Source? I haven’t seen anything of the kind yet.Now that it is starting to become more and more clear that this was an example of MAGA on MAGA violence
I've seen it suggested and there's been rumblings out there that he may be a Laura Loomer or Nick Fuentes supporter. Note - none of this is confirmed.Source? I haven’t seen anything of the kind yet.
I don't believe that @Detective Beauregard @el diablo @____no5 or any of the other MAGAs shedding crocodile tears online actually care about any of this.
The problem here isn't with "radical leftists," it's the guy at the top and the fact that he has attracted some very unsavory and ill intentioned people to his coalition, including people like Nick Fuentes who, if he didn't order the hit directly, definitely stirred his followers into a frenzy that led to Kirk's death. It's not hard to imagine that had Trump lost in November, these people wouldn't have been enabled in such a way and Charlie Kirk would still be alive. So, once again, thanks Trump voters! As long as you keep voting for violent criminals to hold high office and stay silent when violence happens against people you don't like, these sorts of events will continue to happen.
this is the most comprehensive article I could find on what we know so far.Source? I haven’t seen anything of the kind yet.
Some memes, however, aren’t so neutral. The young men who admired, and still admire, Charlie Kirk tend to be extremely online—which doesn’t necessarily mean that they all share exactly the same ideology. Internecine conflict between conservative factions is common, both on social media and at events for young conservatives. The most notable of these are the “Groyper Wars” of 2019. “Groypers” are fans of white nationalist agitator Nick Fuentes who like to hide their racism behind ironic jokes; when Kirk began making an effort to mainstream his ultra-right-wing Turning Point USA movement, Fuentes instructed them to publicly troll Kirk.
A Facebook photo in which Robinson appears to reference a Groyper meme has led to early speculation that Kirk’s killing may have been an outgrowth of these intra-far-right skirmishes. But another feature of the modern far-right is an embrace of the post-truth huckster. In these circles, it’s always possible that someone is playing a character—or will claim to be doing so, muddying the waters so no one can accuse them of having a sincere belief beyond the desire to rile up their targets. For people like this, the whole world is a forum board, where lewd public comments and real-world violence are becoming increasingly interchangeable. (Consider the messages left behind by the deceased shooter of Annunciation Catholic School, which were full of references to both other shooters and innocuous memes.)
Still not sure what you’re talking about. In fact….You mention us for shedding "crocodile tears" and yet not a word about those who openly cheering for a murder in a forum you are moderating.
First of all: I'm not celebrating his death.
Absolutely. I’m not gloating in any way.
Political violence shouldn't be the answer to anything
Whether you agreed with Kirk or not, this is a sad day for the USA.
But no one likes political violence. This is a bad path we've taken as a nation.
My heart bleeds with every new report about a person being killed, it bleeds when the only political action is a tweet for thoughts and prayers, and it bleeds when bad faith actors try to spin this violence into their own political issues instead of addressing the root problems.
I know you don’t like evidence based arguments, but I fail to see the cheering you are referring to, with one exception.I think what has happened is truly awful. It is despicable. He did not deserve to get murdered while participating in discourse, and you don't solve problems by violence and Leftist public figures are condemning, and should continue to do so, this horrific act.
I am. Direct your anger at me.
One less motherfucker, is one less motherfucker.
Small victory but I'll take it.
Don't you Americans have a saying that goes
"If you live by the sword,
you will die by the sword"?
So why are you so surprised?
I know you don’t like evidence based arguments, but I fail to see the cheering you are referring to, with one exception.
This is partially my point. It barely made a blip. A sitting politician was murdered. Her husband was murdered. But she was on the “wrong side” and the supposedly left-wing media I keep hearing about barely ran a headline. But a private citizen with millions of social media followers on the “right team” gets days of national coverage, flags at half mast, and a medal of freedom. It’s sickening.
I think it's A, God's Proper Law is like a proper noun though. And B, derives from God being perfect and thus any of God's laws are divinely perfect.
(Click on it to see the video)
I get that, but pointing to a single instance of plausible deniability and trying to claim that Charlie wasn't homophobic despite there being years of footage where he argues those things is disingenuous. I've said it before, but there's a reason why the media (and social media posts) that are trying to paint him as this innocent figure never actually show clips of him, only images.I think it's A, God's Proper Law is like a proper noun though. And B, derives from God being perfect and thus any of God's laws are divinely perfect.
(that being said, religious cherry-picking is ever omnipresent and people tend to argue their own personal beliefs through proof from scripture. And I don't believe in any of that stuff being an atheist, but as a Christian, you can make logical arguments from scriptures based around the belief system).
Eh, you have folks like @Detective Beauregard who came in hot trying to blame "leftists" and the entire left without a shred of evidence. Right after the shooting you had major Fox News talking heads calling for civil war and violence against the left, despite the left having nothing to do with this shooting!Social media is especially shocking right now. Everyone trying to prove they hate people on "the left" or "the right" even more than the next person. I'm frightened.
"Not me -- him also": That's how schoolboys playing soccer get out of trouble when a window gets broken. The last thing we need in this fucked up world is the USA to completely tear itself apart now. "When they go low, we go high", remember? Now it seems to be: "When they go low, we go even lower."Eh, you have folks like @Detective Beauregard who came in hot trying to blame "leftists" and the entire left without a shred of evidence. Right after the shooting you had major Fox News talking heads calling for civil war and violence against the left, despite the left having nothing to do with this shooting!
There are no "half-truths", just because Stephen King misquoted something. Charlie Kirk was a fascist who wanted the violent eradication of trans people. He said MLK was an awful man and that the Civil Rights were a mistake. He was a white supremacist and an anti-semite. Those are all truths, supported by his very own words. I posted sources on earlier pages, including the clips where he says those things. None of this is up for debate, but trying to muddy the waters about something so clearly established paints a veeery bad look. I'd think twice before going down that route."Not me -- him also": That's how schoolboys playing soccer get out of trouble when a window gets broken. The last thing we need in this fucked up world is the USA to completely tear itself apart now. "When they go low, we go high", remember? Now it seems to be: "When they go low, we go even lower."
It's very easy to show that Trump is a terrible president. It's counterproductive to twist words and construct drama out of, generously speaking, half-truths.
Source? I haven’t seen anything of the kind yet.
Nono, pure coincidence.US DOJ blocks access to their own National Institute of Justice research article citing right-wing extremists responsible for 84% of politically motivated homicides 24 hours after Charlie Kirk's assassination.
Huh, interesting, innit? Here's the archived article: