• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University event. / Charlie Kirk Shot And Killed

He appears to have been pretty good at handling that rifle. Or at least, better than Thomas Matthew Crooks who took aim at Trump. However, Crooks was further away from his target, so there's that.
Actually, you've got that backward. Nobody aims for the neck. He was probably going for the head, which with a scope at 150 yards is an easy shot. In contrast, video analysis has shown that Crooks had a perfect head shot lined up and only missed because Trump turned his head to the side at exactly the right moment.
You too seem to be selective about how you treat evidence in favor of one side over the other, don't you?
Oh, really? Care to back that accusation up?
 
Jack Posobiec: “A century from now, when they write of the pivotal moment that saved western civilization, they will write that the sacrifice of Charles James Kirk was the turning point.”

Princess Diana. Now I remember what this reminds me of.

When Princess Diana died, she had become a divisive figure, but people were naturally shocked and found themselves, perhaps unexpectedly, genuinely grieving. But the phenomenon became almost absurdly extreme. A large proportion of the UK, unexpectedly but very thoroughly, lost its goddamned mind, and any sense of proportion went out the window for weeks.

It was remarkably like this.
 
Princess Diana. Now I remember what this reminds me of.

When Princess Diana died, she had become a divisive figure, but people were naturally shocked and found themselves, perhaps unexpectedly, genuinely grieving. But the phenomenon became almost absurdly extreme. A large proportion of the UK, unexpectedly but very thoroughly, lost its goddamned mind, and any sense of proportion went out the window for weeks.

It was remarkably like this.
And they both had odd connections to Donald Trump...coincidence? I think not! :oops:
 
the term 'fascist' has been used (both correctly and incorrectly) by both left and right to describe their opposition,
Kirk promoted all of the elements of fascism (as applied to our modern American context) so it's not exactly a leap to presume that ideological opposition to him might well motivated by anti-fascism, assuming it's motivated by any ideology at all.
Even if he is talking about hatred towards transgender people, that is not an exclusive gripe of the far left, since the far-right Groypers (from what I've read) are not uncommonly in relationships with a trans partner.
My sources say things like "Groypers oppose immigration, gay and transgender rights, women’s rights, and limits to hate speech," and wikipedia lists Fuentes in the category anti-transgender activists. From what I can tell, Fuentes and Kirk are basically indistinguishable on LGBTQ+ rights.
If they all hate trans so much, why are some of them in relationships with trans partners?
Did you link a source for this?
You want to put people in neat little boxes...
And yet I've never labelled the shooter in this case.

Sometimes the obvious solution is the correct one, though, and Kirk did promote marginalization of people like Luna (Lance) Twiggs.
 
Last edited:
Kirk promoted all of the elements of fascism (as applied to our modern American context) so it's not exactly a leap to presume that ideological opposition to him might well motivated by anti-fascism, assuming it's motivated by any ideology at all.
Nope, bad assumption right there. Could have been something else entirely.
My sources say things like "Groypers oppose immigration, gay and transgender rights, women’s rights, and limits to hate speech," and wikipedia lists Fuentes in the category anti-transgender activists. From what I can tell, Fuentes and Kirk are basically indistinguishable on LGBTQ+ rights.
It's not about rights. Kirk didn't go in for bashing gays...AFAIK. Groypers thought he was FAR too soft in that regard.
And yet I've never labelled the shooter in this case.
Huh, wut?? You have been calling him a leftie from the beginning.
Sometimes the obvious solution is the correct one, though, and Kirk did promote marginalization of people like Luna (Lance) Twiggs.
You're really stuck deep in that groove, aren't you.
 
You have been calling him a leftie from the beginning.
Not once have I done this; I've said that the most likely explanation is probably that Robinson opposes specific hateful right-wing ideas which were espoused by Kirk.

You're really stuck deep in that groove, aren't you.
You've yet to suggest which of Kirk's hateful ideas Robinson wanted to see shut down, AFAICT.

Could have been something else entirely.
Care to guess?
 
Last edited:
Not once have I done this; I've said that the most likely explanation is probably that Robinson opposes specific hateful right-wing ideas which were espoused by Kirk.
Not "labelling", just "picking an appropriate adjective"... Right? ;)
You've yet to suggest which of Kirk's hateful ideas Robinson wanted to see shut down, AFAICT.
Correct. I don't know his motives. And you don't either.
Care to guess?
Nope.
 
Shutting someone up for spreading right-wing hate strikes me as on that spectrum, though.

It doesn’t make them on the left side of that spectrum unless you’re arguing that everyone on the right side is hateful.
 
Such as the elder Mr. Robinson does?
Possibly the elder Robinson and the younger one were both MAGA except that only one of them believed in the joys of gay sex and gender expansive experience and was violently insistent upon protecting those communities from hate speech.

If being pro-gay is the sole province of the left, all those gay republicans are going to be very surprised.
 
No, it does not occur.

Parents turning their murderous child into the authorities isn't them being "good little MAGA loyalists" it's just basic decency and respect for rule of law.

Probably takes a certain amount of partisan internet poisoning to presume otherwise.

It follows that a good MAGA loyalist would both turn in their son for murdering a MAGA hero and claim their son was somehow radicalized by the left even if he wasn’t.

Either way, this claim is based on hearsay which is foolish to take at face value.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom