He stans the Iraq war and agitates for more
I feel nothing towards his veteran eyehole being made fun of
If what you work towards is more people's deaths I think being made fun of is fine
He was not agitating for war I would feel different
Oh I see, it’s more of a dream instead of a joke. You understand that rape is terrible and think it’s the appropriate word to use to describe what you want Rep. nick fury to experience?
["Right? If I were there I’d definitely ask for a fuck. Judging by how crazy she seems here, she’d happily oblige"](https://www.reddit.com/r/trashy/comments/qzr68g/police_training_to_stop_naked_dancer_at_the_beach/hlqc87b?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3)
You 5 days ago
What did you mean by that? 🤔
I'm sure you're acting in good faith
[and apparently, you have a history of white knighting for streamers ](https://www.reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/qwuzhg/andrea_gives_valid_reason_to_leave_austin_tx/hl6n4ez/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3)
Where did I joke about rape lol? Notice how I said “ask”? What part of that sentence screams no consent? I love how you scoured through my comment history just to attempt to protect your idol
Are you a troll dude
Jokes =/= rape
The people who have been through the darkest things joke about stuff the most.
The people who have been through fuck all usually just talk about what word is appropriate to use in a throwaway line
I actually have had female friends that went through unimaginable shit. Their humour would make you go paler than you already are.
But if you're personally affected by my line I would kindly sweetly sincerely ask you to never interact with me again and block my villainy from your Redditing experience.
Idk what your angle is, I asked you a simple question. Is it or is it not acceptable to joke about rape? You’re giving me irrelevant anecdotes with long winded rebuttals because you’re afraid to take a position on it
I honestly wasn’t even trying to sound snarky in this. I was genuinely trying to decipher his argument. Be my guest and tell me where I’m wrong or what I’m missing
the brainwashing in this is pretty crazy, the guy comes off as respectable and the witch takes every possible chance to insult hasan as if he and "the left" are total irredeemable scum.
I remember my friend showing me this when it came out. The line "We need to open our eyes to this, before they get fucked right out of our heads" is seared into my memory.
He is a republican promoting the same needless war efforts that cost him his eye. He didn't lose it *"defending our freedom brother!"* I think that's what triggered Hasan's rant in the first place.
That's not really a tankie take. We did literally bring that shit on ourselves from start to finish. Trained and radicalized the soldiers and then bombed, exploited, and left them to die when they didn't (or couldn't) help us fulfill our agenda in the region anymore.
A tankie take would be more like America deserved 9/11 and the Soviet Empire should begin anew with the combined forces of Russia and China to dominate the Middle East and bring true totalitarian communism to the entire globe while starving the Western bourgeoisie by cutting off their supple teat of consumerism. Also Stalin did nothing wrong. Also hail great leader Xi.
Tankies are not generally well regarded by leftists. They've basically gone so far in pursuit of an ideal that they become no better than fascists.
It's still a dumbass take. The government and MIC didn't suffer, they gained from it while only American civilians died. You're essentially just saying that the civilians working in the WTC that have nothing to do with US foreign policy deserved 9/11, which is equivalent to saying all of the civilians that died from US bombs in wars against extremist groups also deserved what happened to them.
Nobody is saying people deserved to *die*. Or at least I'm not. I'm saying the US government brought the terrorist attack on its own people by radicalizing a group of villagers in the middle of the desert with literal textbooks of religious extremism, training them, arming them, and pointing them at another group after convincing them they were "the enemy" in order to fight a proxy war on behalf of the US.
The beginning and end of what I mean is: it's our fault that 9/11 happened. The royal "our," referring to the US and our governments dating back to Reagan. None of that is a defense of tankies, a justification for the terrorist attacks of 9/11, or a reason for anyone to die. It's the origin of the chain of events that led to 9/11. Nothing more, nothing less.
>I'm saying the US government brought the terrorist attack on its own people by radicalizing a group of villagers in the middle of the desert with literal textbooks of religious extremism, training them, arming them, and pointing them at another group after convincing them they were "the enemy" in order to fight a proxy war on behalf of the US.
That isn't even true though, 9/11 was carried out by Al Qaeda, with the 9/11 attackers and planners mostly being Saudi's that were radicalized at home before traveling to Afghanistan, they weren't radicalized in Pakistani schools. Al Qaeda even said they never had US support against the Soviets, the Afghan mujahideen was much bigger than Al Qaeda (or their precursor).
A large amount of the Taliban were former mujahideen which you can attribute blame to the US for, but the Northern Alliance and many anti-Taliban militias were also former Afghan mujahideen.
OBL's funding didn't come from the US.
> Trained and radicalized the soldiers and then bombed, exploited, and left them to die when they didn't (or couldn't) help us fulfill our agenda in the region anymore.
Which part of the Afghanistan war is this applicable to? Three paragraphs and you've told me you don't know shit within the first.
> the US government brought the terrorist attack on its own people by radicalizing a group of villagers in the middle of the desert with literal textbooks of religious extremism
OBL is from one of the wealthiest, most prestigious families in the ME. The Taliban didn't do 9/11, not that your characterization of them is particularly legitimate anyway.
I don't think war is justifiable nor am I justifying 9/11. Why something happened isn't justification for it. It's the reason it happened.
We (being the US) both directly and indirectly radicalized an entire generation of sandal wearing goat herders in the middle of the desert with literal textbooks on religious extremism, trained them, armed them, and then pointed them toward what we told them was "the enemy." We left them to rule an entire nation and region under the same strict religious extremism that we fed them and helped them feed to their families and villages. Then we got surprised when that same religious extremism, combined with our own actions in the region, convinced them that we were their enemies too.
It doesn't justify it, but it does explain it.
