Charlie Kirk shot and killed at Utah rally.

ZenMode said:
Right. Thanks for supporting the point I made earlier, which is that the things Democrats say aren't reckless and harmful rhetoric because they are true, which is why you just can't figure out anything they've done wrong.

Like I said, I had no misconceptions about getting agreement on this topic.
Click to expand...
By your standards, MLK, Gandhi and Jesus were all "divisive." Which, incidentally, was what the white Southerners, British and Romans said in each instance.
 
thebruinbleedstarheelblue said:
www.theguardian.com

Trump ally Laura Loomer ridiculed for swinging from Charlie Kirk attacks to leading backlash against detractors

Loomer accused TPUSA founder of betraying president in July but now bashes those she perceives to ‘celebrate’ his assassination
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Laura Loomer put him in the crosshairs? Said he should be willing to die for his stance and not a Trump supporter?

Nick Fuentes beefing with kirk?
Click to expand...
Again... anything is possible but Kirk was clearly anti-trans, anti-gay, anti-LGBTQ. Tyler was in some kind of relationship and living with a transgender person.

I guess I don't see how anti-semitism/white nationalism fits into this
 
superrific said:
By your standards, MLK, Gandhi and Jesus were all "divisive." Which, incidentally, was what the white Southerners, British and Romans said in each instance.
Click to expand...
Perfect. Now Dems are really just like Jesus, Gandhi and MLK.

Again, thanks for supporting my point.
 
superrific said:
The cross dresser part is unsubstantiated, but not the gay part. His lifelong "close friend" Clyde Tolson sure as hell acted like a life partner. They would go on vacation together. Hoover bequeathed his estate to Tolson. Tolson accepted the flag that draped Hoover's coffin. Tolson is buried a few yards away from Hoover.

Roy Cohn was a source of information about Hoover, and he was definitely credible on that particular subject. Cohn's take was that Hoover was too scared of his sexuality to act on it, but that's still confirming that he was gay or bi. As for the cross-dressing, you're right a lot of the published material relies on an unreliable witness, but Roy Cohn apparently told people about it before it became a topic of public discussion. Now, that's hearsay and unreliable I think, but it's more than just one witness. That said, it is not well established at all.

The homo/bisexuality seems pretty solid, even if there are people who deny it. Another piece of evidence: Lela Rodgers was his beard.
Click to expand...
In my reading about non-monogamous relationships, it seems that this is a lot more common than most would believe.
 
Willy said:
It's certainly reasonable that Robinson was entrenched in meme-culture. It seems very likely. However, the theory I've seen here is that Robinson was a groypher who killed Kirk because Kirk wasn't conservative enough, e.g., Robinson was ultra-conservative. That doesn't pass the smell test if he had a trans roommate.
Click to expand...
Smell test isn’t reliable with these things. It’s wild stuff.
 
ZenMode said:
Perfect. Now Dems are really just like Jesus, Gandhi and MLK.

Again, thanks for supporting my point.
Click to expand...
You are so bad at logic.

If Dems are not divisive, and also Jesus, Gandhi and MLK were not divisive, that does not mean Dems are like Jesus, Gandhi and MLK in any other respect.

Here we go again. You make errors that my 11 year old would see through. Why you are proud of that, I have no idea.
 
Willy said:
It's certainly reasonable that Robinson was entrenched in meme-culture. It seems very likely. However, the theory I've seen here is that Robinson was a groypher who killed Kirk because Kirk wasn't conservative enough, e.g., Robinson was ultra-conservative. That doesn't pass the smell test if he had a trans roommate.
Click to expand...
Wrong. See below. Just because a lot of us can't identify the smell doesn't make the smell stronger evidence than the on-the-nose evidence. There are unquestionably traditionally left identities in play, but we have to STOP making every damn molehill of liberal association into a mountain, when there's a mountain of right-wing associations that so easily get made into an molehill. The groyper connection is damn near indisputable. Now, does that mean the killer is a dyed in the wool groyper? No. Does the killer having a fetish or fantasy or general attraction to an allegedly non-binary person, who is appears to be a furry, indicate a dyed in the wool leftist? If you think so, it’s safe to say you aren’t familiar with …

The far right-anarcho-nihilistic-video game-meme culture overlaps A LOT with disaffected minority groups who hate political factions, and have a consistent disdain for normie liberals and left pols. They hate right pols, too. The post below is very long. It's tedious. It's also emblematic of the positions of this alleged trans furry roommate/partner, which is to say - unfamiliar to me and I suspect unfamiliar to the majority of non-GenZers. It appears we’re seeing strange overlaps in the nihilist video game GenZ demos.

Healing said:
Long post - fell down a rabbit hole ...

The Daily Mail (skepticism noted, and you can google the article if you like), has what appears to be a pretty well researched article linking alleged online handles of the killer and roommate to niche communities. Appears the killer was clearly deep into the toxic gaming world, and had recently been active in a furry forum with a sexualization bent. We also know the killer was steeped in Groyper lingo and memes.

