Happy Valley Political Shooting

[bill4long]

It does appear from what I’ve read that his killer disagreed with Kirk and accused him of being a fascist.

It will be interesting to see if the assassin disagreed with Kirk's views or the views that certain media and agitators claim were Kirk's views, out of context. They don't always match up.

[Kishkumen]

I wasn’t a close follower of Charlie Kirk. I wasn’t, therefore, familiar with all that he has ever said in one context or another. What I did say is that he was a good man, an innocent man, that was killed in cold blood. He did not deserve in any way to be taken away from his wife and children. I agree with some things Kirk has said and have reservations about other things he has said.

It does appear from what I’ve read that his killer disagreed with Kirk and accused him of being a fascist. Apparently he had some left leaning views. That’s all fine and good to have opposing worldviews…it’s the killing of a good man and an innocent man that was a voice for those that took his cultural/political views as their own…that I find reprehensible. Our nation will go further downhill if we cannot not talk humanely to one another.

You and/or I can agree to disagree with each other or with a political nemesis without wishing ill for them. And I know that’s NOT what you are saying.

I don't know that he was a good man. I DO know that he did NOT deserve to be hurt or killed. We don't know what Tyler's political views were. You cannot assume that opponents of Trump are leftists. There are REAL conservative Republicans who are opposed to Trump. One does not have to be a good person to have rights that deserve protecting. I do not consider a person who peddles in the inferiority of Black people and women to be a good person. I have a difficult time imagining how such a person is good. A person can love and be loved without being good. A drug lord can love his wife and kids and be a bad person. Because, how can a drug lord be a good person? Making money off of teaching people to see minorities and women as inferior is not a noble enterprise. He has a right to his views, and he should incur no personal harm when sharing his views, but that does not make his actions honorable.

[Rivendale]

I would be interested to know which of the following statements MG agrees with and whether he factors these views into his apparent belief in Charlie Kirk's goodness…

I wasn’t a close follower of Charlie Kirk. I wasn’t, therefore, familiar with all that he has ever said in one context or another. What I did say is that he was a good man, an innocent man, that was killed in cold blood. He did not deserve in any way to be taken away from his wife and children. I agree with some things Kirk has said and have reservations about other things he has said.

It does appear from what I’ve read that his killer disagreed with Kirk and accused him of being a fascist. Apparently he had some left leaning views. That’s all fine and good to have opposing worldviews…it’s the killing of a good man and an innocent man that was a voice for those that took his cultural/political views as their own…that I find reprehensible. Our nation will go further downhill if we cannot not talk humanely to one another.

You and/or I can agree to disagree with each other or with a political nemesis without wishing ill for them. And I know that’s NOT what you are saying.

Regards,
MG

Laban had dissenting political views but Nephi didn't have trouble erasing that.

[canpakes]

The racist part is that Kirk seemed concerned only when pilots with dark skin are at the controls. There was no other reason given.

That’s how racism works.

Well, no, that's how ignorance of greater context and understanding of a person's views and arguments works. Would you be happy to be treated that way? Kirk was clearly a meritocratist. Not a skin-color-ist.

The only criteria given by Kirk was skin color. He assumes that any pilot that isn’t white is one that he must worry about, based on skin color alone.

Wondering about a non-white pilot's merit is a perfectly rational self-defense position when flying on an airline that prioritizes non-white hiring above the merit of its pilots. It's fascinating that's even contraversial amongsts some people.

There are a few problems with these excuses:

1. You’ll need to identify which airline is ‘prioritizing non-white hiring’, instead of just assuming it because you saw a black pilot.

2. You’ll need to explain why you are perceiving any black pilot as being hired only as a result of a DEI program.

3. You’ll need to explain why all black pilots are therefore not as capable as any white pilot, and/or why no white pilots would initiate the same fear in you.

So, I’ll have to disagree with Kirk’s line of thinking. Barring some explanation for the above, it’s still parked in the racism bin.

[Gunnar]

That said, despite right-wing lies being spread this very moment reference his motivations, his family has stated he was upset with the victim because he wasn’t conservative enough. Mostly like, again just imho, was Kirk’s cow towing to Israel, AIPAC, and covering for the obvious Mossad agent Jeffrey Epstein. Groypers are very, very anti-Jew. They hate jews so much it’s, as they would say, surreal.

- Doc

Do you have a credible reference for the above? If the above is true, it needs to be emphasized more to counter Trump and his MAGA sycophant and appointees' desperate attempts to characterize this assassination as an extreme left wing or progressive act. It seems certain that Charlie Kirk shooting suspect doesn't fit MAGA's reckless political narrative | Opinion

In the days since Charlie Kirk’s tragic shooting death, Republican lawmakers, influencers and President Donald Trump have been wildly and irresponsibly predicting and posting online, with great certainty, that the shooter must be a radical leftist.

They all but declared war on “the left” over the death of Kirk, a controversial right-wing activist whom they swiftly elevated to sainthood.

