Charlie Kirk Part III

[92tide]

Since 2002, right-wing ideologies have fueled more than 70% of all extremist attacks and domestic terrorism plots in the United States, according to the Anti-Defamation League.

The Justice Department also said in a study last year that the number of far-right attacks in this country continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism. The study was removed from the Justice Department website in the past few days, according to 404 Media.

 

[Bamaro]

some folks may need to do a lot of laundry to clean up those bloody shirts they've been waving

'No evidence' found yet of ties between Charlie Kirk's shooting and left-wing groups, federal officials say

Three people familiar with the federal probe into Kirk’s assassination told NBC News that investigators have yet to find a link between the alleged shooter and left-wing groups.

www.nbcnews.com

AKA, lone wolf

 

[selmaborntidefan]

some folks may need to do a lot of laundry to clean up those bloody shirts they've been waving

'No evidence' found yet of ties between Charlie Kirk's shooting and left-wing groups, federal officials say

Three people familiar with the federal probe into Kirk’s assassination told NBC News that investigators have yet to find a link between the alleged shooter and left-wing groups.

www.nbcnews.com

The idea this guy MIGHT have been motivated because of his notions of Kirk's politics on LGBTQ is defensible (at this point).

The idea this was a conspiracy masterminded by some amorphous "they" is typical proportionality bias, scapegoating, and has not a damn bit of evidence to support it.

 

[UAH]

Color me niave this morning for not thinking about where the money comes from for someone such as Charlie Kirk to arise out of the litterly millions of right wing sympathizers world wide to become a major spokesperson.

That prompted me to look a Jimmy Kimmel's salary on ABC and saw a number like $16 million. I am likely not going out to protest over his show being suspended!

It seems a complex world we live in today.

 

[81usaf92]

Incidentally, we're up to Day 7 in Heather Held Hostage, Richardson's defiant refusal to admit exactly who the shooter of Charlie Kirk was. She mentioned the shooting while favorably quoting the Democratic Party's Satan VI, Karl Rove, so it's not like she didn't have time to, you know, GET IT RIGHT.

You can't call yourself a "historian" and then not tell the ACTUAL FACTS OF HISTORY, folks, I don't care how many initials you have after your name. "History is supposed to make us uncomfortable" apparently doesn't apply if your ideology holds you hostage.

By the way, she's now going with the American aphorism "lone gunman" to get around "guy who wasn't a conservative Republican killing Kirk" pretense she had a week ago.

When the rubber meets the road, you separate the agenda setters from the objective, and it ain't hard.

It’s why I never took her seriously. Historians tend to peak very early in their careers and find out that they should have chosen archeology instead. Only like 1% will ever really matter on their own merits or will progress in other mediums such as Historical documentaries or collaborators for big Hollywood productions. So many of the Heather Richardsons of the world get this idea of trying to act like they are reporting the decline of X and won’t accept any evidence that contradicts their opinion. They basically become political shills.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

It’s why I never took her seriously.

We're at Day Eight of the Heather Hostage crisis btw....still chained to her ideology....

Historians tend to peak very early in their careers and find out that they should have chosen archeology instead. Only like 1% will ever really matter on their own merits or will progress in other mediums such as Historical documentaries or collaborators for big Hollywood productions.

One of the best I've seen - and it does an OUTSTANDING job of representing all perspectives - is the American Revolution series by the History Channel that can be seen on You Tube and was narrated long ago by Edward Herman. And they go all across the spectrum, a guy in uniform, a couple of black historians, a few women historians, they don't have just ONE perspective shared, and you get this widespread notion that the Revolutionary War wasn't as clean and easy as we were presented in high school history of good George Washington against bad George III.

So many of the Heather Richardsons of the world get this idea of trying to act like they are reporting the decline of X and won’t accept any evidence that contradicts their opinion. They basically become political shills.

Isn't it funny how many of these people would mock someone like Jack Van Impe standing at a TV quoting bible verses about how this particular event that happened today was prophesied in the book of Revelation DO THE SAME THING in other career fields, especially history?