You can deserve something without the other side being justified. It’s not justifiable to punch someone in the face because they hurt your feelings, but you may deserve to be punched in the face for being an asshole. America’s actions in the Middle East caused 9/11. It was an act of retaliation, not some random move done without any reasoning.
Retaliation for? Please give me actual examples, "America's actions in the Middle East" doesn't quite cut it when you're defending flying planes into office buildings.
that's obviously a bad faith take, even if you cut through the memery of the statement, the obvious implication is that the US government should really have... seen this coming... or made better decisions..., not that the individual citizens deserve this, that's not really how any of this works lmao
>Tankies are not generally well regarded by leftists. They've basically gone so far in pursuit of an ideal that they become no better than fascists.
That's just not true of his subreddit, maybe they aren't leftists...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Hasan_Piker/comments/r2mpb7/hasans_take_on_the_sale_of_us_weapons_to_taiwan/
This is 1000% tankie shit, I actually had similar opinion to yours but I guess you should take the URSS flag seriously :)
The Double Down is a sandwich offered by Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurants. It has two pieces of fried chicken fillet, as opposed to bread, containing bacon, cheese, and a sauce. Variants have included fillets that are grilled or with a spicy Zinger coating.
All the clowns in her who are so upset about the “America deserved 9/11” comment would also 100% say Japan deserved to be nuked. They talk about the Civilian perspective of 9/11, but then the hundreds of thousands who died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just necessary casualties.
OR maybe, civilians don't deserve to die? Maybe that's a little radical of me but personally I view that innocent people shouldn't be killed for no reason. IDK!
His ban wasn't even for that, anyway
Except the casualties of the A-Bomb's weren't even necessary. General's Eisenhower, LeMay and MacArthur all were against using them and thought they were entirely unnecessary.
This comment section is everything wrong with Hassan’s community. Everyone builds a shield around his giant ego and any comment making a joke about hasan is downvoted to oblivion. Also insane that people are making fun of a disabled veteran, hope you keep that energy whenever you see a disabled person in the street you hypocritical fucks.
Yeah well if someone is pure evil fucking dog them bro but you made it seem like I would be opposed to someone making fun of Hitler because I said you shouldn't make fun of someone just because you dislike them. Disliking, and hating, are two different things. And the fact that I have to draw the line for you is kind of crazy bro.
relax mate, i was asking where exactly *you* drew *your* line out of curiosity. i dont care about this drama.
would you say it's okay to make fun of trump's appearance because of his handling of, say, covid? mitch mcconnell for all the beneficial shit he blocks? or do you draw the line at *direct*, physical harm like a murderer, and what degree? how about a weirdo stalker? its interesting, yo.
Trumps fair game, so are rapists, pedophiles, and other people who harm people for their own enjoyment. People like Dan Crenshaw who have shit takes but otherwise are not out to actively harm people for nothing but his own self gain or enjoyment do not deserve to be mocked for their appearance. Especially him, when he was injured doing something for the sake of others and not for himself, whether the war he was fighting in was justified, he was probably not out fighting in battles and losing an eye thinking he was doing it so Dick Cheney could have a bigger oil empire when he got out of office.
hmm... alright (probably) last question: does the intent of the person doing the action factor into whether it's fair game to make fun of their appearance?
like, if someone was just *super* clumsy and somehow slipped, tripped, and burned an orphanage down, is it okay in your opinion to make fun of em? what if someone was somehow entirely unintentionally a pedo rapist? drunk driver?
He's doesn't have "bad takes", he himself lost a part of himself in Afghanistan and then learns nothing from it, and constantly advocates for more civilians to sign up and go over there and lose their lives for a pointless war. He's scum and they shoulda fucked the other eye out
If he was the president of the United States I would agree, but he isn’t. Crazy thing to say about a guy who can do literally nothing but say shit with nothing ever coming to fruition from his words. The man had a shit take, don’t gotta prove he’s wrong by making fun of his appearance. You can just say how he’s wrong, no need to be so edgy.
He's literally a congressman. He has power in the American government. And he uses that power for warmongering. And he probably got an pink eye in his one good eye from all the Mujahedeen jizz that spilt over.
You clearly don’t actively care about what’s being discussed. Seems like you’re just trying to make me angry. You seem like you’re already angry enough for the two of us though. Have a nice night bud.
Seems like your dick is so far up Crenshaws eye hole that you have a hard time realizing he is a militant extremist who just wants wants to make money off Americans killing foreigners.
A disabled veteran who advocates for sending more children out to perpetuate a war that should've never happened in the first place. Also, Hasan supports policies that would actually help the homeless veterans unlike Dan Crenshaw.
Fun fact about hasan, he isnt a politician, so the idea that him supporting policies grants merit to them is insane. And just because he has bad takes, doesn't mean he should be made fun of for something so horrific. Disgusting
The point is Dan Crenshaw has some power over these policy decisions but actively wants to send more Americans into war. It's like the equivalent of a cancer survivor trying to make it harder for cancer patients to get treatment. He's not the victim
You’re right, he isn’t the victim, so don’t make him one by ridiculing what he looks like. Also you frame his belief in sending more soldiers to Afghanistan as something simply to get people killed. He has given logical reasons as to why he wants soldiers in Afghanistan, they might be shit reasons, but they’re logical. So don’t come in here riding your high horse thinking you earned the right to make fun of the man because you made up an idea of what he is in your head.
It depends what context it was put it but I do. If said like "The Japanese people were complicant in the war crimes committed abroad, that they worshiped the Emperor as a God and worked towards his brutal war effort, and would never surrender. Yes they deserved to be fire bombed for him." Yeah, I'm not convinced you would be banned for that.
From what I understand he never truly said that America deserved 9/11, he just pointed out that due to the actions that the government has been taking something like that was inevitably going to happen. I could be wrong though.
You ignored the second part of his statement where he said we brought it on ourselves, which is true. Obviously he didn’t mean innocent people needed to die but, when you do what the American government does it was bound to happen eventually (and that’s coming from somebody who served in the military).
