Wow, that's a pretty lazy and misleading description of the situation.
He was stripped of citizenship and it was instated 3 times by the Canadian court system. Why? "2013 Supreme Court ruling that guilt by association is not sufficient grounds to be considered a war criminal."
What you called "sheltering nazi war criminals" I would call due process. You know, not actually punishing people unless they've been fairly judged as guilty according to the law.
I don't know much about this topic, but: Please do not use that guy as an example in your earlier post if he is not a good example. It made it sound to me as if your goal is to convince, not to lead others to truth. Instead, just point to your strongest point (the memorials, I believe).
Regarding the memorials, I could not find this in the link. Could you point me at it?
The article you link does not mention any memorials in Canada for this person - nor did they ever even live in Canada. He was shot by the Soviet security agents in 1950 in Ukraine while fighting for Ukrainian independence. ...and then his entire family was imprisoned to set an example to others.
There is also no evidence that this person committed any war crime at all. The notes in the link document that his military division committed war crimes.
Guilt by association? Collective punishment? Really?
He joined the nazi forces, infamous Schutzstaffel (SS) during WW2. He participated in killing tens of thousands of Jews (and Russians, but that doesn't count in the western world anymore).
He isn't guilty by association - he was a leader of death squadron and he is directly responsible for extermination of tens of thousands of non combatants.
Wikipedia is not 100% reliable and universal source of truth. Besides, he was a leader of the SS battalion and he got Iron Cross for his war crimes from nazies. Does such a person deserve a monument in Canada?
This is why the US makes you sign forms promising you are and were not a Nazi in Germany during the 30s/40s and were never affiliated with various terrorist groups as as part of the customs paperwork. It's unclear what US laws could apply to all those members, but lying on that form is a clear and serious felony.
When I went through my US naturalization process, I was surprised to note that while they still ask whether you were a Communist or a member of a terrorist organization, they no longer explicitly ask if you were ever a Nazi. Then again, this was under Trump.
I mean, the question was specific to the German WWII Nazi party. The youngest person who could check yes is probably 80 if they were a 6 year old in their first year of school right before Germany surrendered, and 90 if they could make an adult decision.
Seems slightly early for it to go away, but the question did have a finite lifetime.
This bullshit again... He was illegally detained without due process, tortured and confessed to killing an enemy soldier (murder implies civilian circumstances, it was a fight with US soldiers where he was injured and fought back). He recants his confession, and even if it's true, not getting tortured is a human right. (Not getting your country invaded also, but that's a whole different matter). And he was 15 at the time. A kid getting tortured for fighting in a war that was brought to him ( he was taken to Afghanistan by his father, and the US army came to fight them)? What the fuck are you on to consider that appropriate?
We can play on words, that won't bring back his victims.
> Not getting your country invaded also, but that's a whole different matter
He was rather quick to claim Canada was "his" country despite having brutally murdered an allied soldier. Also, he was fighting "his" country pretty hard until it became convenient not to.
> We can play on words, that won't bring back his victims
I really disagree with calling a soldier on a mission, an agressive overseas mission, getting killed in action "a victim". A casualty, yes. If anyone's a victim, it's the innocent civilians getting blown up by both sides in a conflict they didn't ask for, not the combattants on either side.
> He was rather quick to claim Canada was "his" country despite having brutally murdered an allied soldier. Also, he was fighting "his" country pretty hard until it became convenient not to.
He says he did so to be extradited there so that he actually has some human rights and dignity restored, because, remember, he was tortured for actions he did when he was 15. He's still technically a war criminal if he did indeed kill the US soldier (not being a regular soldier in uniform), but the US had no jurisdiction over him, illegally detained and tortured him for an alleged crime he committed while being a minor.
Anyone involved with this on the US side should rot for life in The Hague ( of course that would never happen).
He was stripped of citizenship and it was instated 3 times by the Canadian court system. Why? "2013 Supreme Court ruling that guilt by association is not sufficient grounds to be considered a war criminal."
What you called "sheltering nazi war criminals" I would call due process. You know, not actually punishing people unless they've been fairly judged as guilty according to the law.