Replies (212)
Demons
π―
don't you think that there are same zealots on both side tho?
There are.
I wish my fellow leftists were brave enough to be on nostr, but I never saw Charlie Kirk mention nostr either. Weird how you're trying to reframe reality
So how does your idea of progress deal with the Nazis?
Faker than the trump assassination attempts. They are priming you for a fake trump assasination.
Did he die?
There's almost no way he survived, sadly
The left has escaped facing real consequences for too long.
Youβre confusing speaking truth for hate. Just like the far left so vehemently does on a daily basis. Heβs always been calm and willing to be respectful to those he speaks with. Just leave this alone and take a walk.
This will not go over well.
That's a weak attempt at projection. Try harder, piece of shit
I am hateful but really being quite honest
Everything is gods will.
That's a fucking crock of shit statement, and you know it.
There are zealots of all kinds
Not sure who the "both" are in this scenario; by the time someone is killing another human in cold blood he's in his own world.
I'd feel sorry for you if you weren't coming off as a Nazi
We're here. I agree with you.
Wish it would've been a woman or women pulling triggers instead of some old dude.
@unknown Dont engage I reckon itβs a bot. Or a total loser numnut!
A bullet doesn't change the cold hard reality that Charlie is 100% correct
Heβs not a bot. But he is most likely mentally unstable. Thank you PringleMac π this assassin hits deep.
I just wish Charlie Kirk could learn from this instead of dying or doubling down on his Nazism
Iβm devastated for all of you. I have many friends in the USA and we are sending prayer to ALL ππ
TPUSA sources confirm Charlie Kirk is in βcritical but stable conditionβ after a shooting at Utah Valley University.
Just waking up in Australia to this story
Crazy
And yes, when weβre not able to openly debate, what kind of a world is that?
Why would he have ever done that? Money, meet hand, repeat.
Makes me want to buy more bitcoin and get into nature. People are idiots.
OP says leftists, so I assume the right π€·π»ββοΈ
Thanks for your deep insights. Now GFY
or maybe some three letter agency.
Left leaning libertarian here. I don't think folks need to die for us to be able to work together. Violence just begets violence and an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. The problem, outside of the puppet masters pulling their strings, is the fact that a large number of humans don't have empathy.
ππ» heartbreaking
Fanatical right wingers have done it too. Its not fuckinhg left and right or red and blue. It's the fucking government pitting the people against each other so they can keep raping our kids and robbing us blind. But hey, yeah, let's blame politics and not the politicians.
I respect not wanting bloodshed, but I don't see what you're doing about the Nazis that makes you better than the person that did this
We have no evidence the shooter was someone incapable of engaging in serious debate
I call that shit out when I see it. I shame them publicly. I make sure anyone that encounters them in my presence knows who they are. I don't tolerate extremism on any side.
Don't try to bully me today, bud. I'm usually the one defending you out here.
I'm not trying to bully you, I'm saying I think the gun is potentially mightier than the pen at this stage of Nazi empire
So sad RIP Charlie π
BUT MAGA ARE THE FASCISTS
(Incomprehensible unemployed screeching in the background)
Well, I can't personally take up arms because I have children to consider, but I am more than willing to help get someone crucified in the court of public opinion if need be.
Like I said, both sides have acted in this manner. Again, you're being blinded by red/blue rage bait.
I don't feel like I can take up arms either, but I'm thankful to people who do it for a good cause
Luigi Mangione is a hero. Whoever killed this Charlie Kirk guy (someone I had never heard of before today if I'm being fully transparent) is a pawn in the government games. Or will be used as such even if they were a legitimate lone actor.
Absolutely true
And after hearing the conflicting reports on whether the shooter is in custody, idk if it was a lone actor. Fuck them if they got paid or given special fed immunity to do this
But if it was a lone actor, I hope they don't get the death penalty for going after a Nazi
I dont use the National Socialist tag all willy-nilly personally. Is there evidence of him belonging to such a group? Like I said, I had never heard of him before today.
