1
855
856

Ouch !! (i.imgur.com)

submitted by luckysk

top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
best
best
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順

[–]HashSlingingHacker[🍰] 142 ポイント143 ポイント

I never trust random photos of people holding signs on the internet.

[–]kingofbigmac [score hidden]

http://i.imgur.com/FIo9seX.jpg

[–]Xioola [score hidden]

I don't know what I was expecting.

[–]jhc1415 [score hidden]

Thanks for posting the original. Figures people would manipulate it for their own political agendas.

[–]gloves4222 [score hidden]

I know... that brown lady on the left is obviously not to be trusted.

load more comments (2 返事)

    [–]Brian_is_trilla 788 ポイント789 ポイント

    Stop posting this shit to r/pics.

    [–]brocolicookies 65 ポイント66 ポイント

    That's like asking advice animals to stop posting puffins with popular opinions.

    [–]FyourFeelings 35 ポイント36 ポイント

    God I hate that sub.

    [–]r00x [score hidden]

    Unsubscribe! I did, long ago. finally ditched /r/funny a few weeks ago too. Feels great!

    [–]pbj192 [score hidden]

    meh, it's more fun to get yourself banned, then unsubscribe

    [–]Paremo [score hidden]

    How can I get myself banned?

    load more comments (1 返事)

      [–]MrCharlieBacon [score hidden]

      Eh, I'll join you with unsubbing from /r/funny. Just done.

      load more comments (3 返事)

        [–]quadrumvirate 7 ポイント8 ポイント

        God I hate that meme.

        [–]StickleyMan 81 ポイント82 ポイント

        http://imgur.com/Ufd3Vyl.gif

        [–]Albaek 9 ポイント10 ポイント

        I kind of want the 'Yeah' to disappear into her cleavage.

        [–]Yourhero88 14 ポイント15 ポイント

        Source...

        [–]docforlife 9 ポイント10 ポイント

        It's Taylor vixen

        [–]StickleyMan [score hidden]

        Good...eye.

        It's from the aptly titled, Lesbians in Charge 4

        [–]Ehnker [score hidden]

        I was in charge once.

        It didn't make me a lesbian...

        [–]Co_Co_Co1a [score hidden]

        If i watch Lesbians in Charge 4 will i miss out on the plot from Lesbians in Charge 3?

        [–]StickleyMan [score hidden]

        I mean, I'd recommend it for sure. You'll be able to catch up on most of the major plot points either way, but you'll miss out on the real nuanced character development that's been subtly developing since the first installment. You may find the denouement somewhat disappointing, as you wouldn't appreciate the completeness of the major character arc. It's really up to you, but I'd say load up on some non-chafing lotion, book off a Sunday afternoon, and catch up on tetralogy.

        load more comments (1 返事)

          load more comments (10 返事)

            [–]simjanes2k 22 ポイント23 ポイント

            Sidebar rules: There are none! Have fun, fuckers!

            [–]Kruse 14 ポイント15 ポイント

            Why? It's a pic.

            [–]B0BtheDestroyer 11 ポイント12 ポイント

            It fits the established rules on the sidebar. If you want a purer sub tailored to your interests, get the sidebar changed or make another sub.

            [–]GimmeHugs 16 ポイント17 ポイント

            You're not wrong... But let's not pretend this isn't shit.

            [–]amorpheus [score hidden]

            No worse than all this Facebook-level stuff we see here every day.

            load more comments (7 返事)

              load more comments (7 返事)

                [–]esoteric_enigma 4 ポイント5 ポイント

                Why? Is it in the rules somewhere that pictures can't be political in this subreddit?

                [–]RExOINFERNO [score hidden]

                well theres a no text based pics rule and this qualifies for that

                never mind

                [–]InternetFree [score hidden]

                Weird, the same is true of the pic of Michelle Obama. Saw nobody complain there.

                Guess what: People are upset because they are nationalists and don't like it when someone validly criticizes the US.

                [–]FluidHips [score hidden]

                I don't believe so. No screenshots, pictures with added, or superimposed text.

                [–]RExOINFERNO [score hidden]

                oh true, just edited original comment

                [–]bluekite5 1 ポイント2 ポイント

                Seriously. #JihadDenial

                load more comments (28 返事)

                  [–]SquidwardSnowden1 455 ポイント456 ポイント

                  While I get what you are trying to say and acknowledge you have a point the attempt at shock value is off putting and undercuts the ability to have a constructive and meaningful dialogue. If you can't back a statement like this up with hard numbers it probably shouldn't be made in this way. Plus would you rather the White House simply ignores the kidnapped girls? I think it's unfair to attack someone for other situations like drone warfare when they are doing what I think most of us would agree is the right thing in trying to recover the missing girls. Edit:spelling

                  [–]cujo195 454 ポイント455 ポイント

                  They're trying to equate unintentional consequences of war with deliberate criminal activities. That's the same mentality that supports terrorism.

                  [–]B0BtheDestroyer 133 ポイント134 ポイント

                  You are right that there is a difference between intentional harm and unintentional harm. The collateral damage accepted for drone strikes, however, goes beyond what should be acceptable as "unintentional."

                  "The Obama administration classifies any able-bodied male a military combatant unless evidence is brought forward to prove otherwise."

                  Edit: Here is the journalistic source for the quote.

                  [–]thebretandbutter [score hidden]

                  Far too often the argument is phrased against drone warfare when it should in fact be against the practice of targeted killings in general. Drone Warfare actually causes the least amount of collateral damage when you compare it to special force operations, surgical bombings, etc. If we're going to be killing high profile targets, we absolutely should use drones.

                  The question is, should we be doing targeted killings at all?

                  [–]B0BtheDestroyer [score hidden]

                  True, but drone warfare has reduced the cost and U.S. risk dramatically allowing surgical strikes to be used much more frequently. They have not created a new problem, but amplified an old one.

                  [–]thebretandbutter [score hidden]

                  Surgical strikes in the sense of more drone strikes, you mean right? I agree, it's lowered the threshold for violence. But then you would have to decide if the increase in drone strikes due to the lower cost ends up killing more innocents through collateral damage than a regular amount of tactical strikes/operations would.

                  I also think there's a general stigma around drones because it is mechanical, lifeless, etc. certainly in places where, ya know, we're killing innocent people... but in terms of sheer collateral damage, I don't think it's the worst. But again, I'm not convinced we should be doing these types of operations at all, drones or special forces or whatever.

