They were doing that, super vigorously, up until about a day ago when it became pretty clear that Hasan was lying. Now, all of a sudden, the identity of the messenger is the only thing worth talking about (and also why you keep talking about this, bro, I think you’re taking streamer drama WAY too seriously…)
Which claim? That his dog wears a shock collar? That he used it during a stream? Or that (granting the two previous claims) this stands as evidence that he abuses his dog?
I’m far more interested in why some people are so eager to litigate a political commentator’s relationship with his dog when the bulk of his commentary is pointed at western-backed genocidal apartheid states.
november@piefed.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
Okay. Them being pieces of shit doesn’t make it okay to use a shock collar on your dog.
anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
It also doesn’t make the conclusion of abuse any less spurious.
november@piefed.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
If you want to debunk the actual claim rather than the person it comes from, we’re all ears.
PhilipTheBucket@piefed.social 4 weeks ago
They were doing that, super vigorously, up until about a day ago when it became pretty clear that Hasan was lying. Now, all of a sudden, the identity of the messenger is the only thing worth talking about (and also why you keep talking about this, bro, I think you’re taking streamer drama WAY too seriously…)
anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
Which claim? That his dog wears a shock collar? That he used it during a stream? Or that (granting the two previous claims) this stands as evidence that he abuses his dog?
I’m far more interested in why some people are so eager to litigate a political commentator’s relationship with his dog when the bulk of his commentary is pointed at western-backed genocidal apartheid states.