Direction for Hassan's Character on SmackDown

[Lord of The Curry 0]

Be scared all you want, it's going down.

[tekcop 0]

They did Cena/Brock at Backlash that one year, so I don't doubt it.

[The C Man 0]

Firstly, that was Backlash. Not one of the 'big 4'. And secondly Brock was far better than Batista, and Cena was far better than Hassan.

[Kurt Angle Mark 0]

Update from Dave Meltzer

 

UPN sent word today to WWE after all the negative media publicity stemming from last week's show that they didn't want the Muhammad Hassan character on this week's show.

 

WWE had planned a storyline change for Hassan tonight in Worcester after the storyline involving terrorists from last week backfired.

[Dangerous A 0]

Already being discussed (sort of) in the "Backlash from Hassan Angle" thread.

[zyn081 0]

Update from Dave Meltzer

 

UPN sent word today to WWE after all the negative media publicity stemming from last week's show that they didn't want the Muhammad Hassan character on this week's show.

 

WWE had planned a storyline change for Hassan tonight in Worcester after the storyline involving terrorists from last week backfired.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This is ridiculous. UPN said that they could have decided to cut out the segment if they wanted to. Every TV station has this right. Sky Sports in England excercised that right and Ive heard nothing about Vince or the WWE being upset with Sky for cutting it. UPN had the power to do so, Vince or the WWE. The problem is not the angle itself but the timing of it. SD is film on Tuesday and sent to UPN for airing. The product is then sent into UPN.

 

This is UPN's freaking fault. They fucked up by not cutting it. They have realised that they have cocked up big time and now are trying to shift the blame onto the WWE. Ass monkeys. Vince just take SD elsewhere.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Update from Dave Meltzer

 

UPN sent word today to WWE after all the negative media publicity stemming from last week's show that they didn't want the Muhammad Hassan character on this week's show.

 

WWE had planned a storyline change for Hassan tonight in Worcester after the storyline involving terrorists from last week backfired.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This is ridiculous. UPN said that they could have decided to cut out the segment if they wanted to. Every TV station has this right. Sky Sports in England excercised that right and Ive heard nothing about Vince or the WWE being upset with Sky for cutting it. UPN had the power to do so, Vince or the WWE. The problem is not the angle itself but the timing of it. SD is film on Tuesday and sent to UPN for airing. The product is then sent into UPN.

 

This is UPN's freaking fault. They fucked up by not cutting it. They have realised that they have cocked up big time and now are trying to shift the blame onto the WWE. Ass monkeys. Vince just take SD elsewhere.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

WWE deserve the blame too. They had it cut out of every overseas version of Smackdown, but made no such call for the US and Canadian versions, which they could have done. The blame lies with both WWE and UPN.

[zyn081 0]

Update from Dave Meltzer

 

UPN sent word today to WWE after all the negative media publicity stemming from last week's show that they didn't want the Muhammad Hassan character on this week's show.

 

WWE had planned a storyline change for Hassan tonight in Worcester after the storyline involving terrorists from last week backfired.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This is ridiculous. UPN said that they could have decided to cut out the segment if they wanted to. Every TV station has this right. Sky Sports in England excercised that right and Ive heard nothing about Vince or the WWE being upset with Sky for cutting it. UPN had the power to do so, Vince or the WWE. The problem is not the angle itself but the timing of it. SD is film on Tuesday and sent to UPN for airing. The product is then sent into UPN.

 

This is UPN's freaking fault. They fucked up by not cutting it. They have realised that they have cocked up big time and now are trying to shift the blame onto the WWE. Ass monkeys. Vince just take SD elsewhere.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

WWE deserve the blame too. They had it cut out of every overseas version of Smackdown, but made no such call for the US and Canadian versions, which they could have done. The blame lies with both WWE and UPN.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I havent read that they asked for it to be cut out by every overseas TV company that shows SD. If Im not mistaken Sky just went ahead and cut it out themselves.