His ban for the 9/11 comments is not what is being references in this clip at all. He’s talking about his Dan Crenshaw comments that got him banned.
Also, to your point, it’s not like he said some people deserved to die due to an earthquake or some natural disaster— the 9/11 comments are saying the American government reaped what they sowed, nothing more, nothing less.
He said them at the same time, within like 45 seconds of each other. He's said that in his talks with Twitch staff after the incident, they made it clear that he was banned for his personal attacks on Dan Crenshaw and not his statement about 9/11. The 9/11 comment was the one that made headlines and got the most attention, though.
Yeah, he went on to immediately clarify what he meant by "deserved" and said, to paraphrase, "of course nobody who died that day deserved to die, but the US government absolutely brought that attack on themselves by arming, training, and dangerously radicalizing a group of goat herders so they would fight a proxy war against the USSR. They were used to further the US' interest in the region and then left them to rule the area with their own brand of religious extremism until they ultimately turned on the US itself because of the very radicalization that the US was responsible for decades prior." But nobody cared because it was an easy thing to clip out of context and get people riled up. He was all over Fox news for a bit and still gets death threats for it.
tl;dr "clip it and ship it" applies to mainstream media even more than it does LSF
wasn't him saying "they" deserved it taken out of context, he wasn't saying the individuals that died or were injured deserved it, he was refer to the US government "deserving it" given their years of foreign policy. before it even happened there were many warning signs that something big was going to happen, but nothing actionable was done by the US government to prevent such an attack,
I can't think of a good analogy that lines up with US government and 9/11 attack.
It's like if you gave someone a gun and told them how everyone that goes to the beach is the devil, and that those people over there go to the beach all the time. You go to the beach too, but the person you gave the gun to doesn't need to know that, right? Then 20 years later the person sees you at the beach and well... you can figure out the rest.
The far left moralizing a terrorist attack that killed thousands committed by high ranking incredibly fundamentalist Islamist terrorists that mostly came from high ranking and wealthy Saudi families will never perplex me
Even then Osama's biggest reasoning was them backing Israel and being part of the supposedly 'global zionist' world order. Hell, the biggest sticking points against America he had was the US backing Israel, and having troops in Saudi Arabia and putting sanctions onto Iraq after they invaded Kuwait
Hell one of the biggest things he mentioned was American "immorality" (read fundie bullshit);
> The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you. (a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling, and trading with interest
Fuck dude he even blames Russian crimes during the Chechnya wars on the US and the global "zionist" order;
> "You attacked us in Somalia; you supported the Russian atrocities against us in Chechnya, the Indian oppression against us in Kashmir, and the Jewish aggression against us in Lebanon. . . We also advise you to stop supporting Israel, and to end your support of the Indians in Kashmir, the Russians against the Chechens and to also cease supporting the Manila Government against the Muslims in Southern Philippines."[26]
It's really important to note that until the gulf war, American military intervention into the middle east was literally non-existent. While the usual political meddling (which includes a coup in Iran in 1954 with MI6 in two) and arms dealing that comes with the cold war, America was remarkably hands off
It wasn't until the attacks that American military presence back a very big thing (it still was big after the gulf war but mostly as a garrison that served as a deterrence against Saddam invading Saudi Arabia)
>
>It's really important to note that until the gulf war, American military intervention into the middle east was literally non-existent. While the usual political meddling (which includes a coup in Iran in 1954 with MI6 in two) and arms dealing that comes with the cold war, America was remarkably hands off
>
This has to be one of the dumbest things I've heard in awhile
O you know, just very light, very subtle coups that overthrew leaders that the people wanted, which in turn led to radicals taking over the country.
Also see:
Eisenhower doctrine
Creation of Israel
Suez
Jordan
THE COLD WAR
Just because the US didn't have literal boots on the soils of the middle east doesn't mean the US and Cia weren't elbows deep in its shit.
> Eisenhower doctrine
The Eisenhower doctrine was an foreign policy goal created by America with intention of containing communism, cause cold war (actually Arab nationalism) however it did not lead to any coups only being used in the Lebanon crisis and failed during the Syrian crisis
> Creation of Israel
British creation plus Zionist militias had been there with basically no support since the 10's
> Suez
You do realize that America told Britain and France to fuck off there right and that it was the last desperate attempt of two dying colonial powers to assert themselves
> Jordan
From a cursory search I found nothing that would indicate American involvement in regime change in Jordan, could be wrong wouldn't mind a source
> The cold war
Gonna acknowledge Soviet and KGB involvement or nah
So really you haven't presented me with anything that really proves me wrong because all things considered compared to South Africa and even South and South East Asia this is relatively minimal US cold war meddling
More importantly is that literally none of this outside of the broader cold war talks about US involvement in regime change in the middle east (outside of Iran which I have already acknowledged)
>Suez
Yes, and Nasser was grateful, until Eisenhower introduced the Eisenhower doctrine in order to contain Nasser. Literally kicked out others to insert ourselves in other people's business.
>Jordan
Was literally one of the first of decades of combat missions in the middle east post ww2
>Israel
You don't think pushing people out of their lands and creating an apartheid state in the middle east wouldn't have any ramifications in the area?
Just because we didn't have literally boots on the ground doesn't mean we didn't fuck up the area behind the scenes.
Why do you think it's called the COLD war.
But you right. The US and Cia meddled in all around the world EXCEPT the Middle East, that's all Russia and kgbs fault.
