Canadian Parliament gives Nazi standing ovation - Al Jazeera

@DukeGusGold said in #47:
> your one mistake is that their is evidence he was part of a nationalist group as a teen that believed in the nazi ideals

1: I doubt this evidence exists as I think it would have been mentioned in this enourmous media attention showerd on him in the past year and a half.

2: Even if, people do do silly stuff as teens and change their views when they grow up. I feel like, if you just say that whochever person did something as a teenager so they're for sure still like this 20 years latet, then you're not honest.

Because I don't believe anybody could truly and really believe that "whatever we think as teenagers is what we think forever."

It's the same as the 20 years old photo of somebody blackfacing at a carnival. Internet people are immedately like omg "Justin Trudeau is probably Grand Wizard in the Ku Klux Klan because he blackfaced while getting drunk at high school party."

I don't believe the people who say that REALLY believe it. It's just like they don't like Trudeau for whatever reason, and then somebody finds this picture and then they're like "Hey, I can take this meaningless picture and make it a big deal if I just lie and pretend I think he's secretly a racist."

I don't think it being a Carnival makes blackfacing not racist.

@Raspberry_yoghurt said in #46:
> That's the default. It's how everybody thinks if you're honest.
>
> Nobody genuinely believes outlandish crazy things without a LOT of added evidence that shows with no doubt that here we have something extraordinaty.
>
> So somebody saying "with no evidence to think that some Jew is a Nazi I belive it is so" is just lying. They don't belive he is Nazi, they just make up a lie in order to like make your case stronger.

I am not saying that Zelensky is a Nazi. My point is, that if it is in his interests, Zelensky may support Nazis. And being Jewish is not sufficient counter-evidence for this, since ethnicity/religion does not predetermine morals or especially interests. Also, I am not entirely convinced that he did not know who Yaroslav Hunka was. It is quite clear (especially to someone who was born in the Soviet Union) that if a person was "fighting for the Ukrainian Independence during WWII" then he is going to be a Nazi collaborationist.

@Raspberry_yoghurt said in #46:
> That's the default. It's how everybody thinks if you're honest.
>
> Nobody genuinely believes outlandish crazy things without a LOT of added evidence that shows with no doubt that here we have something extraordinaty.
>
> So somebody saying "with no evidence to think that some Jew is a Nazi I belive it is so" is just lying. They don't belive he is Nazi, they just make up a lie in order to like make your case stronger.
>
> Example 1:
>
> You see a random car in the street. Do you assume that
>
> a) This is probably just a normal car
>
> b) This is probably a car fitted with a secret device so it can fly and turn into a submarine
>
> If you're honest, you assume a every time you see a car.
>
> Example 2:
>
> A friend tells you he's been to a concert with Taylor Swift
>
> a) You assume he bought a ticket and went and listened to the concert
>
> b) You assume that he is friends with Taylor Swift and was invited backstage as well as gave her some singing tips
>
> Example 3:
>
> You hear somebody does running as a sport
>
> a) You assume he's just probably a normal trained person
>
> b) You assume he is a physical prodigy that easily can beat the world record for 100 m running.
Zelenski is not just a random dude. He's the president of Ukraine. So there is plenty of reason to not assumet that he's completely ordinary.

Example A) you see a car parked in the street. Do you assume
1) it is a normal car ?
2) it has armoured windows and secret devices?
Now same question if you see the same parked in front of the White House.

Example B) your friend tells you she's going to a Taylor Swift concert. Do you assume
1) she's just going to attend the concert?
2) She's a guest star and she will perform on stage with Mrs Swift?
Now same question if your friend happens to be Miley Cyrus.

Example C) you see someone running a 100 meters sprint. Do you assume
1) he's just a regular guy doing his exercise?
2) he's going to beat a new record?
Now same question if you saw the guy in question running at the Olympics.

@thence said in #55:
> Zelenski is not just a random dude. He's the president of Ukraine. So there is plenty of reason to not assumet that he's completely ordinary.

Well in that case, let's agree Zelenskiy is actually the world's best banjo player and also his weekend hobby is taming wild jaks.

There's plenty of reason to believe those things as he's not ordinary!

Can we just invent crazy stuff about any famous person and then it has to be taken seriously?

@Alex_1987 said in #21:
> To explain it better. You are russian i.e. the part of russia. And russia commits the crimes in Ukraine. So, you are guilty in these crimes and will be prosecuted no matter if you actually took active participation in the war or not.
>
> That said, all russians are of course responsible for the crimes of their country, but not all of them will face legal consequences.

Talk about whataboutism... lol

You are comparing Russians (an ethnicity/nation) to SS (a paramilitary Nazi group which took part in terror acts.) People have no choice when it comes to ethnicity or where they are born, however joining the SS is certainly a decision that can be made.

@Raspberry_yoghurt said in #57:
> Can we just invent crazy stuff about any famous person and then it has to be taken seriously?
Of course not. I was just explaining why your explanation that @StateYourPoint's point is a fallacy is a fallacy.

The fact that the explanation itself is wrong doesn't necessarily mean the conclusion is also wrong.

@thence said in #59:
> Of course not. I was just explaining why your explanation that @StateYourPoint's point is a fallacy is a fallacy.
>
> The fact that the explanation itself is wrong doesn't necessarily mean the conclusion is also wrong.

If it was not a fallacy, then it would be sound thinking to assume Zelenskiy is the world's best banjo player for no reason, It is not, hence it is a fallacy.

I forgot the name of the fallacy though.

Maybe it could be a non sequitur. No sequitur is the fallacy where the premises and conclusions bear no relationship, like this:

Premise: Zelenskiy was born in Kryvyj Rih.
Conclusion: Zelenskiy was a founding member of Black Eyed Peas.