I think it's more likely a way to get a portion of your employees to resign without having to deal with the socio-econo-political headache of layoffs or give severance packages.
It doesn't boost productivity, but it may cut payroll.
Hunka was part of a division of Ukrainian volunteers under Nazi command.
This is minimizing it. He was part of the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS. (From Wikipedia:) The SS was the military wing of the Nazi party. The man swore an oath to Hitler.
I understand that a young man that:
-Grew up in a region recovering from the Russian Civil War
-Grew up during the mass murder and starvation of the soviet purge of the kulaks
-Was subjected to nationalistic propaganda (Nazi and other)
might have great animosity towards the Soviets, and be inclined to join any force opposing them. I'm not asserting that Hunka was a bad person and should have known better, but he may have been. I'm not saying Canada was wrong to admit him as a displaced person, but we might have been. To minimize the Nazi ties of the Waffen SS is not responsible.
His division might have:
::: spoiler Trigger Warning Gore
cut open the belly of a pregnant Polish woman and smashed the infant on the wall so that it was the last thing the mother saw before she died.
:::
(This is one of the allegations against the SS division he served in, just a small example of what's alleged at the massacre at Huta Pieniacka)
Wikipedia references a publication that claims the Soviets managed to capture several hundred of the SS division in question, a few weeks after the massacre and concluded they had participated in the massacre. The captured SS soldiers were executed. Maybe none of the guilty survived.
Parliamentary guests should be vetted. I actually think a letter from Hunka decrying propaganda, dictatorship and imperialism and celebrating a democratic and pluralistic Ukraine would have been a great thing to applaud in Parliament.
We should mock anyone saying this procedural failure shows Ukraine has significant Nazi sympathies. Or that Canada is soft on Nazis. This was a bureaucratic oversight that had embarrassing fallout. I'm angry that it happened, but let's have a sense of scale.
I agree that there should be space for kids to learn to love books, but I don't think OP is at all unreasonable for wanting there to be a part of the library that's quiet.
Libraries are not your unpaid office space.
I agree, they are a space OP pays for. They aren't an office space, but they ought to be kept suitable for tasks like reading, research, note taking, poetry writing, and math homework.
Hey I'm not sure this was your intention but the way you passed your response feels like you're criticizing me.
It makes it hard to respond without seeming like I'm on the defensive. But for example, I am grateful to live in a country with more sane gun laws than the USA. I do things normaltm citizens do. I also happen to know normaltm people that own guns. How do I know them? By participating in hobbies (with them). Like yeah I agree not many people need to own guns but a lot do, and if you want to improve the gun situation in the USA there are some legal and political realities you'll have to work within.
A bit about me for context: I'm Canadian, I have an interest in guns. I do not own any guns. I can imagine myself owning a gun, but don't want one right now. I know a bit about guns, but not a lot. eg Rim fire vs center fire, and that there isn't anything specific that makes a rifle an assault rifle. I support gun regulation but think Canada's recent changes go too far (it's now impossible for a normal citizen to legally obtain a handgun in Canada).
My two cents on this bill:
Every responsible gun owner ought to have liability insurance that covers their firearms regardless of whether or not it's required.
Objections to such requirements based on the cost of insurance could be overcome in a few ways. Two that occur to me off the top of my head: a. Individual insurance could be not necessary if the citizen is a member of a well regulated militia (but the state could define what qualifies as a well regulated militia, maybe: shared liability, annual training) b. The state could offer tax payer funded insurance, for gun owners that agree to certain conditions e.g. gun use, storage (and inspections)
I don't see what could possibly go wrong