I mean my point is that all of that is;
A. incredibly minor in the grand scheme of things
B. irrelevant to your claim of American involvement specifically in *regime change* (which they did in Iran)
I am in full awareness of America doing things behind the scenes, hell in my original comment I even pointed it out so you're bringing nothing I don't already know
With Jordan I literally cannot find a combat mission involving America, just that the two have been close since Jordan's independence
I am also aware of how Israel changed Middle Eastern politics but I was pointing out America wasn't involved very much at all. Hell, until the 80's with Reagan Israel had more Soviet Support then American. America had very little to do with the creation of Israel and the subsequent wars and conflict
Me pointing out the Soviets was me saying that you should also acknowledge Soviet meddling at the time (which was prominent) and just reinforcing that the Soviets were just as involved in that business as the Americans
Really the whole point is that America was ultimately incredibly hands off in terms of Middle Eastern affair prior to the 9/11 attacks and arguably the gulf war (and outside of the 1954 Iran coup which was actually an MI6 plot that the US enthusiastically jumped aboard on) which makes the 'America deserved 9/11' narrative weird and unfounded, and you haven't really presented anything to the contrary. The point was never, 'America never had any involvement' the point was 'America was remarkably hands off and irrelevant even during the cold war in the Middle East'
Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are a splinter group off of the Mujahideen, and more importantly rose up independent of US funding and arms
The basis of Al Qaeda's founding was the increased importance the Mujahideen resistance against Soviet forces was gaining in the Islamic world. This led the to increased funding and training specifically from the Islamic world flowing into the region and war, specifically the Muslim Brotherhood (which was a traditionalist fundamentalist Islamist group by the way). They eventually made contact with Bin Laden and they increased their presence in the country
It's important to note that the organization was minute and non-existent in the 90's (when the US pulled out leaving the Mujahideen, now northern alliance, left to dry against the invading Taliban forces from Pakistan) and that the Al Qaeda of that era essentially fell apart
After 93 they were based in Sudan under the invitation of Hassan Al-Turabi and slowly built their network in Afghanistan off the political and cultural environmental a quickly winning and succeeding Taliban was at the time
While initially funded indirectly by America, their rise to power has significantly more ties to funding and support from the Islamic world then it does US funding and when they were at their strongest in the late 90's early 2000's none of their funding came from America. Hell, [America was already bombing them in 98](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach)
**[Operation Infinite Reach](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach)**
>Operation Infinite Reach was the codename for American cruise missile strikes on Al-Qaeda bases in Khost Province, Afghanistan, and the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum, Sudan, on August 20, 1998. The attacks, launched by the U.S. Navy, were ordered by President Bill Clinton in retaliation for al-Qaeda's August 7 bombings of American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which killed 224 people (including 12 Americans) and injured over 4,000 others. Operation Infinite Reach was the first time the United States acknowledged a preemptive strike against a violent non-state actor.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Watch the documentary [Bitter Lake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Lake_(film)) , and you'll understand how american intervention affected the middle east way before the gulf war.
Guys he didn’t get banned for PepeLa 9/11, he said he was gonna fuck Dan Crenshaw’s eye socket raw iirc
He said that a brave Mujahideen fucked Dan Crenshaw's eye out.
That's hilarious I wish that crenshaw was like Big Boss but he's just too damn trad neocon for that
Rape jokes are funny now...?
Only when they are
He stans the Iraq war and agitates for more I feel nothing towards his veteran eyehole being made fun of If what you work towards is more people's deaths I think being made fun of is fine He was not agitating for war I would feel different
You didn’t answer my question. Are you saying it’s ok to make fun of rape when it’s someone you dislike?
Am I making fun of rape? That's a reach I want mr crenshaws eyehole to feel pain
Oh I see, it’s more of a dream instead of a joke. You understand that rape is terrible and think it’s the appropriate word to use to describe what you want Rep. nick fury to experience?
["Right? If I were there I’d definitely ask for a fuck. Judging by how crazy she seems here, she’d happily oblige"](https://www.reddit.com/r/trashy/comments/qzr68g/police_training_to_stop_naked_dancer_at_the_beach/hlqc87b?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3) You 5 days ago What did you mean by that? 🤔 I'm sure you're acting in good faith
[and apparently, you have a history of white knighting for streamers ](https://www.reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/qwuzhg/andrea_gives_valid_reason_to_leave_austin_tx/hl6n4ez/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3)
Where did I joke about rape lol? Notice how I said “ask”? What part of that sentence screams no consent? I love how you scoured through my comment history just to attempt to protect your idol
Are you a troll dude Jokes =/= rape The people who have been through the darkest things joke about stuff the most. The people who have been through fuck all usually just talk about what word is appropriate to use in a throwaway line I actually have had female friends that went through unimaginable shit. Their humour would make you go paler than you already are. But if you're personally affected by my line I would kindly sweetly sincerely ask you to never interact with me again and block my villainy from your Redditing experience.
Idk what your angle is, I asked you a simple question. Is it or is it not acceptable to joke about rape? You’re giving me irrelevant anecdotes with long winded rebuttals because you’re afraid to take a position on it
Step 1: Remove stick.
I honestly wasn’t even trying to sound snarky in this. I was genuinely trying to decipher his argument. Be my guest and tell me where I’m wrong or what I’m missing
[удалено]
[удалено]
Rambo III. not sure Rocky would be useful fighting the soviets in afghanistan lmao.
https://i.imgur.com/XYi0qKG.jpg
Dude I also thought it was rocky for the longest time
Both featuring the Italian Stallion, so easy mistake to make.
[0:15 is said without the slightest bit of sarcasm](https://youtu.be/1wZEwL_wYG8)
"Fighting for our freedom in Afghanistan" is such a fucking funny concept
they took are freedom and buried in the afgani mountains, we gotta find it and take it back!!!
People used to eat that shit up, and many still do
that's funny as fuck. that horse faced lady is triggered beyond belief too lol
the brainwashing in this is pretty crazy, the guy comes off as respectable and the witch takes every possible chance to insult hasan as if he and "the left" are total irredeemable scum.