                  [–]B0BtheDestroyer [score hidden]

                  I agree. As far as weapons go, I don't have a problem with drones in theory. I have a problem with how they are being used. The fact that they are drones just makes it easier to abuse them without human cost to the U.S. American people.

                  I have known people who have lived in Pakistan for a few years during the drone strikes and the average civilian lives in constant terror. They don't know where the U.S.'s enemies are. As far as they know, a drone strike could come at any time to any place.

                  [–]assholejammer 18 ポイント19 ポイント

                  That website backs up drone strikes for me.

                  The other targets are not civilian targets. So that leaves militant targets with the overwhelming majority, >76%.

                  The small number if high profile targets is quite obviously going to be small. There is not going to be a high number of high profile targets to even kill. That is why they are high profile.

                  It is unfortunate that civilians are killed however it makes no differance if it is from a manned fighter/bomber or an un manned drone.

                  The aircraft pilot will see almost identical information to the drone pilot (Probability less due to space restrictions) .

                  Another point is that the Taliban have probably killed many times more civilians than NATO forces during their consistent barrage of suicide attacks.

                  [–]Sha-WING 39 ポイント40 ポイント

                  It's funny how this Muslim man can so eagerly point out the US's civilian casualties, while completely unintentional, and somehow move right over the fact that suicide bombers of his own country and religion directly attack hospitals, schools, women, children and more. There was a surveillance video I remember watching of a hospital that came under attack by some terrorists in a truck. They walked up into the hospital with injured and sick and began executing the nurses and others as they walked through. I don't think anything has ever made my blood boil so hot and quickly. I wish the very worst that hell has to offer to individuals like that.

                  Edit: Source. You can see one man calmly walk up to a group of people and as nonchalantly as most say hello, he tosses a grenade in the middle of them. I'm normally a calm person, but I would love nothing more then to watch each one of them be executed in the most painful form.

                  Edit2: I was NOT generalizing all Muslims. I was merely talking about the extremists that seek to murder others in the name of religion. I was simply pointing out that the Muslim man that used the current popularity of these captured girls to try and rile up the US hate train by spewing nonsense comparing how we "murder" civilian Muslims to in the name of freedom when he should be more concerned with how his own people actively try to murder they own populace.

                  [–]I_suck_at_mostthings [score hidden]

                  The FUCK? Link to the video?

                  [–]HappyCatFish [score hidden]

                  Excuse me, but I feel the need to point out that radical extremists in any country cannot ever be assumed a representation of that country's population. Would you feel comfortable being compared to members of the KKK for being a white American? Or a fascist Neo-Nazi for being born in Germany? Even though the amount of radical Muslims hiding in the borders of middle eastern nations is enough to be a percentage of the population, there have been equal if not greater atrocities committed by groups bred out of whatever country you identify with.

                  [–]Easymath1001 [score hidden]

                  Extremism is pervasive in the Mideast, it's so volatile and lacking for any forward logical progression to becoming a steady political or safe region we should have just dipped after eliminating the heads. I'm usually not one to generalize but that shits cray

                  [–]PistolPuma [score hidden]

                  Active, extremist Muslims are very common though.

                  [–]FyourFeelings [score hidden]

                  Oh come off it mate.

                  load more comments (3 返事)

                    load more comments (5 返事)

                      load more comments (2 返事)

                        [–]piss4njoymtNOTmplymt 26 ポイント27 ポイント

                        Yeah? Let's just switch back to ww2 style carpet bombing. Spending billions of dollars to reduce civilian casualties is not enough?

                        [–]B0BtheDestroyer [score hidden]

                        There is a big difference because we are not at war with Pakistan.

                        [–]Thisbymaster [score hidden]

                        Really? Then why do the Taliban living in Pakistan come over the border to attack people in Afghanistan? Why did they hide the most wanted criminal for 10 years? Why do they not police or control THEIR territory just so they can try to extort money out of the west? This is a war on people holding on to a past that is no longer needed.

                        [–]B0BtheDestroyer [score hidden]

                        If you think that is the case, you should start the rallying cry for war rather than justifying extensive bombing of a country we are officially at peace with.

                        [–]clavalle [score hidden]

                        Trouble is, we are not at war with a country. The US would love to have something as coherent and manageable as a country to go to war with.

                        Instead the US is at war with a movement. That movement takes many forms and has many leaders and many allies. Some of those allies happen to have positions of power in the Pakistani government. It so happens that the US also has allies in that same government.

                        IOW the situation is complicated and trying to reduce it to mesh with past conflicts with nation-states is absurd.

                        load more comments (1 返事)

                          [–]subiklim [score hidden]

                          No, we're not. Otherwise they would not allow the USA to fly their drones from Pakistani bases.

                          load more comments (1 返事)

                            load more comments (1 返事)

                              [–]Dicond 27 ポイント28 ポイント

                              So guilty until proven innocent? I think they got that backward.

                              [–]KageStar [score hidden]

                              Well, our Bill of Rights/Constitution only extends to citizens of our country.

                              [–]HerrHaakon [score hidden]

                              It also extends to legal residents.

                              [–]drewcifer1986 [score hidden]

                              Unless you're considered an enemy combatant. Isn't that how they justified drone strikes on American citizens who turned into jihadists?

                              [–]quintinza [score hidden]

                              Isn't that why there is such a furore about the decision to kill a US citizen in a drone strike? Too lazy to cite sources or look up more info, I have it kicking around the back of my mind somewhere...

                              load more comments (2 返事)

                                [–]fido5150 0 ポイント1 ポイント

                                You're under the impression that it works any other way?

                                Most people are assumed guilty, or they would not have been arrested. Then it is up to their lawyer to prove their innocence.

                                I think the 'innocent until proven guilty' thing is only an ideal, because those arrested and accused of crimes sure are treated like they're guilty, before it has actually been proven in a court of law.

                                [–]midasMIRV [score hidden]

                                Except the innocent until proven guilty refers to court proceedings and convictions. The jury MUST believe, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty based on the evidence presented in court. I've had to let a guy who I knew beat his wife go because the prosecution couldn't get pictures of the injuries and the woman refused to testify. Its a very imperfect system, but its what we got.

