fair to believe that either people don't care about it or don't have a problem with it.

Or possibly we didn't know about it, because it's not widely discussed in the US, which is a historical memory problem in itself and no mistake. Did that occur to you?

Of course. Doesn't that seem a little odd to you if people are as anti Nazi as they are now claiming to be?

Both Operation Paperclip and the whitewashing of the Nazism of Von Braun are certainly known if not well known. If people aren't aware of this bust, it can really only be because they didn't want to know about it.

Is wilfull blindness really any better than an overt act?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Doesn't that seem a little odd to you if people are as anti Nazi as they are now claiming to be?

The most charitable way to read this sentence is as more knee-jerk jingoism about anyone from the US criticizing anyone from Canada for any reason. I'm not going to get into what the less charitable ways are.

In any case, Hunka might well be morally worse now than he was eighty years ago. Being an unrepentant SS veteran just because you yourself didn't do any Holocaust is itself disqualifying. I can't believe I have to spell this out.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

It's pretty ludicrous to behave on the basis that Nazis are still a significant foe to keep in mind in 1950. Especially after the Berlin airlift, especially after the start of the Korean War, especially after everything that had happened over the past five years.
Von Braun is seen appropriately. He committed his sins, but he in good faith worked for this country as recompense. He helped us get into space sooner as well, which is what America actually needed.
A bust to Werner von Braun is not only completely justified but also a notice to how America was able to make good use of things the Nazis did for evil purposes, for good ones. This silly puritanism is a luxury nursed by those for whom they lose nothing by adopting it. It is plainly shortsighted. The idea that we would need to act like nothing had changed since 1940 is plainly nonsensical and I'm thankful that our leadership was more pragmatic than that. It was hard to get into space. Von Braun helped us get there.

[Upper Canada Tory]

Every MP who applauded should resign and take Grade 10 History.

[Benjamin Frank]

Doesn't that seem a little odd to you if people are as anti Nazi as they are now claiming to be?

The most charitable way to read this sentence is as more knee-jerk jingoism about anyone from the US criticizing anyone from Canada for any reason. I'm not going to get into what the less charitable ways are.

In any case, Hunka might well be morally worse now than he was eighty years ago. Being an unrepentant SS veteran just because you yourself didn't do any Holocaust is itself disqualifying. I can't believe I have to spell this out.

1.It was meant as a comment that the reason people here are now grandstanding about Nazis is primarily due to partisan politics and a dislike of the Liberals/Trudeau.

2.The Allies themselves drew a distinction between SS on the Western Front and non German SS on the Eastern Front:

An interesting and ironic part of the Yalta settlement in 1945 was that citizens of pre-war Eastern European countries who served in ethnic SS regiments fighting against the Soviets - the Western Ukrainians of the SS Division "Galizia" such as this fellow, plus their counterparts in two Belarussian SS Divisions, two Latvian SS Divisions and an Estonian SS Division - were exempted by the Western Allies of being members of a criminal organization the way other Waffen-SS soldiers were and were not held accountable for crimes committed as part of their service. Rather, they were deemed "involuntary" participants in these groups (even if they (were allegedly) volunteers like the man in question) and given the ability to seek asylum in Western countries after the war without the threat of deportation back to the Soviet Union or other Communist-ruled Eastern European countries.

In an even odder twist, several hundred former Latvian and Estonian Waffen-SS men were employed as guards at Nuremberg during the 1945-47 war crimes trials there, under US supervision wearing special black-and-blue uniforms. These men often accompanied convicted Nazi war criminals to the gallows or transfer to prison for long sentences.

It'd disappointing that I have to point this out but we certainly seem to be at the point where many people can only think with simple binaries.

[2952-0-0]

Given my personal experience with Parliament, this is what I think most likely happened.

The Speaker's constituency includes the city of North Bay. The SS fighter also lives in North Bay. Some local Ukrainian group had, at some community event earlier, introduced him to the Speaker's constituency office as a "hero", without elaborating on what he had actually accomplished. Then when Zelensky's visit was arranged at short notice, the man was added to the guest list, and then both the PMO and the Speaker's office assumed the other would perform the necessary background check.

I myself have been regularly emailing my MP, who is the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and I even gave my opinions on some issues that are not related to his portfolio. I could, hypothetically, be a spy for a foreign country, and thus through my emails, manipulate Canada's foreign policy.

If that was the case, then Rota is primarily responsible for this f-ck up. He was Speaker of the House, and invited the man to Parliament in his capacity as Speaker, so should have used his powers as Speaker to conduct the vetting. His biggest mistake was being naive toward what the local Ukrainian group, which certainly understood the truth, said about the man. Secondarily responsible would be the PMO, who, knowing that Zelensky is a target for assassination and arranging for tight security for him, should have asked the Speaker to vet any special guests for security reasons.

MPs should be open to all constituents since that's their job, but there should be a dedicated vetting process under the authority of the Parliamentary security service for matters like this. It was an SS fighter who is now physically harmless, but it could well have been an infiltrator tasked with assassinating Zelensky.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Doesn't that seem a little odd to you if people are as anti Nazi as they are now claiming to be?