Leftism destroys everything.
Go jump in a woodchipper shitforbrains
He supported the Trump campaign last year, while Trump was openly supporting the genocide in Gaza
There's no proof he hasn't committed violence, but there is proof he has participated in group violence, which is open to debate whether you'd call it "committing" violence
Go suck on a 12 gauge, over and under
Suck it good and hard
I might have had Charlie Kirk confused with a different Nazi called Nick Fuentes apparently, but I'm not gonna kill myself over it, you drama queen
Pally flag in bio? Youre a muzzie lover
Time for you to stagefive off a tall building, ten seconds later the world will be a bit better place
Weak gaslighting attempt, racist
I think you should.
Suck that shotgun real good and do some nice ceiling decorations, at least your brain will be useful for something then.
That makes him okay with genocide, not necessarily a Nazi. That's still a shitty stance. But like, fuck both sides of the american government aisles? That's still my base stance.
Not anymore
What are you drinking?
There was a word for people who didn't join the military or anything in Nazi Germany, just chilled being okay with genocide
That word is Nazi
Republicans and Democrats are both modern Nazi party branches in the US
That will not change
Yes, im a racist and you should end yourself asap
Make the world a better place
Yes according to recent announcements
This doesn't appeal to me
Canβt wait.
Still weak and racist
I notice how you said "individuals," plural
Did you mean what you said? Plural individuals? Like, a fucking group maybe?
You are now banned from nostr
Racism is bad actually
Fuck off with that fundie crap
Im gonna be filthy rich the day i invent a way to strangle people through a keyboard
And this connects to the context you're replying to in some way? How?
Yes pronounced dead 45mins ago π
It's when a group of creatures (in this case people) perpetrate violence together. Try to keep up
*Monero
Group: Nazis
Exact acts: voting, sending dollars, etc.
Am I gonna have to repeat this again?
> "respectful"
> constant logical fallacies, no apologies
I mean can you even show me 1 time he apologized for being disingenuous/arguing in bad faith?
Kids in Gaza are walled in and starving.
Charlie Kirk supported that, with words and also materially with actions.
That's what I call being a Nazi / a member of the Nazi group.
Any members of Hamas participating in walling in children and starving them are Nazis. Yes.
Unlike the Israeli authorities, I have no evidence that includes many, if any, members of Hamas.
Weird time to post those emoji you fucking Nazi creep
Humans are the ones with dangerous ideas, not demons.
Anyway, re-evaluating π
This is the closest thing to the truth
100% , my folks and friends are so enraged many of them took off work once they heard this to calm down and I can't blame them, things are imploding. We know this was intended to stir the masses and cause chaos and it will.
I know, that guy who said that must have seen one CNN short and said, yup that's what happened and didn't look any further.
His views were about as bad as they come. But this doesn't mean he should have been assassinated.
Certainly did not mean to βlikeβ your retarded post
You are a piece of trash
Sorry that happened to you
Then the left gaslights their ass off
Sad day indeed
Respectful dialogs?
Very sad day. For what Iβve seen Charlie was a nice, articulate and respectful guy irrespective of which side he took. His political views made no difference to me.
My only word of warning to the people is: donβt let these events weaponise you. Itβs easy to put labels on things (e.g. βradical leftβ). In reality, if you took off the labels and looked at the facts ONLY, across history, it would be hard not to notice that βradical leftβ is very similar to βradical rightβ and that once you reach a certain point of abstraction left=right=centre=corrupt system . The system is there to make you slave. Fuck the system using non-violent, smart, anonymous, freedom-based resistance. Study Bitcoin, buy Bitcoin, set yourself FREE. βοΈβ€οΈπ€
Don't use this event to demonize the "radical left". I'm sure you didn't like it when people used the super trump lover in Texas who shot over 40 people at a Walmart to call it the "radical right" on a murder spree.
