Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Lance and Tyler were this flaming, furry bizarre counterculture couple, they would have left Utah.

+1 This is what I said as soon as Robinson was identified. If he were actually a lefty he would have take his great ACT score and 4.0 GPA and gone anywhere else. For free. Now people are trying to convince us that his one semester at Utah State of all places radicalized him. Come the f*** on.

The shooter went to USU for one semester 3 years ago. He wasn't there long enough to get "indoctrinated" (ie educated and exposed to people of different backgrounds and cultures)

I read that his single semester was online. He spent a few months logging into blackboard, that’s it.

That seems likely given COVID. Lots of kids dropped out then, even ones who would have been successful otherwise. The strong ones got back on track. Many others didn't.

We are seeing the results of the seeds that were planted during Covid. Whatever content people took in when we are all locked in the house has now fruited into a lot of the intense beliefs and online behaviors we see now. We were all chronically online that year, and everyone didn’t come out the same on the other side.

That’s when Tyler and Lance started hacking into domestic and foreign govt agencies probably.

When were they hired by the foreign governments? Because there's literally zero connection between hacking into an agency's computer and being hired by them, usually.

They could have been hired after freshman year.

No they worked for the CIA or were independent. They weren’t assisting foreign governments. God…

Why would the CIA have hired them? That is also crazy talk. They don't seem very stable. Or discreet.

He is a brilliant hacker, he can hack into anything he wants.

But cyber operations is not big at CIA. It’s another agency.

Ok NSA whatever. He could have been an independent contractor.

This is just silly talk. I hope you are being sarcastic. If not, seek help.

Silly talk? Who do you think works for these agencies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Lance and Tyler were this flaming, furry bizarre counterculture couple, they would have left Utah.

+1 This is what I said as soon as Robinson was identified. If he were actually a lefty he would have take his great ACT score and 4.0 GPA and gone anywhere else. For free. Now people are trying to convince us that his one semester at Utah State of all places radicalized him. Come the f*** on.

The shooter went to USU for one semester 3 years ago. He wasn't there long enough to get "indoctrinated" (ie educated and exposed to people of different backgrounds and cultures)

I read that his single semester was online. He spent a few months logging into blackboard, that’s it.

That seems likely given COVID. Lots of kids dropped out then, even ones who would have been successful otherwise. The strong ones got back on track. Many others didn't.

We are seeing the results of the seeds that were planted during Covid. Whatever content people took in when we are all locked in the house has now fruited into a lot of the intense beliefs and online behaviors we see now. We were all chronically online that year, and everyone didn’t come out the same on the other side.

That’s when Tyler and Lance started hacking into domestic and foreign govt agencies probably.

When were they hired by the foreign governments? Because there's literally zero connection between hacking into an agency's computer and being hired by them, usually.

They could have been hired after freshman year.

No they worked for the CIA or were independent. They weren’t assisting foreign governments. God…

Why would the CIA have hired them? That is also crazy talk. They don't seem very stable. Or discreet.

He is a brilliant hacker, he can hack into anything he wants.

But cyber operations is not big at CIA. It’s another agency.

Ok NSA whatever. He could have been an independent contractor.

This is just silly talk. I hope you are being sarcastic. If not, seek help.

Silly talk? Who do you think works for these agencies?

Not dropouts of fourth-tier regional universities, that's for sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess the legacy of Charlie Kirk will be "sure, disagree with me, but if you do you'll lose your job"

Celebrating an innocent man being murdered isn't just disagreeing with someone. It's disgusting and we should be doing better. These lunatics losing their jobs is a GOOD thing for society.

The pastor at Alfred Street Baptist wasn't celebrating his death at all. Yet according to a PP, he now has a target on his back.