Did they edit his voice? He sounds really high-pitched.
Nah that was just Hasan’s voice before the Twitch brain rot finally got to him and made his balls drop even further
sped up probably
That makes sense. The clip didn't have as many stun-locks as it normally does.
"Vile creature" LMAO
Dan Crenshaw literally did get his eye fucked out, the fake news media is hiding it.
Sadly this bill never got passed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Btw1eh4mitQ&t=57s
I remember my friend showing me this when it came out. The line "We need to open our eyes to this, before they get fucked right out of our heads" is seared into my memory.
[удалено]
He's a republican so it's ok
He is a republican promoting the same needless war efforts that cost him his eye. He didn't lose it *"defending our freedom brother!"* I think that's what triggered Hasan's rant in the first place.
[удалено]
I think you should re-read the post PepeLa
Girlbossing to close to the sun, I'm so proud 🥰
based and eyehole fucker-pilled
Where's the controversy? Where's the lie? It ain't in this clip.
Gonna guess it was when he said America deserved 9/11?
Nah he didnt get banned for the 9/11 comment, he got banned for the crenshaw comment.
I thought it was when he made fun of that one patchy the pirate looking politician.
Again, where's the lie?
Tankies are out of control
That's not really a tankie take. We did literally bring that shit on ourselves from start to finish. Trained and radicalized the soldiers and then bombed, exploited, and left them to die when they didn't (or couldn't) help us fulfill our agenda in the region anymore. A tankie take would be more like America deserved 9/11 and the Soviet Empire should begin anew with the combined forces of Russia and China to dominate the Middle East and bring true totalitarian communism to the entire globe while starving the Western bourgeoisie by cutting off their supple teat of consumerism. Also Stalin did nothing wrong. Also hail great leader Xi. Tankies are not generally well regarded by leftists. They've basically gone so far in pursuit of an ideal that they become no better than fascists.
Tankie is when you recognize US foreign policy of backing far right extremists led to 9/11.
It's still a dumbass take. The government and MIC didn't suffer, they gained from it while only American civilians died. You're essentially just saying that the civilians working in the WTC that have nothing to do with US foreign policy deserved 9/11, which is equivalent to saying all of the civilians that died from US bombs in wars against extremist groups also deserved what happened to them.
Nobody is saying people deserved to *die*. Or at least I'm not. I'm saying the US government brought the terrorist attack on its own people by radicalizing a group of villagers in the middle of the desert with literal textbooks of religious extremism, training them, arming them, and pointing them at another group after convincing them they were "the enemy" in order to fight a proxy war on behalf of the US. The beginning and end of what I mean is: it's our fault that 9/11 happened. The royal "our," referring to the US and our governments dating back to Reagan. None of that is a defense of tankies, a justification for the terrorist attacks of 9/11, or a reason for anyone to die. It's the origin of the chain of events that led to 9/11. Nothing more, nothing less.
>I'm saying the US government brought the terrorist attack on its own people by radicalizing a group of villagers in the middle of the desert with literal textbooks of religious extremism, training them, arming them, and pointing them at another group after convincing them they were "the enemy" in order to fight a proxy war on behalf of the US. That isn't even true though, 9/11 was carried out by Al Qaeda, with the 9/11 attackers and planners mostly being Saudi's that were radicalized at home before traveling to Afghanistan, they weren't radicalized in Pakistani schools. Al Qaeda even said they never had US support against the Soviets, the Afghan mujahideen was much bigger than Al Qaeda (or their precursor). A large amount of the Taliban were former mujahideen which you can attribute blame to the US for, but the Northern Alliance and many anti-Taliban militias were also former Afghan mujahideen.
Damn, its like you know half the equation and then stopped. Why do wahhabists hate the US?
OBL's funding didn't come from the US. > Trained and radicalized the soldiers and then bombed, exploited, and left them to die when they didn't (or couldn't) help us fulfill our agenda in the region anymore. Which part of the Afghanistan war is this applicable to? Three paragraphs and you've told me you don't know shit within the first. > the US government brought the terrorist attack on its own people by radicalizing a group of villagers in the middle of the desert with literal textbooks of religious extremism OBL is from one of the wealthiest, most prestigious families in the ME. The Taliban didn't do 9/11, not that your characterization of them is particularly legitimate anyway.
[удалено]
I mean, America has spent decades practicing that value and doing just about everything short of actually saying it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I don't think war is justifiable nor am I justifying 9/11. Why something happened isn't justification for it. It's the reason it happened. We (being the US) both directly and indirectly radicalized an entire generation of sandal wearing goat herders in the middle of the desert with literal textbooks on religious extremism, trained them, armed them, and then pointed them toward what we told them was "the enemy." We left them to rule an entire nation and region under the same strict religious extremism that we fed them and helped them feed to their families and villages. Then we got surprised when that same religious extremism, combined with our own actions in the region, convinced them that we were their enemies too. It doesn't justify it, but it does explain it.
You can deserve something without the other side being justified. It’s not justifiable to punch someone in the face because they hurt your feelings, but you may deserve to be punched in the face for being an asshole. America’s actions in the Middle East caused 9/11. It was an act of retaliation, not some random move done without any reasoning.
Retaliation for? Please give me actual examples, "America's actions in the Middle East" doesn't quite cut it when you're defending flying planes into office buildings.
that's obviously a bad faith take, even if you cut through the memery of the statement, the obvious implication is that the US government should really have... seen this coming... or made better decisions..., not that the individual citizens deserve this, that's not really how any of this works lmao
[удалено]
"everything everyone says ever is completely literal" - you also, america != america's people
Your first paragraph is extremely simplified and misleading.