The most charitable way to read this sentence is as more knee-jerk jingoism about anyone from the US criticizing anyone from Canada for any reason. I'm not going to get into what the less charitable ways are.

In any case, Hunka might well be morally worse now than he was eighty years ago. Being an unrepentant SS veteran just because you yourself didn't do any Holocaust is itself disqualifying. I can't believe I have to spell this out.

1.It was meant as a comment that the reason people here are now grandstanding about Nazis is primarily due to partisan politics and a dislike of the Liberals/Trudeau.

2.The allies themselves drew a distinction between SS on the Western Front and non German SS on the Eastern Front:

An interesting and ironic part of the Yalta settlement in 1945 was that citizens of pre-war Eastern European countries who served in ethnic SS regiments fighting against the Soviets - the Western Ukrainians of the SS Division "Galizia" such as this fellow, plus their counterparts in two Belarussian SS Divisions, two Latvian SS Divisions and an Estonian SS Division - were exempted by the Western Allies of being members of a criminal organization the way other Waffen-SS soldiers were and were not held accountable for crimes committed as part of their service. Rather, they were deemed "involuntary" participants in these groups (even if they (were allegedly) volunteers like the man in question) and given the ability to seek asylum in Western countries after the war without the threat of deportation back to the Soviet Union or other Communist-ruled Eastern European countries.

In an even odder twist, several hundred former Latvian and Estonian Waffen-SS men were employed as guards at Nuremberg during the 1945-47 war crimes trials there, under US supervision wearing special black-and-blue uniforms. These men often accompanied convicted Nazi war criminals to the gallows or transfer to prison for long sentences.

It'd disappointing that I have to point this out but we certainly seem to be at the point where many people can only think with simple binaries.

Read my post again. I'm concerned about the Hunka of 2023, not the Hunka of 1945 who might or might not have individually done much wrong.

[Benjamin Frank]

Doesn't that seem a little odd to you if people are as anti Nazi as they are now claiming to be?

The most charitable way to read this sentence is as more knee-jerk jingoism about anyone from the US criticizing anyone from Canada for any reason. I'm not going to get into what the less charitable ways are.

In any case, Hunka might well be morally worse now than he was eighty years ago. Being an unrepentant SS veteran just because you yourself didn't do any Holocaust is itself disqualifying. I can't believe I have to spell this out.

1.It was meant as a comment that the reason people here are now grandstanding about Nazis is primarily due to partisan politics and a dislike of the Liberals/Trudeau.

2.The allies themselves drew a distinction between SS on the Western Front and non German SS on the Eastern Front:

An interesting and ironic part of the Yalta settlement in 1945 was that citizens of pre-war Eastern European countries who served in ethnic SS regiments fighting against the Soviets - the Western Ukrainians of the SS Division "Galizia" such as this fellow, plus their counterparts in two Belarussian SS Divisions, two Latvian SS Divisions and an Estonian SS Division - were exempted by the Western Allies of being members of a criminal organization the way other Waffen-SS soldiers were and were not held accountable for crimes committed as part of their service. Rather, they were deemed "involuntary" participants in these groups (even if they (were allegedly) volunteers like the man in question) and given the ability to seek asylum in Western countries after the war without the threat of deportation back to the Soviet Union or other Communist-ruled Eastern European countries.

In an even odder twist, several hundred former Latvian and Estonian Waffen-SS men were employed as guards at Nuremberg during the 1945-47 war crimes trials there, under US supervision wearing special black-and-blue uniforms. These men often accompanied convicted Nazi war criminals to the gallows or transfer to prison for long sentences.

It'd disappointing that I have to point this out but we certainly seem to be at the point where many people can only think with simple binaries.

Read my post again. I'm concerned about the Hunka of 2023, not the Hunka of 1945 who might or might not have individually done much wrong.

I don't understand. If you're now saying he may not have done much wrong, why should he be repentant?

Again, it isn't clear what he did, and he may have engaged in the murder of Poles, but if not, why should he think that he did anything wrong with choosing to fight against Stalin rather than against Hitler?

If that is the case, I think the appropriate response from everybody right here right now is 'there but for the grace of God go I."

Edit to add: I'm not aware of any claim that Hunka participated in the Holocaust. The claim as I understand it is that he murdered Poles in the SS unit as part of the historical emnity between Poles and Ukrainians.  During World War II there were mass killings in what had been eastern Poland of Ukrainians by Poles and of Poles by Ukrainians.

It's also my understanding that Hunka may have been fighting Soviets in support of Ukraine, which was not uncommon there even in the later years of the war.

Obviously that would also mean he was fighting on the side of the Nazis, even if he had no interest in that, but given that Stalin/the Soviets had killed upwards of 5 million Ukrainians only a decade prior, I think it might help to understand that history (or even just be aware of it, which I think clearly most here are not) before condemning this person as some evil Nazi.