                                [–]kymri [score hidden]

                                As shitty as the situation you described is (and man, letting a guy 'get away' with beating his wife is pretty shitty, though I fully understand that you did all you could)...

                                The opposite situation is MUCH, MUCH more terrifying. I'd rather see cases like the above transpire where the guy 'gets away with it' because there's no evidence than have guys who HAVEN'T done any such thing thrown into jail because we are convinced they're doing what we think they've been doing despite the lack of evidence.

                                It goes against the grain to "let someone get away with it", but I think that pales in comparison to the sheer horror of imprisoning (or worse, as has definitely happened more than once) an innocent man.

                                "Innocent until proven guilty" is imperfect but without true, infalliable omniscience, I think it's the best option available.

                                [–]CivilityBeDamned [score hidden]

                                You didn't 'let a guy go'. You had no case.

                                [–]mathgod [score hidden]

                                I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the entirety of your legal experience consists of TV shows and internet articles.

                                No, "innocent until proven guilty" is not just an ideal. It is the law. Yes, some individual police officers and judges do indeed subscribe to a "guilty by default" mindset, but they are the exception, and they are in the wrong.

                                [–]skeezyrattytroll [score hidden]

                                I understand a single instance does not prove a point. I once had a job running an adult book store. Job was 16 hrs/day, 7 days a week, sleep on site. I got an offer for a real job and quit on a Sunday. I took the store receipts to the main office and got a receipt for them. The owner did not appreciate me quitting one of his prime locations with no notice, so he filed embezzlement charges on me.

                                My experience being charged with embezzlement and jailed for 2 weeks pending a hearing sure felt like I was regarded as guilty. I was removed from my world, locked up with other people charged and convicted, lost my new job because I did not have bond money. I was released at court with a 'nolle prosequi' because the charging party failed to show in court. This was in the early 70's. Don't you know that nolle prossed embezzlement charge is still on my record?

                                Innocent until proven guilty in America is very much like "he's paid his time, give him a second chance" for ex-convicts: A pleasant fiction of an ideal we tell ourselves.

                                [–]Dicond 2 ポイント3 ポイント

                                Just pointing out the irony, don't read too much into it.

                                [–]streetbum [score hidden]

                                You're a fucking retard. Please stop talking.

                                load more comments (1 返事)

                                  load more comments (14 返事)

                                    [–]Nodbugger 14 ポイント15 ポイント

                                    Assuming military aged males surrounding a known terrorist leader are combatants seems to be a pretty reasonable assumption to me.

                                    [–]sunshine-x [score hidden]

                                    Right, just like people around a presidential parade are all politicians.

                                    load more comments (4 返事)

                                      [–]cujo195 [score hidden]

                                      A fancy website doesn't make it legitimate.

                                      "The Obama administration classifies any able-bodied male a military combatant unless evidence is brought forward to prove otherwise."

                                      If that was true, then the war would have been over a long time ago. The solution would have been very simple. But our problem is that our enemies intentionally hide among the innocent, and we have a difficult time identifying and attacking them without killing the innocent people around them.

                                      [–]B0BtheDestroyer [score hidden]

                                      Our enemies do hide among the innocent, but that does not absolve us of moral culpability.

                                      [–]cujo195 [score hidden]

                                      Right, that's why we take measures to prevent/minimize civilian casualties. Do you have any idea how many missions have been called off because of the risk of killing non-combatants?

                                      Like I said, if we didn't care about the civilians, this war would have been simple. Our military could easily have destroyed their country in the blink of an eye.

                                      [–]Renmauza [score hidden]

                                      We would have won Vietnam, we just needed more time! We could have beat those Afghanis, if we weren't so humanitarian! I don't know what the US military produces more of, tanks or excuses.

                                      [–]generationderp [score hidden]

                                      That quote is not anything from a legal doctrine. It's just something someone made up at some point that circulates through the internet.

                                      Unless you can quote a law or administration official making this statement, it's just random internet bullshit.

                                      It would be like me just making up whatever I thought was a persons rational and selling it as fact, then taking my opinion and putting some cute web graphics to it and pretending it's a factual statement.

                                      [–]B0BtheDestroyer [score hidden]

                                      Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties that did little to box him in. It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.

                                      From this article from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

                                      That is not law or administration, but it is from a NY Times investigative journalist. IMO, that is a little more credible than "random internet bullshit."

                                      load more comments (1 返事)

                                        [–]DoctorExplosion 23 ポイント24 ポイント

                                        Check their website. One of their defining principles is "Reviving the Obligation of Jihad".

                                        http://www.mpacuk.org/about-mpacuk.html

                                        These aren't normal people we're talking about here, so of course they're going to minimize the actions of Muslim terrorists and engage in whataboutism.

                                        [–]generationderp [score hidden]

                                        That's all just standard religious fundamentalism. It's not in any way unique to Islam.

                                        One of the huge flaws in religion is how hiveminded people can act if they feel they have god on their side. They can easily supersede any base human morals and herd instincts. Humans do have natural tendancies to want to contribute for the greater good, one of the best examples is how we are programmed at the most basic level to care about and protect children. It's hard to invoke more rage from a human than when you harm children, this is a genetic trait, not merely learned behavior.

                                        Religion has the power to supersede these basic genetic moral codes due to the power of blind faith. If you truly believe in god and you are convinced he wants you to kill your child, you are obligated to kill your child. It's an odd evolution of things like burial rights into complex hierarchical beliefs which at clearly at odds with natural law.

                                        One of the downsides of being an imaginative creature is being able to be convinced and convince others of things that disobey natural law.

                                        [–]AliasUndercover [score hidden]

                                        Oh, so they push for Jihad to fight Islamophobia. Great tactic, there, fellas!!

                                        [–]FluidHips [score hidden]

                                        So much for giving the full definition they offered:

                                        Jihad means the struggle for justice in the way of Allah, and MPACUK aims to empower Muslims to fulfil this Islamic obligation through intelligent political action to protect the Ummah. We believe that pro-active engagement in mainstream media and politics, as active citizens, is the most effective solution to bring about an ethical foreign policy, defend civil liberties and combat Islamophobia.

                                        Read more: http://www.mpacuk.org/about-mpacuk.html#ixzz31QYucfqF

                                        load more comments (5 返事)

                                          [–]jeffly777 9 ポイント10 ポイント

                                          I think that goes too easy on the Obama administration's perpetration of the illegal drone assassination program. However, I agree that collateral deaths as a result of military action--even illegal military action--are not comparable to the kidnapping, rape, torture, and sale of children. While equally tragic, they are absolutely not morally equivalent.