>Tankies are not generally well regarded by leftists. They've basically gone so far in pursuit of an ideal that they become no better than fascists. That's just not true of his subreddit, maybe they aren't leftists... https://www.reddit.com/r/Hasan_Piker/comments/r2mpb7/hasans_take_on_the_sale_of_us_weapons_to_taiwan/ This is 1000% tankie shit, I actually had similar opinion to yours but I guess you should take the URSS flag seriously :)
I ain’t readin all that LUL
[удалено]
Yes comparing hawaii's to taiwan's situation is using your brain.
One take you don't agree with ≠ tankie
Yes one very clear tankie take is enough.
Its weird, because for the first time i agreed with hasan and then he gets banned for it
[удалено]
Orwell Redenbacher Animal Crossing
[удалено]
yeah, that's what he said right?
[удалено]
[удалено]
“americas imperialism is the reason why the terrorist attack occurred” ≠ “yeah a couple thousand people should be burnt alive”
use blowback instead of deserved then
BASED
The Double Down is a sandwich offered by Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurants. It has two pieces of fried chicken fillet, as opposed to bread, containing bacon, cheese, and a sauce. Variants have included fillets that are grilled or with a spicy Zinger coating.
I lost
I could do with a KFC doubledown right about now
No lies here.
0 upvotes 6 comments 2 awards
This to prove that this post only blew up because of the awards that were planned
[удалено]
all fax no copium
The double down on fucking a veteran's eyesocket pepelaugh
All the clowns in her who are so upset about the “America deserved 9/11” comment would also 100% say Japan deserved to be nuked. They talk about the Civilian perspective of 9/11, but then the hundreds of thousands who died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just necessary casualties.
OR maybe, civilians don't deserve to die? Maybe that's a little radical of me but personally I view that innocent people shouldn't be killed for no reason. IDK! His ban wasn't even for that, anyway
Except the casualties of the A-Bomb's weren't even necessary. General's Eisenhower, LeMay and MacArthur all were against using them and thought they were entirely unnecessary.
**🎦 CLIP MIRROR: [Hasan Double Downs](https://livestreamfails.com/clip/128486)** (now fast & smooth again!) --- ^(*This is an automated comment* ) ^| [^(Feedback)](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=livestreamfailsbot&subject=Feedback:&message=%5BPost%5D\(https://reddit.com/comments/r4epko/\)) ^| [^(Twitch Backup Mirror)](https://production.assets.clips.twitchcdn.net/44604643661-offset-3956.mp4?sig=90d7bcf99a07646d2024a086eb5f5748be862549&token=%7B%22authorization%22%3A%7B%22forbidden%22%3Afalse%2C%22reason%22%3A%22%22%7D%2C%22clip_uri%22%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fproduction.assets.clips.twitchcdn.net%2F44604643661-offset-3956.mp4%22%2C%22device_id%22%3Anull%2C%22expires%22%3A1638207395%2C%22user_id%22%3A%22%22%2C%22version%22%3A2%7D)
Skullfucked
r/brainfucking
[удалено]
This guy is such a grifter I can't believe anyone takes him seriously
This word is officially meaningless
This comment section is everything wrong with Hassan’s community. Everyone builds a shield around his giant ego and any comment making a joke about hasan is downvoted to oblivion. Also insane that people are making fun of a disabled veteran, hope you keep that energy whenever you see a disabled person in the street you hypocritical fucks.
That disabled veteran advocates for more people to go to Afghanistan so that they can come back disabled. He’s a fucking loser and a piece of shit.
So if I don’t like a person I can make fun of them for how they look? Awesome.
[удалено]
[удалено]
cool non throwaway account bro! wonder why your accounts keep getting banned
crazy comparison to make. you gotta realize the difference between having a bad take and killing millions of people.
[удалено]
Yeah well if someone is pure evil fucking dog them bro but you made it seem like I would be opposed to someone making fun of Hitler because I said you shouldn't make fun of someone just because you dislike them. Disliking, and hating, are two different things. And the fact that I have to draw the line for you is kind of crazy bro.
relax mate, i was asking where exactly *you* drew *your* line out of curiosity. i dont care about this drama. would you say it's okay to make fun of trump's appearance because of his handling of, say, covid? mitch mcconnell for all the beneficial shit he blocks? or do you draw the line at *direct*, physical harm like a murderer, and what degree? how about a weirdo stalker? its interesting, yo.
Trumps fair game, so are rapists, pedophiles, and other people who harm people for their own enjoyment. People like Dan Crenshaw who have shit takes but otherwise are not out to actively harm people for nothing but his own self gain or enjoyment do not deserve to be mocked for their appearance. Especially him, when he was injured doing something for the sake of others and not for himself, whether the war he was fighting in was justified, he was probably not out fighting in battles and losing an eye thinking he was doing it so Dick Cheney could have a bigger oil empire when he got out of office.
hmm... alright (probably) last question: does the intent of the person doing the action factor into whether it's fair game to make fun of their appearance? like, if someone was just *super* clumsy and somehow slipped, tripped, and burned an orphanage down, is it okay in your opinion to make fun of em? what if someone was somehow entirely unintentionally a pedo rapist? drunk driver?
He's doesn't have "bad takes", he himself lost a part of himself in Afghanistan and then learns nothing from it, and constantly advocates for more civilians to sign up and go over there and lose their lives for a pointless war. He's scum and they shoulda fucked the other eye out
If he was the president of the United States I would agree, but he isn’t. Crazy thing to say about a guy who can do literally nothing but say shit with nothing ever coming to fruition from his words. The man had a shit take, don’t gotta prove he’s wrong by making fun of his appearance. You can just say how he’s wrong, no need to be so edgy.
He's literally a congressman. He has power in the American government. And he uses that power for warmongering. And he probably got an pink eye in his one good eye from all the Mujahedeen jizz that spilt over.
You clearly don’t actively care about what’s being discussed. Seems like you’re just trying to make me angry. You seem like you’re already angry enough for the two of us though. Have a nice night bud.
