Trump 2.0

[sptrawler]

Well I guess we may as well play out the Kirk issue out to the end, if most think it is related to the thread.

Here is another twist, the left wing assasin apparently gave himself up, because he didn't want to be shot by police.
Now there's a do unto others as you would have done unto you, contradiction.

He didn't like what the Kirk had to say, so it justified shooting and killing him, but he didn't like the idea of being shot himself, because it might hurt or worse.

Alleged Kirk killer surrendered in fear of being shot by police, sheriff says

Tyler Robinson, the Utah man accused of killing political activist Charlie Kirk, only agreed to surrender if it was done peacefully, a sheriff involved with his arrest says.

www.abc.net.au

Tyler Robinson, the Utah man accused of killing right-wing activist Charlie Kirk in a politically charged shooting, was afraid of being shot by police and eventually only agreed to surrender if it was done peacefully, according to a sheriff involved with taking him into custody.

 

[Knobby22]

Well I guess we may as well play out the Kirk issue out to the end, if most think it is related to the thread.

Here is another twist, the left wing assasin apparently gave himself up, because he didn't want to be shot by police.
Now there's a do unto others as you would have done unto you, contradiction.

He didn't like what the Kirk had to say, so it justified shooting and killing him, but he didn't like the idea of being shot himself, because it might hurt or worse.

Alleged Kirk killer surrendered in fear of being shot by police, sheriff says

Tyler Robinson, the Utah man accused of killing political activist Charlie Kirk, only agreed to surrender if it was done peacefully, a sheriff involved with his arrest says.

www.abc.net.au

Tyler Robinson, the Utah man accused of killing right-wing activist Charlie Kirk in a politically charged shooting, was afraid of being shot by police and eventually only agreed to surrender if it was done peacefully, according to a sheriff involved with taking him into custody.

He was protecting his family. They could have shot his Mum or Dad. You know how trigger happy they are.

 

[sptrawler]

He was protecting his family. They could have shot his Mum or Dad. You know how trigger happy they are.

Couldn't he have just got off the foof and walked over to the neatest police, or police station?
He put his family under threat by going home, it wasn't as though he just happened upon the Kirk lecture by chance. Lol

He planned the whole episode, now all of a sudden he was being a considerate person, didn't Kirk have a family?

 

[Knobby22]

Couldn't he have just got off the foof and walked over to the neatest police, or police station?
He put his family under threat by going home, it wasn't as though he just happened upon the Kirk lecture by chance. Lol

He planned the whole episode, now all of a sudden he was being a considerate person, didn't Kirk have a family?

Obviously they gave him a chance to give up.
People's motivations are complex. Maybe he thought his friend would be impressed. Geez he messaged her.
Stupid adult/kid, living at home, flunked Uni, playing computers, trained wonderfully well in firearms. Even his messages were gamer.
Don't worry, he will be shot by firing squad before too long.

He thought he was doing good, would impress her. Dumb. lacking empathy. No excuse for taking a life.

 

[wayneL]

The order came from the FCC, no doubt because of direct pressure from the Trump Administration, not even Disney can over ride the FCC.

But it’s weird I thought Trump and MAGA were all about Freedom of speech. Turns out as usual they don’t want Freedom of speech, they want privilege for them selves to say what they like, but not anyone else.

Kimmel blatantly lied about the motivation of the shooter. Nobody removed Kimmel's 1A rights, but nobody ever says free speech is not exempt from consequences, especially the left.

Double standards here.

 

[wayneL]

Double standards here.

 

[JohnDe]

I don't know who Tucker Wilson or Jimmy Kimmel, but those comments and the way he tries to hide them behind humour is despicable and disgusting. No wonder his boss 'parted ways" with him. probably the same for Wilson, but I don't follow US current affairs programs to know. What I do know is that those kinds of remarks are a form of belittling and bullying, and by making it common through media and daily life it degrades humanity and causes rifts in society that leads to anger and violence. Exactly what we are seeing play out.

 

[wayneL]

I don't know who Tucker Wilson or Jimmy Kimmel, but those comments and the way he tries to hide them behind humour is despicable and disgusting. No wonder his boss 'parted ways" with him. probably the same for Wilson, but I don't follow US current affairs programs to know. What I do know is that those kinds of remarks are a form of belittling and bullying, and by making it common through media and daily life it degrades humanity and causes rifts in society that leads to anger and violence. Exactly what we are seeing play out.

I've mentioned before on these pages the thesis of The Fourth Turning. It seems to be playing out as expected.

The bad news is that according the the thesis, it will probably get worse before it gets better.

The good news is that it will get better.

 

[orr]

given the consequences probably worth a full take;

 

[Value Collector]

Couldn't he have just got off the foof and walked over to the neatest police, or police station?

No, because he was hoping to get away with it, and at first he believed he had. Apparently he only gave himself up when he knew he had been identified, his Grandad recognised the rifle when it was shown on TV, and other family recognised his image.

 

[Value Collector]

My quote was:
It certainly seems that many feel that actual assasination is ok, as long as it is accompanied with a character assasination.

Well actually you prove the point, you say that you haven't heard MANY PEOPLE express those feelings. So you have heard some.

Then you give him a character assasination.

Which could well be perceived as meaning you are very likely to be one of those you mention, that express those ferlings

So I don't know why you are pontificating, by trying to correct everyone.

When your obvious dislike of the person condones homicidal behaviour toward them.

What are your feelings on capital punishment? Would you say it's ok as long as the person can be shown as right wing.

It's certainly an interesting time in history, where the victim who is shot while going about his lawfull business, comes under more scrutiny for their behaviour, than the criminal that shot the person and you are attacking anyone that is saying it was a disgracefull act.
Interesting.

