ChaoticMusings

Maddog wrote:

---

 

No telling what sort of nonsense will happen at the funeral tomorrow.

 

---

 Expect speeches designed to stir up further division along the lines of good (us) vs evil (the others)

Syl wrote:

---

Hopefully his funeral will be dignified. His family, like every family who have lost a loved one, need to say goodbye to him in peace.

---

 For the sake of his family let's hope no screeching flag waving morons fetch up.

Syl wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

---

Syl wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

---

Syl wrote:

---

Yes, for some his opinions were problematic, who has said he should be shot for them?

---

 Do you generally drag people through the mud after they have been murdered? 

---

 It's called debate. Charlie Kirk was a great believer in that.

No one is celebrating his death here, it was a cold callous murder, but people who had never heard of him before (including me) have listened and seen loads of his stuff now, some I agree with, some I dont.  I think it's natural people will give opinions on what they have seen.

-- Edited by Syl on Saturday 20th of September 2025 11:20:09 PM

---

 I think you just described everyone from the Pope to Princess Di..

 

I guess as long as your consistent it's all good..

---

 Consistent in what way?

---

 Consistently point out "problematic' views people had, or comments they made, after they die.

I also think we should point out problematic actions too..

When Harvey Weinstein dies there won't be much to say about things he said,  because he said all the right things..

But his actions were horrific..

Maddog wrote:

---

Vam wrote:

---

Barksdale wrote:

---

Fluffy wrote:

You KNOW he didn't ! I don't know why you didn't tell Avon he had missed the news about Stephen King getting his wires crossed  but you have picked on the one and only inaccurate and infamous example.

---

 LOL, yes that Stephen King story completely passed me by. MD did say however that Stephen King had got it right in his last tweet where he stated it was about cherry picking Bible quotes. Also, I generally like to check things for myself if I can so I can form my own view. 

I've watched a bit of Charlie Kirk's Jubilee debate and I can see why white Christian people like him. He puts forward standard arguments which supports those viewpoints.

---

 20 pages in, and it’s good to see a general consensus that it IS possible be shocked and saddened by Charlie Kirk’s death at such a young age, while at the same time not be impressed by what he stood for.

Personally, I suspect the reality is that he didn’t really stand for anything much. He was able to identify a lucrative market of bored, disaffected, dipshit kids and - just like trump  - he cynically exploited that market with toxic bullshit, lies and triggering rhetoric that was guaranteed to keep the $$$ rolling in.

I doubt he believed in half of what he used to preach or ‘debate’. Again, just like trump, he performed the politics of spectacle.

If by any chance his bible-thumping ways were heartfelt, and not performative, then that would make him a Christofascist in my opinion.

---

 Who is shocked or saddened? 

 

Basically what I see is victim blaming.

 

 

Tantamount to saying "well, it's sad she was raped but we shouldn't be surprised based on what she was wearing and her well known body count'..

---

 Nope Madders, what you see is the debate about Kirk's beliefs that you literally insisted on having. So that's rather sneaky of you.

I said several times through the thread it felt a bit unseemly to judge the young man at this moment but you insisted he wasn't extreme in any of his beliefs, and was  just an average Joe with Christian values.

When I and a few others thought differently and stated as such you wanted to challenge that, which is fine. Debate and challenging other people's views is what a forum is for. At one point in the thread you were asking me to post examples of Kirk 's beliefs so you could argue he was being "misrepresented". When I was too slow, you started listing examples for us to disagree over!

But you can't then turn around and attempt to shame people for debating the belief system of someone who has recently  passed just  because they happen to disagree with your points. You know your accusation is totally inaccurate because everybody made it clear in their posts that nobody deserves to be killed for their views, especially a young family man. So why say it?

Syl wrote:

---

Hopefully his funeral will be dignified. His family, like every family who have lost a loved one, need to say goodbye to him in peace.

---

 Agreed Syl. I understand people not agreeing with much of his rhetoric, even finding some of it offensive. But his family deserve a dignified funeral and the right to grieve without people heckling or sign waving from the sidelines.

