Current Events > The Young Armenian Genocide Denier's Nephew Banned from Twitch

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/twitchbanned/status/1164921551998935042

Get that ass bannnnned

For saying the US deserved 9/11 and sexually mocking a veterans disability

Good.
---

Keep in mind I think Crenshaw is a manipulative asshole; but I wouldnt, especially as a journalist mock someones disability. Let alone a veterans disability.

Wtf we love 'censoring' people now!

Malfunction posted...

Wtf we love 'censoring' people now!

Who is we?

I wouldn't be surprised if TYT let him go also, his "apology" on the show was hilarious, basically saying "I was taken out of context, it was just a joke!" then spent 5 minutes ranting how "The US didn't deserve 9/11, but they caused it!" and "I'm sorry, unpopular opinion but Veterans don't deserve respect."

Cenk looked sooooo uncomfortable while it was going on and kept trying to reel the guy in, but he refused and just doubled down on everything lol
---

CruelBuffalo posted...

Malfunction posted...

Wtf we love 'censoring' people now!

Who is we?

All the right wingers celebrating this in the replies

Malfunction posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

Malfunction posted...

Wtf we love 'censoring' people now!

Who is we?

All the right wingers celebrating this in the replies

Ah carry on then

Malfunction posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

Malfunction posted...

Wtf we love 'censoring' people now!

Who is we?

All the right wingers celebrating this in the replies

I can't vouch for twitter trolls, but even people like Glenn Beck start their coverage with "I fully respect his right to say these things, and I am not calling for him to be arrested, boycotted, fired, cancelled, etc."

I am assuming that saying that a war veteran lost his eye "because a freedom fighter fucked his eye hole" repeatedly is against the Twitch TOS though?
---

Targeted harassment against somebody on the basis of their sexuality and egging your followers on to harass them is nominally against YouTube TOS too but these same people were mad as hell Steven Crowder got like one vid demonetised

is this like when someone trolls on here and gets purged and then comes back on an alt crying about how this board can't handle their jokes?
---

Just looking at the name "the Young Turks" is inflammatory. If there was a news station called "the final solution". Genk is a known genocide denier. He wrote an article in the 90s not believing what happened. Screw them.
---

Malfunction posted...

Targeted harassment against somebody on the basis of their sexuality and egging your followers on to harass them is nominally against YouTube TOS too but these same people were mad as hell Steven Crowder got like one vid demonetised

Youtube looked at all the evidence and decided he didn't do those things.
---

And they were wrong

KillerKhan420 posted...

Just looking at the name "the Young Turks" is inflammatory. If there was a news station called "the final solution". Genk is a known genocide denier. He wrote an article in the 90s not believing what happened. Screw them.

Agreed so hard.

I love how spooking was accusing 'libruls' of creating an echo chamber by blocking people earlier but blocks anybody with views to the left of his

Honestly what he did this time is so bad I could see Cenk actually firing him, but probably not since I dont really see it as significantly different from the garbage he's usually allowed to post on the TYT Network, just an infinitely more extreme version of it.

The fact that Cenk forced him to wear a suit when talking about the comments should tell you he's being fairly serious about it (no way he chose that for himself) and even then when trying to reel him in Hasan basically just farted in his face and doubled down.

---

KillerKhan420 posted...

Just looking at the name "the Young Turks" is inflammatory

Not necessarily. Ottoman reformists who opposed the Sultan and went into exile in the 1880s, carrying on their radical activism from the safety of European capitals like Paris, called themselves "Young Turks" after the example of the "Young Italy" movement. The name long predates the CUP (Committee of Union and Progress) regime that later carried out the Armenian genocide, whose leaders generally called themselves "Unionists" rather than "Young Turks". European commentators didn't bother too much with the fine detail of political differences between the Ottoman reformist and revolutionary groups, so "Young Turks" was a label that got hung kind of loosely on all of them.

However, "not necessarily" doesn't mean "no, of course it isn't". I'm just pointing out that the name can be said to have more than one historical connotation, and doesn't have to specifically mean a tribute to a genocidal regime.
---

The term "young turk" has a little more varied cultural recognition in the western world than the swastika does.

When the person who came up with the idea of using that term as a name for his company has previously denied the Armenian genocide (and this was the time where he came up with the name) and currently is extremely wishy washy on his views on the Armenian Genocide, that's when one of those ways to understand the term fades into the far distance.

---

shockthemonkey posted...

Firewerx posted...

KillerKhan420 posted...

Just looking at the name "the Young Turks" is inflammatory

Not necessarily. Ottoman reformists who opposed the Sultan and went into exile in the 1880s, carrying on their radical activism from the safety of European capitals like Paris, called themselves "Young Turks" after the example of the "Young Italy" movement. The name long predates the CUP (Committee of Union and Progress) regime that later carried out the Armenian genocide.

That doesnt sound all too different from its not a swastika, its a kanji.

Well, at least you know that a kanji isn't a swastika.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary definition of "young Turk": "an insurgent or a member of an insurgent group especially in a political party broadly : one advocating changes within a usually established group". Take it up with the publisher if you're not happy about the term having multiple meanings.

The name's not inflammatory by itself. It's about context. If you've got other grounds for believing it's something more than innocent wordplay, fine.
---

most turks deny the armenian genocide to be fair
---

ThyCorndog posted...

most turks deny the armenian genocide to be fair

Which is a double historical blindness, because for the first few months following the end of WW1 (from November 1918 until roughly May 1919), the Armenian massacres were widely acknowledged, openly discussed, and even harshly condemned in Ottoman Turkey.

The Ottoman press published details of the killings and demanded thorough investigations, prompt arrests and public trials. The newspaper Ikdam was furious at the inadequacy of the early investigations; Alemdar named and shamed suspects and published articles calling for the execution of the guilty parties; Minber, an Istanbul daily endorsed by Mustafa Kemal and published by his close friend Fethi Okyar, blasted the destruction of the Armenians as "the most unpardonable act in history". The main opposition party, Hrriyet ve Itilaf (Liberty and Concord), crushed by the CUP during the war, was reconstituted in January 1919 and the party's platform demanded full disclosure and punishment of war crimes. The massacres were debated hotly in the Ottoman parliament.

The Republic's current denialist position isn't the same one that's always been. It doesn't only deny the genocide, it even denies the initial Turkish admission of the genocide.
---