550
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2026
550 points (95.4% liked)
Not The Onion
22472 readers
659 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
The whole thing is predicated upon him training her to sit still for hours on end on stream "like a prop", which she barely ever does. Litterally you just have to watch the VODs , you'd be lucky to find more than 10 minutes of her on-screen on most streams. The whole scenario is pure brainrot and only believable if you don't look critically at the evidence. So this guy used a shock collar to train a large dog to sit still for hours on end but there was only one (1) transgression ever recorded and she never sits still anyway. How do you square that up ?
You're grasping at a few seconds of video (out of the 6+ hours he produces daily year in year out), edited out of context by people with a very specific agenda, and walls of concern-trolling prose that tugs at your emotional strings for some reason. It's trivially easy to make up that kind of story and astro-turf it to death, with hundreds of inactive accounts coincidentally posting their first comment in the same week, which happens to be a copy-pasted list of pre-digested arguments and fact-free appeals to outrage. You're getting QAnon'd in the worst way.
"An abuser!" You guys are absolutely hilarious.
That's fine by me. I don't care that he doesn't know me. I just really hate that one specific dog. I don't even care about his politics, just so long as he's making Kaya suffer.
Hey, by the way, you're vegan, right? Because the amount of animal suffering you're accusing Hasan of causing is absolutely dwarfed by the suffering you're actively funding if you eat meat or animal products. I am, except for that one carve out that I just really hate one specific dog.
It is kind of strange though that you're calling me scum and attacking Hasan over allegedly shocking one dog one time instead of for all the cows and chickens and so on he has killed for him. Come to think of it, what's really strange is that you're more concerned about this one dog than you are about the countless human beings being slaughtered in Gaza. How many lives has he saved by raising money? Pretty sure his entire workout routine could just be beating dogs and he'd still be a net positive.
So let's recap, I'm scum because I don't give a shit about a single dog, so that means that every non-vegan is super mega ultra scum and anyone on the wrong side regarding Palestine is super mega ultra scum times infinity.
I am vegan, first off, so sorry to burst your bubble. But you're clearly not a vegan if you're defending a dog abuser. Being vegan is an ideal that goes beyond not consuming animal products. Imagine being a vegan and sitting here defending that fucking dude.
I do care about Gaza, but this isn't about that and I can care about more than one thing. How do you feel about pedophila in the Catholic church? They also raise a lot of money and help a lot of people in need. I guess in your book that offsets. No one is black and white; but I'm not going to sit here and defend animal abuse.
If you pick and chose when to have morals and care, you don't really have any morals. You're just roleplaying. So fuck off, scum, for defending an animal abuser. The time you've spent here could also have been spent on helping Gaza in some way, but you are actively choosing to defend an animal abuser. If you don't care about him you could have ignored my comments and just moved on to something you do care about. But you made the conscious decision to stop here and waste time defending an animal abuser. All the things you say about me could be thrown back at you; the difference is that I'm calling out animal abuse while you defend it. So, once and for all, fuck you.
That's why I said, "except" yes.
Isn't it? What was Hasan talking about literally at the moment the internet decided to make everything about his dog?
Right back act ya.
And fuck every single non-vegan streamer and fuck every single person who watches them too, right?
There's no "except". You're not vegan.
No, it's not. Answer my catholic priests question. Plenty of them are saying to love thy neighbour, the Pope has also spoken in support of Gaza and Ukraine. So how do you feel about pedophila in the church?
You're the one who brought it up mate, don't try to gotcha me with "back at ya" when that's what I'm doing to you lmao
Reading is a useful skill. As I said, that time is being spent by me to call out an animal abuser; it's being spent by you to defend an animal abuser.
Sure, fuck em, but at least they have the excuse of cognitive dissonance and being raised to see farm animals as meat. Most people don't even think of the animal as they eat the meat, and at least something is gained by eating. None of that can be used as an excuse for Hasan to abuse his dog.
But you're not even denying the abuse anymore, just trying to deflect onto other things to protect your beloved abuser. So fuck off. I'm blocking you; feel free to use your time to do all the things you think I should be doing with mine instead.
No, I don't approve of Catholic priests molesting children, which is absolutely in no way comparable to using a shock collar on a dog. Allegedly using a shock collar on a dog.
I am absolutely denying your made up bullshit, I'm just also not accepting the bullshit framing around the bullshit. Hasan didn't shock his dog, but even if he had, it's really not that significant.
You literally did the exact same thing already, in reverse. You claimed that even if he didn't shock his dog, he "barely gave a fuck" that it yelped which is "still condemnable."
This is exactly how you ratfuck someone. You talk shit about made up bullshit and then you've established that they're in the position of being "on trial" and once they're on trial, even if the original allegation doesn't stick, you can find something else to pin on them. This is why I'm making it clear that, not only is the original allegation nonsense, but even if it was true it wouldn't matter. You're only trying to cancel him because of the things he says politically, that, or you've fallen for an influence campaign by people who want that.