 

Im not making excuses for them, but SD is shown later overseas than it is in the US, sometimes delayed by a day or 2. Given the short time span, I think that UPN shouldnt have had to ask permission to cut it (which they clearly dont have it) and just gone ahead and cut it. They could have just told the WWE that it was a network decision given the circumstances. The WWE would have accepted that as they did in the UK. That makes it more UPN's fault with respect to this particular segment. I have never defended the WWE for this storyline or angle though.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Update from Dave Meltzer

 

UPN sent word today to WWE after all the negative media publicity stemming from last week's show that they didn't want the Muhammad Hassan character on this week's show.

 

WWE had planned a storyline change for Hassan tonight in Worcester after the storyline involving terrorists from last week backfired.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This is ridiculous. UPN said that they could have decided to cut out the segment if they wanted to. Every TV station has this right. Sky Sports in England excercised that right and Ive heard nothing about Vince or the WWE being upset with Sky for cutting it. UPN had the power to do so, Vince or the WWE. The problem is not the angle itself but the timing of it. SD is film on Tuesday and sent to UPN for airing. The product is then sent into UPN.

 

This is UPN's freaking fault. They fucked up by not cutting it. They have realised that they have cocked up big time and now are trying to shift the blame onto the WWE. Ass monkeys. Vince just take SD elsewhere.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

WWE deserve the blame too. They had it cut out of every overseas version of Smackdown, but made no such call for the US and Canadian versions, which they could have done. The blame lies with both WWE and UPN.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Im not making excuses for them, but SD is shown later overseas than it is in the US, sometimes delayed by a day or 2. Given the short time span, I think that UPN shouldnt have had to ask permission to cut it (which they clearly dont have it) and just gone ahead and cut it. They could have just told the WWE that it was a network decision given the circumstances. The WWE would have accepted that as they did in the UK. That makes it more UPN's fault with respect to this particular segment. I have never defended the WWE for this storyline or angle though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, UPN should have cut it, but in the same vein, WWE should have had the smarts to order it cut out themselves, and that alone, as well as everything else involved, makes WWE partly to blame here.

[zyn081 0]

Update from Dave Meltzer

 

UPN sent word today to WWE after all the negative media publicity stemming from last week's show that they didn't want the Muhammad Hassan character on this week's show.

 

WWE had planned a storyline change for Hassan tonight in Worcester after the storyline involving terrorists from last week backfired.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This is ridiculous. UPN said that they could have decided to cut out the segment if they wanted to. Every TV station has this right. Sky Sports in England excercised that right and Ive heard nothing about Vince or the WWE being upset with Sky for cutting it. UPN had the power to do so, Vince or the WWE. The problem is not the angle itself but the timing of it. SD is film on Tuesday and sent to UPN for airing. The product is then sent into UPN.

 

This is UPN's freaking fault. They fucked up by not cutting it. They have realised that they have cocked up big time and now are trying to shift the blame onto the WWE. Ass monkeys. Vince just take SD elsewhere.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

WWE deserve the blame too. They had it cut out of every overseas version of Smackdown, but made no such call for the US and Canadian versions, which they could have done. The blame lies with both WWE and UPN.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Im not making excuses for them, but SD is shown later overseas than it is in the US, sometimes delayed by a day or 2. Given the short time span, I think that UPN shouldnt have had to ask permission to cut it (which they clearly dont have it) and just gone ahead and cut it. They could have just told the WWE that it was a network decision given the circumstances. The WWE would have accepted that as they did in the UK. That makes it more UPN's fault with respect to this particular segment. I have never defended the WWE for this storyline or angle though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, UPN should have cut it, but in the same vein, WWE should have had the smarts to order it cut out themselves, and that alone, as well as everything else involved, makes WWE partly to blame here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If WWE had the power to order UPN to cut it out at such short notice, then yes, WWE is partly to blame, but on that note, IMHO UPN are more at fault than the WWE, since they have the power of veto regarding what they show on their channels.

 

Some people are making it out here though that this is a 100% WWEs fault, cause they came up with the segment.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

You've got to be kidding me. UPN is MORE RESPONSIBLE than WWE? Despite the fact that the WWE thought of the angle, that the WWE implemented the angle, that the WWE filmed the angle, that the WWE sent the angle to UPN, that the WWE during the 3 days that followed kept the angle intact - and during every single one of those steps could have said "Hey, maybe we shouldn't do this". What planet do you live on?