The roommate appears to have been active in r/trans, while also subscribing to (via my lookup) Anarcho_Capitalism, 4chan, JordanPeterson, and a host of video game, anime, meme, cryptid forums. This roommate's apparent reddit handle was involved in an Anarcho_Capitalism thread during which the roommate's alleged handle responded "i like how you worded this" to the following framing of "the left":
  • When they (referring to "the left") are showing a man, balls out, in demon make up, reading to kids, they are not representing that community well (re: trans). I'm not talking about the confused 13 year old kid who just wanted to feel normal. They go find the worst of society to hold up just to "own the right"
Mind you, the thread they were commenting on was titled "The left deliberately makes transpeople look bad", following by the parent comment below:
  • This is a hypothesis I've had I'm pretty confident in. Nonsense like the bathroom debate, transpeople in sports and all the drag pushing (this last thing really has nothing to do with transpeople but can still be used to confuse normies) and in general all the screaming trans folks you see put on TV or in protests and rallies. It's all stuff that conveniently creates a divide to force transpeople to the left against the right which gets radicalized to hate them. It all seems orchestrated to create an oppressed minority to help maintain the left's power while also empowering the right to maintain the binary.
It seems online GamerGate like swamps have extremely odd bedfellows, with lots of sniping back and forth between the ideologies, in something more akin to edgy anarchy.

Lastly, I spent about 20 min reading posts by the roommate's alleged handle, and came across this one on the JordanPeterson sub, which feels particularly salient. In response to a question about avoiding "perilous pitfalls, such as ideological entanglements, when even individuals with higher moral and intellectual caliber have fallen into them?", the alleged roommate allegedly says:
  • Honestly I think everyone is going to land in these pitfalls, it's part of being human. Doing your best to recognize and remedy that is all you can do. Keep your strongest truths close to heart and don't be easily swayed in any direction without a strong and well put together reason. Even then you'll something realize the environment, friends, or communities you choose to spend time with aren't helping you grow or progress, or may otherwise be pushing towards an echo chamber. Being able to take a step away and reprioritize is the best you can do. If you aren't ever in a situation you didn't want to be in, chances are you never go out and meet people in general. Remember that just discussing a topic doesn't mean falling into an ideological pitfall. Keep your statements and opinions in line with each other, and make your own opinions base on factual evidence you have seen or read. I think the largest pitfall anyone could fall into would be to simply take to heart the opinions they see on social media. If you don't choose a side, a side will many times choose you. Keep yourself grounded mentally and emotionally, and don't worry yourself about being infallible.
My guess, the killer and the alleged roommate are a couple of intelligent young men who fell into the oddities of niche and often dark online gaming culture. It appears plausible the killer is both a Groyper, has a furry fetish and/or attraction, and has a friend/roommate/sexual partner with furry/trans/anarchocapitalist identities.

I suspect this is a strange estuary few of us have encountered, until now.
Click to expand...
 
I continue to struggle with why his motive matters. That said, I would imagine that since he is alive we will learn more. I don't expect it will change much other than one team gets to say, "See, it was your guy."
 
ZenMode said:
I don't think the damage comes from describing Trump's actions or the actions of his administration. Just by describing an event (minors being shipped to Guatemala), you are expressing how terrible it is. A person can objectively describe the events surrounding Kirk's death and express sadness in a way that all people can understand and relate to - "It's horrible when someone is killed for their political beliefs" or "He was a father of two and a husband", etc.

That's not where it generally ends. It often gets into fascist, racist, Hitler, dictator, ruining the country, he's not leaving office, putting gays in cages...There's much more than that I could spend time digging up IF I thought it would matter.

I've said repeatedly that Trump is the biggest piece of shit ever to hold the Presidency. He, his lies, those on the right who enabled him and social media have divided the country, but Democrats have absolutely contributed with hyperbole, dangerous rhetoric, sometimes violent rhetoric, etc.
Click to expand...
I think there's a couple different things being conflated here, some of which I agree with and some of which I don't.

First, I generally agree (and have said many times) that Dems and leftists need to avoid hyperventilating, doom-crying predictions about what Trump will do in the future (like "he's going to put gays in cages!" or "he's going to try to stay in office forever," etc.). It worked against Dems in 2016 when they made all sorts of horrible predictions about what a Trump presidency would mean, and while Trump 1.0 was an objectively awful president, whose policies or lack thereof did real harm to a lot of people, the sky didn't fall and the country didn't descend into chaos and pigs didn't start flying. So when the same predictions got recycled in 2024 it fell flat with a lot of people. It made what was objectively a bad presidency seem not so bad because the predictions were so much worse.

Second, it is generally unhelpful and counterproductive for Dems to paint with a broad brush with pejorative terms applied to Trump's supporters (racist, fascist, "deplorables," etc) because nobody ever sees themselves as those things and using that sort of language just pushes people away.