According to a lot of people anyone that doesn't put Charlie Kirk on a pedestal is "celebrating his death". No, I don't care that he died and it certainly doesn't make me happy. But he was horrible. Unfortunately there are many more like him.

like this Canadian journalist

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2025/09/15/Dangerous-Targeting-Canadian-Journalist/Canadian journalist Rachel Gilmore took to social media to share insights based on years of reporting, writing that she was concerned some fans of Kirk on the far right who are “aching for more violence, could turn this into an even more radicalizing moment. Will they now believe their fears have been proven right and they have a right to ‘retaliate,’ no matter who was behind the actual shooting?”

Conservative MP Andrew Scheer swiftly reposted Gilmore’s comments, saying she was “twisted” and had “so much hate in her.” Other Canadian Conservatives also weighed in or reposted Scheer’s comment, while a screenshot of another post Gilmore made was circulated by right-wing influencers.

Hours later, Gilmore’s name was the first to appear on a website called “Expose Charlie’s Murderers,” part of an effort by right-wing figures to identify people they viewed as having celebrated Kirk’s killing. In many cases, MAGA supporters have called for those people to lose their jobs.

Gilmore then received death and rape threats, including threats that say, “We know where you live.”

As the U.S. tech magazine Wired reported, Gilmore’s initial analysis was accurate: in the hours following the shooting, high-profile figures in the MAGA movement, as well as far-right extremists, posted calls for war or civil war, to punish Democrats for “terrorism,” named “the left” as “the party of murder” and called to restart far-right militias.

This is the truly scary part. Ethical journalists are being silenced for doing their jobs.

Meh. It could be worse. They could get shot in the neck.

That lady journalist doesn't deserve death threats. Her statements are full of lies but as long as she's just writing her glorified opinion piece, she's within her right.
If they identify the people that sent her the alleged death threats, of course those people should be prosecuted.

But again, this is entirely different. People cheering on a murder of an innocent and doing so in a public format should accept the social and professional consequences to their own behavior. This shouldn't be political. It works both ways!

When you say "this" what specifically are you referring to? Presumably these are online statements, so I assume you have links.

Here’s one. This person’s comments are gross - and they are within their right to free speech to say them. But they need to accept the social and professional consequences of their statements. No decent company is going to condone this sort of speech. It’s violent and full of hate.

https://mol.im/a/15100227

When you say "social consequences" are you referring to the hundreds of death threats she's received? It's wild you are calling for people to accept that as normal. It's not normal. It's hateful and violent. Her comments were crude but not incorrect. As a wise man said recently, the Bible does not call on us to honor evil.

Social consequences = if you spew vile comments and celebrate violence and murder, expect to lose some friends.

Also, btw...if you view this person's comments as "not incorrect" I would say that you are part of the problem and maybe you need to actually read the bible instead of quoting others that have.

Quotes from Gretchen Felker-Martin:
"I hope the bullet's OK" (after Kirk's murder last Wednesday.)
"Can pretty safely state that bin Laden and I did not, uh, agree on much, but blowing up the World Trade Center is probably the most principled and defensible thing he did,"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the shooter had a boyfriend who was transitioning M->F.

Do I have that correct? It's all over the news.

It looks like there's not actually proof that it's his boyfriend or that he's MtF. But if there's actual evidence out there, I would honestly like to see it.

All MAGA has is a blurry instragram post of the roommate donning an anime costume begetting a furrie, which would put them in the AltRight, not the left.

The FBI has confirmed it. They have questioned/are questioning the roommate. So I’m pretty sure they aren’t wrong.

No, they haven't.

Omg. Yes they have. Move on.

DP. All I’m seeing is that the governor has alluded to this. Where/when did the FBI confirm?

There was no alluding. “The roommate was a romantic partner. A male transitioning to female,” who has been cooperating with investigations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Lance and Tyler were this flaming, furry bizarre counterculture couple, they would have left Utah.

+1 This is what I said as soon as Robinson was identified. If he were actually a lefty he would have take his great ACT score and 4.0 GPA and gone anywhere else. For free. Now people are trying to convince us that his one semester at Utah State of all places radicalized him. Come the f*** on.