Don't be part of the problem dividing everyone with your rhetoric. You have a big platform, use it to make things better, not create more division.
From TXMCtrades on twitter:
I've hesitated to post this all day but I'm going to now. Will probably lose me some followers but I have things to say and I've never been one to hold my tongue. I respect the exchange of ideas and a diversity of thought.
Political violence should be widely condemned by all and it's unfortunate that we are so eager to paint outcomes as a single faction's work. We do it every time, and so quickly. However the pendulum is forever swinging. It was just three months ago that two Minnesota lawmakers and their spouses were shot at their respective homes in the same night, two of them fatally (Melissa Hortman and husband), all Democrats. Some recall the 2017 Congressional baseball game shooting targeting Republicans. Infamous and awful. 2017 was also the Charlotte car ramming incident that killed 1 and injured 35 people protesting against the Unite The Right rally, mostly progressive victims. In 2018 CΓ©sar Sayoc pled guilty to 65 felony counts for mailing pipe bombs to various Democrats and Trump opponents. Last year we had the horrific attempt on President Trump's life at a rally that he amazingly survived. Another Trump rally that summer had a man arrested with guns and a fake passport. These are just the first things I thought of. This is not an exhaustive list and isn't meant to encapsulate all political strife in this country, before anyone lists more tragedies. Let us not compete. I only bring these up because in my view it's important not to allow single events to deepen our partisan trenches any more than they already are. I see a lot of folks suggesting all our violence emanates from one direction but history says otherwise. It is becoming too easy to dismiss whole swaths of our countrymen as violent lunatics when most people are good and decent and law abiding. Charlie Kirk's murder is an abysmal tragedy and we should seek the ultimate justice against his perpetrator. Just as those who carry out any heinous crimes should be punished. Think we can all agree on that last bit.
Memories are short. Emotions are sky high. People are enraged, and rightfully so. But we are not tearing apart at the seams solely because of the efforts of left or right. We're tearing apart, in my eyes, because the social contract has been destroyed and people increasingly feel they've lost any agency to improve their own lives and leave their children a better world. Our communities are fraying. The classic American dream is dead, replaced by a fevered race to try to gamble thine self into wealth or risk drowning in five figure net worth hell with zero prospects and no property of your own. This is a soul crushing fact we must face as a nation. As I said earlier today, the very fabric of civil society feels as though it's being pulled apart. And whomever is tugging the threads surely benefits from seeing us divided by ideologies rather than united in any capacity.
This is not a cry for any one party, I have no partisan allegiance. I think it's all a big cabal as I've said consistently for a long time. But I hate feeling as though we're allowing the republic to be ripped apart by an unidentifiable evil. Events are in motion that cannot be easily undone, and it is heartbreaking to think that the nation my son inherits will be worse than the one I knew. We are being tested and so far we are failing. I'm not sure what we're supposed to do, but unanswerable grief and dread appear to loom over us like a cloud, dark as obsidian on a breezeless night. My soul aches.
Social media is designed to divide us. It is working.
Know that you are loved.
Goodnight. β€οΈ
The problem is the giant outpour of people celebrating his death. The "radical right" did not celebrate the death of people killed at walmart. The left is celebrating the death of Charlie. No matter who the killer was, the people celebrating speak for themselves. You simply do not see the right celebrating the death of leftist politicians like we are seeing from the left now. This is the problem that your post has completely avoided. If you celebrate murder, you are evil. There will always be evil people and we won't always know their motivations. But we can know who condemned them or celebrated them after the fact.
People weren't on social media celebrating the death of the congress member. The left is celebrating Charlie's death.
π’ π« π§‘
I think you may be stuck in a media echochamber. I assume rightwing media minimizes bad behaviour by the right and leftwing media minimizes bad behaviour by the left.