 

Both groups allowed it to air. But the WWE ultimately chose to do it. Had the WWE not done the angle, UPN wouldn't even have the opportunity to decide on whether to air it or not. This is a 80/20 situation in terms of responsibility.

[zyn081 0]

You've got to be kidding me.  UPN is MORE RESPONSIBLE than WWE?  Despite the fact that the WWE thought of the angle, that the WWE implemented the angle, that the WWE filmed the angle, that the WWE sent the angle to UPN, that the WWE during the 3 days that followed kept the angle intact - and during every single one of those steps could have said "Hey, maybe we shouldn't do this".  What planet do you live on? 

 

Both groups allowed it to air.  But the WWE ultimately chose to do it.  Had the WWE not done the angle, UPN wouldn't even have the opportunity to decide on whether to air it or not.  This is a 80/20 situation in terms of responsibility.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Good you could make it to the ball RRR. And yes, UPN is more responsible. I thought of all the people here, you would get my point, but again, what I say, you cant possibly agree with.

 

Did London happen before the WWE thought of the angle? Did London happen before the WWE implemented the angle? Did London happen before the WWE filmed the angle? Did London happen before the WWE sent the angle to UPN? Ummmmm, NO, NO, NO and most probably NO.

 

EDIT: And I really dont know where you magically get these 3 days from either. It was less than a day that they had time to change it, and that really is a maximum time.

 

Last time I checked and was told so by people in this forum, SD was aired on Thursdays in the US for the 1st time wordwide. People here have told me this, I havent invented this, so excuse my ignorance if I am wrong.

 

If London didnt happen, the segment (NOTE that I am ONLY referring to the UT, Hassan and co SEGMENT, that was aired last Thursday on UPN for the first time) wouldnt being getting the attention that it is now.

 

Let me repeat so that you understand me: The problem with the SEGMENT AIRED ON LAST WEEKS SD is not because of the storyline angle (which has been run since DECEMBER 2004). The problem with it is that it is felt that it was pretty tastless given what happened in LONDON, THE MORNING THAT SD WAS AIRED.

 

The problem is not that the WWE chose to do the segment, it is the TIMING of the segment. Just like a TV channel or a radio station can decide whether or not to beep a caller (and not the person conducting the interview who is providing the product), the UPN could have done so too.

 

WWE is responsible for the product. UPN airs the product. The problem I and other people have is with the airing of the segment. We are for once not just saying that its bad booking on the WWEs part or that the WWE are morons, as you so often accuse of doing when you try to have an intellectual converesation here.

 

When somebody records a commercial it is sent to the TV channel for airing. I find it hard to believe that I can be changed before then. It is either aired or not. But HTQ has opened my eyes to the fact that the WWE had the oppourtunity to cancel the segment. I thought that it was out of their hands based on what people said here.

 

But yes, your right, the AIRING of the segment on SD on THURSDAY was 80/20, just the other way round. And for your information, I live on planet Earth and have lived for some years in the UK, and I have friends and family members who live in and use London.

Edited July 13, 2005 by zyn081

[Stephen Joseph 0]

It's just a shitty angle people.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

The problem is not that the WWE chose to do the segment

 

Yes it is.

 

I don't even care about London, it shouldn't have been done, period. Aren't people still dying in Iraq? Aren't terrorists still killing innocent people in the Middle East? Are you trying to say that it's all relative? That the deaths in London mean more than the deaths elsewhere? That the deaths a week ago mean more than the deaths, say, 2 weeks ago? Is the WWE not trying to profit from those deaths by exploiting certain images and characteristics? Is the WWE tastelessly, tactlessly, and terribly and without any form of critical, social, or artistic commentary not portraying terrorists and terrorism on their television show?

 

The WWE could have made a simple phone call and said "we don't want that on the air" and UPN could have would have complied. It was tasteless when they did it on Monday, it was tasteless when they were editing it on Tuesday, it was tasteless when they sent it on Wednesday, and it was tasteless after the terrorist attack on Thursday. Trust me, any time before 8pm on Thursday could the WWE have prevented it from airing if they really wanted it gone. It doesn't take a lot of time or effort to remove it and put a commercial in its place.

[zyn081 0]

The problem is not that the WWE chose to do the segment

 

Yes it is.