The shooter went to USU for one semester 3 years ago. He wasn't there long enough to get "indoctrinated" (ie educated and exposed to people of different backgrounds and cultures)

I read that his single semester was online. He spent a few months logging into blackboard, that’s it.

That seems likely given COVID. Lots of kids dropped out then, even ones who would have been successful otherwise. The strong ones got back on track. Many others didn't.

We are seeing the results of the seeds that were planted during Covid. Whatever content people took in when we are all locked in the house has now fruited into a lot of the intense beliefs and online behaviors we see now. We were all chronically online that year, and everyone didn’t come out the same on the other side.

That’s when Tyler and Lance started hacking into domestic and foreign govt agencies probably.

When were they hired by the foreign governments? Because there's literally zero connection between hacking into an agency's computer and being hired by them, usually.

They could have been hired after freshman year.

No they worked for the CIA or were independent. They weren’t assisting foreign governments. God…

Why would the CIA have hired them? That is also crazy talk. They don't seem very stable. Or discreet.

He is a brilliant hacker, he can hack into anything he wants.

But cyber operations is not big at CIA. It’s another agency.

Ok NSA whatever. He could have been an independent contractor.

This is just silly talk. I hope you are being sarcastic. If not, seek help.

Silly talk? Who do you think works for these agencies?

Not dropouts of fourth-tier regional universities, that's for sure.

+1 Please stop with the CIA conspiracy talk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the shooter had a boyfriend who was transitioning M->F.

Do I have that correct? It's all over the news.

It looks like there's not actually proof that it's his boyfriend or that he's MtF. But if there's actual evidence out there, I would honestly like to see it.

All MAGA has is a blurry instragram post of the roommate donning an anime costume begetting a furrie, which would put them in the AltRight, not the left.

The FBI has confirmed it. They have questioned/are questioning the roommate. So I’m pretty sure they aren’t wrong.

No, they haven't.

Omg. Yes they have. Move on.

DP. All I’m seeing is that the governor has alluded to this. Where/when did the FBI confirm?

There was no alluding. “The roommate was a romantic partner. A male transitioning to female,” who has been cooperating with investigations.

What’s the current status of that transition?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All people on her talking about "leftist ideology", explain specifically what you mean.

Tell us outright, do you believe this man's motivations, whatever they may have been, justify the calls by POTUS and GOP leaders for violence, retribution, and a "war" on regular Democrats and liberals who have killed/harmed no one?

Do you have any qualms about the vitriol spewed by the GOP in the wake of this murder?

Cmon all you posting about "leftys". What is your answer. What do you mean, specifically, about leftist ideology?

Is inciting political violence against a large group of people not at all related to this murder okay with you?

Are death threats appropriate from anyone ever, including our POTUS or randos online who don't like what someone said about Kirk?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the shooter had a boyfriend who was transitioning M->F.

Do I have that correct? It's all over the news.

It looks like there's not actually proof that it's his boyfriend or that he's MtF. But if there's actual evidence out there, I would honestly like to see it.

All MAGA has is a blurry instragram post of the roommate donning an anime costume begetting a furrie, which would put them in the AltRight, not the left.

The FBI has confirmed it. They have questioned/are questioning the roommate. So I’m pretty sure they aren’t wrong.

No, they haven't.

Omg. Yes they have. Move on.

DP. All I’m seeing is that the governor has alluded to this. Where/when did the FBI confirm?

There was no alluding. “The roommate was a romantic partner. A male transitioning to female,” who has been cooperating with investigations.

Ok, that’s what he said. When/where did the FBI confirm?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the shooter had a boyfriend who was transitioning M->F.

Do I have that correct? It's all over the news.

It looks like there's not actually proof that it's his boyfriend or that he's MtF. But if there's actual evidence out there, I would honestly like to see it.

All MAGA has is a blurry instragram post of the roommate donning an anime costume begetting a furrie, which would put them in the AltRight, not the left.

