Sunday, October 10, 2010

US Republican candidate Rich Iott in Nazi uniform row

Rich Iott, the Tea Party Republican running against Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), has responded to the publicizing of the fact that one of his hobbies is dressing up and pretending to be a Nazi in reenactments. - tpm

...pictures of him dressed in a Nazi uniform emerged on the internet.

Senior Republican figures have now sought to distance themselves from Rich Iott, a House candidate from Ohio.

Mr Iott admitted being a member of a group that re-enacted SS battles.

But he said he had been involved in re-enacting from many different eras and did not mean "any disrespect to anyone" in the US military.

Repudiation

Several photographs show Mr Iott posing as an officer in the Waffen SS - the combat wing of Hitler's feared Schutzstaffel.

The pictures first appeared on the website of Wiking, a re-enactment group based in America's mid-west.

Mr Iott, who uses the character name Reinhard Pferdmann, has admitted being a member of Wiking, saying it was a "purely historical interest".

And in a statement on his website, Mr Iott said: "Never, in any of my re-enacting of military history, have I meant any disrespect to anyone who served in our military or anyone who has been affected by the tragedy of war, especially the Jewish community.

"Historical re-enacting is a hobby enjoyed by millions of men - and women - around the world. I have been involved in historical re-enacting from many different eras since I was in college." ...

via BBC News - US Republican candidate Rich Iott in Nazi uniform row.

12 comments:

Cole said...

The real losers are the ones who think this is a bad thing.

What about movie actors? People have had to play Nazis before (like in Downfall, source of those awesome dubbed Hitler videos). I guess they're evil, too, huh?

Of course, the damage is done. Things like his stick in people's heads long after they've been dismissed. Oh, well.

Cheng said...

To suggest Iott was evil or even a nazi sympathiser would be ridiculous, but for a politician, he has shown spectacularly poor judgement and detachment from the voting public.
If he can do it in his private life, can you be sure he'll show more tact in his public persona.

Ann said...

"... for a politician, he has shown spectacularly poor judgement and detachment from the voting public."

Is that understatement? Please name a politician who hasn't shown similar "judgement" [a common spelling error, I done my share also.] and detachment!

Cheng said...

Mahatma Gandhi?

Judgment is only correct in americanese. From the Washington State Uni website:

In Great Britain and many of its former colonies, “judgement” is still the correct spelling; but ever since Noah Webster decreed the first E superfluous, Americans have omitted it. Many of Webster’s crotchets have faded away (each year fewer people use the spelling “theater,” for instance); but even the producers of Terminator 2: Judgment Day chose the traditional American spelling. If you write “judgement” you should also write “colour.”

And favour and honour and humour.... :)

Ann said...

below

Ann said...

Yes, I knew about the differences in spelling, of course. But, I hadn't realized at the time of my haste comment if it pertained to the fore mentioned word. I have no problem with the differences in spelling at all. If the Brits want to adhere to archaic spellings, its ok with me.

And, for a Brit to exalt Mahatma Gandhi to the level of an honest politician is indeed honorable in itself. Churchill, among others I suppose, didn't have too many pleasant things to say about him. Congratulations? But, Cheng, you're right about Gandhi.

Cheng said...

We are humbled by your gracious acceptance of our archaic language.

Actually, I don't think Churchill or Gandhi are particularly good role models. They were both politicians and both human. That's never a good mix.

Ann said...

I thought you might catch my use of that intellectually brilliant Americanism: "ok," which originated, according to one account (and wouldn't you know it), during a political campaign.

I'll agree with you about Churchill (with expletives!); about Gandhi, it seems to me, he was more transparently sincere and not driven by an underlying ideology, such as capitalism, as was Churchill (e.g. his role in Greece after WWII).

Where does one go from: "They were both politicians and both human. That’s never a good mix." .. to, heaven forbid, human-computer hybrids?

Cheng said...

Another story has "OK" coming from West Africa as used by slaves imported from that region. Another shameful political episode.

No! Human-computer hybrids won't work either because of the "human" part. I'm afraid every human above the age of a few years is corrupt (and I include Gandhi, Mother Theresa, Jesus Christ, et al in that). The vast majority manage to partly quash that instinct, or don't have the opportunity to wield it, so that it is kept within acceptable boundaries. Politicians on the other hand and by their very nature, have no such inhibitions and every opportunity to let rip.
I guess they are just a necessary evil and do a job that most of us wouldn't want anyway. At least within the illusion of democracy, we have a chance of changing them every few years.

Ann said...

see below

Cheng said...

I don't think you should be confused by corruption. It's just part of the human psyche, probably left over from an earlier stage of evolution, ensuring we had the biggest portion of pie, so to speak. Whether we like it or not, it afflicts us all.
I wasn't criticising any particular regime. Indeed, as you say, western 1st world governments generally have better track records than others, probably because of the hounding press. But it's there just the same. Look at the storm over MPs expenses in the UK recently.
You are right about capitalism. It absolutely depends on the basic human need for amassing more "stuff". It works most of the time, or at least until we find out the amassers have been lying about the amount amassed, and it all comes crashing down.
If compassion could be distilled from oil or distributed by bullets, you'd be on to winner Ann.

Ann said...

Thanks for the reply. I remember a Jane Goodall film where a group of wild chimps were given a huge amount of bananas. If remember correctly, some of individual chimps loaded up with bananas & tried to carry them off, even if it was more than they themselves could eat. Perhaps this depicts how "basic human need for amassing more 'stuff'" really is.