But I simply can't agree that we should never apply labels like "authoritarian" or "fascist" to Trump (and the members of his administration and media mouthpieces), because it is important to put his actions and words into their proper political and historical context for people who might not understand that context. It is important, for example, to say and explain why stuff like these statements by Trump or his influential minions is overtly fascist rhetoric:

"In honor of our great veterans on Veterans Day, we pledge to you that we will root out the communists, Marxists, fascists, and the radical-left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country—that lie and steal and cheat on elections, and will do anything possible; they'll do anything, whether legally or illegally, to destroy America, and to destroy the American Dream"

"It's time for the Trump administration to shut down, defund, and prosecute every single leftist organization."

""The Democrat Party must be classified as a domestic terror organization and their members and leaders treated accordingly."

Calling the press "the enemy of the people"

Saying that the "Democrat Party . . . supports everything that God hates."

"[Immigrants] are poisoning the blood of our country."

"There is [a leftist] ideology that has steadily been growing in this country, which hates everything that is good, righteous and beautiful and celebrates everything that is warped, twisted and depraved. . . . It is an ideology that leads, always, inevitably and willfully, to violence. The fate of millions depends on the defeat of this wicked ideology.”

"The power of law enforcement, under President Trump’s leadership, will be used to find you, will be used to take away your money, take away your power, and, if you’ve broken the law, to take away your freedom."

Calling out rhetoric like this as overtly fascist rhetoric is important to help illustrate to people how far outside the modern American political discourse statements like this are. To not call out this rhetoric as extreme is too allow it to be normalized. Similarly, to not call out the Trump admin for its overtly authoritarian tendencies (many of which were explicitly outlined in Project 2025, which Trump laughably denied any knowledge of) - such as the the shameful example I gave of its lies, deception, and utter disregard for the law in immigrant deportations; the EO on birthright citizenship; the desire to suppress and punish critical speech; the willingness to leverage the executive power of the President to compel and coerce universities and businesses to do what the President wants them to do; etc) is to give the impression that they are all within the realm of ordinary political policy disagreements, rather than fundamental attacks on the legitimacy and power of the rule of law and the other branches of the federal government.

So while I agree that sometimes the use of pejorative labels can be problematic - especially when applied to followers rather than leaders of a political movement - I simply can't agree that when Trump walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck, we shouldn't call him a duck.
 
heel79 said:
I continue to struggle with why his motive matters. That said, I would imagine that since he is alive we will learn more. I don't expect it will change much other than one team gets to say, "See, it was your guy."
Click to expand...
Is this ignorant or disingenuous? One side is literally using the killing to justify a violent holy war against people with policy differences.
 
heel79 said:
I continue to struggle with why his motive matters. That said, I would imagine that since he is alive we will learn more. I don't expect it will change much other than one team gets to say, "See, it was your guy."
Click to expand...
Well, one side is using it as a justification for threatened oppression, denial of civil liberties, and perhaps worse. so it does seem to matter to them, and that means it matters to everyone.
 
superrific said:
You are so bad at logic.

If Dems are not divisive, and also Jesus, Gandhi and MLK were not divisive, that does not mean Dems are like Jesus, Gandhi and MLK in any other respect.

Here we go again. You make errors that my 11 year old would see through. Why you are proud of that, I have no idea.
Click to expand...
Jesus was a nobody talking to maybe a few hundred people in a tiny portion of the Middle East but, like you said, dems are just like Jesus!

Who's gonna argue with what Jesus does??? :rolleyes:
 
heel79 said:
I continue to struggle with why his motive matters.
Click to expand...
^ This. It's simple. A young kid who grows up in gun culture irresponsibly desires to go from bad/good guy with a gun to good/bad guy with a gun. Too bad he didn't opt for good/bad guy with a slingshot. Just another day in the SCOTUS Hellscape. Carry on.
 
ZenMode said:
Again... anything is possible but Kirk was clearly anti-trans, anti-gay, anti-LGBTQ. Tyler was in some kind of relationship and living with a transgender person.

I guess I don't see how anti-semitism/white nationalism fits into this
Click to expand...
Yeah but this hate was on the record, yet you want to stretch and make assumptions.

you don’t even know what this person’s relationship and ideas towards the trans community are… but we do know that he was part of the Groyper incel losers.

I kinda don’t care what he came from because he’s not a card carrying member of any party..but part of a sickness.

but why did the right jump so hard to try to say the killer wasn’t from the right? We had an elected official killed recently on the other side with proof…none of this performance? It seems like everyone from the President to his wife are being completely irresponsible and incendiary in response to his murder.

They treat him like he died for a cause, but then when people talk about some of the things he said that were racist or fascist or just plain ignorant, they whine about it.

Heck they are trying to get ppl fired, deny passports for calling that out. I thought that this party was against cancel culture? Against wokeness! Against poetical correctness??
 
Willy said:
It's certainly reasonable that Robinson was entrenched in meme-culture. It seems very likely. However, the theory I've seen here is that Robinson was a groypher who killed Kirk because Kirk wasn't conservative enough, e.g., Robinson was ultra-conservative. That doesn't pass the smell test if he had a trans roommate.
Click to expand...
Lots of conservative people are gay and
1moretimeagain said:
Click to expand...

dumbass pos
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top