The FBI has confirmed it. They have questioned/are questioning the roommate. So I’m pretty sure they aren’t wrong.

The FBI is being run by partisan hacks now who have a vested interest in stocking the misinformation, so take it all with a grain of salt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the shooter had a boyfriend who was transitioning M->F.

Do I have that correct? It's all over the news.

It looks like there's not actually proof that it's his boyfriend or that he's MtF. But if there's actual evidence out there, I would honestly like to see it.

All MAGA has is a blurry instragram post of the roommate donning an anime costume begetting a furrie, which would put them in the AltRight, not the left.

The FBI has confirmed it. They have questioned/are questioning the roommate. So I’m pretty sure they aren’t wrong.

No, they haven't.

Omg. Yes they have. Move on.

DP. All I’m seeing is that the governor has alluded to this. Where/when did the FBI confirm?

There was no alluding. “The roommate was a romantic partner. A male transitioning to female,” who has been cooperating with investigations.

What’s the current status of that transition?

Who cares?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess the legacy of Charlie Kirk will be "sure, disagree with me, but if you do you'll lose your job"

Celebrating an innocent man being murdered isn't just disagreeing with someone. It's disgusting and we should be doing better. These lunatics losing their jobs is a GOOD thing for society.

The pastor at Alfred Street Baptist wasn't celebrating his death at all. Yet according to a PP, he now has a target on his back.

According to a lot of people anyone that doesn't put Charlie Kirk on a pedestal is "celebrating his death". No, I don't care that he died and it certainly doesn't make me happy. But he was horrible. Unfortunately there are many more like him.

Well unless you put out a tik tok talking about how happy you are that he died, I wouldn't worry. The people who are losing their jobs are gleefully celebrating murder. I think we can all agree that murder is a tragedy that shouldn't be celebrated or laughed about.

People were showing happiness when the liberal Supreme Court justices died.

They were happy when George Floyd died.

And that is their right. Freedom of Speech.

Here’s the thing with social media: context, intent and tone are MISSING.

No one was actually happy Floyd died.
But they posted that he was drugged up, in/out of jain, stole from the store, was about to drive away high in an SUV, had multiple children o it if wedlock, and ran from police / refused to get in their vehicle, threw his heavy body down, got restrained and died from some heart + drugs+ breathing issue.
So some idiots posted all that online (cuz internet!) and said something flippant like “there you go, karma.”
And then some more idiots posted the same or opposite and burned Kenosha and other cities to the ground, looting, arson, vandalism.

Same with the elderly death of a politician. McCain, RBG, others.
No one is happy someone died.
But they cherry pick moments they didn’t like, flippantly post a Good Riddance, they’re crazy post (cuz, internet!), and both sides attack thay instead.

So.

What are we left with?

Can we get everyone in social media to not flippantly say “mean” stuff, that they don’t really mean or literally mean. They’re just mouthing off. Probably not.

Can we get people to have some judgment and understanding in the big picture or all the good, bad, ugly of a person or matter? Some of them, but this is a mature sense of empathy to see a view, note it, disagree and move on.

Can we get mentally on the cusp people or underdeveloped brain people to stop taking extreme social media opinions as gospel and get them more grounded in real life? A better rounded like? Adaptable and resilient to life’s ups and downs, meeting differing people, finding universal values?
Sure hope so.

According to this guy, y’all better ensure that you are in tip-top cardiovascular shape at all times - just in case you’re detained one day unexpectedly (or by mistake, which happens from time to time - be ready!) and an officer decides to use substantially more force than is necessary to detain you, effectively kneeling with their full body weight on your neck and throat for 15 minutes.

Everything else you said was idiotic, but I only devote time to one idiotic comment per day. Congrats!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess the legacy of Charlie Kirk will be "sure, disagree with me, but if you do you'll lose your job"

Celebrating an innocent man being murdered isn't just disagreeing with someone. It's disgusting and we should be doing better. These lunatics losing their jobs is a GOOD thing for society.