But I'll be honest with you, and I don't blame Heather for this: I think the invention of the Internet (or mass communication anyway) helps CAUSE this kind of stuff. There's a bigger audience for you when you slant the news than there is when you tell the truth ("No, Trump is not gassing Jews in ovens"). It's hardly her. Look at Rachel Maddow, who has a PhD from Oxford, and pretends to be someone who believes the garbage she utter(ed) on MSNBC. She cannot possibly be as dumb as some of her commentary. Nor can Princeton historian Kevin Kruse, whose WRITTEN chapter in "The Myth of Southern Exceptionalism" is outstanding but his Twitter persona sounds like he's handing out tracts at the entrance of a Democratic Party fundraiser. (If he was a right-winger, his historic methodology as shown on Twitter would be a conspiracy theory as opposed to "research").

Then again, remember...Benny Hinn and faith healers draw huge audiences. The more learned, scholastic, and well-argued John Calvin or Thomas Aquinas (among many) wouldn't draw the eyes to pay for the broadcast. We really are into "entertainment."

 

[some_al_fan]

It just continues to prove to me the difference between a Republican and a Democrat in today's political climate is about as different as a person looking in a mirror. They're basically the same people.

Along the same line of thinking, I support the Horseshoe theory ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory )
And according to the theory, the far left and the far right are closer to each other than to the rest of their sides.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Along the same line of thinking, I support the Horseshoe theory ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory )
And according to the theory, the far left and the far right are closer to each other than to the rest of their sides.

correct.

The further away one gets from the center, the more alike the actions.

Thus, a right-winger can murder an abortion doctor and a left-winger can murder a debater/activist/whatever.

I

 

[colbysullivan]

It’s very telling that there’s a ton of people more upset about Kimmel losing his job than Kirk being murdered in front of his family. I will continue to say it…we are not the same.

 

[81usaf92]

We're at Day Eight of the Heather Hostage crisis btw....still chained to her ideology....



One of the best I've seen - and it does an OUTSTANDING job of representing all perspectives - is the American Revolution series by the History Channel that can be seen on You Tube and was narrated long ago by Edward Herman. And they go all across the spectrum, a guy in uniform, a couple of black historians, a few women historians, they don't have just ONE perspective shared, and you get this widespread notion that the Revolutionary War wasn't as clean and easy as we were presented in high school history of good George Washington against bad George III.




Isn't it funny how many of these people would mock someone like Jack Van Impe standing at a TV quoting bible verses about how this particular event that happened today was prophesied in the book of Revelation DO THE SAME THING in other career fields, especially history?

But I'll be honest with you, and I don't blame Heather for this: I think the invention of the Internet (or mass communication anyway) helps CAUSE this kind of stuff. There's a bigger audience for you when you slant the news than there is when you tell the truth ("No, Trump is not gassing Jews in ovens"). It's hardly her. Look at Rachel Maddow, who has a PhD from Oxford, and pretends to be someone who believes the garbage she utter(ed) on MSNBC. She cannot possibly be as dumb as some of her commentary. Nor can Princeton historian Kevin Kruse, whose WRITTEN chapter in "The Myth of Southern Exceptionalism" is outstanding but his Twitter persona sounds like he's handing out tracts at the entrance of a Democratic Party fundraiser. (If he was a right-winger, his historic methodology as shown on Twitter would be a conspiracy theory as opposed to "research").

Then again, remember...Benny Hinn and faith healers draw huge audiences. The more learned, scholastic, and well-argued John Calvin or Thomas Aquinas (among many) wouldn't draw the eyes to pay for the broadcast. We really are into "entertainment."

I think alot of it comes with the realization that non historians like Dan Carlin and the YouTube history channels make far more money and get far more eyes and ears than actual historians. I call it jealousy and anger.

 

[81usaf92]

. I will continue to say it…we are not the same.

Cool.

 

[some_al_fan]

It’s very telling that there’s a ton of people more upset about Kimmel losing his job than Kirk being murdered in front of his family. I will continue to say it…we are not the same.