                                          [–]macallen 7 ポイント8 ポイント

                                          They're not illegal, that's the point. They are 100% within the laws written during the Bush administration, written, voted upon, and passed by our elected officials. They are the law of the land, making them legal.

                                          They are also not unConstitutional, because the Patriot Act has been signed into law and not repealed or reversed by the Surpreme Court.

                                          Edit: To clarify my point...WE did this. This is OUR fault. If we don't want these results, we need to elect different people to do it. Saying THEY did this is passing the buck to "someone else" when there is no one else, anywhere, who can fix this for us.

                                          [–]Levelek [score hidden]

                                          American Law is not the only law at play. The drone strikes are unambiguously illegal under international law, and represent an infringement of Pakistan (and other nations') sovereign rights as nations. Just because some American lawmaker passed a law doesn't make something legal from an international perspective, and drone strikes perpetrated by one nation on the citizens of another nation are clearly not subject to US domestic law. These drone strikes are subject not to American law, but to Pakistani (or in the other nations where they occur) and international law. American laws are utterly irrelevant.

                                          [–]mrbooze [score hidden]

                                          Which international laws protect countries from terrorists hiding in other countries again? Which international police force hunted down and prosecuted Bin Laden for his crimes? Or for the attacks in India? Or the bombings in Madrid?

                                          The international community and international law does not give a single fuck about the lives of people in any other country. This forces nations to act when they have the power to.

                                          load more comments (4 返事)

                                            [–]jeffly777 [score hidden]

                                            I agree with your last point; the people of America needs to be better informed, more involved, and elect leaders that won't do these kinds of things.

                                            However, the legality of the programs is not so cut and dried. I'm an attorney and constitutional scholar and feel qualified to make professional judgments on these issues. As such, I feel the Patriot act is unconstitutional, but it is, indeed, the law of the land and has not been repealed or invalidated by the Supreme Court. You are correct in that regard. On the other hand, the drone program is absolutely illegal under international law. It amounts to military force being used on foreign nationals within the boundaries of nations with which we're not at war without their consent. That is an illegal act of aggression which allows the offended country to retaliate militarily. Obama is well within his powers--and, I believe, his duty as commander-in-chief--to stop them, Bush-era laws be damned.

                                            [–]TracyMorganFreeman [score hidden]

                                            even illegal military action--are not comparable to the kidnapping, rape, torture, and sale of children. While equally tragic, they are absolutely not morally equivalent.

                                            Ok then, funny how Michelle hasn't mentioned the hundreds of boys butchered by the same organization.

                                            This whole campaign is little more than an example of how selective people are in whose suffering they care about, which would be fine if they were a bit more honest about it.

                                            [–]generationderp [score hidden]

                                            I don't see the practice of killing fundamental militants who use innocents as shields as being equally as tragic as targeting children for rape.

                                            But I do think just ignoring them would be as effective or more effective than bombing them. Our focus should be simply to secure US interests directly, not attempt to eliminate ideological beliefs with bombs. I just find that view more efficient. I'm not overly concerned with the idea that people who use innocent people as shield results in getting innocent people killed. Perhaps if the common population of these areas would learn to reject militants they would not be in harms way so often.

                                            If you're living in the same house as a terrorist I don't have much faith in the idea that you are really all that innocent unless you are truly being held captive. If I was in a simple village and militants moved in, I'd want them removed. To be brutally honest, if that involved some of my neighbors dying, I would still consider that an action for the greater good because the militants themselves will have a negative impact on my village in so many ways and potentially for decades or centuries if they are allowed to grow and fester into society.

                                            [–]SquidwardSnowden1 3 ポイント4 ポイント

                                            Exactly

                                            [–]FrostyPlum [score hidden]

                                            "Yeah, he's got the right id- wait, what?"

                                            [–]AIDSofSPACE [score hidden]

                                            Drone strikes do stretch the definition of war and blur the definition of murder. When future terrorists are being recruited, which definition do you think they're rallying against?

                                            [–]cujo195 [score hidden]

                                            I couldn't care less about what goes through a future terrorist's mind as he's being recruited... I'd hope it's a bullet.

                                            [–]IO4 [score hidden]

                                            They are well aware of the unintended targets, but they do it anyway. Both sides are evil in their own right.

                                            Furthermore, you say "deliberate criminal activity," well who defines "criminal activity"? Your view is a bit too convenient, and it misses a lot of the reality. By our own laws and policies, it's perfectly legitimate to fly drones into foreign countries and take out enemy targets, but that doesn't mean it's right, it's just not "criminal activity." I bet you'd have a very different opinion if it was some other country flying drones into the US to take out terrorists.

                                            [–]Ranikins [score hidden]

                                            The My Lai Massacre was unintentional?

                                            If the US doesn't intend to kill people, it shouldn't send it's military around the world to do it.

                                            [–]InternetFree [score hidden]

                                            They're trying to equate unintentional consequences

                                            Ever heard about the term "shock and awe"?

                                            The US is the biggest terrorist state on the planet.

                                            Also: Nothing excuses the vile atrocities committed by the US government. How anyone could upvote the shitty apologetics in this thread is beyond me. Vile, inhuman people all around. Where are you from? 99% of the people doing the upvoting are American, right? Just shameful.

                                            load more comments (57 返事)

                                              [–]mrbooze [score hidden]

                                              Granted, far far far far far more girls have been killed, mutilated, enslaved, etc in Muslim countries overall, but...let's not talk about that.

                                              [–]rasputin777 8 ポイント9 ポイント

                                              The very nature of these stupid printout hash tags that the white house and state Dept. keep posting is to minimize thoughtful discussion and play to emotion. Guy is just working at their level.

                                              [–]generationderp [score hidden]

                                              Yeah.. that makes no sense. People just see an opportunity to criticize world leaders and they take it. If it wasn't one thing, it would be another. This guy is just going for the biggest emotional reaction he can get.

                                              You can't minimize thoughtful discussion by posting a picture of yourself holding a sign, that's just stupid.

                                              [–]FtMyersMuffDiver 2 ポイント3 ポイント

                                              Imagine if hard numbers were readily available. oh wait...

                                              [–]SquidwardSnowden1 6 ポイント7 ポイント

                                              There are hard numbers about the amount of people boko haram have killed over the years in rural Nigeria? Please enlighten me and post a link

                                              [–]FtMyersMuffDiver 4 ポイント5 ポイント

                                              My bad I thought you were talking about official civilian casualty reports from drone strikes, disregard my comment

                                              [–]cloverhaze [score hidden]

                                              Drone attacks have no real followup as far as victims of which Obama ramped up. By blowing this up in the media gives this man (terrorist) more acknowledgement then they should give him. The US shouldn't get involved they should let the UN/Africa handle it. I get picking issues to bring to the media's attention but honestly he's too involved, making that comment about trayvon martin was overboard

                                              load more comments (22 返事)

                                                [–]Newyauchcity 70 ポイント71 ポイント

                                                I emphatically agree. Until the government stops doing wrong-doing of any kind, they should also stop doing good things.

                                                /s

                                                [–]Area206 18 ポイント19 ポイント

                                                I'll take it one step further. If the government can't straighten itself out and stop doing anything wrong, then we should just accept our status as an evil empire and brutally invade the rest of the world. It sounds horrible, but there really isn't anything worse that a hypocrite.

                                                [–]Newyauchcity 1 ポイント2 ポイント

                                                Well, to be clear I was being sarcastic. I feel that, although yes there are absolutely some atrocities happening to the Muslim community in places abroad, that hijacking an issue to make one's point is somewhat detracting to the parent issue. It's as if the guy on the right is punishing the U.S. for doing something reasonably altruistic, because of the issue they're choosing to stump for.

                                                I may be missing something.

                                                load more comments (3 返事)

                                                  [–]the_one_54321 85 ポイント86 ポイント

                                                  I think that claim may be a little dubious.

                                                  [–]StickleyMan 28 ポイント29 ポイント

                                                  Just a little...

                                                  [–]Bean1268 7 ポイント8 ポイント

                                                  I like you Mister Stickly Man

                                                  [–]StickleyMan 10 ポイント11 ポイント

                                                  http://i.imgur.com/mVfA1Jj.gif

                                                  [–]leComte_deFrouFrou -1 ポイント0 ポイント

                                                  I find it hard to believe the band that recorded Whiter Shade of Pale could be responsible for such a tragedy.

                                                  load more comments (2 返事)

                                                    [–]czarina09 134 ポイント135 ポイント

                                                    I don't support the war in Iraq or Afghanistan, so more than Obama being held responsible it should be Bush who gets pelted for that. However in such a situation, Obama or the army haven't gone targeting women or girls specifically. It is sad that the loss of lives are part of collateral damage. However Boko Haram have targeted girls specifically. So rather than raising worldwide awareness and anger towards Boko Haram, you get fools like these rallying their personal issues. Priorities.

                                                    [–]TheOnlyPanda 20 ポイント21 ポイント

                                                    Most civilian casualties during Obama's term have been caused by poorly executed drone strikes. That's what I'm guessing the guy is talking about.

                                                    [–]mrbooze [score hidden]

                                                    How many civilian casualties would there have been from traditional bombing and missile strikes?

                                                    [–]ccctitan80 [score hidden]

                                                    False: Most civilian casualties in Afghanistan have been been caused by antigovernment forces since 2008.

                                                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_in_the_War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)#Civilian_and_overall_casualties_.282008.29

                                                    [–]BBSLICK 3 ポイント4 ポイント

                                                    I agree.

                                                    [–]TracyMorganFreeman [score hidden]

                                                    Obama or the army haven't gone targeting women or girls specifically.

                                                    However Boko Haram have targeted girls specifically.

                                                    Boko Hara butchered boys too.

                                                    So I guess they're targeting girls specifically by...treating them better than boys?

                                                    [–]jeffly777 46 ポイント47 ポイント

                                                    Thank you. I'm so fucking sick of the anit-'murica circle jerk that completely eliminates the possibility of constructive dialogue. The war in Iraq was illegal and the invasion of Afghanistan was ill-conceived, but those can't be blamed on Obama. I'm also opposed to the drone assassination program--which is also illegal under international law. However, it's idiotic to compare it to the kind of terrorism that Boka Harram is responsible for. The former is bad policy motivated by expediency and military hegemony; the latter is barbarism, pure and simple.

                                                    [–]OrkBegork 19 ポイント20 ポイント

                                                    Exactly. Acting like Obama could have just strolled in and instantly dismantled all military involvement in the middle east, is nonsense... and while there are serious issues with things like the drone program, acting like we should just ignore Islamic terror groups is stupid.

                                                    It's the kind of childish, oversimplistic thinking that's better off staying in /r/conspiracy.

                                                    [–]jeffly777 0 ポイント1 ポイント

                                                    I think he did the best he could with Iraq and Afghanistan, honestly. Both were clusterfucks before he got involved, and he ended the Iraq war in his first term like he promised.

                                                    However, I don't think that terrorists should be ignored, but assassinating foreign nationals (and in one case, an American citizen) using military equipment in countries with which we're not at war is unquestionably illegal and, I think, immoral. Not only are there better (albeit more difficult) ways to prosecute the war on terror, but it weakens the standing of the US as a world leader.

                                                    [–]medulla-0blongata 8 ポイント9 ポイント

                                                    he did start the drone attacks on Pakistan though. And there is a reason you will never find any 'hard number' of innocent GIRLS and boys (in schools) killed by those drone attacks. And if he didn't start it, he didn't do anything to stop it either. Its almost the end of his two terms..

                                                    [–]generationderp [score hidden]

                                                    There is no reason, Pakistan can report it's own news and the US isn't scrubbing the internet of such news. Other than mainstream media doesn't care, there is no conspiracy to cover up the details. There is no law that says the military has to publicize all it's actions.

                                                    The only reason you wouldn't be able to find data on drone death tolls in Pakistan is because Pakistan itself is covering it up.. since that is where we'd expect to find such information, not from the military.

                                                    I think it's probably just more about there being no reliable and coordinated effort to compile such data. Even the US military would not be aware of much of the collateral damage since it's data is coming from reports from Pakistan. We don't have agents in every location we send drones to to verify the targets and count causalities. We rely on spotty reporting from Pakistan to estimate those things.