The pastor at Alfred Street Baptist wasn't celebrating his death at all. Yet according to a PP, he now has a target on his back.

According to a lot of people anyone that doesn't put Charlie Kirk on a pedestal is "celebrating his death". No, I don't care that he died and it certainly doesn't make me happy. But he was horrible. Unfortunately there are many more like him.

like this Canadian journalist

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2025/09/15/Dangerous-Targeting-Canadian-Journalist/Canadian journalist Rachel Gilmore took to social media to share insights based on years of reporting, writing that she was concerned some fans of Kirk on the far right who are “aching for more violence, could turn this into an even more radicalizing moment. Will they now believe their fears have been proven right and they have a right to ‘retaliate,’ no matter who was behind the actual shooting?”

Conservative MP Andrew Scheer swiftly reposted Gilmore’s comments, saying she was “twisted” and had “so much hate in her.” Other Canadian Conservatives also weighed in or reposted Scheer’s comment, while a screenshot of another post Gilmore made was circulated by right-wing influencers.

Hours later, Gilmore’s name was the first to appear on a website called “Expose Charlie’s Murderers,” part of an effort by right-wing figures to identify people they viewed as having celebrated Kirk’s killing. In many cases, MAGA supporters have called for those people to lose their jobs.

Gilmore then received death and rape threats, including threats that say, “We know where you live.”

As the U.S. tech magazine Wired reported, Gilmore’s initial analysis was accurate: in the hours following the shooting, high-profile figures in the MAGA movement, as well as far-right extremists, posted calls for war or civil war, to punish Democrats for “terrorism,” named “the left” as “the party of murder” and called to restart far-right militias.

This is the truly scary part. Ethical journalists are being silenced for doing their jobs.

Meh. It could be worse. They could get shot in the neck.

That lady journalist doesn't deserve death threats. Her statements are full of lies but as long as she's just writing her glorified opinion piece, she's within her right.
If they identify the people that sent her the alleged death threats, of course those people should be prosecuted.

But again, this is entirely different. People cheering on a murder of an innocent and doing so in a public format should accept the social and professional consequences to their own behavior. This shouldn't be political. It works both ways!

When you say "this" what specifically are you referring to? Presumably these are online statements, so I assume you have links.

Here’s one. This person’s comments are gross - and they are within their right to free speech to say them. But they need to accept the social and professional consequences of their statements. No decent company is going to condone this sort of speech. It’s violent and full of hate.

https://mol.im/a/15100227

When you say "social consequences" are you referring to the hundreds of death threats she's received? It's wild you are calling for people to accept that as normal. It's not normal. It's hateful and violent. Her comments were crude but not incorrect. As a wise man said recently, the Bible does not call on us to honor evil.

Social consequences = if you spew vile comments and celebrate violence and murder, expect to lose some friends.

Also, btw...if you view this person's comments as "not incorrect" I would say that you are part of the problem and maybe you need to actually read the bible instead of quoting others that have.

Quotes from Gretchen Felker-Martin:
"I hope the bullet's OK" (after Kirk's murder last Wednesday.)
"Can pretty safely state that bin Laden and I did not, uh, agree on much, but blowing up the World Trade Center is probably the most principled and defensible thing he did,"

I have no idea who this person is. Are the an elected official? Someone who's voice carries any weight or legitimacy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess the legacy of Charlie Kirk will be "sure, disagree with me, but if you do you'll lose your job"

Celebrating an innocent man being murdered isn't just disagreeing with someone. It's disgusting and we should be doing better. These lunatics losing their jobs is a GOOD thing for society.

The pastor at Alfred Street Baptist wasn't celebrating his death at all. Yet according to a PP, he now has a target on his back.

