Comments by "dixon pinfold" (@dixonpinfold2582) on "CNBC-TV18" channel.

Not one person who was applauding him knew this important detail of his past. It was a ridiculous error by the PMO (prime minister's office), failing to conduct a proper check. The chief of staff should be fired immediately.
5
That's not reasonable. Hundreds of MPs are not going to carry out hundreds of separate vettings for an unimportant, quick and dull ceremony in the House. I'm prepared to assume that nothing this stupid has ever happened before, so trusting the Prime Minister's Office to carry out such a simple thing is not blameworthy. Please come down off your high horse and have a nice day.
3
There is no need to be ashamed. It was a pathetic error. But yes, let's see some PMO firings/PMO resignations.
3
@brianlevine249 Educated people nonetheless had no idea of the details of this unknown old man's life. The Speaker told the House that he was "a WW II veteran" and that he "fought for Ukrainian independence against the Russians" but they were never told these two things were one and the same. For all they knew, his WW II service was in the Red Army, battling the Germans, while his fight for Ukrainian independence was against the Soviet government at another time (or even concurrently). Ukraine had both for enemies, after all. The last thing MPs would have assumed in the context was that he indeed never served in the Red Army. The Speaker, who meant well but isn't perhaps very bright, is the boss of the House of Commons and by right of that respected status he invited the man on his own, not even (according to the Govt. House Leader) informing anyone else in the PMO, nor Global Affairs, nor the Ukrainian delegation. He blindsided all involved with his mother's-little-helper stunt and should have resigned hours later, not days. The delay made it appear to many that he was a fall guy. Spectacularly, effortlessly inept. Thus he was in my view at least 90% personally at fault for the whole fiasco, except that the PMO should have had such airtight control over this important state visit that the Speaker's plans did not escape their scrutiny. It's important for us to always analyze events for ourselves and never carelessly rely on the judgement of journalists (the quality of whom is much degraded in our day from a generation ago) and common internet mobs.
1
They were not informed of his Nazi past. They are now steaming mad at the govt.
1
No, that's deeply unreasonable. It was obviously a (very!) stupid mistake by the Prime Minister's Office. Think for a moment: Would the PMO invite him knowingly, and assume that this important detail of his life would not soon come to light? Obviously no. That's simply too far-fetched. Add to that the fact that none of these people are tolerant of Nazism. Come down to Earth.
1
@wasupfool5692 No, the PM definitely shouldn't resign over this. His chief of staff should. But yes, the PM definitely should resign for everything else he's done for the past eight years!
1
It's totally unreasonable to tar Pierre Poilievre with any blame of any sort. If he was indeed told that, I'm inclined to assume he thought it was some kind of mistake, rather than him believing that it was even possible for the PMO to make the much, much bigger mistake of not properly vetting a guest before honouring him. Or maybe he mistakenly thought that "fighting the Russians" might mean in the Holodomor (1932-33). (It couldn't, since the man would've been several years too young, but people make mistakes. He could've thought the Holodomor was in the late-30s.) In any case, in my view it's overdoing it to flatly assert he should've/must've known. It was such a minor event that if he gave it little thought, it's understandable. The responsibility lies with the people actually handling it.
1
@MrJoeSomebody Haha, good catch. He would've been 7 or 8, so at a theoretical minimum 7 years too young. (Many a 15-year-old has become a soldier.) But then, if I can make that slip, so could Poilievre (and what I'm arguing against here is that he 'must've known!', which is different from a mental/arithmetical slip). Nonetheless, edit made. Thanks.
1
@lyndalebrun1681 This time No. Yeah, it's stunningly incompetent. (Or maybe not so stunning. Trudeau is stunningly incompetent himself, so why should his staff be on the ball? After all, they're not hired without his approval.)
1
Concerning that protestor, he was calling Trudeau a Nazi. He spray-painted "TRUDEAU" in front of the swastika as a condemnation of Trudeau. I saw the photos. (Nonetheless, other protestors didn't think it was a good idea and forced him to leave.) The media and Trudeau knew this and still made partisan hay out of it. Supreme shamelessness.
1
@theorncampbell4432 First of all, it is false that "WW II" was mentioned. What the speaker said was that he "fought for Ukrainian independence against Russia." Big difference. Neither the name of the conflict nor the date was mentioned. Watch the video from the House of Commons. As for whoever wrote the introduction, I would say that it's obvious that he or she didn't know what he or she was saying. (Which is still really bad, but of course nowhere near as bad.) As for "everyone in that room," I would imagine that some were puzzled, others just assumed that there were hostilities between Ukrainians and the Soviet government not long before 1941, others assumed the Speaker of the House misspoke, and the remainder thought it best to trust that the Speaker and the Prime Minister's Office somehow knew what they were doing. Few would risk withholding their applause only to later find out that they themselves had not thought things through adequately, during a very brief 100-second tribute.
1
Finally someone who gets it right. Those trying to shame Canadians here are revealing their agenda. Obviously the prime minister's office was totally incompetent.
1
Obviously not this time. The staff involved must be fired at once.
1