 

I don't even care about London, it shouldn't have been done, period. Aren't people still dying in Iraq? Aren't terrorists still killing innocent people in the Middle East? Are you trying to say that it's all relative? That the deaths in London mean more than the deaths elsewhere? That the deaths a week ago mean more than the deaths, say, 2 weeks ago? Is the WWE not trying to profit from those deaths by exploiting certain images and characteristics? Is the WWE tastelessly, tactlessly, and terribly and without any form of critical, social, or artistic commentary not portraying terrorists and terrorism on their television show?

 

The WWE could have made a simple phone call and said "we don't want that on the air" and UPN could have would have complied. It was tasteless when they did it on Monday, it was tasteless when they were editing it on Tuesday, it was tasteless when they sent it on Wednesday, and it was tasteless after the terrorist attack on Thursday. Trust me, any time before 8pm on Thursday could the WWE have prevented it from airing if they really wanted it gone. It doesn't take a lot of time or effort to remove it and put a commercial in its place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I was expecting your usual line by line analysis. Youve been asking for mature conversations so your getting to get one.

 

First of all, Ill pretend that I didnt hear your 'tastless' comment saying that you dont care about London and then go on to rant about terrorism. And you have gravely misunderstand me. Terrorism is never justifable and is never relative. The taking of human life is never right, let alone the taking of innocent human life. It doesnt matter how many people died in New York, in Iraq, in east Timbuktu, in the south Pacific, in a man living on one man island which is attacked.

 

I had a rather heated conversation about 3 hours ago with a person over what happened in London and the value of human life. I personally believe that the West and countries sharing the same mentally and development should just pull out of certatin countries so as to avoid simialr gutless acts to occur in the future. That isnt a retreatist attitude, its just that with such inhumane cowards you can never win. This persons response was that the US will never pull out of the Middle East because of oil. That persons words, not mine. My response was, oh, thats great, so whats the value of my life in terms of barrels of oil?

 

I dont think that this is a case of the WWE have a laugh at the victims expense. The WWE has a history of making bad calls. I admit that. But you dont seem be understanding me. If anything you are speaking in relatives. The soreness over the segment is the timing of it, because come on now, surely the hurt of 9/11 was awakened in your mind when you heard about London. I dont know what happened in the US, but in Malta, people were running stories about 9/11 and Madrid. Isnt that making money out of something that people are trying to forget. Please try to get what I am saying. London triggered those bad memories. Would we be having this conversation now if London didnt happen? No, we wouldnt.

 

Given the fact that the WWE could have pulled it, then yes they are to blame. But UPN could have put their foot down as Sky Sports did in the UK. They could have and should have cut the segment, but as people apart from myself have stated here, UPN should have spoken up and decided to cut it. UPN are ultimately responsible for what they air on their TV channel, not the WWE. They could have made the show shorter as they did in the UK. I have heard nobody here cmplaining saying hey why was SD so many odd minutes shorter. I dont think, or at least, I hope that people wouldnt have complained about that in the US.

[bob_barron 0]

First of all, Ill pretend that I didnt hear your 'tastless' comment saying that you dont care about London and then go on to rant about terrorism.

 

I don't think that's what RRR meant. I think he meant that regardless of the London attacks or not, it's still a stupid angle.

 

Is that right RRR?

 

I personally believe that the West and countries sharing the same mentally and development should just pull out of certatin countries so as to avoid simialr gutless acts to occur in the future.

 

Yes, because pulling out will send a great message to the terrorists. That'd just be letting them win.

 

The soreness over the segment is the timing of it, because come on now, surely the hurt of 9/11 was awakened in your mind when you heard about London.

 

No it's not. I read about the angle on Monday night and was disgusted then, saw pictures of it on Tuesday and thought it was stupid then too. If London hadn't happened, it still would've been an incredibly stupid angle to run.

 

London just made it worse.

 

London triggered those bad memories. Would we be having this conversation now if London didnt happen? No, we wouldnt.

 

The discussions probably wouldn't have been heated (and I think it was a horrible decision to close that thread IMO), but people would still be discussing it, because the London attacks or not-

 

It still was a stupid and offensive angle to run, that shows how classless WWE is.

[Guest Frank_Nabbit]

WWE replayed the angle on both Sat night and Sun Morning, they knew what they were doing...