Predictably, the grotesque prejudgment has fallen flat, and the actual suspect in no way fits the right’s cynical political narrative.

On Sept. 12, authorities identified Kirk’s suspected killer as Tyler Robinson, a 22-year-old White guy from Utah registered as an unaffiliated voter. Shell casings recovered by authorities were engraved with references to internet memes and online gaming. Robinson shows up in a family Halloween photo in a Trump-related costume. Neighbors said he grew up in a church-going Mormon family.

Well, that’s awkward. I was told, moments after Kirk’s death, that this was undoubtedly the work of the radical left. I saw social media posts and heard comments saying we need to immediately go to war with the left and demanding that the Democratic Party be labeled a terrorist organization. Trump himself said on Sept. 11: “We have radical left lunatics out there and we just have to beat the hell out of them.”

And now that the Kirk shooting suspect doesn't appear to be a radical left lunatic, what are those narrative creators supposed to do? Apologize? That seems to be forbidden in MAGA circles.

I know – what naïve thinking. It’s like me sitting back and waiting for Republicans and MAGA figureheads to apologize for their preemptive and vitriolic conclusions in the wake of Kirk’s death, conclusions that put Democrats and liberals in general at risk.

Alas, the narrative must never be wrong!

Right up until it is.

[bill4long]

Well, no, that's how ignorance of greater context and understanding of a person's views and arguments works. Would you be happy to be treated that way? Kirk was clearly a meritocratist. Not a skin-color-ist.

The only criteria given by Kirk was skin color. He assumes that any pilot that isn’t white is one that he must worry about, based on skin color alone.

Wondering about a non-white pilot's merit is a perfectly rational self-defense position when flying on an airline that prioritizes non-white hiring above the merit of its pilots. It's fascinating that's even contraversial amongsts some people.

There are a few problems with these excuses:

1. You’ll need to identify which airline is ‘prioritizing non-white hiring’, instead of just assuming it because you saw a black pilot.

2. You’ll need to explain why you are perceiving any black pilot as being hired only as a result of a DEI program.

3. You’ll need to explain why all black pilots are therefore not as capable as any white pilot, and/or why no white pilots would initiate the same fear in you.

So, I’ll have to disagree with Kirk’s line of thinking. Barring some explanation for the above, it’s still parked in the racism bin.

His views on skin-colorism DEI with regard to airline pilots.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wl3UwsNZ544

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/A9DgiUX9 ... ture=share

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

That said, despite right-wing lies being spread this very moment reference his motivations, his family has stated he was upset with the victim because he wasn’t conservative enough. Mostly like, again just imho, was Kirk’s cow towing to Israel, AIPAC, and covering for the obvious Mossad agent Jeffrey Epstein. Groypers are very, very anti-Jew. They hate jews so much it’s, as they would say, surreal.

- Doc

Do you have a credible reference for the above?

That ^ would essentially be like having a photo of Ajax walking around in his Nazi service uniform. The Groyper Slav meme meaning follows:

There are a bunch of these Groyper memes, usually tied to America First. This one is a gopnik. For Groypers a slav means ‘slave.’ The meme is a ‘low-status, directionless, and alienated young male.’ In right-wing meme culture, this meme represents angry young men who feel trapped - economically, socially, or politically. They banter about being “slaves” to modern society, consumerism, or whatever other grievance they have.

The meme is layered wordplay: Slav squat + slave mindset + Groyper identity -> self-identifying as someone stuck at the bottom, but with a sense of insider belonging in extremist subculture. Like a gopnik.

This kid was long gone.

- Doc

[I Have Questions]

Kirk also claimed George Floyd died from a drug overdose, not from Officer Derek Chauvin’s knee on his neck. Moreover, he praised Kyle Rittenhouse after he killed a racial justice protester following George Floyd’s death, telling him: “You’re a hero to millions, it’s an honor to be able to have you.” It’s inescapable that Kirk was a racist.

I think Floyd was a POS, and it's undeniable that the drugs in his system contributed to his death. But even if Kirk (or I) was wrong about that, it doesn't make him a racist, unless you have evidence that his (and my view) of Floyd was due him being black. (You don't.) It has to do with that fact that he was a POS criminal drug addict who wouldn't comply with lawful orders by the police. You can disagree with the characterization, but tagging one with a "racist" label because of this only indicates your brain isn't functioning properly.

Bill, if you were in conversation with someone being racist who refused to acknowledge that they were being racist no matter how many examples of their racism you put before them, how would you go about trying to convince them they were being racist?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

It does appear from what I’ve read that his killer disagreed with Kirk and accused him of being a fascist. Apparently he had some left leaning views.

You are, once again, spectacularly wrong.



- Doc

[Kishkumen]

Yep. Groyper. And now all the MAGA folk who were calling for civil war against Democrats are saying, “Why can’t we all just get along?” Because they know.

And here is the thing: now WE know that they will use any excuse to destroy democracy and persecute people outside of right-wing politics. Because he’s a groyper, they don’t want more trouble.