According to a lot of people anyone that doesn't put Charlie Kirk on a pedestal is "celebrating his death". No, I don't care that he died and it certainly doesn't make me happy. But he was horrible. Unfortunately there are many more like him.

like this Canadian journalist

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2025/09/15/Dangerous-Targeting-Canadian-Journalist/Canadian journalist Rachel Gilmore took to social media to share insights based on years of reporting, writing that she was concerned some fans of Kirk on the far right who are “aching for more violence, could turn this into an even more radicalizing moment. Will they now believe their fears have been proven right and they have a right to ‘retaliate,’ no matter who was behind the actual shooting?”

Conservative MP Andrew Scheer swiftly reposted Gilmore’s comments, saying she was “twisted” and had “so much hate in her.” Other Canadian Conservatives also weighed in or reposted Scheer’s comment, while a screenshot of another post Gilmore made was circulated by right-wing influencers.

Hours later, Gilmore’s name was the first to appear on a website called “Expose Charlie’s Murderers,” part of an effort by right-wing figures to identify people they viewed as having celebrated Kirk’s killing. In many cases, MAGA supporters have called for those people to lose their jobs.

Gilmore then received death and rape threats, including threats that say, “We know where you live.”

As the U.S. tech magazine Wired reported, Gilmore’s initial analysis was accurate: in the hours following the shooting, high-profile figures in the MAGA movement, as well as far-right extremists, posted calls for war or civil war, to punish Democrats for “terrorism,” named “the left” as “the party of murder” and called to restart far-right militias.

This is the truly scary part. Ethical journalists are being silenced for doing their jobs.

Meh. It could be worse. They could get shot in the neck.

That lady journalist doesn't deserve death threats. Her statements are full of lies but as long as she's just writing her glorified opinion piece, she's within her right.
If they identify the people that sent her the alleged death threats, of course those people should be prosecuted.

But again, this is entirely different. People cheering on a murder of an innocent and doing so in a public format should accept the social and professional consequences to their own behavior. This shouldn't be political. It works both ways!

When you say "this" what specifically are you referring to? Presumably these are online statements, so I assume you have links.

Here’s one. This person’s comments are gross - and they are within their right to free speech to say them. But they need to accept the social and professional consequences of their statements. No decent company is going to condone this sort of speech. It’s violent and full of hate.

https://mol.im/a/15100227

When you say "social consequences" are you referring to the hundreds of death threats she's received? It's wild you are calling for people to accept that as normal. It's not normal. It's hateful and violent. Her comments were crude but not incorrect. As a wise man said recently, the Bible does not call on us to honor evil.

Social consequences = if you spew vile comments and celebrate violence and murder, expect to lose some friends.

Also, btw...if you view this person's comments as "not incorrect" I would say that you are part of the problem and maybe you need to actually read the bible instead of quoting others that have.

Quotes from Gretchen Felker-Martin:
"I hope the bullet's OK" (after Kirk's murder last Wednesday.)
"Can pretty safely state that bin Laden and I did not, uh, agree on much, but blowing up the World Trade Center is probably the most principled and defensible thing he did,"

Saying "I hope the bullet's ok" to me means she doesn't care he was killed. Kirk himself explicitly said, quite soon after killings of children, that he was okay with gun deaths.

Anyway, you haven't mentioned the death threats. A death threat is a violent act. Saying you think 9/11 is defensible is not a statement many people would like or agree with, but that statement is not a violent act. She didn't threaten or directly cause violence against anyone. Doxxing someone online is a violent act. You are tangibly putting people in danger with that act. And you haven't even acknowledged that it is happening (though I am sure that you know it is) which tells me you support it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess the legacy of Charlie Kirk will be "sure, disagree with me, but if you do you'll lose your job"

Celebrating an innocent man being murdered isn't just disagreeing with someone. It's disgusting and we should be doing better. These lunatics losing their jobs is a GOOD thing for society.

The pastor at Alfred Street Baptist wasn't celebrating his death at all. Yet according to a PP, he now has a target on his back.

