Jump to content

Charlie Kirk assassinated at an event in Utah (by a 22 YO groyper)


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Without Mr. President’s leadership it’s hard to see how the FBI could have cracked this case. 
 

image.thumb.png.eb3ec296343740a6a635819b58ac1776.png

Oh look, it's Brooke Singman again. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Her posting hovering over his body/casket reeks of performance art and of desperation. And his jacket not being completely buttoned up makes me surly. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • immamac changed the title to Charlie Kirk assassinated at an event in Utah (by a 22 YO groyper)
Posted (edited)

 

35 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

Frankly I'm struggling a little with this. (I did not read the article-paywall) It's happened (leopards) and yes--both sides--and it's been discussed regarding one's speech not being free from consequences. The troubling aspect that I am seeing is what I believe to be the misuse of governmental power to punish those who are not actually employed by the government. A private employer within reason is allowed to hire and fire employees as is the government, but (and please educate me if I'm mistaken) and the government has policy that dictates the do's and don'ts for its employees as well and some legal justification for 'interfering' with private concerns that cross over into the relationship between public and private (say embezzling PPP loans etc). But I was witnessing government leadership essentially citing opinions by citizens as terrorism, yes? And opinions that were directed toward another private citizen, who is no longer among the living. That the deceased was either liked or disliked by many is perhaps irrelevant to the government excepting cases of interference (meaning actual threats, harassment, etc).

So the consequences for one's crass tweet(s) I can somewhat square with how things have been; but the idea that groups are sending 'lists' of other citizens' media to the government (and other than Miller's statement on Fox, I admittedly don't know how true or not that is) to be tattled ratted out reported on and then harrassed is hmmm, something our country needs to square up and say, nope, not happening here. Because to do so weakens the argument that our country is not under threat from actually an authoritarian regime. Events are moving so quickly, it's hard to get a handle on things, but I do know one thing; if the current leader were to pass due to health, the surveillance state, its protocol, and what happens afterward will likely have been greatly shaped by this event.

I don't know if I'm making sense here. It's all so sad all around. What are we doing to each other and why why we do we behave so stupidly to each other?

 

Edited by Mrs Whiggins
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

 

Frankly I'm struggling a little with this. (I did not read the article-paywall) It's happened (leopards) and yes--both sides--and it's been discussed regarding one's speech not being free from consequences. The troubling aspect that I am seeing is what I believe to be the misuse of governmental power to punish those who are not actually employed by the government. A private employer within reason is allowed to hire and fire employees as is the government, but (and please educate me if I'm mistaken) and the government has policy that dictates the do's and don'ts for its employees as well and some legal justification for 'interfering' with private concerns that cross over into the relationship between public and private (say embezzling PPP loans etc). But I was witnessing government leadership essentially citing opinions by citizens as terrorism, yes? And opinions that were directed toward another private citizen, who is no longer among the living. That the deceased was either liked or disliked by many is perhaps irrelevant to the government excepting cases of interference (meaning actual threats, harassment, etc).

So the consequences for one's crass tweet(s) I can somewhat square with how things have been; but the idea that groups are sending 'lists' of other citizens' media to the government (and other than Miller's statement on Fox, I admittedly don't know how true or not that is) to be tattled ratted out reported on and then harrassed is hmmm, something our country needs to square up and say, nope, not happening here. Because to do so weakens the argument that our country is not under threat from actually an authoritarian regime. Events are moving so quickly, it's hard to get a handle on things, but I do know one thing; if the current leader were to pass due to health, the surveillance state, its protocol, and what happens afterward will likely have been greatly shaped by this event.

I don't know if I'm making sense here. It's all so sad all around. What are we doing to each other and why why we do we behave so stupidly to each other?

 

Donald Glover GIF by Childish Gambino

  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted

The snowflakes on the right are using it as a way to get people removed. 
 

https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/complaints-filed-against-bothell-wa-hs-principal-over-charlie-kirk-post.amp
 

Quote

The post read: "Thoughts and prayers. Too bad gun control would have been far far more effective (he’d still be alive). Maybe thoughts and prayers will work…oops – nope."

The post also contained a picture of Kirk with the words "Pray For Charlie Kirk." 

When people complain about something like this, they are looking for a reason. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Never been on rumble before. All the ads were maga related, and all the videos below this one appeared from thumbnails to be right wing agitprop about Kirk and the shooter’s trans partner. 

Rumble is not a credible source. Their relationship with fact is tortured.

Posted
7 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Rumble is not a credible source. Their relationship with fact is tortured.

So it's MAGA approved and a an excellent source of all "real" information.

  • Haha 1


×
×
  • Create New...