Find me one post by a democratic senator or housemember about Charlie Kirk similar to what Mike Lee posted about the assassination of the elected Minnesota lawmakers.
Also note Trump did not think those lawmakers murdered deserved the flags to be flown at half staff, even for a day.
------------------------
Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah took down X posts Tuesday making an apparent connection between Gov. Tim Walz and the man accused of shooting two Minnesota lawmakers and their spouses, and blaming βMarxistsβ for the murders. The change comes after blowback from Sen. Tina Smith and her staffers as well as Minnesota Democratic and Republican lawmakers.
One X post said βNightmare on Waltz Street,β with pictures of Boelter, who is accused of killing Minnesota Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, and shooting Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, in the early morning hours of June 14. Boelter also went to the homes of two other state lawmakers that night; one house was empty, and at the other, a police officer pulled up to the house shortly after Boelter arrived, so Boelter left.
Another Lee post read, βThis is what happens When Marxists donβt get their way,β with a picture of Boelter.
its not a left or right question and also he was promoting the current governments political views and supporting genocide
Probably not your intention but this comment sounds like justification for his murder
Yeah he spoke a lot of good values. And he was logical and fair. Many got angry that they couldnβt make rational arguments against him.
I just hope whoever cowardly killed him finds Jesus before they meet Jesus. I canβt imagine the haunting conscience they must have now after killing a good man. As Judas did.
You are still missing the point.
They want us to keep fighting with each other in the name of left and right.
The real enemy is the one you can't publicly criticize and everyone knows who is that foreign entity is.
This foreign entity wants big government to control us.
Agreed. Demons walk among us. True evil exists in this world.
nope, i am saying that there are situations when you have to choose between 1 death or 100k death, and which choice is more ethical and if you are promoting death in front of a large audience, there is a big chance that you are also causing death, and not only 1
for example: when hitler died would you said that it is very sad that this person died, he had a family, rest in peace hitler?
An equivalent case could be made for killing vocal pro-choice speakers because their speaking might cause the deaths of many pre-birth babies.
I donβt believe Charlie was pro death of innocents in any case.
Comparing him to hitler who was explicitly and absolutely pro death is false equivalence.
I think I understand what youβre trying to say though.
I bet it does, now.
also perhaps helpful as your media bubble may not share facts with you:
How much? It will fade just like 9/11.
Weβve got our women and children to protect. Giddyup!
What evidence do you have that the guy is a radicalβor any other kind ofβleftist?
Evidence for this claim? I havenβt seen that anywhere.
βThe Leftβ is tens of millions of people. One or two saying something stupid is not a collective response. Be real.
im glad i could explain it and yes i was just trying to find a radical example so it is more demonstrative, so yeah its difficult to find a grood example, but everybody knows hitler and kind of has similar opinions (most of the time)
Authorities are claiming to have recovered a rifle wrapped in a towel in the woods near the shooting and they believe this to be the weapon used in the murder. Allegedly there were three unfired rounds still in the rifle and there were leftist slogans written on the casings
source? Press conference this morning didn't give details on rounds and writings on gun.
Exactly. Key word is allegedly. What is the source?
For those of us who lived through it it is hardly faded. There is however, a younger generation who wasnβt there for it who arenβt listening to people who were.
Yes the bullet engravings have been reported on... but if true it sure seems fishy as heck if you ask me.
You still live in New York?
I donβt live in NY, no.
Hello, care to chat a little?
Oh I share your sentiment
Itβs reported widely but I think WSJ had it first. Regardless, if youβre skeptical about convenient facts, I share your sentiment
Wall Street Journal reported it first and I am seeing it in Reuters and elsewhere.
Care to address the point I made?
Did Trump fly the flags at half staff when actual elected representatives were killed? Why the double standard? We only honor the dead when they are the president's friend?
Did any elected democrat say callous things like Mike Lee did after those democrats were murdered? Which clearly even he realized were wrong (or perhaps he couldn't stand the backlash) so he deleted the comments?
We talk all day about how bluesky, x, facebook are full of bots sowing dissent and how the algo sucks and that is why we use nostr. Then your 'evidence' is a bunch of stuff from those platforms we all decry daily?
So, you lived through it like 95% of the country. With tsa restrictions and expanded government.
Feels like Intel or foreign gov trying to start civil war.
well, the facts are that the shot would not have taken a pro sniper to do, just a someone trained adequately, 200 yards is not a hard distance with a scope and a 303 or 308 cal and by the amount of superficial damage i'm betting they were hollowed, also likely the bullet hit his shoulderblade and again, this seems indicative of the bullet being an expanding tip of some sort. probably not a FMJ.
remote control assassins is pretty much proven, i saw a video where a hypnotist demonstrated doing it, using hypnosis to train the shooter really quickly (which was part of the go signal trigger) and the individual "blanked out" while they were doing it. so, yeah, hypnotising someone to shoot on a signal is easy to do, and someone with susceptibility to hypnosis, very easy to implant all the ideas to write all that stuff, the manifesto, the bullet engravings, etc.
meanwhile, the people who orchestrate it sit comfortably distant while their wingnut takes the heat for them.
OR, the evidence was created like this in order to mislead the investigators, that seems more likely, and that the shooter was a trained covert operative, a mercenary, who was given loads of money and help and guarantees to escape without being found. either way, it's covert ops, spooks, and psychological operations, one on the public, the other on the shooter and the public.
Trump knew Charlie personally, its really as simple as that. Get out of your bubble, go browse reddit.
Also, bots don't post memes about someone dying. Kind of a shit argument. Obviously to see people on the left, you have to go where they are. That's how you avoid living in an echo chamber.
Sure does. But letβs be honest. At this point in the breakdown of our national society itβs also entirely possible that some angry young individual was so bought into the leftist propaganda that he thought he was doing a good thing
I agree with your assessment that the shooter did not have to be particularly skilled and also on the very real possibility that this has been orchestrated in some way. However we shouldnβt rule out the possibility that it really is just a lone individual heavily influenced by years of hysterical left-wing propaganda thinking heβs doing a good deed by taking out a bad guy. Iβm not ruling out shadow individuals and deep state organizations but letβs not overlook the damage that has been done by regime media and the increasingly shrill culture that nowadays counts as βmainstreamβ
Do they make that shot and escape though?
Possible
I just saw that. WSJ normally a reliable source, but itβs still early.
I think weβve all seen too many action movies that make us think it takes a ninja to pull the trigger and escape but honestly it doesnβt.
Very early. And who knows what to believe about anything these days.
Thatβs unnecessarily cynical.
Well, I believe Charlie Kirk was a real person and that he was killed and I believe that killing was utterly wrong. Beyond that, itβs very hard to know what information can be trusted about the specifics of this event. With these high profile killings, everyone has an agenda and theyβre either actively pushing itβ perhaps with deliberate misinformation or at the very least they may be letting their bias influence their narrative so that they appear more confident than they really are when asserting what they claim to know
I can relate. Thatβs why we need to consult reliable sources and wait for police to do their job.
Agreed. But I think that no specific source is always reliable so itβs a lot more work than I feel like it used to be to decide on what is true. I think the best we can do nowadays is triangulate based on multiple sources after having made sure that theyβre not all simply echoing one source
So Trump (the president of the entire united states) lowers the flags for someone he knew personally. But when two elected officials are assassinated, he does not lower the flag, because... he doesn't know them personally?
Is that your argument? Does this make sense to you and/or feel acceptable?
So you're still ignoring the points I made in the post while trying to change the argument to what you'd like to argue. Got it.
Good luck to ya my friend
If you want to tell me how I lived through it it defeats the point of me telling you how I lived through it. Needless to say, I didnβt have the same experience your 95% statistic would like to suppose.