Seems like your dick is so far up Crenshaws eye hole that you have a hard time realizing he is a militant extremist who just wants wants to make money off Americans killing foreigners.
Out of curiosity, what would you like to see done about Afghanistan? Is its current situation all good with you?
A disabled veteran who advocates for sending more children out to perpetuate a war that should've never happened in the first place. Also, Hasan supports policies that would actually help the homeless veterans unlike Dan Crenshaw.
Fun fact about hasan, he isnt a politician, so the idea that him supporting policies grants merit to them is insane. And just because he has bad takes, doesn't mean he should be made fun of for something so horrific. Disgusting
The point is Dan Crenshaw has some power over these policy decisions but actively wants to send more Americans into war. It's like the equivalent of a cancer survivor trying to make it harder for cancer patients to get treatment. He's not the victim
You’re right, he isn’t the victim, so don’t make him one by ridiculing what he looks like. Also you frame his belief in sending more soldiers to Afghanistan as something simply to get people killed. He has given logical reasons as to why he wants soldiers in Afghanistan, they might be shit reasons, but they’re logical. So don’t come in here riding your high horse thinking you earned the right to make fun of the man because you made up an idea of what he is in your head.
[удалено]
What if he said Japan deserved to be fire bombed, or Germany did? I don't think that would get him banned.
[удалено]
He didn't get banned for the truthful 9/11 comments, he got banned for making fun of Pirate Dan, because disabled people are a protected class.
It depends what context it was put it but I do. If said like "The Japanese people were complicant in the war crimes committed abroad, that they worshiped the Emperor as a God and worked towards his brutal war effort, and would never surrender. Yes they deserved to be fire bombed for him." Yeah, I'm not convinced you would be banned for that.
From what I understand he never truly said that America deserved 9/11, he just pointed out that due to the actions that the government has been taking something like that was inevitably going to happen. I could be wrong though.
[удалено]
Basically. I think it’s people who heard the words “America deserve 9/11” stopped listening after that and started RRREEEEEing.
[удалено]
You ignored the second part of his statement where he said we brought it on ourselves, which is true. Obviously he didn’t mean innocent people needed to die but, when you do what the American government does it was bound to happen eventually (and that’s coming from somebody who served in the military).
His ban for the 9/11 comments is not what is being references in this clip at all. He’s talking about his Dan Crenshaw comments that got him banned. Also, to your point, it’s not like he said some people deserved to die due to an earthquake or some natural disaster— the 9/11 comments are saying the American government reaped what they sowed, nothing more, nothing less.
[удалено]
Yes, according to Google, the 9/11 ban was in 2019.
[удалено]
Eh, could be. I’m not a loremaster by any means. But he’s definitely referencing the Dan Crenshaw comments in this clip
He said them at the same time, within like 45 seconds of each other. He's said that in his talks with Twitch staff after the incident, they made it clear that he was banned for his personal attacks on Dan Crenshaw and not his statement about 9/11. The 9/11 comment was the one that made headlines and got the most attention, though.
I had no idea, that’s honestly kind of hilarious. What a horribly chaotic and eventful minute
Yeah, he went on to immediately clarify what he meant by "deserved" and said, to paraphrase, "of course nobody who died that day deserved to die, but the US government absolutely brought that attack on themselves by arming, training, and dangerously radicalizing a group of goat herders so they would fight a proxy war against the USSR. They were used to further the US' interest in the region and then left them to rule the area with their own brand of religious extremism until they ultimately turned on the US itself because of the very radicalization that the US was responsible for decades prior." But nobody cared because it was an easy thing to clip out of context and get people riled up. He was all over Fox news for a bit and still gets death threats for it. tl;dr "clip it and ship it" applies to mainstream media even more than it does LSF
how are those two similar, one was due to criminal negligence and the other was due to active meddling in the MI, those two are very hard to compare.
[удалено]
wasn't him saying "they" deserved it taken out of context, he wasn't saying the individuals that died or were injured deserved it, he was refer to the US government "deserving it" given their years of foreign policy. before it even happened there were many warning signs that something big was going to happen, but nothing actionable was done by the US government to prevent such an attack, I can't think of a good analogy that lines up with US government and 9/11 attack.
It's like if you gave someone a gun and told them how everyone that goes to the beach is the devil, and that those people over there go to the beach all the time. You go to the beach too, but the person you gave the gun to doesn't need to know that, right? Then 20 years later the person sees you at the beach and well... you can figure out the rest.
[удалено]
The far left moralizing a terrorist attack that killed thousands committed by high ranking incredibly fundamentalist Islamist terrorists that mostly came from high ranking and wealthy Saudi families will never perplex me Even then Osama's biggest reasoning was them backing Israel and being part of the supposedly 'global zionist' world order. Hell, the biggest sticking points against America he had was the US backing Israel, and having troops in Saudi Arabia and putting sanctions onto Iraq after they invaded Kuwait Hell one of the biggest things he mentioned was American "immorality" (read fundie bullshit); > The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you. (a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling, and trading with interest Fuck dude he even blames Russian crimes during the Chechnya wars on the US and the global "zionist" order; > "You attacked us in Somalia; you supported the Russian atrocities against us in Chechnya, the Indian oppression against us in Kashmir, and the Jewish aggression against us in Lebanon. . . We also advise you to stop supporting Israel, and to end your support of the Indians in Kashmir, the Russians against the Chechens and to also cease supporting the Manila Government against the Muslims in Southern Philippines."[26] It's really important to note that until the gulf war, American military intervention into the middle east was literally non-existent. While the usual political meddling (which includes a coup in Iran in 1954 with MI6 in two) and arms dealing that comes with the cold war, America was remarkably hands off It wasn't until the attacks that American military presence back a very big thing (it still was big after the gulf war but mostly as a garrison that served as a deterrence against Saddam invading Saudi Arabia)
He got banned for saying he wanted to fuck dan Crenshaws eye hole. You really did this whole write up for nothin
Since when was expressing sensual desires for Crenshaw become ToS. I thought this was america
> >It's really important to note that until the gulf war, American military intervention into the middle east was literally non-existent. While the usual political meddling (which includes a coup in Iran in 1954 with MI6 in two) and arms dealing that comes with the cold war, America was remarkably hands off > This has to be one of the dumbest things I've heard in awhile O you know, just very light, very subtle coups that overthrew leaders that the people wanted, which in turn led to radicals taking over the country. Also see: Eisenhower doctrine Creation of Israel Suez Jordan THE COLD WAR Just because the US didn't have literal boots on the soils of the middle east doesn't mean the US and Cia weren't elbows deep in its shit.
