Stephen Roney's Blog, page 71

As Others See Us

 

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

On Nazis and Forgiveness

 

Ex-House Speaker Anthony Rota

Friend Xerxes has come out in qualified defense of the Canadian Parliament applauding for a former Nazi last week.

To begin with, he makes the valid historical point that Hunka’s actions might not have been that unforgivable, given the history of the Western Ukraine. Barring evidence of his participation in specific war crimes.

But Hunka is not the real issue; and there is a valid distinction between forgiving his actions and giving them a standing ovation.

More generally, Xerxes objects to calling anything “unforgivable.”

I agree that “unforgivable,” if it was used, is the wrong term. Apparently the NDP House Leader, at least, used the word. Nothing is unforgivable in principle. The term should never be used, here or elsewhere. “Intolerable” or “unacceptable” would be proper—requiring apology, atonement and then forgiveness.

What was intolerable, to be precise, was the Canadian parliament giving a standing ovation to someone for fighting for Nazi Germany, during a state visit by the president of Ukraine. This looked to the enemies of Canada and of Ukraine like an endorsement of Nazism and an admission that the Ukrainians have Nazis among them, and they are officially embraced. Fitting perfectly with Putin’s justification for his invasion.

This being so, the people of Canada, the government of Ukraine, the Jews, the Poles, Canadian veterans, and the people of the world, are entitled to a full investigation and a clear explanation of how this happened, and apologies and atonement all round. Nothing really personal against Hunka.

The Speaker of the House has taken full responsibility, claimed it was due to his ignorance, and resigned. But this leaves too many unanswered questions. He announced to the House that Hunka fought against Russia in World War II. Anyone who knows the basics of that conflict would have known that meant he also fought against Canada; how could that not be a concern? How could that not raise further questions? Is it credible that the Speaker, and those in his office, were so ignorant? How was Hunka not also vetted by the security services, in the context of a state visit?

The situation was intolerable; meaning we cannot look the other way. We must investigate. It is likely that more people must lose their jobs, to make it clear that Canada does not support or endorse Nazism. It would actually make most sense if the entire parliament resigned and submitted themselves to the judgement of the people.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Sweet Sounds of Heaven

 

And here's a new prayer from the Rolling Stones, for anyone who still believes they are on the dark side, the side of Satan. Just released.

I think it is also significant that Lady Gaga and Stevie Wonder are on the track.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Angry

 

If you haven't heard it yet, this is classic Stones. Suddenly we're back in the Sixties. We even have a Kennedy running for president.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Come Healing

 

A prayer for Sunday. No comment could be worthy.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

As We Were Saying in 1963, Before We Were So Rudely Interrupted...

 

Rumour is that RFK Jr. is going to announce an independent run, possibly with the Libertarian Party. This seems confirmed by a recent teaser video from his campaign.

He absolutely should. This is the only way around the DNC’s subversion of the democratic process. The American primary system is critical to allow for only two parties. If it is subverted, multiple parties are needed to ensure that all concerns are heard.

Some suggest this will take votes away from Trump, assuming Trump is the Republican nominee. They point to polls that show Kennedy actually more popular with Republicans than Democrats.

I think it will hurt Biden, should Biden be the Democratic nominee.

RFK is popular with Republicans. That does not mean he is their first choice. His situation is like that of Erin O’Toole in Canadian politics: the most acceptable Democrat to the other side, but not so much that they have any reason to vote for him instead of their guy.

With Trump, you are either love him, or hate him. Nobody loves Biden. The Biden vote is the anti-Trump vote. If the anti-Trump vote splits, he is in trouble.

Now picture strong runs by RFK Jr. for the Libertarians, and Cornell West for the Greens. 

In theory, Libertarians should take more votes from the right than the left: the left rejects their views out of hand while the right generally accepts them into their more tolerant tent. So Libertarianism is commonly considered to be on the right. However, proving the pudding, 2016 had a strong Libertarian ticket of Gary Johnson and William Weld, two former Republican governors. Trump won that race. He lost (if he did lose) four years later, when there was not a strong Libertarian ticket.

What seems to happen is that right-leaning Libertarians are happy enough to vote the Republican ticket, feeling their views are thus advanced. The Libertarian ticket is left more attractive to left-leaning Libertarians, who have no other home.

I believe it is also possible, in the current climate, that an RFK Libertarian ticket might catch fire. People are unhappy with the choice of Trump or Biden. They sense the system is broken, but may still see Trump as too reckless.  I can imagine Biden running third.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

The Stolen Thrones

 

The Rolling Stones have a certain reputation. It is worth pointing out that it is all a sham.

I recently watched a documentary series on the Stones, aired by the CBC.

In in, Keith Richards refers to Mick Jagger as a very honourable man. Ron Wood refers to Richards as “a very moral guy,” and portrays him as being not just moral, but moralistic. Charlie Watts has stayed married to the same woman throughout their fame, and has avoided all the groupie action, despite the obvious and overwhelming temptations. Wood speaks of the band being guided by a “higher power”—the AA standard reference to God—and things coming to them “from above.”

It is true that members of the group have had drug problems. This is common among musicians. Apparently it is difficult to get up there on stage night after night as if you are someone special, and then have to prove it with your playing. Almost everyone seems to resort to drugs of some sort to steady their nerves. Many get addicted. Occupational hazard.