If the MAGA media hadn't attempted to make him into a martyr I think after the initial hostile tik toks things would have claimed down organically.  But Trump in his wisdom started to curb freedom of speech and used Kirk's death to "wage war on the vermin" meaning any Democrats , any where, who were of course  nothing but shocked by Kirk's murder. 

Fluffy wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

---

Vam wrote:

---

Barksdale wrote:

---

Fluffy wrote:

You KNOW he didn't ! I don't know why you didn't tell Avon he had missed the news about Stephen King getting his wires crossed  but you have picked on the one and only inaccurate and infamous example.

---

 LOL, yes that Stephen King story completely passed me by. MD did say however that Stephen King had got it right in his last tweet where he stated it was about cherry picking Bible quotes. Also, I generally like to check things for myself if I can so I can form my own view. 

I've watched a bit of Charlie Kirk's Jubilee debate and I can see why white Christian people like him. He puts forward standard arguments which supports those viewpoints.

---

 20 pages in, and it’s good to see a general consensus that it IS possible be shocked and saddened by Charlie Kirk’s death at such a young age, while at the same time not be impressed by what he stood for.

Personally, I suspect the reality is that he didn’t really stand for anything much. He was able to identify a lucrative market of bored, disaffected, dipshit kids and - just like trump  - he cynically exploited that market with toxic bullshit, lies and triggering rhetoric that was guaranteed to keep the $$$ rolling in.

I doubt he believed in half of what he used to preach or ‘debate’. Again, just like trump, he performed the politics of spectacle.

If by any chance his bible-thumping ways were heartfelt, and not performative, then that would make him a Christofascist in my opinion.

---

 Who is shocked or saddened? 

 

Basically what I see is victim blaming.

 

 

Tantamount to saying "well, it's sad she was raped but we shouldn't be surprised based on what she was wearing and her well known body count'..

---

 Nope Madders, what you see is the debate about Kirk's beliefs that you literally insisted on having. So that's rather sneaky of you.

I said several times through the thread it felt a bit unseemly to judge the young man at this moment but you insisted he wasn't extreme in any of his beliefs, and was  just an average Joe with Christian values.

When I and a few others thought differently and stated as such you wanted to challenge that, which is fine. Debate and challenging other people's views is what a forum is for. At one point in the thread you were asking me to post examples of Kirk 's beliefs so you could argue he was being "misrepresented". When I was too slow, you started listing examples for us to disagree over!

But you can't then turn around and attempt to shame people for debating the belief system of someone who has recently  passed just  because they happen to disagree with your points. You know your accusation is totally inaccurate because everybody made it clear in their posts that nobody deserves to be killed for their views, especially a young family man. So why say it?

---

 His beliefs were pretty run of the mill. His interactions with people were 99% of the time very civil.  His actions (as far as I know), were that of a stand up guy.

Now you did misrepresent his positions, which started all of this..

Fluffy wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

---

Digger wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

---

Digger wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

The Universities have been the engines for the grand alliance of Feminism - Woke Liberalism - DEI-LQGBT+ - Islamism - Open Borders - Globalism overthrowing traditional Western Societies.

---

 Universities are hotbeds for this, because people of a certain age are easily manipulated.

---

 Utah is a very conservative state. 

 

While universities are hot beds for woke nonsense, I think this was someone from outside of the university.  

---

 Was he a contender for being the next President?   If so, there's your answer.

---

 He was only 31, so I doubt he would be 35 soon enough.

 

I've never heard Charlie ever mention political office, nor anyone mention that about him. I'll be honest, I only saw clips here and there of him because he's a bit too much of a Bible thumper for me..

Basically,  he was a happily married Christian with two beautiful children that loved to debate liberals on college campuses. He was the traditional family guy that many people loathe. He made his opponents look silly at times and some people just want to silence people like him..

The tictok crowd is ecstatic over his death.  There are tens or hundreds of thousands happy about this. There doesn't need to be some great conspiracy with that large of a supply of hate.

---

 The reason some people seem happy (which is wrong. Murder can never be justified no matter how loathsome a person is) is because he was a racist who openly believed and said that black women were stupid, Martin Luther King was not a "good person" (how did he know this??) and  that the Civil Rights Act  that was supposed to achieve equality and inclusion for people of colour was a mistake 🤦

Obviously the 1964 Civil Rights Act failed because black people are being spoken about disgustingly at the moment in America. The radical rhetoric of the far right like the deceased made many law abiding black people scared to walk the streets at night.