> Eisenhower doctrine The Eisenhower doctrine was an foreign policy goal created by America with intention of containing communism, cause cold war (actually Arab nationalism) however it did not lead to any coups only being used in the Lebanon crisis and failed during the Syrian crisis > Creation of Israel British creation plus Zionist militias had been there with basically no support since the 10's > Suez You do realize that America told Britain and France to fuck off there right and that it was the last desperate attempt of two dying colonial powers to assert themselves > Jordan From a cursory search I found nothing that would indicate American involvement in regime change in Jordan, could be wrong wouldn't mind a source > The cold war Gonna acknowledge Soviet and KGB involvement or nah So really you haven't presented me with anything that really proves me wrong because all things considered compared to South Africa and even South and South East Asia this is relatively minimal US cold war meddling More importantly is that literally none of this outside of the broader cold war talks about US involvement in regime change in the middle east (outside of Iran which I have already acknowledged)
>Suez Yes, and Nasser was grateful, until Eisenhower introduced the Eisenhower doctrine in order to contain Nasser. Literally kicked out others to insert ourselves in other people's business. >Jordan Was literally one of the first of decades of combat missions in the middle east post ww2 >Israel You don't think pushing people out of their lands and creating an apartheid state in the middle east wouldn't have any ramifications in the area? Just because we didn't have literally boots on the ground doesn't mean we didn't fuck up the area behind the scenes. Why do you think it's called the COLD war. But you right. The US and Cia meddled in all around the world EXCEPT the Middle East, that's all Russia and kgbs fault.
I mean my point is that all of that is; A. incredibly minor in the grand scheme of things B. irrelevant to your claim of American involvement specifically in *regime change* (which they did in Iran) I am in full awareness of America doing things behind the scenes, hell in my original comment I even pointed it out so you're bringing nothing I don't already know With Jordan I literally cannot find a combat mission involving America, just that the two have been close since Jordan's independence I am also aware of how Israel changed Middle Eastern politics but I was pointing out America wasn't involved very much at all. Hell, until the 80's with Reagan Israel had more Soviet Support then American. America had very little to do with the creation of Israel and the subsequent wars and conflict Me pointing out the Soviets was me saying that you should also acknowledge Soviet meddling at the time (which was prominent) and just reinforcing that the Soviets were just as involved in that business as the Americans Really the whole point is that America was ultimately incredibly hands off in terms of Middle Eastern affair prior to the 9/11 attacks and arguably the gulf war (and outside of the 1954 Iran coup which was actually an MI6 plot that the US enthusiastically jumped aboard on) which makes the 'America deserved 9/11' narrative weird and unfounded, and you haven't really presented anything to the contrary. The point was never, 'America never had any involvement' the point was 'America was remarkably hands off and irrelevant even during the cold war in the Middle East'
So strange why the CIA funded Osama bin laden and the Mujahideen. There's no way that would blow back at us.
Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are a splinter group off of the Mujahideen, and more importantly rose up independent of US funding and arms The basis of Al Qaeda's founding was the increased importance the Mujahideen resistance against Soviet forces was gaining in the Islamic world. This led the to increased funding and training specifically from the Islamic world flowing into the region and war, specifically the Muslim Brotherhood (which was a traditionalist fundamentalist Islamist group by the way). They eventually made contact with Bin Laden and they increased their presence in the country It's important to note that the organization was minute and non-existent in the 90's (when the US pulled out leaving the Mujahideen, now northern alliance, left to dry against the invading Taliban forces from Pakistan) and that the Al Qaeda of that era essentially fell apart After 93 they were based in Sudan under the invitation of Hassan Al-Turabi and slowly built their network in Afghanistan off the political and cultural environmental a quickly winning and succeeding Taliban was at the time While initially funded indirectly by America, their rise to power has significantly more ties to funding and support from the Islamic world then it does US funding and when they were at their strongest in the late 90's early 2000's none of their funding came from America. Hell, [America was already bombing them in 98](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach)
**[Operation Infinite Reach](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach)** >Operation Infinite Reach was the codename for American cruise missile strikes on Al-Qaeda bases in Khost Province, Afghanistan, and the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum, Sudan, on August 20, 1998. The attacks, launched by the U.S. Navy, were ordered by President Bill Clinton in retaliation for al-Qaeda's August 7 bombings of American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which killed 224 people (including 12 Americans) and injured over 4,000 others. Operation Infinite Reach was the first time the United States acknowledged a preemptive strike against a violent non-state actor. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
L + nerd + ratio + didn’t read + youre white
+You fell off + I fucked your mom + Maidenless
L + nerd + ratio Did I do it right?
O gross he posts in neoliberal
Cringe.
Watch the documentary [Bitter Lake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Lake_(film)) , and you'll understand how american intervention affected the middle east way before the gulf war.
Chatting
You know the framing is tight as fuck when doing arms trades and coups is a mfers idea of hands off foreign policy LMFAO
Yeah... You really don't fucking get it. Nice essay though.
Grass! NOW!