Good luck your ptsd then
It seems safer to just etch such ideas into the ether here on Nostr. No one can censor you, no one can shoot you in the neck, and everyone can comment and attack your ideas (or, if they are good ideas, get swayed by your ideas).
Yes he should fly flags at half staff whenever anyone politically associated dies. Now that I've addressed that, what do you think about the left celebrating charlies death?
Great, I'm glad we agree he should have flown the flags at half staff when 2 elected Minnesota lawmakers were murdered. But when he chose to not do that, but to lower the flags immediately after personally announcing the murder of a right wing political podcaster/influencer, it comes across as very divisive. "If my team gets hurt, we mourn, if your team gets hurt, fuck em." That is what makes it feel like "there is a war about to erupt", its that type of attitude.
In terms of your second question, I think people (and bots I guess) are free to do what they want. I don't like celebrating someone's death personally, but I also don't like many other things I see people do on social media or in real life, but I don't try to control them or change that behaviour.
If an elected representative on the other hand were to celebrate the death of Charlie Kirk (or the Minnesota lawmakers like a republican senator did), there likely should be consequences for that action because of the position and power they hold. I think politicians should be held to a higher standard in general vs. the regular public, but unfortunately I think we actually allow them a much much lower bar.
I also generally am not a fan of super broad terms like "the left". I've seen so many people use the following terms interchangeably (I can't blame them as the president himself, their leader, taught them to do this through repetition): the left, communists, democrats, fascists, radical left, etc...
I lean left of center most of the time (although I didn't vote for Kamala and I did vote for George W) so would consider myself a moderate democrat. I don't want to be associated with the 1-5% "radical left". Similar to how I assume you may lean right of center (maybe not?), but you may not want to be associated with the far right radical elements that exist in that party.
We've drifted towards using super divisive language (starting from the top with the prez) which is a very common divide/conquer tactic used throughout history by the rich/powerful to control the masses.
I'd imagine in real life, if we were to share a meal, we'd agree on 80%+ of issues and perhaps even enjoy each others company.
Or maybe you've become much more aware of the need to triangulate because all information is partial.
I think itβs both. It really did used to be easier for people in our society to agree on narrative and also, as you say, there was always a need to triangulate because indeed all information is partial
I'd also add this post from twitter I read earlier today that may help explain where a lot of people are coming from:
Kirk should not have been killed. I have empathy for his daughters, his wife, his family, and his friends.
But my compassion has limits. I didnβt care for Charlie. He showed no empathy for others, and his words and actions dehumanized people.
You donβt get to be outraged when others donβt extend compassion toward him. That doesnβt mean weβre celebrating his death.. it means weβre human. It means our compassion has limits.
This is the limit..
MAGA you have no compassion for the people you despise, you had no compassion for the Dem Rep Hortman and her husband when they were murdered in their sleep... You had no compassion for Nancy Pelosiβs husband.; So spare us the selective outrage. This lack of compassion isnβt something unique to MAGA, we see it in all groups.
Violence comes from individuals who are unwell or hateful. Their politics and actions donβt always reflect the core values of a movement.
I am a conservative at heart. But MAGA is not conservatism. Itβs extremism and division wrapped in cheap appeals to Christianity and patriotism. Nothing you show proves otherwise.
Information follows a Pareto distribution: 90 percent of the information comes from 10 percent of the sources. Prior to the internet and mobile phones, that meant a few TV networks and local radio stations and newspapers. It used to cost tens of dollars for a long distance phone call; now itβs basically free. Now the outliers can broadcast their messages. In some cases, theyβre valuable. But there are a lot of wing nuts out there. There have always been conspiracy theories, for instance, but now they have a global community and can talk to each other.
If youβre saying that it used to be easier for people to settle on a narrative, whether that narrative accurately or inaccurately reflects the truth, thatβs what Iβm also saying.
Agreed
He shouldnβt have been killed. But he never minded Palestinians being killed either.