According to a lot of people anyone that doesn't put Charlie Kirk on a pedestal is "celebrating his death". No, I don't care that he died and it certainly doesn't make me happy. But he was horrible. Unfortunately there are many more like him.

like this Canadian journalist

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2025/09/15/Dangerous-Targeting-Canadian-Journalist/Canadian journalist Rachel Gilmore took to social media to share insights based on years of reporting, writing that she was concerned some fans of Kirk on the far right who are “aching for more violence, could turn this into an even more radicalizing moment. Will they now believe their fears have been proven right and they have a right to ‘retaliate,’ no matter who was behind the actual shooting?”

Conservative MP Andrew Scheer swiftly reposted Gilmore’s comments, saying she was “twisted” and had “so much hate in her.” Other Canadian Conservatives also weighed in or reposted Scheer’s comment, while a screenshot of another post Gilmore made was circulated by right-wing influencers.

Hours later, Gilmore’s name was the first to appear on a website called “Expose Charlie’s Murderers,” part of an effort by right-wing figures to identify people they viewed as having celebrated Kirk’s killing. In many cases, MAGA supporters have called for those people to lose their jobs.

Gilmore then received death and rape threats, including threats that say, “We know where you live.”

As the U.S. tech magazine Wired reported, Gilmore’s initial analysis was accurate: in the hours following the shooting, high-profile figures in the MAGA movement, as well as far-right extremists, posted calls for war or civil war, to punish Democrats for “terrorism,” named “the left” as “the party of murder” and called to restart far-right militias.

This is the truly scary part. Ethical journalists are being silenced for doing their jobs.

Meh. It could be worse. They could get shot in the neck.

That lady journalist doesn't deserve death threats. Her statements are full of lies but as long as she's just writing her glorified opinion piece, she's within her right.
If they identify the people that sent her the alleged death threats, of course those people should be prosecuted.

But again, this is entirely different. People cheering on a murder of an innocent and doing so in a public format should accept the social and professional consequences to their own behavior. This shouldn't be political. It works both ways!

When you say "this" what specifically are you referring to? Presumably these are online statements, so I assume you have links.

Here’s one. This person’s comments are gross - and they are within their right to free speech to say them. But they need to accept the social and professional consequences of their statements. No decent company is going to condone this sort of speech. It’s violent and full of hate.

https://mol.im/a/15100227

When you say "social consequences" are you referring to the hundreds of death threats she's received? It's wild you are calling for people to accept that as normal. It's not normal. It's hateful and violent. Her comments were crude but not incorrect. As a wise man said recently, the Bible does not call on us to honor evil.

Social consequences = if you spew vile comments and celebrate violence and murder, expect to lose some friends.

Also, btw...if you view this person's comments as "not incorrect" I would say that you are part of the problem and maybe you need to actually read the bible instead of quoting others that have.

Quotes from Gretchen Felker-Martin:
"I hope the bullet's OK" (after Kirk's murder last Wednesday.)
"Can pretty safely state that bin Laden and I did not, uh, agree on much, but blowing up the World Trade Center is probably the most principled and defensible thing he did,"

I have no idea who this person is. Are the an elected official? Someone who's voice carries any weight or legitimacy?

She is a trans woman which of course means whatever she says is punishable by death threats to her and anyone they associate with her which is all "leftists" s/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the shooter had a boyfriend who was transitioning M->F.

Do I have that correct? It's all over the news.

It looks like there's not actually proof that it's his boyfriend or that he's MtF. But if there's actual evidence out there, I would honestly like to see it.

All MAGA has is a blurry instragram post of the roommate donning an anime costume begetting a furrie, which would put them in the AltRight, not the left.

The FBI has confirmed it. They have questioned/are questioning the roommate. So I’m pretty sure they aren’t wrong.

The FBI is being run by partisan hacks now who have a vested interest in stocking the misinformation, so take it all with a grain of salt.

Their neighbors confirmed it. Saw the boy boy couple holding hands and kissing in their walks.