Usually when a person who was inspirational public speaker dies, we get over whelmed with montages on social media of all the inspirational quotes and speeches they made.

So far I haven’t noticed any of these going around yet, I wonder why?

I mean there are plenty of Montages on him saying crap things, and his supporters are just saying he is being taken out of context, but why are the supporters putting together reels of all his best quotes they love?

 

[sptrawler]

Usually when a person who was inspirational public speaker dies, we get over whelmed with montages on social media of all the inspirational quotes and speeches they made.

So far I haven’t noticed any of these going around yet, I wonder why?

I mean there are plenty of Montages on him saying crap things, and his supporters are just saying he is being taken out of context, but why are the supporters putting together reels of all his best quotes they love?

ASF is the only social media I'm on, so luckily I avoid most of the loonie self indulgent vitriol.

If you will notice, I haven't said anything about the content of Kirks speaches, or about his character, only generalisations about the incident.

With regard the incident, there was only one criminal, the victim whether liked or disliked has a right to voice his opinion, same as those who dissagree with him, it is strong opinions that bring about change like marriage equality, stopping the Vietnam war etc.
Society has a problem when only one side has a stage and the other side is demonised, which is happening currently and driving social unrest in the West.
Only my opinion and I'm sure you will disagree, as is your want and your right.

 

[DB008]

​

 

[The Triangle]

given the consequences probably worth a full take;

It's fascinating how in the same take - he covers Trump making billions (Via the ABC question)....then promotes a book about how Trump squandered his fathers fortune. Elon musk (supposedly) was down to nothing at the early stages of Tesla and nearing bankruptcy. Thats just part of being an entrepreneur and businessman.

I rarely consume US late night talk shows anymore and the vast majority of Australians have never consumed them. Letterman, Leno, Carson, even the lesser known ones like Conan, Craig Ferguson, Jimmy Fallon managed to stay balanced and not preach. The content was generally pop-culture and celebrity related so at any given time anyone could tune in and likely be entertained. Now? Only a select group will be entertained.

Watching Kimmel do 15 minutes of Trump and 'right wing' bashing on a public broadcaster with a special licence to operate just demonstrates why these shows are dead and are getting cancelled. From the trusty interweb: Colbert's show hosted 176 liberal guests compared to just one conservative, former Rep. Liz Cheney. I'm too lazy to find the Kimmel stats but I'd bet they would be similar.

Because these networks are given exclusive rights to free to air TV slots - they have to follow some rules like giving equal airtime for political messaging. But that's drifted in the past 20 years and what these networks now do it bring political messages in to their entertainment shows and try to disguise it as simple interviews to get around equal airtime rules. It worked - but it has consequences - reduced viewership, and upsetting the other side.

Anyways long way of saying Kimmel has freedom of speech. He can start a podcast and say what he wants. He can start a website and write what he wants. But he can't use a government licenced TV slot to say what he wants when he wants about what he wants free from consequences.

 

[Value Collector]

ASF is the only social media I'm on, so luckily I avoid most of the loonie self indulgent vitriol.

If you will notice, I haven't said anything about the content of Kirks speaches, or about his character, only generalisations about the incident.

With regard the incident, there was only one criminal, the victim whether liked or disliked has a right to voice his opinion, same as those who dissagree with him, it is strong opinions that bring about change like marriage equality, stopping the Vietnam war etc.
Society has a problem when only one side has a stage and the other side is demonised, which is happening currently and driving social unrest in the West.
Only my opinion and I'm sure you will disagree, as is your want and your right.

Well I have never said Kirk didn’t have the right to voice his opinion, or that he deserved to die… all I have said was that he wasn’t a great person, and shouldn’t be made out to be a hero, he was actively fighting against all the positive changes that have happened, and wanted to return to the bad old days.

 

[sptrawler]

Well I have never said Kirk didn’t have the right to voice his opinion, or that he deserved to die… all I have said was that he wasn’t a great person, and shouldn’t be made out to be a hero, he was actively fighting against all the positive changes that have happened, and wanted to return to the bad old days.

That's your opinion, which you have every right to and hopefully you don't have a loonie harm you for it.

I personally don't have an opinion on what U.S citizens choose to believe and the majority voted for Trump, so IMO let them get on with it until the next election.

Same as I don't think the U.S population should be making judgements on our choice of leader, or our political decisions, it's our business.

As far as I have heard Charlie Kirk hasn't tried to change Australia's belief in anything and if he has I haven't read it.

 

[Antirnator]

Character assassination --> Real assassination --> more Character assassinations of the target and everyone connected = Leftist Logic

Criminal dies --> Character assassination of people involved --> Riots, destruction and violence = Leftist Logic

What is absent from conservatives, centrists and the right when their friends die?

 

[moXJO]

Lol VC had to put me on ignore.
Don't scratch the surface on their ideology too deep or expose any lies or they run for cover.

 

[moXJO]

The truth is Charlie wasn't the racist they are making him out to be, didn't hate gays, or trans. In fact he was a lot more of a moderate than many of the other religions currently flooding in.

Charlie's problem was that he was a spokesman on the right. Thats it.

The left are literally in mass hypnosis and will delude themselves into believing they are correct and the right are evil (despite evidence to the contrary).
Its extremely black and white thinking.

The left need a major shift back towards the moderate leftists.

 

[SirRumpole]

Kimmel blatantly lied about the motivation of the shooter. Nobody removed Kimmel's 1A rights, but nobody ever says free speech is not exempt from consequences, especially the left.

The Right's version of cancel culture.

I hate both of them. (Sorry, hate is a bad word, replace with "extremely dislike").