I'm sure he thought some Palestinians should be killed. But there is a difference between arguing over whether something is an act of war and doing the killing. Last I checked, he was not responsible for killing anyone.
He took money from Israeli billionaires to spread propaganda
Thatβs like hitler never killed anyone cuz he might have never physically done it
Thatβs like saying*
You lost me at Hitler, who ordered the deaths.
Charlie argued that Israel had the right to defend itself. Whether you agree with him is another thing. He also pushed back on the idea that Israel could not be criticized, and he hated that Israel was killing women and children in Gaza. There is such a thing as a nuanced position.
No nuance of how you support starving children to death en masse will make me care if you get killed for supporting starving children to death en masse
The nuance might impact like, how you should be killed, but the fact that you support starving kids to death is just not nuanced in itself
So if he doesnβt care about people being killed why are people expected to care he got killed?
Show me a quote where he supported starving children, and I will condemn it.
Didn't you say he went along with Israeli framing where this is presented as "Israel's right to defend itself" while this was happening?
you made an assertion. support it.
I just tried while I awaited your reply, but Google wouldn't even give me any quotes where he suggested voting for Donald Trump
Did he somehow campaign for Donald Trump while telling people not to vote for him? Or like, without commenting on voting or something? I don't get it
Not some collated Google search. Post a direct video quote of Charlie saying it was OK to kill women and children either by blowing up buildings or starving them. That was your accusation. I'll even accept one where he says it was OK to raise Gaza. Support it with something other than inference.
This sort of accusation shit game that the left plays.
And keep in mind, I hate Israel, and I think Netenyahu allowed Hamas in on Oct 7 so he could hold onto power.
Look man, if he campaigned for Trump while saying "don't vote for Trump" and that was part of a general pattern of looking like a Nazi without actually advocating for doing anything to any starving children, then I was wrong about him.
I'm just pretty sure there are plenty of actual quotes from him that prove me right, even if Google didn't wanna show me one at first
I'm pretty sure with your line of thinking you would also be fine with genocide since there are millions who agree with Charlie on his positions. I don't see the difference between what you're accusing Charlie of and your own position.
Making exceptions for kids, and using guns instead of bombs or starvation, are pretty big differences in my position
again, post the soundbite. Otherwise you're just saying programming.
You refute that Charlie Kirk ever suggested to vote for Trump?
Why don't you make things more interesting with a wager. I'll bet you 100 sats he did
π I voted for Trump. it was either that or the dementia guy and his corrupt team of marxists. That wasn't what you were arguing. You said that Charlie wanted to starve children.
If you aren't allowed to vote for third parties or write in your own votes where you live, why live there? And why vote there at all?
I voted for Trump in "2016" when he wasn't genocidal.
Supporting Trump in "2020" was supporting killing and disabling kids with a deadly virus; not the kind of "free speech" I care if you get killed over.
Supporting "Trump 2024" was like in "2020," but now also walling in a city full of kids and starving many of them to death.
I will stay in this place as long as I think there's a fighting chance to stop authoritarianism. Nowhere else in the world is there a mass of people with enough guns and FU money to hold the evil at bay.
Israel is a sideshow. You can accuse people like Charlie of supporting genocide, which is truly what's happening there, but it's not on the mainstage if the 4th Turning at this point. Charlie challenged the Marxist authoritarian ideology, and that, my friend, is the fight that will matter in the end.
Marxist authoritarians aren't the problem
Nazis are
We might end up with an eco fascist world government to stop us from using crude oil and nuclear weapons to commit global suicide, that would be much better than what we have now or in the past
I have a personal belief in anarchy but it seems too late to try that as a productive solution for the problems we've created today
Nazis? Weird take.
