News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.9K     0 

Freedom of speech should be protected at all cost, no matter a person's beliefs are. Nobody deserves to die because of being crazy. Violence is never the answer
While you won’t be getting much argument on me on this. But it should be noted that thanks to this incident puts the outcome of the consequences of this in the hands of those who hate free speech and other civil liberties the most…

….and if that doesn’t hit home, Trump is already blaming peeps with my views and leanings on killing this guy on their national television. And that terrifies me.
 
Last edited:
No, there need to be limits to freedom of speech
I would argue there are natural limits on free speech by being…er, free speech. So it’s not absolutism by any stretch. And will likely have consequences if it starts to go south.

….not justifying what happened here, but there is saying about how one makes their bed they also have to learn to sleep in it. Keep in mind Kirk was a guy who was fond of openly advocating violence against others in that example.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PL1
…and finally, does anyone know what the shooter’s motivation was here. I’ve tried to look this up…only to find mainstream media types eulogizing Kirk, which made me want throw up. Maybe I am looking in the wrong places. /sigh
 
…and finally, does anyone know what the shooter’s motivation was here. I’ve tried to look this up…only to find mainstream media types eulogizing Kirk, which made me want throw up. Maybe I am looking in the wrong places. /sigh

They have not made any arrests, so there is no way to know the killer's motivation. Of course, that isn't stopping Trump and many on the right from pointing the finger at the left while vowing retribution. The fact is, there are certain powerful factions on the right who have not been happy with Kirk lately as he has been "going off the reservation" on the issue most near and dear to them.

As an example, last weekend on his Fox show, Mark Levin, while speaking with Ben Shapiro, lamented that "certain big conservative conferences for young people have been sprinkling their speaker roster with kooks". While he did mention Kirk by name, it was clear he was referring to Kirk's TPUSA, which platformed Tucker Carlson and comic Dave Smith at their last youth conference. On X, I see reports that Kirk told a close friend he was afraid a certain foreign country would kill him after he became "red-pilled" on certain issues. Kirk had also maintained a friendship with Candace Owens. Another big no-no in the eyes of certain factions on the right and very concerning to them, given the fact that Kirk was the most influential figure when it comes to influencing young college-age conservatives, i.e., the future of the GOP.

One thing is for sure is this was a very professional hit job. The fact that no arrests have been made or even weapons recovered means that the track is getting cold. The killer could very well be out of the country by now. The big question is, did the killer act alone or was he put up to it by another entity/country? I'm guessing this murder will not be solved, and as with Butler, PA, and the Las Vegas Mandalay Bay massacre, the media will not be pressing hard for answers.
 
Team Trump is definitely trying to "MLK" Kirk. Turn him into a martyr for his cause where everything left right and centre (actually, right right and right) is going to be named for him. And who knows if Kirk, himself, subliminally wanted it that way--that whole "if you gotta die, die with your boots on" racket infecting so much of the Patriotic Right.

As for the left in high places, they're condemning the shooting more than they're joining in the cloying Charlie-the-martyr chorus--because they know how violence is not only not the solution, it can be a tripwire for undesired retaliatory action. Not to mention that it places them above the crickets or blame-passing disinfo the GOP paid to Melissa Hortman's shooting. And on top of that, decrying the shooting hasn't prevented said left from raising how Kirk was basically playing chicken...
 
One thing is for sure is this was a very professional hit job. The fact that no arrests have been made or even weapons recovered means that the track is getting cold.

There’s zero proof of anything that this was some kind of professional hit. Professionals aren’t going to leave a victim bleeding, they’re going g to leave them dead. That means security shots.

This is a state with a high number of sport shooters, and at 200 yards (likely with a scope), is a shorter range than the US military requires infantry to be able to hit a target using iron sights alone; 300 yards.

As others have this stated, there are a good number of people in the state who could’ve made this shot, especially on a seated, non-moving individual.

1) Cops are bad at their jobs.
2) Security was relatively light there.
3) A large panicked crowd is relatively easy to blend into.
4) The fact that no casing has been found could mean a single action bolt hunting rifle.
 