                                                    load more comments (2 返事)

                                                      [–]mrbooze [score hidden]

                                                      using military equipment in countries with which we're not at war

                                                      Legally, the US has not been at war since WW2.

                                                      [–]generationderp [score hidden]

                                                      I have no problem with killing Americans who are operating as terrorists on foreign soil. It isn't a matter of justice, it's a matter of war.

                                                      The US is NOT a world leader, the sooner we get that through our heads the better. The time of America being THE superpower is ending and likely for the best. It's not anything we did wrong, it's just the natural progression of developing nations and realistic scientific and economic curves.

                                                      load more comments (3 返事)

                                                        [–]generationderp [score hidden]

                                                        I'm not sure that mostly ignoring them is stupid. I think monitoring them and using education is probably, dollar for dollar, far more effective than bombing them, which can never possibly solve the problem.

                                                        Unless you're willing to basically commit the genocide of an ideological group then bombings aren't going to ever have a real impact.

                                                        In fact the biggest impact that these bombings have could be to turn the general population against the militants. It creates a common repercussion for allowing terrorists to operate in your village or town. The question is does that breed more terrorists than it kills. I would say MOST citizens will not become terrorists simply because their friend or relative was killed in this 'war on terror'. Many of them will hold a negative view of America, but they will also hold a negative view to the terrorists who effectively brought the drones to their town.

                                                        I'm just not sure that it's any more effective than just ignoring these groups and focusing on information gathering. On the other hand infecting a forceful event into the life of a terrorist creates a gold mine of information gather. That is, when you kill a top leader and you're monitoring them, you have a higher chance to get insight into who is involved and how the groups work and communicate.

                                                        load more comments (4 返事)

                                                          [–]TheBRADLeyB 4 ポイント5 ポイント

                                                          I'm honestly just sick of seeing the 'anti-Obama' movement which feels more like a weird propaganda war. I feel bad for Bush, Obama, and whoever else runs next because this country is very 'anti-President' regardless of who is in the White House and they get saddled with so much shit that isn't even within their control. A good example is the Debt Limit which everyone wants to blame Obama for but if you look at the Debt Limit it's completely in the control of Congress and the President literally just is the asshole who's job it is to enforce it.

                                                          Now I'm not saying that the presidents are innocent of everything and that nothing is within their control but when the country can't decipher what power the Congress has and what power the President has they (the president) literally can never do anything right.

                                                          And I'll admit it's getting harder and harder to support Obama with the NSA problems and Snowden effect but to use something the first lady does to try to help the world to shame her husband is absolutely disgusting in my eyes. Secondly I would really like someone to do the math and see how many 'Muslim' girls Obama has killed because I highly doubt the accuracy of the claim.

                                                          anti-'merica circle jerk

                                                          Is precisely what I feel this country has come to and since people know so little about how our government works all the anti-government/president bullshit just looks like the 'flavor of the moment' when I see people post shit like this.

                                                          Even though I disagree with your position on drones and Iraq (I feel Saddam needed to be removed. I disagree with the unneeded lies that were told to get us there and feel it was handled poorly, but I do think the death of Saddam was needed) I'm pleased to see someone who hasn't fallen into this weird "the President has all power" fallacy. I wish this country had more people like you.

                                                          [–]throwaweight7 [score hidden]

                                                          I mean if you really care to know about how many innocent children have been killed in drone strikes since Obama took office you can look into that. There have been reports by independent sources that put the number of dead children in 150-200 range in Pakistan alone in the past 5 years.

                                                          load more comments (4 返事)

                                                            [–]Moronoo 2 ポイント3 ポイント

                                                            The former is bad policy motivated by expediency and military hegemony; the latter is barbarism, pure and simple.

                                                            The former is barbarism as well. and the latter could be argued to be bad policy motivated by expediency and military hegemony. Anyway, you're oversimplifying it.

                                                            [–]jeffly777 5 ポイント6 ポイント

                                                            Of course I am, I didn't feel like writing a masters thesis on the subject. However, I still contend that to forcefully kidnap children, torture them, rape them, and then sell them as sex slaves, which Boko Harram has openly admitted is their intention, is for worse morally than the collateral deaths of children.

                                                            Like I said, I don't support the drone programs; they are illegal and immoral. But two equate that program with what's happening in Nigeria is not only a much bigger oversimplification than mine, but completely lacking in perspective.

                                                            [–]Moronoo 0 ポイント1 ポイント

                                                            I can't argue with that. Well said.

                                                            load more comments (3 返事)

                                                              [–]Bulder [score hidden]

                                                              Wait a second, the latter is bad policy motivated by expediency. Are you really arguing that "hey, we sent a note to these girls if they wanted to be sold into slavery, or forced married, but you know, bitches be bitches"

                                                              [–]Moronoo [score hidden]

                                                              "the quality of being convenient and practical despite possibly being improper or immoral; convenience."

                                                              does this not apply to most criminals, except for crimes of passion?

                                                              [–]Bulder [score hidden]

                                                              So the policy is convenience, we should overlook the means, because it is the easiest way.

                                                              [–]Moronoo [score hidden]

                                                              I don't follow.

                                                              load more comments (9 返事)

                                                                [–]bonga_fett 11 ポイント12 ポイント

                                                                If you think Bush is responsible then you're just as much on the bandwagon as everyone else. The problems in the 'stans started back in the 60s and 70s.

                                                                [–]_tom_crews_ [score hidden]

                                                                Boko Haram doesn't target girls. They slaughtered all the boys in the school. Girls just have sale value in sex slavery. They target education.

                                                                [–]Ignitablepanda [score hidden]

                                                                That's unfair to absolve Americans of sin on the basis that there was no "criminal intent" to kill people we've termed "collateral." The fact remains that we know our drone strikes will kill innocent bystanders, but we accept these peoples' deaths as a necessary consequence. We are complacently killing innocent people. We are just as responsible for their deaths as a man like Boko. You may equate it to the difference between "murder" and "manslaughter." However, the persistent nature of our drone strikes and our knowledge of the consequences have been ongoing...we've had time to correct our tactics, but we haven't. We are undeniably responsible, but we rationalize it with our "mission" in the Middle East. I'm sure Boko Haram thinks he has a good reason to abduct girls as well.

                                                                [–]Dreyyy 0 ポイント1 ポイント

                                                                Fuuuuuuuuck stop bringing up bush in every excuse. He is gone now.