Since this keeps coming up lately, I have an explanation ready to copy and paste of why I use this wording
Level 1 Nazi
πππππππ π ππ πππππ ππ πππππ ππ ππ ππππ π πππππ πππππ ππππππππ πππ ππππππ ππππππππππππππππ
Examples: Charlie Kirk's support of Trump and Israel, maybe your posts defending him
Level 2 Nazi
ππππ ππ π·, πππ π πππ π ππππππππππ πππππ ππ πππππππππ πΉππ π πππ πππππ ππππππππ/πππππππππ’
Examples: Charlie Kirk's support of Trump and Israel
Level 3 Nazi
πππππππ π ππππππππ’ πππππππππ ππ πππ π½ππ£π πππππ’ ππ πππππ πππ πΈ πΆππππππ’
Examples: Charlie Kirk's support of Israel and the 21st century American uniparty
ok. Well, have fun fighting the "Nazis." π
I won't. It sucks. I hope you're not one of them
Don't really care if I am or not. I'm more interested in stopping those who would love to destroy anything Christian and then lock us into a authoritarian prison that looks like a globalist Soviet society.
Then you should be glad the Catholic Church seems quite non-Nazi and ready to be part of a non-nuclear-apocalypse future, so people like me have no desire to destroy everything Christian.
eh. There's a Christless-ness there as well. I doubt I will be looking towards any institution as we go forward.
I've already said what I think about Bibi.
Not suggesting that. I'm just saying, as a Christless commie myself, they're doing a good job ensuring real Marxists shouldn't want to "destroy everything Christian"
I know, I'm just saying this stuff makes people from all walks of life willing to defend at least a large part of Christianity
the destruction of the God idea is inherent in Marxism. I am therefore opposed to it. It also insists on the centralization of the financial system, so I am opposes to it. It has no interest in the family unit, so I am opposed to it.
My idea of communism doesn't do anything to your church or your family unit, it mainly just prices most people out of luxuries they should have the self control to avoid to begin with (like eating tons of meat and driving huge vehicles faster than necessary all the time)
why do you believe it's your right to make those decisions for others? this is "you'll own nothing and be happy" authoritarianism..
It's my simple right to self defense. I don't like my air being poisoned
Also I personally don't have the self control to cut out meat so it's not just projecting what's easy for me onto others
then you need to personally, publicly campaign against it rather than asking the govt to do it for you.
lol. now you are satire
Well that's why I'm always posting on nostr and never filing taxes
But ultimately I kinda expect someone else with an AI powered robot army to do more than I can
I'm not
We need collective effort to survive
at least I know you're not serious.
I am serious, retard
You have picked a random time to start pretending I'm joking for no reason
ok, then you are a coward, trying to force something on other people and hoping they use violence to do it because you are too weak to do it yourself. You are not a serious person.
I am definitely a serious person. If I live long enough, I will build the robot army myself
Also, it's not hard at all to drive reasonable speeds, but you people are still vastly far too retarded for that
Given your violent vision to force us to do your will, you will, of course, be resisted. It will be to the bitter end, and it's a fight a lot of us will enjoy.
Because I'd make you eat less meat and drive reasonable speeds?
Thank gosh wars aren't usually won on delusion alone
yep. you don't get to make me do anything.
Because someone else will probably do it first, but like I said, if I somehow avoid being murdered first, it could end up being me
wouldn't wish that on you.
Many people would.
If I send unarmed quadcopters to crash into people's trucks and scratch the paint when they're driving too fast, people will want to strike me with predator drones.
Thank you for being more reasonable
π
And now perhaps you understand how this meme is bullshit
nah. you want what the globalists want. so it's still the same.
"Globalists" as in get rid of national borders, yes
"Globalists" as in ship everything across oceans to help poison everyone, obviously not
Either way, how the fuck does blurting out the word "globalism" change the fact that you, not some shadowy overlord, want to kill me by poisoning my air and you threaten to escalate the violence further for anything people who want to survive (like me, not some shadowy overlords) do to defend ourselves?
π
You didn't answer the question