It is true that Bill Wyman, the original bassist, had a reputation for womanizing. But again, this is an occupational hazard, and another kind of addiction. Women will throw themselves at you if you perform onstage, or if you are famous. As Trump has famously remarked, and been condemned for pointing out. It would be hard for anyone to resist this temptation. And Richards has publicly scolded Wyman for giving in to it so completely.

"Sympathy for the Devil"? Listen to the lyrics. It is not on his side. Or listen to "Salt of the Earth"--a restatement of the Beatitudes. Or "Prodigal Son"; an uncritical restatement of the parable.

Jagger does not say that the “bad boy” image is wrong; it would be imprudent to do so, would damage the brand. And Jagger is a smart man and a canny businessman, someone who is able to give an interview in fluent French. But he does tell the interviewer that they are the same sort of blokes as the Beatles, and have always hung out with them. When the Beatles were marketed, at least initially, as fun-loving but essentially nice young men, the Stones management intentionally created the “bad boy” image for the Stones for marketing purposes, to distinguish the product.

In other words, it’s hype. People in general are incredibly naïve, and will usually just accept whatever hype they are fed.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Jesus Wept

 

Cohen’s “Come Healing” is a great hymn.

This in particular is a remarkable stanza. It explains original sin:

Behold the gates of mercy
In arbitrary space
And none of us deserving
The cruelty or the grace

But this is even deeper:

O, troubledness concealing
An undivided love
The heart beneath is teaching
To the broken heart above
And let the heavens falter
Let the earth proclaim
Come healing of the altar
Come healing of the name

“The Name” is how an Orthodox Jew refers to God himself. 

God himself is broken-hearted. God needs healing, and it is up to us to help. God is love, and there is no love without pain. God loves us with an unrequited love. We hurt him beyond measure, enough that he was prepared to die.

Jesus hears of the death of Lazarus.

He needs us. He created us because he needs us.

What? God has emotions? God has needs?

Of course he does. As Blake points out, the greatest thing any human can imagine is a perfect human. A being lacking emotion would be less than human, not more than human. Just a cyborg presence. God loves, he can be angry, he can be amused, he can be sad.

He is reaching out to us, like a lover,  vulnerable like a lover always is.

And let the heavens hear it
The penitential hymn
Come healing of the spirit
Come healing of the limb.

The Vaisnava Hindu metaphor of the Rasa-Lila: each soul dances with God.



'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Flowers for Hitler

 

These are strange days in Canada, getting stranger daily. The House of Commons recently gave two standing ovations to an unrepentant Nazi, a former soldier in the Waffen SS, of a unit implicated in some of the worst atrocities of the Holocaust. How did it happen?

I think we can take as given that they did not mean to do it. Once one member stands and begins to applaud, all other members will do likewise, unless they have some clear reason not to. For they are going to be grilled by the media and interest groups over why they did not. 

The Speaker, of the House Anthony Rota, has taken full responsibility, but claiming he did not realize just who he was introducing.

This sounds improbable; incredible. This was in the context of a state visit by Vladimir Zelensky, president of the Ukraine, in a time of war. Were guests not vetted by security services? It would be insane not to do so. Even without security services, the simplest of online searches would have revealed who Yaroslav Hunka was. Just the fact that he fought against Russia in the Second World War, the reason he was honoured by speaker Rota, was incriminating enough.

Moreover, some have pointed out from the video of the moment that Rota falters a bit when he reads that Hunka fought against Russia in the Second World War. His eyebrow goes up. He seems not to have been aware of this, and suspects something. Yet it is too late to pull out; he continues.

He is reading someone else’s words, and is surprised.

Lisa Raitt noes that, if some war veteran is introduced to Parliament, his regiment is cited, and where it fought. Details are omitted in Hunka’s case; whoever wrote Rota’s remarks seems to have known they would be a problem.

Rota has taken the fall; it does not seem possible that he was responsible.

Was it someone in his office setting him up? If acting alone, I don’t see the motive.

At the same time, it does not seem possible that the Trudeau government was trying to slip this by. They had little to gain by doing so—perhaps an extra pander to the Ukrainian-Canadian lobby, on top of the cheque to Zelensky--and too much to lose.

So whodunit?

It seems to me it must have been the security service itself; or the deep state, acting collectively. They must have vetted Hunka, known who he was, and set the government, Rota, and parliament up.

The security services seem to have turned on Trudeau; it was they who leaked the information about Chinese interference in Canada. Those leaks seemed coordinated and systematic, keeping the issue hot for week after week. This may be a continuation of the same campaign.

Why is the Trudeau government not pointing the finger at the real culprits?

Because the security services are already too powerful. As Scott Adams predicted, or observed, they were inevitably going to seize power in any government. The Deep State is and always has been the Liberals’ key constituency. The Liberals cannot turn on them.

At the same time, the Deep State may not need the Liberals. They may own the Tories too. Best, then, to make it clear to the Grits just who is boss. Pull the plug on the little jerk. And their recent leaks and this incident too, seem tailored to discredit parliament and our democracy itself, not just the current government.

It is eerie, as well, that the revelation that there are Nazis living peacefully and with honour in Canada also dovetails well with recent charges from the Indian government, made in response to Trudeau’s attacks over the murder of Najjar Singh. How far does this coordination spread?

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Muslims Condemn Trudeau

 

It's all coming apart.

Now who's the Islamophobe?

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.