Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

The good news is they already know who they are looking for. They just aren’t telling us yet. Make no mistake, Trump knew about the ammo markings long before any of us did which is probably why he started blaming the left.

We will all be seeing his picture and hearing his story soon. Try not to make too much of a fool of yourselves claiming false flag in the meantime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

Funny because in my neighborhood nobody is talking about this assassination since nobody knows who he was and he didn't hold public office. Of course, it is sad when anybody is killed, especially a parent of young children.

Are you in an assisted living community? Funny that an entire neighborhood can be so clueless and uninformed.

It sounds like if you followed conservative influencers or religious influencers, you would know about him. If you're not in those communities, you might recognize the name, but you're not going to know who he is or look at him as any kind of leader.

I never focused on what he said or listened to his podcast but any reasonably educated person in DC knew he founded Turning Points and that was an important figure on the Right.

If you and your neighbors are clueless about who he was, it doesn't mean you are uneducated, it just means you do not have a pulse on the political landscape of the country.

People knew the name and maybe the name of turning point. Beyond that most have learned about him because of all of this current coverage. So it sounds like he was a leader in these communities but not that well known outside of them.

For people that would like to be educated, who are other "leaders" on the right or left are this level?

I knew who he was and had seen clips, but I didn’t really know that he was influential and hateful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kirk’s speaking events are a worldwide lesson in respectful civil discourse.

He’s a stand up person, but I’m from liberal Arlington Heights where he grew up and lives.

This is a major loss for the country, political rhetoric aside.

Obviously it was a hired sniper, could be brainwashed leftist American or foreigner.

NSA, CIA and FBI investigators are all over this.

At some point a foreign entity or leftist domestic group will take credit.

+1

Am in the center, only mid 40s, don’t know him, but could quickly figure out this Kirk was out to talk, share perspectives and challenge premises of flimsy claims.

Debate team 101 stuff.

Critical thinking stuff.

America needs more of that not less.

Except he spread false information, and made up facts to suit his arguments.
He also extended the debate from legitimate policy issues to the identity of who really counts as an American. That's not respectful - it's bigotry.
George Will, William F Buckley, Ross Douhout - those are people on the right who I can respect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

Funny because in my neighborhood nobody is talking about this assassination since nobody knows who he was and he didn't hold public office. Of course, it is sad when anybody is killed, especially a parent of young children.

Are you in an assisted living community? Funny that an entire neighborhood can be so clueless and uninformed.

It sounds like if you followed conservative influencers or religious influencers, you would know about him. If you're not in those communities, you might recognize the name, but you're not going to know who he is or look at him as any kind of leader.

I never focused on what he said or listened to his podcast but any reasonably educated person in DC knew he founded Turning Points and that was an important figure on the Right.

If you and your neighbors are clueless about who he was, it doesn't mean you are uneducated, it just means you do not have a pulse on the political landscape of the country.

People knew the name and maybe the name of turning point. Beyond that most have learned about him because of all of this current coverage. So it sounds like he was a leader in these communities but not that well known outside of them.

For people that would like to be educated, who are other "leaders" on the right or left are this level?

Just get your own X account. If you read it like you read the NYT or WaPo, then you will have figured out who the thought-leaders are in about 2-3 days. You really need to spend a little time on your own just reading than waiting for a summary from mass media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TPUSA is bringing in $100M a year. You think that's organic? This boy was propped up with global money to brainwash American youth into being pro Zionist, pro war, pro austerity, and pro big business.

Kirk was starting to break rank with Trump. Liar Loomer stated he didn’t support the Iranian strikes in June and critiqued the President for it. Most MAGA are on the same page as someone like Ana Kasparian and are anti war much to the chagrin of Israel /USA war hawks like Loomer so no, Kirk was not necessarily pro war. He said in June “not even the romans could beat Persia”. He was not for that war anyway.

My money’s still on Iranian patsy

lol. Sure, sure chicken hawk. If you’re itching for war so bad why don’t you go enlist for the front lines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The good news is they already know who they are looking for. They just aren’t telling us yet. Make no mistake, Trump knew about the ammo markings long before any of us did which is probably why he started blaming the left.

We will all be seeing his picture and hearing his story soon. Try not to make too much of a fool of yourselves claiming false flag in the meantime.

Because it's too easy to inscribe a few bullets or your rifle with markings, so now we get suspicious when these things happen. If it turns out that the perp is indeed a far-left person, I certainly won't regret expressing doubts about it, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The good news is they already know who they are looking for. They just aren’t telling us yet. Make no mistake, Trump knew about the ammo markings long before any of us did which is probably why he started blaming the left.

We will all be seeing his picture and hearing his story soon. Try not to make too much of a fool of yourselves claiming false flag in the meantime.

Oh lord. You’ll buy whatever boogeyman Trump is selling, won’t you?

Anyway, release the Trump-Epstein files.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And maybe those bullets were planted to stoke hate, obviously.

