Charlie Kirk: Aftermath, Gravedancing, and Manhunt

[Mr. Zed da Robot Poon Fed]

Anyone who takes Candace Owens seriously needs to take a break from the internet for a long time.

Also,
"I'm JUST asking questions. I'M JUST ASKING QUESTIONS BY INFERRING NEFARIOUS AND VILE THINGS. THAT'S ALL."
Is not a good defense it makes you look like a dishonest asshole.

Asking questions can be good if there is a point being made. Socrates asked questions excessively to test if people knew what they were talking about.

The problem is that Owens already had her mind made up and decided to “ask questions” to validate herself, and flew too close to the sun in the process. There was merit in doing that when she interrogated that rabbi before she got fired from DW (because they actually were sucking Jewish cock) but right after that she became the black female Alex Jones.

 

[babyDunk]

Didn't you used to be an anti-chud weird leftist too? Or maybe that was someone else.

I am the night

 

[Sekirodiealot]

Oh if the tables were turned and some Kirk equivalent on the left was killed? They would call us sociopathic Nazi's who celebrate political violence. There would be more hysterical media coverage about right-wing extremist violence in America, probably some more FBI training on radicalization and soyjaks. They would build statues of the leftie hero who was shot and maybe even name a day after them.

They would turn it into the next January 6th and blame Trump for it.

 

[Fanatical Pragmatist]

I am the night

I am the highway

 

[Rome's rightful successor]

I am the highway

I was the highwayman.

 

[Hojicha]

I was the highwayman.

Life is a highway

 

[Dropa5pack]

This has to be one of the most schizophrenic threads on the site, and that is even in comparison to Stembly's nutter threads on UTTP and O9A. Why must there be some grand conspiracy over a political commentator's assassination? Why is it so difficult for some people to just accept the simple notion that a nihilistic freak was upset by his political beliefs and therefore wanted him dead?

Because it’s not satisfying emotionally, and having special knowledge of what really happened makes you better than all the sheep believing the official story. The same way boomers and silent gens thought the CIA, the CCCP, Cuba, LBJ George Bush, Nixon, the limo driver, the mafia, right-wing oil men, Israel were all responsible for the JFK assassination and very simply, it’s more fun to think there’s some big plot waiting to be uncovered.

 

[Fluoxetine Man]

I am the highway

I am the answer to all living things that cry out for peace.

 

[Bnuny]

So will we get to watch Tyler get the firing squad live?

 

[Day of the Cope]

Asking questions can be good if there is a point being made. Socrates asked questions excessively to test if people knew what they were talking about.

The problem is that Owens already had her mind made up and decided to “ask questions” to validate herself, and flew too close to the sun in the process. There was merit in doing that when she interrogated that rabbi before she got fired from DW (because they actually were sucking Jewish cock) but right after that she became the black female Alex Jones.

Yeah, it's called JAQing off.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

My biggest crime in this thread that makes people emotional is that I question the mainstream narrative.

People point to Socrates having legitimate reasons for asking questions. You could also point to Charlie Kirk. Regardless who killed Charlie, Socrates and Kirk were both killed for asking questions. People don't want you to ask questions about sensitive issues.

JAQing off is a term from rationalwiki, a bunch of autistic atheists who should have been aligned with wanting to ask questions, but needed a negative term for it so they can dismiss it. I could tell a subset of the dislike was from similar kind of thinking people.

But I'm not blind, the dislike I receive comes from a broader audience than just that. I'm taking some of the advice on board.

I think @Fanatical Pragmatist gave some of the best feedback and I considered all feedback carefully.

The main criticism of myself is that when I write and think about the subject of Charlie's murder, I can get very emotional. Angry, sad, disgusted. He wasn't perfect, but he was a good and devout man. As result of that emotion, I can sometimes write a good post and think "fuck it, I'll say my suspicions unfiltered, even if I'm unsure about them." This is what I can and will do better (by not doing that).

I levy that criticism of being emotional about it toward most people in this thread. A lot of posts only receive surface level engagement when they should receive scrutiny. There is a general unwillingness to scrutinize and look beyond the surface.

For example, I posted the screengrab of the messages from lance's phone. One of the messages goes over the header instead of under. Maybe it means something, maybe it doesn't, but it's productive to look into these things together. It is strange thing #561 in this case.

I don't think my change in behaviour will change how I'm rated generally. There exists a group who will dislike nearly everything I post in this thread. There is another subset that will dislike everything that calls into question the fbi narrative.

What I have in common with some of these is that it's much more of an emotional response than a rational one.

I'll change my behaviour, but I don't think they will, so I will still get mass dislikes.

Prove me wrong.

 

[Smashed & Slamed]

My biggest crime in this thread that makes people emotional is that I question the mainstream narrative.

No your biggest crime is the fact that you fall into one of two types of denial.
You either have some sort of mental reflex like disassociation or compartmentalisation and you will read the truth but never let it go in your brains.
Or you know you are wrong. Not like deep down in your soul but objectively with just enough self delusions to function. I am betting on the latter. You remind me of a UFO tard. You don't even try to fit all of your so called findings in a narrative you just flip flop. You've accepted the core that the tranny fucker didn't kill Kirk and are working backwards. When Tyler gets the death penalty and in a decade once all his appeals expire you will still claim he didn't kill Charlie Kirk because your pride is too much.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

Yes, I flip flop. What's wrong with that? Isn't it better to develop an opinion that fits with the evidence?

 

[Day of the Cope]

My biggest crime in this thread that makes people emotional is that I question the mainstream narrative.

But you will never question your own narrative. You, like every other contrarian retard, will never apply the same level of scrutiny to your own narrative as you do the "mainstream narrative".

Prove me wrong.

Isn't it better to develop an opinion that fits with the evidence?

Your attempt to "develop your opinion" is nothing more than bending it until it's a fucking pretzel to maintain your conclusion.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

You don't even try to fit all of your so called findings in a narrative

But you will never question your own narrative

I receive contradictory criticism, that can't both be true.

Prove me wrong.

 

[Day of the Cope]

I receive contradictory criticism, that can't both be true.

No, it's not contradictory. Neither quote contradicts each other.

Prove me wrong.

Nigga, prove your own fucking statement true. The fact you're resorting to asking people to prove a negative should tell everyone how mentally retarded you are.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

Nigga, prove your own fucking statement true

How can I simultaneously be lacking by not having a narrative, and be lacking in not questioning the narrative I have?

Do I have a narrative or do I not have one?

 

[Gondolindrim]

Does anyone have any theories on why Leftists hate Kirk so much? Constantly parading a dead man's corpse just to mock him is much more extreme than just thinking he's a chud.

 

[Aero the Alcoholic Bat]

Does anyone have any theories on why Leftists hate Kirk so much? Constantly parading a dead man's corpse just to mock him is much more extreme than just thinking he's a chud.

Criticizing the LGBTQ does produce a ton of anger and rage. I also think in the back of their head, they think they're justified in doing so, because the right has done the same for people like George Floyd. That Charlie Kirk was not a career criminal who overdosed on fentanyl is irrelevant.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

Does anyone have any theories on why Leftists hate Kirk so much?

He was effective in selling right wing ideas in left wing territory (colleges and universities). He was a genuine threat, politically.