Of course, we are not the same….
- Kirk was killed by a lunatic.
- Kimmel has lost his job because of the deliberate actions of the US government.

As a proponent of the First Amendment and limited government intervention, I am more concerned about Kimmel (and not him personally, but the actions of the Administration)

 

[colbysullivan]

Of course, we are not the same….
- Kirk was killed by a lunatic.
- Kimmel has lost his job because of the deliberate actions of the US government.

As a proponent of the First Amendment and limited government intervention, I am more concerned about Kimmel (and not him personally, but the actions of the Administration)

Has nothing to do with the First Amendment. Kimmel isn’t going to prison. He lied about Kirk’s killer so he lost his job.

Where was the outrage from the Left when Rosanne was cancelled? Or Gina Carano? Or Tim Allen?

 

[81usaf92]

Has nothing to do with the First Amendment. Kimmel isn’t going to prison. He lied about Kirk’s killer so he lost his job.

Where was the outrage from the Left when Rosanne was cancelled? Or Gina Carano? Or Tim Allen?

1) he didn’t lie about the killer. He made a point about MAGA fans scoreboard chasing instead of grieving

2) There is a huge difference between axing someone because your company believes opinions don’t reflect your standards and beliefs; and the government threatening to pull licenses and make a merger difficult if you don’t censor or fire someone who has been critical of the administration.

Some of yall need to turn off FOX news and pick up your 7th grade civics book. Because this isn’t a normal set of circumstances that we are witnessing… and this is coming from someone who hates both parties and both extremes with a passion.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I think alot of it comes with the realization that non historians like Dan Carlin and the YouTube history channels make far more money and get far more eyes and ears than actual historians. I call it jealousy and anger.

The number of idiots right now thinking TPUSA should sue AOC because she slandered a dead man suggests “not knowing what I’m talking about” is a terminal illness.

 

[Huckleberry]

NYT gift link

With Calls for Retribution Over Kirk, Some See Rise of a ‘Woke Right’
Conservatives have pressed for consequences for those who make negative comments about Charlie Kirk. But a few on the right say they worry about limits on speech.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

NYT gift link

With Calls for Retribution Over Kirk, Some See Rise of a ‘Woke Right’
Conservatives have pressed for consequences for those who make negative comments about Charlie Kirk. But a few on the right say they worry about limits on speech.

I have far better hobbies than scouring the Internet to see what somebody said about a person who was murdered. I’m not trying to make light of any of it, it’s a tragedy, but this guy was not exactly president of the United States or chief justice of the Supreme Court.

What’s funny is that if one of my coworkers said something about being glad Kirk is dead on their Facebook pages or whatever do you know what I would do about it?

Not a damn thing, because I have bigger fish to fry.

 

[some_al_fan]

DOJ Can’t Tie Suspected Kirk Killer to Left Like MAGA Wants

Investigators have yet to turn up evidence that suspect Tyler Robinson was connected to any left-wing organizations.

www.thedailybeast.com

 

[92tide]

DOJ Can’t Tie Suspected Kirk Killer to Left Like MAGA Wants

Investigators have yet to turn up evidence that suspect Tyler Robinson was connected to any left-wing organizations.

www.thedailybeast.com

sadly, it won't stop them from doing it.

 

[75thru79]

DOJ Can’t Tie Suspected Kirk Killer to Left Like MAGA Wants

Investigators have yet to turn up evidence that suspect Tyler Robinson was connected to any left-wing organizations.

www.thedailybeast.com

Of course they aren't going to. It's not like people on the fringes of society have membership groups. Statements like "well the shooter was a card carrying KKK member" or "he was a known member of Antifa". No. There is no group called "The KKK" or "Antifa". No membership cards or rosters. Both these "groups" are just people that consider themselves members of what they think that group should be and they chat on the dark corners of the internet.

I personally never thought Kirk's shooter was a member of Antifa, or one of any other leftist leaning "community". He was just a crazy, misguided person that shared beliefs on issues that matched the beliefs on the left side of the aisle. I guess that makes you a leftist. I don't know. I don't think it makes you a leftist any more than voting for a Republican makes you right-wing.