Yep, this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those who say Charlie Lirk was a great person, nothing but respectful, only trying to do good in the world…

Do you think it’s a good thing that his organization (Turning Point USA) maintained a “Professor Watch List”? That list has led to people getting death threats and needing security to do their jobs. Would you want to be on such a list? Would that make you feel safe? Do you think putting people on a public list that results in them being targeted by unstable
individuals is a Christian thing to do?

I am really trying to understand how people can sort of paper over documented harmful actions like this. And I don’t wish to hear a whataboutism type argument about something a liberal did because that’s not the question at hand. It just seems to me that people are cherry picking certain actions and words to only paint CK in a good light simply because CK was on “their team”.

Oh and to be clear I am in no way trying to suggest that CK deserved what happened. There is no justification for murder. I am specifically trying to understand the current effort to paint an image that is not the full picture of what CK did and stood for.

When people die, humans have a custom of saying nice things about them rather than listing their shortcomings.

Sure, for people you know personally. But why go out of your way to practically canonize a public figure you have never met in a social media post, when there are documented things that person did which are not Christian?

I don’t think it helps anyone to act like someone never did a single harmful thing in their life and use that to paint one side as all good and one side as all evil.

Well sure. I’m not canonizing the guy, but I understand why people who admired him are. Not sure I understand the purpose of feigning confusion about this.

The only reason to say bad things about him at this point is to justify, excuse, or diminish his murder.

That said, I certainly agree that the current trend of painting the sides (whichever side you may be on) as good/evil is inaccurate and damaging.

A worst people are using his own words against him.

I think you need to re-read this thread. People are doing far worse.

And even if what you say is true, what’s the purpose? What does it accomplish?

“I was right and he was wrong and now he’s dead. Ha ha!” Not a good look, imo.

He was running a for profit hate machine and said a bunch of horrible things over the years. He displayed complete indifference to the suffering of others.

That’s just a flat out lie. I’d bet good money you’ve never watched more than five minutes of him speaking.

You do understand that anyone with Internet access can find his videos and quotes, right?

Honestly, you people are sick for lionizing him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP


https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/charlie-kirk-shot

As the WSJ article states, it is reminiscent of the NYC executioner, Luigee Mangionee in the the ammunition in the rifle used to brutally assassinate Charlie Kirk was found to be inscribed with Antiffa and pro-transg slogans, according to WSJ:

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/charlie-kirk-shot

I don't believe Patel's FBI and that shot was professional.

Need someone that is an amateur hunter to weigh in.

Any amateur hunter can easily make a 200 yard shot with halfway decent equipment. Literally millions of Americans do it every hunting season.

A 5 minute YouTube search proves it.

This amateur teenage girl easily made this shot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those who say Charlie Lirk was a great person, nothing but respectful, only trying to do good in the world…

Do you think it’s a good thing that his organization (Turning Point USA) maintained a “Professor Watch List”? That list has led to people getting death threats and needing security to do their jobs. Would you want to be on such a list? Would that make you feel safe? Do you think putting people on a public list that results in them being targeted by unstable
individuals is a Christian thing to do?

I am really trying to understand how people can sort of paper over documented harmful actions like this. And I don’t wish to hear a whataboutism type argument about something a liberal did because that’s not the question at hand. It just seems to me that people are cherry picking certain actions and words to only paint CK in a good light simply because CK was on “their team”.

Oh and to be clear I am in no way trying to suggest that CK deserved what happened. There is no justification for murder. I am specifically trying to understand the current effort to paint an image that is not the full picture of what CK did and stood for.

When people die, humans have a custom of saying nice things about them rather than listing their shortcomings.

Sure, for people you know personally. But why go out of your way to practically canonize a public figure you have never met in a social media post, when there are documented things that person did which are not Christian?

I don’t think it helps anyone to act like someone never did a single harmful thing in their life and use that to paint one side as all good and one side as all evil.

Well sure. I’m not canonizing the guy, but I understand why people who admired him are. Not sure I understand the purpose of feigning confusion about this.

The only reason to say bad things about him at this point is to justify, excuse, or diminish his murder.

That said, I certainly agree that the current trend of painting the sides (whichever side you may be on) as good/evil is inaccurate and damaging.

Actually, the only reason not to list all the horrible things he’s done is because jeff asks people to wait 48 hours.

People can peruse his X feed and form their own opinions. I don't understand why people need to be told how to think. Read and form your own opinions.

The problem is that people don’t read or do any research. They go on social media, see posts that do not tell all sides of a story, and become outraged accordingly. Maybe some people who admired this guy would feel a little differently if they were fully aware of all of his actions and not just curated social media clips from events.

And I disagree that to point anything like this out is to justify or diminish what happened. We have a real problem in this country. We’re social media is used to distort or misrepresent the truth or hide certain pieces of information in order to get people all spun up. And I would be saying the same thing if we were talking about say a killing of a black person by the police. It’s a problem if people run to social media and only talk about how that person was a saint when maybe there is more to the story. People are forming opinions without having all of the facts and no one wants to put in any effort beyond scrolling their feeds, which only give them things that reinforce their existing beliefs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

He was not a leader. He was a podcaster.

He had the ear of the POTUS. Stop trying to minimize his importance.

Random podcasters don’t get assassinated for political reasons.