                                                                [–]BBSLICK 0 ポイント1 ポイント

                                                                So if boko took a entire boys school it be targeting boys specifically?

                                                                [–]unbannable9412 [score hidden]

                                                                As we know, JSOC was allowed to run operations outside warzones under Bush....oh wait, that was Obama.

                                                                This has been going on since the Entente/Allied powers divided up the middle east after the fall of the Ottoman empire.

                                                                Obama is just the latest in a long list of war mongers to screw over the people living in that part of the world.

                                                                It just amazes me what kind of mental gymnastics leftists will pull to defend Obama and try and blame the previous administration.

                                                                Of course the right blamed previous administrations for Bush's fuck ups too.

                                                                The truth is you're a mirror of rightwingers who think Bush was a saint.

                                                                load more comments (5 返事)

                                                                  [–]PostHipsterCool 19 ポイント20 ポイント

                                                                  If this conversation is going to be about Muslim girls, how about the number of Muslim girls killed by Muslims? Over 11 million Muslims have been violently killed in conflict over the last 60 years, and 90% of them have been killed by fellow Muslims.

                                                                  [–]Important_Matters 13 ポイント14 ポイント

                                                                  [Citation needed]

                                                                  [–]Meganick410 [score hidden]

                                                                  Overruled. OP provided no citation.

                                                                  load more comments (1 返事)

                                                                    [–]neutronfish 42 ポイント43 ポイント

                                                                    Classic tu quoque fallacy in action. Because person X did something terrible or wrong, it excuses or at least diminishes the harm caused by person Y by comparison.

                                                                    Two wrongs don't make a right, and I'm pretty sure that not everyone killed in drone strikes was an innocent bystander just minding his or her business and randomly blown up just for fun.

                                                                    [–]Misc_Rodriguez 8 ポイント9 ポイント

                                                                    What's "Wahhhhhmbulance" in Arabic?

                                                                    [–]VansSkate95 [score hidden]

                                                                    In February, about 60 boys were killed by the same group that captured these girls, yet we never heard about it. When females get captured it's all over the media(not hating on females, just making a point). If you search U.S and Nigeria on google you will get tons of hits about the capture of girls. If you search "Boys killed in Nigeria" you will still get hits about girls! and you even had to be specific in your search! And on top of that you will rarely see the word "boy". It says "children", "students", "pupils" !? what does that imply!? That men are disposable! Ouch.

                                                                    [–]rodmandirect [score hidden]

                                                                    What about the common belief that the American media will focus on the abduction/murder of pretty white girls, but brutal crimes against minorities get ignored?

                                                                    load more comments (7 返事)

                                                                      [–]ForFUCKSSAKE_ 27 ポイント28 ポイント

                                                                      Yes, Obama the famous girl kidnapper/killer.

                                                                      [–]Chester2707 [score hidden]

                                                                      Give me a fucking break with this.

                                                                      [–]esoteric_enigma 23 ポイント24 ポイント

                                                                      You can't really equate the unintentional collateral damage of war with the very intentional criminal act of kidnapping.

                                                                      [–]Mitchellonfire 23 ポイント24 ポイント

                                                                      You can if you are an idiot.

                                                                      So it's a fucking field day for reddit.

                                                                      load more comments (5 返事)

                                                                        [–]OceansOnPluto 46 ポイント47 ポイント

                                                                        Jesus the internet sucks sometimes. I get it, people have mixed feelings about Obama and the fact that his presidential record hasn't been the greatest.

                                                                        But his wife was just trying to speak out on the kidnapping of nigerian school children. Does she deserve to be mocked for that? Isn't that the sort of thing that maybe, in times past, wouldn't have been made fun of and attacked so much?

                                                                        I understand this man's anger but there are better places to put it, and better causes to attack. What happened in Nigeria is heinous and awful, and the fact that we're paying attention to how "gif-able" Michelle Obama's picture was than the actual KIDNAPPING OF SCHOOL CHILDREN makes me sick.

                                                                        Edit: Okay, I am in no way saying this man does not have a legitimate beef with Obama or that he's not right. But there are better avenues for this.

                                                                        [–]niggajewarab 25 ポイント26 ポイント

                                                                        screw this guy

                                                                        [–]bebopdebs 6 ポイント7 ポイント

                                                                        ur name though.

                                                                        [–]I_Up_Vote_Porn 1 ポイント2 ポイント

                                                                        Maybe he's tolerant to niggas, jews and arabs?

                                                                        [–]bigollurch 9 ポイント10 ポイント

                                                                        Lamarr Fariq Bernstein

                                                                        [–]bigtaterman [score hidden]

                                                                        TIL Obama personally killed people. Fuck off.

                                                                        [–]farfarawayS [score hidden]

                                                                        Yea. The Emperor of Japan circa WW2 never personally shot anyone either.

                                                                        [–]ConfusedNastyGirl [score hidden]

                                                                        So you're saying it wasn't Obama who killed Usama Bin Laden? What?!?!?

                                                                        [–]mackinoncougars [score hidden]

                                                                        Nah, that was biden. he got on the chopper with Seal Team 6 and said, "I got this one".

                                                                        load more comments (5 返事)

                                                                          [–]evanr111 [score hidden]

                                                                          For Michelle Obama: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_burn_centers_in_the_United_States

                                                                          [–]dldoxie2195 [score hidden]

                                                                          This is interesting and supports his claims: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5292312

                                                                          [–]MrSlim [score hidden]

                                                                          I know right? I just saw Obama last weekend, strolling through DC, personally choking out Muslim girls. He's such a monster.

                                                                          [–]Opaque_Justice [score hidden]

                                                                          Thinking just like a terrorist. Equating unintentional acts of war with intentional acts of crime. FUCK that guy

                                                                          [–]Ror2013 4 ポイント5 ポイント

                                                                          That is known in Latin as "tu quoque".

                                                                          [–]DrJosiah 3 ポイント4 ポイント

                                                                          Oh the layers of this propaganda is amazing. cujo195 said it best:

                                                                          "They're trying to equate unintentional consequences of war with deliberate criminal activities. That's the same mentality that supports terrorism."

                                                                          Lets not forget the girls in question were kidnapped by Islamic terrorists. So in the event the Marines don't get them all out alive, I guess that counts too right? shakes head

                                                                          [–]ColdDuckButter 5 ポイント6 ポイント

                                                                          When is the USA gonna get a thank you for all the fucking schools, wells, hospitals and other vital services that our men and women risked their lives for an ungrateful Afghanistan? That's right, acknowledging how much good the United States does isn't "Cool" anymore.