He also disagreed with abortion even if a woman was r*ped, said gay people were an abomination and believed a woman as a man's intellectual  inferior should "obey" and submit to her husband. In.a horrible twisted irony he believed the deaths that occurred from liberal gun laws in the States were "worth it " (his exact words)

I have raised these points  to elaborate on him being simply a happily married Christian bloke. He had loathsome views that went beyond merely right wing and  that explains, but does not excuse  , the social media celebrating his death. That is inexcusable. His two young children have still lost their Dad and I understand the administration being angry at the reaction to Kirk's murder.

However I also understand people disliking him as he went out of his way to fan the flames between races and just didn't seem to harbour particularly fair or intelligent views.

 

---

 Right here is where the bullshit started on this thread.

You misrepresented his views and labeled him a racist..

Maddog wrote:

---

Fluffy wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

---

Digger wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

---

Digger wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

The Universities have been the engines for the grand alliance of Feminism - Woke Liberalism - DEI-LQGBT+ - Islamism - Open Borders - Globalism overthrowing traditional Western Societies.

---

 Universities are hotbeds for this, because people of a certain age are easily manipulated.

---

 Utah is a very conservative state. 

 

While universities are hot beds for woke nonsense, I think this was someone from outside of the university.  

---

 Was he a contender for being the next President?   If so, there's your answer.

---

 He was only 31, so I doubt he would be 35 soon enough.

 

I've never heard Charlie ever mention political office, nor anyone mention that about him. I'll be honest, I only saw clips here and there of him because he's a bit too much of a Bible thumper for me..

Basically,  he was a happily married Christian with two beautiful children that loved to debate liberals on college campuses. He was the traditional family guy that many people loathe. He made his opponents look silly at times and some people just want to silence people like him..

The tictok crowd is ecstatic over his death.  There are tens or hundreds of thousands happy about this. There doesn't need to be some great conspiracy with that large of a supply of hate.

---

 The reason some people seem happy (which is wrong. Murder can never be justified no matter how loathsome a person is) is because he was a racist who openly believed and said that black women were stupid, Martin Luther King was not a "good person" (how did he know this??) and  that the Civil Rights Act  that was supposed to achieve equality and inclusion for people of colour was a mistake 🤦

Obviously the 1964 Civil Rights Act failed because black people are being spoken about disgustingly at the moment in America. The radical rhetoric of the far right like the deceased made many law abiding black people scared to walk the streets at night.

He also disagreed with abortion even if a woman was r*ped, said gay people were an abomination and believed a woman as a man's intellectual  inferior should "obey" and submit to her husband. In.a horrible twisted irony he believed the deaths that occurred from liberal gun laws in the States were "worth it " (his exact words)

I have raised these points  to elaborate on him being simply a happily married Christian bloke. He had loathsome views that went beyond merely right wing and  that explains, but does not excuse  , the social media celebrating his death. That is inexcusable. His two young children have still lost their Dad and I understand the administration being angry at the reaction to Kirk's murder.

However I also understand people disliking him as he went out of his way to fan the flames between races and just didn't seem to harbour particularly fair or intelligent views.

 

---

 Right here is where the bullshit started on this thread.

 

You misrepresented his views and labeled him a racist..

---

Agreed. 

A fact that has been debunked by many, many PoC as has been pointed out in this very thread.

A ‘racist’ who has many dark faces at his memorial I might add, that’s some “racist” 

Vam wrote:

---

trump is predictably making political haystacks out of this terrible event (wait for the spectacle of the made-for-tv funeral), and Republicans are proceeding with their maudlin near-canonisation of Charlie Kirk.

 

---

 ☝🏻 Me, a couple of weeks ago.

But, yeah, it was worse than I could have imagined… 

https://x.com/lisa_liberal/status/1969967590341824734?s=61

’ FOR A GIFT OF ANY AMOUNT TEXT MERCH TO 71776 TO RECEIVE A “WE ARE CHARLIE KIRK“ WRISTBAND ‘