Well, he DID just break from his talking points and demand the release of the Epstein files. That could have upset some powerful people. Especially Trump.

Actually, in July, he demanded the release of the files.

After a phone call with Trump, he changed his opinion.

Just recently, he said that the signature on the letter was fake.

That could really piss off some MAGA.

Mark my words: a q anon crazy went after him for backing Trump on the Epstein files.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those who say Charlie Lirk was a great person, nothing but respectful, only trying to do good in the world…

Do you think it’s a good thing that his organization (Turning Point USA) maintained a “Professor Watch List”? That list has led to people getting death threats and needing security to do their jobs. Would you want to be on such a list? Would that make you feel safe? Do you think putting people on a public list that results in them being targeted by unstable
individuals is a Christian thing to do?

I am really trying to understand how people can sort of paper over documented harmful actions like this. And I don’t wish to hear a whataboutism type argument about something a liberal did because that’s not the question at hand. It just seems to me that people are cherry picking certain actions and words to only paint CK in a good light simply because CK was on “their team”.

Oh and to be clear I am in no way trying to suggest that CK deserved what happened. There is no justification for murder. I am specifically trying to understand the current effort to paint an image that is not the full picture of what CK did and stood for.

When people die, humans have a custom of saying nice things about them rather than listing their shortcomings.

Sure, for people you know personally. But why go out of your way to practically canonize a public figure you have never met in a social media post, when there are documented things that person did which are not Christian?

I don’t think it helps anyone to act like someone never did a single harmful thing in their life and use that to paint one side as all good and one side as all evil.

Well sure. I’m not canonizing the guy, but I understand why people who admired him are. Not sure I understand the purpose of feigning confusion about this.

The only reason to say bad things about him at this point is to justify, excuse, or diminish his murder.

That said, I certainly agree that the current trend of painting the sides (whichever side you may be on) as good/evil is inaccurate and damaging.

A worst people are using his own words against him.

I think you need to re-read this thread. People are doing far worse.

And even if what you say is true, what’s the purpose? What does it accomplish?

“I was right and he was wrong and now he’s dead. Ha ha!” Not a good look, imo.

He was running a for profit hate machine and said a bunch of horrible things over the years. He displayed complete indifference to the suffering of others.

That’s just a flat out lie. I’d bet good money you’ve never watched more than five minutes of him speaking.

I've watched hours of him debating. He's very well-spoken but that doesn't change the substance of what he says. For example: "If I see a Black pilot, I'm gonna be like 'boy, I hope he is qualified." That's just inexcusable.

[Anonymous]

BREAKING: Investigators have obtained "high quality" video of the Charlie Kirk assassin, but will NOT yet be releasing it to the public yet

The suspect arrived on campus at 11:52am, walked across campus, and accessed a rooftop from a stairwell.

After the shooting, he ran to the other side of the building, jumped off the rooftop, and fled into the neighborhood.

That's where investigators found the doorbell camera footage of him.

HE WILL BE FOUND.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those who say Charlie Lirk was a great person, nothing but respectful, only trying to do good in the world…

Do you think it’s a good thing that his organization (Turning Point USA) maintained a “Professor Watch List”? That list has led to people getting death threats and needing security to do their jobs. Would you want to be on such a list? Would that make you feel safe? Do you think putting people on a public list that results in them being targeted by unstable
individuals is a Christian thing to do?

I am really trying to understand how people can sort of paper over documented harmful actions like this. And I don’t wish to hear a whataboutism type argument about something a liberal did because that’s not the question at hand. It just seems to me that people are cherry picking certain actions and words to only paint CK in a good light simply because CK was on “their team”.

Oh and to be clear I am in no way trying to suggest that CK deserved what happened. There is no justification for murder. I am specifically trying to understand the current effort to paint an image that is not the full picture of what CK did and stood for.

When people die, humans have a custom of saying nice things about them rather than listing their shortcomings.

Sure, for people you know personally. But why go out of your way to practically canonize a public figure you have never met in a social media post, when there are documented things that person did which are not Christian?

I don’t think it helps anyone to act like someone never did a single harmful thing in their life and use that to paint one side as all good and one side as all evil.

Well sure. I’m not canonizing the guy, but I understand why people who admired him are. Not sure I understand the purpose of feigning confusion about this.

The only reason to say bad things about him at this point is to justify, excuse, or diminish his murder.

That said, I certainly agree that the current trend of painting the sides (whichever side you may be on) as good/evil is inaccurate and damaging.

A worst people are using his own words against him.

I think you need to re-read this thread. People are doing far worse.

And even if what you say is true, what’s the purpose? What does it accomplish?

“I was right and he was wrong and now he’s dead. Ha ha!” Not a good look, imo.

He was running a for profit hate machine and said a bunch of horrible things over the years. He displayed complete indifference to the suffering of others.

That’s just a flat out lie. I’d bet good money you’ve never watched more than five minutes of him speaking.

You do understand that anyone with Internet access can find his videos and quotes, right?

Honestly, you people are sick for lionizing him.

+1

Just look at what he posted this past week......