                                                                          P.S. Don't try to claim the moral high ground on the US on account of Drones when people use children to suicide Mosques, Schools, and Hospitals over there.

                                                                          [–]sexythrowback 2 ポイント3 ポイント

                                                                          By that logic, Abraham Lincoln is responsible for the death of 618,000 soldiers. Literally genocide on his own people.

                                                                          [–]Trentos 4 ポイント5 ポイント

                                                                          No comments about "Muslim"? That word does not need to be in there and the statement would probably be more true if it wasn't. It always surprises me when people segregate themselves.

                                                                          [–]Dhcopeland [score hidden]

                                                                          The majority of the kidnapped girls are Christian, which the media is choosing not to mention all to often. Cause no one wants to admit it could be about religion.

                                                                          [–]trash-juice 3 ポイント4 ポイント

                                                                          false equivalence

                                                                          [–]thesynod [score hidden]

                                                                          So according to angry muslim guy, who apparently had enough time off today from keeping women as property, says that Obama kills muslim children, therefore its okay to abduct 200 girls from a school. Ok. Good logic.

                                                                          [–]azamatoSC2 [score hidden]

                                                                          This kid is a retard people, scroll on.

                                                                          [–]m3Zephyr [score hidden]

                                                                          Hashtags don't work like that, there shouldn't be any spaces. Fucking casuals man.

                                                                          [–]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 ポイント2 ポイント

                                                                          I'm not sure he understand hash-tags

                                                                          [–]RossBoss95 1 ポイント2 ポイント

                                                                          Yeah obama is targeting muslim girls. Just slaughtering them. Poor muslims and their religion of peace

                                                                          [–]kokain711 0 ポイント1 ポイント

                                                                          So is that bearded dumbass openly support the kidnapping of the girls. What an idiot

                                                                          [–]gromnirit 2 ポイント3 ポイント

                                                                          Soooo, what the (presumably) muslim guy is saying is that Boko Haram are right to kidnap all the girls?

                                                                          Fuck this guy. He ignores the plight of these girls in order to point out hypocrisies of the US. Seriously fuck him.

                                                                          Why isn't anyone offended by this? oh right, because 'islamaphobia' is a thing.

                                                                          [–]Important_Matters 5 ポイント6 ポイント

                                                                          You're the only one saying that Boko Haram are right to kidnap all the girls. I dont see anything like that in the picture.

                                                                          [–]gromnirit 1 ポイント2 ポイント

                                                                          Well, I followed the logic of the picture:

                                                                          Michelle was holding a sign to raise awareness of the plight of the girls.

                                                                          The guy was holding a sign saying that she was being hypocritical for wanting the girls back when the Obama Administration had killed many more by drone strikes.

                                                                          Therefore in the guy's mind, Michelle being hypocritical is a bigger deal than the plight of the girls.

                                                                          So, following this, the guy must think what Boko Haram did was at least better than what Michelle/Obama did, if not right.

                                                                          That was what I was thinking. Either way I am offended at the guy trying to act persecuted at the expense of real tragedies.

                                                                          [–]saintstryfe [score hidden]

                                                                          I'd really love to see some proof that more than 300 girls have been killed in drone strikes. I'm guessing more than zero, a lot less than that.

                                                                          load more comments (1 返事)

                                                                            load more comments (1 返事)

                                                                              [–]Theappunderground 2 ポイント3 ポイント

                                                                              So since obama has killed women, he shouldnt save these ones?

                                                                              Great logic you dumb piece of shit.

                                                                              [–]ErechBelmont 1 ポイント2 ポイント

                                                                              This is really dumb.

                                                                              [–]Newyauchcity 1 ポイント2 ポイント

                                                                              Why is this necessary? They're not mutually related issues.

                                                                              EDIT: For Chrissakes don't just downvote, explain yourself. Explain to me how pairing both of these issues together doesn't do anything but cloud both issues. I enjoy learning and probing issues, and your downvotes aren't teaching me shit.

                                                                              [–]AIDSofSPACE [score hidden]

                                                                              I opened this in a new tab, and upon seeing the title, thought reddit crashed again.

                                                                              [–]ozyastro [score hidden]

                                                                              what does the original michelle obama picture say?

                                                                              [–]iamsofired [score hidden]

                                                                              I did think that sign was ill advised.

                                                                              [–]reitveld [score hidden]

                                                                              He has killed terrorists.

                                                                              [–]beaverburgular [score hidden]

                                                                              Wait, is this photoshopped Michelle Obama?

                                                                              [–]jamestavendale [score hidden]

                                                                              This may be mildly interesting. If you are on mobile on an iPhone or iPod Touch, then when you double tap zoom it fits perfectly into the width of each picture.

                                                                              [–]oscillating_wildly [score hidden]

                                                                              also i don't think you can use an apostrophe on a hash tag

                                                                              [–]haveyouseenhim [score hidden]

                                                                              Nice pouty face

                                                                              [–]Mishaal12 [score hidden]

                                                                              Meow!

                                                                              [–]ricky251294 [score hidden]

                                                                              It's not a religious issue, it's a cultural one. Americans are not there to fucking wipe out Muslims, the terrorists and the country where the majority are happen to be in a Muslim majority country. Secondly I swear the girls are Christian, or the school is anyways. Third, Boko Haram is actively killing them, Obama isn't on the radio with every single soldier telling them who to shoot at in a middle of a firefight, nor do I think he has a say in every rocket, artillery shell or mortar that is fired in retaliation. Drone's I think are a different issue but even then they aren't aiming for cities/towns, they're aiming for terrorists and guess where the terrorists happen to take refuge.

                                                                              [–]krepitus [score hidden]

                                                                              Yes, because Muslims never kidnap, kill, rape or torture children. Equating unintentional deaths to the purposeful, criminal act of kidnapping young girls to be married off and raped makes it ok.

                                                                              [–]quietchaos215 [score hidden]

                                                                              He forgot to add that Muslim Men have killed more Muslim girls through honor killings and the like than Obama ever could.

                                                                              [–]spunwasi [score hidden]

                                                                              Psh...he doesn't understand hashtags.

                                                                              load more comments (125 返事)