 

 

Based on the Bradshaw principle......Muhammed the new champ at SSLAM

[zyn081 0]

1.

First of all, Ill pretend that I didnt hear your 'tastless' comment saying that you dont care about London and then go on to rant about terrorism.

 

I don't think that's what RRR meant. I think he meant that regardless of the London attacks or not, it's still a stupid angle.

 

Is that right RRR?

 

2.

I personally believe that the West and countries sharing the same mentally and development should just pull out of certatin countries so as to avoid simialr gutless acts to occur in the future.

 

Yes, because pulling out will send a great message to the terrorists. That'd just be letting them win.

 

3.

The soreness over the segment is the timing of it, because come on now, surely the hurt of 9/11 was awakened in your mind when you heard about London.

 

No it's not. I read about the angle on Monday night and was disgusted then, saw pictures of it on Tuesday and thought it was stupid then too. If London hadn't happened, it still would've been an incredibly stupid angle to run.

 

London just made it worse.

 

4.

London triggered those bad memories. Would we be having this conversation now if London didnt happen? No, we wouldnt.

 

The discussions probably wouldn't have been heated (and I think it was a horrible decision to close that thread IMO), but people would still be discussing it, because the London attacks or not-

 

It still was a stupid and offensive angle to run, that shows how classless WWE is.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

1. RRR started by saying "I don't even care about London". Just like RRR decided to pick up on 1 line of my post, Im picking up on 1 line of his. I said Ill pretend I didnt hear it. You should have let that slide. I know that RRR is going on about the freaking booking. I can read. But he still wrote "I don't even care about London".

 

2. O yeah, cause the current strategy is working so perfectly isnt it. If you to know about my full thoughts on how to decrease the occurences of such actions, I dont mind telling you, but I have to warn you, I will go way off topic by doing so.

 

3. Yes, I understand and appreciate what your saying. But as you say, London made it worse. If London didnt happen, people would have just had a go at the WWE. My problem with the angle is that London did happen, and the UPN should have just said, we dont give two hoots what Vince McMahon says, the segment is out. Somebody is one of the threads on this segment here (there are a few of them, and its starting to get confusing now) said that the UPN walked the line to make money out of it. If it was cut from other countries round the world, why wasnt it cut in the US?

 

4. I like the way that you acknowledge what I am trying to say and instead of replying to that, you just decide to disregard it and rant on. Lets chip and give 1 shiny dollar each to UPN for a job well done.

 

Close which thread?

[zyn081 0]

WWE replayed the angle on both Sat night and Sun Morning, they knew what they were doing...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If they did that then shame on them. I dont think people can drop the hammer so heavily on them with respect to the first airing of the segment on Thursday. Which has been my argument, just to point that out.

[bob_barron 0]

UPN should've cut it, but WWE shouldn't have the done angle in the first place.

 

And if they ran the angle without the London bombing, there still would've some backlash. People were outraged before the attacks happened.

[Boon 0]

Apparently Hassan's direction is Velocity, b/c they don't want him on Smackdown.

[Guest xad]

On this weeks Smackdown Hassan makes a statement - this most likely won't get aired as UPN has directed WWE not to show "the Hassan character" this week, therefore i don't think this can be constituted as a spoiler. The video however can be seen on WWE.com and i myself found it very interesting even though i was originally somewhat disturbed by what i saw. Hassan makes some really good points, for example, the new york post's guy wrote about how "arabs" in ski masks attacked someone...however, hassan points out how this guy came to the conclusion they were arabs if they had ski masks on? He pointed out how every is too quick to blame all problems on arabs. He also asked why the guy saw them as terrorists when they have never met him nor have they done anything that would allow someone to label them as terrorists - being arab doesn't automatically make them terrorists. A lot of other stuff was said which i found interesting.

 

 

 

Heres a transcript of what was said (copy pasted from pw.com):

I stand here tonight the only patriot left in America. I stand here tonight perhaps even a martyr against tyranny and injustice. Because the fact is I am an AMERICAN professional wrestler, but because of my heritage, because of my background, because of who my ancestors were, I'm labeled - we're labeled terrorists. Terrorists; I'm a terrorist! Well it must be true - it's gotta be true - because it's right here in black and white, in a reputable source, like the New York Post.