Where were these words when the Minnesota politicians were shot and killed?
That was one of my first thoughts, or his divisiveness following a natural disaster in a 'blue' state.

Just like in '1984', the threat of 'the other' must be constantly fueled.

His "speech" that we're concerned with "protecting" is calling for violence against others. Just to be clear.
I admittedly haven't seen at lot of clips of him but I don't recall hearing him call for outright violence against others. I found him to be arrogant and dismissive, but a decent debater who shone when he was up against people who were not, which he tended to attract (perhaps the clips purposely focused on that, IDK). That he was against Republican or right wing touchstones like immigration, sexual identity, etc. is without question but advocating against something is not necessarily violence against something.
 
There’s zero proof of anything that this was some kind of professional hit. Professionals aren’t going to leave a victim bleeding, they’re going g to leave them dead. That means security shots.

This is a state with a high number of sport shooters, and at 200 yards (likely with a scope), is a shorter range than the US military requires infantry to be able to hit a target using iron sights alone; 300 yards.

As others have this stated, there are a good number of people in the state who could’ve made this shot, especially on a seated, non-moving individual.

1) Cops are bad at their jobs.
2) Security was relatively light there.
3) A large panicked crowd is relatively easy to blend into.
4) The fact that no casing has been found could mean a single action bolt hunting rifle.
Huh? "Professionals aren’t going to leave a victim bleeding; they’re going to leave them dead."

Have you seen the close-up video of the shooting? If you haven't, I don't recommend that you or anyone else view it. What is seen cannot be unseen (it's horrific).

The second Charlie was struck in the neck; he was effectively dead. It was obvious from the blood gushing out from the neck wound (sorry to be so graphic). There was no way that he was going to survive such a grievous injury, despite what must have been valiant efforts at the Hospital.

There can be no doubt, and I mean ZERO doubt, that this was a professional hit job, probably conducted by someone who has lots of experience sniping innocents from a very long distance. If my suspicions are correct, the killer could very well be outside of the United States by now, on his way to a territory where he cannot be extradited to the U.S... Time will tell, but IMO this was the work of a professional assassin, and I suspect that he had confederates inside the United States.

If my gut instincts are correct, this will be one of the many unsolved assassinations in the history of American political assassinations. Another "we may never know".
 
For anyone who might want to lionize or "only say nice things about the dead" in regards to Kirk;


Huh? "Professionals aren’t going to leave a victim bleeding; they’re going to leave them dead."

Have you seen the close-up video of the shooting? If you haven't, I don't recommend that you or anyone else view it. What is seen cannot be unseen (it's horrific).

The second Charlie was struck in the neck; he was effectively dead. It was obvious from the blood gushing out from the neck wound (sorry to be so graphic). There was no way that he was going to survive such a grievous injury, despite what must have been valiant efforts at the Hospital.

There can be no doubt, and I mean ZERO doubt, that this was a professional hit job, probably conducted by someone who has lots of experience sniping innocents from a very long distance. If my suspicions are correct, the killer could very well be outside of the United States by now, on his way to a territory where he cannot be extradited to the U.S... Time will tell, but IMO this was the work of a professional assassin, and I suspect that he had confederates inside the United States.

If my gut instincts are correct, this will be one of the many unsolved assassinations in the history of American political assassinations. Another "we may never know".
There's footage of the alleged shooter fleeing on a far away rooftop, around where the shot rang out. The shooter's lucky they're in bumfuck utah. They got Mangione so can't say for certain they won't get this guy. Also, the timing of this "assassination" is pretty weird huh? Like didn't the epstein birthday book stuff come out recently? dons got some crazy plot armour lmao, the timing is interesting...

That close up footage was crazy yo, I didn't watch it myself but reading everyone's description of it on twitter, instagram and reddit was nauseating.

Videos of the shooting are still going around on social media along with the Nepal situation so if you're someone who can't stomach violence of the sort, please be careful.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top