 

What, you don't believe me? Here it is: "Terrorist Wrestles After Bombing." I'm a terrorist - we're terrorists. We wrestled after a bombing. Well, Mr. Don Kaplan, (to Daivari) have you ever met Don Kaplan? Have you ever spoken to Don Kaplan? Have you ever called Don Kaplan on the phone? Well, I never have either. So, if Don Kaplan of the New York Post has never met us, how does Don Kaplan know we're terrorists? Don Kaplan also wrote that "Arabs in ski-masks carried Daivari out as a sacrifice last week." Arabs in SKI-MASKS...in SKI-MASKS...in a ski-mask. How does he know that they were Arabs?

 

The point is, because of articles like this, because of the fear that the media has put in all of you people, I have been denied my God-given right to pursue the profession of my choosing...to pursue the American Dream. I have been denied my basic rights as an American citizen. You know, as I look around this crowd and I look at all these faces looking at me in disgust, I think a lot of you have forgotten what this country was founded on. I think you have forgotten that your ancestors fought for their freedom. They gave their lives for their freedom - whether they be black, Irish-American, Italian-American, Jewish-American, Asian-American, they gave their lives for their freedom.

 

What's next? What's next? Because anytime anything goes wrong in this country, it's the Arabs. When a plane crashes, it's the Arabs. When a bomb goes off, it's the Arabs. The blackout two summers ago - it was the Arabs. Hurricane Dennis must be the Arabs.

 

You people say what you want. Because I have a right to be in here. I have a right to say what I want. And what I'm going to say, my name is Muhammad Hassan. I am an Arab-American and I am very proud of my heritage. But, as an American, my first amendment rights have been trampled. And, I stand here before all of you ashamed of my country.

 

(Hassan rips the NYPost article as Daivari translates the speech)

[Dangerous A 0]

Great, Vince is venting his "freedom" rant through Hassan.

 

Yep, Batista is losing the title at Summerslam to Hassan. I can just feel it. Call it the JBL syndrome.

[Guest jumpingbombangel]

WWE replayed the angle on both Sat night and Sun Morning, they knew what they were doing...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If they did that then shame on them. I dont think people can drop the hammer so heavily on them with respect to the first airing of the segment on Thursday. Which has been my argument, just to point that out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's easy as hell to drop the hammer on WWE. They've shown time and again to be immature and just goddamn stupid by trying to show their balls, and this time it bit them right on the taint so badly that they're pussifying out with this spin bullshit.

 

If no one had called the WWE out on the carpet, you could be damn sure this angle would have intensified.

[notJames 0]

Hear hear. If only they had presented Hassan from the beginning as merely a Arab-American trying to dispel the myths about his heritage and let the audience decide whether they approve of him or not, none of Vince's bluster and backtracking would be necessary. A well-rounded character could have naturally evolved from it instead of going directly to the knee-jerk "anti-American" heel that WW_ thinks is a ticket to the big money. Because that shit hasn't worked in a long time, especially the way they always seem to go about it.

[Crimson Platypus 0]

I hope that everyone that is all up in arms about this read the transcript of that promo that Hassan did that will not air on UPN. For all any of us know that was written prior to last week's attack on Undertaker (although, knowing the tendencies of the WWE bookers it was written as soon as they got heat on Hassan from UPN).

[Boon 0]

 

If no one had called the WWE out on the carpet, you could be damn sure this angle would have intensified.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I really feel like this was the best angle for them to take, even before all the fallback. It fits best with Hassan's character the way he's been portrayed up to this point. I said when I saw the spoilers that next week he'd cut a promo saying what he said. He just had that New York Post article to back up what he was saying.

[Crimson Platypus 0]

Methinks some people are using their jump to conclusions mat a bit too often.

[Boon 0]

You see, it would be this mat...

[bobobrazil1984 0]

This is UPN's freaking fault. They fucked up by not cutting it. They have realised that they have cocked up big time and now are trying to shift the blame onto the WWE. Ass monkeys. Vince just take SD elsewhere.

 

WWE wrote the shit in the first place, they created the Hassan character. You dont need another actual terrorist attack to let you know that the whole thing sucks ass.