I’m confused about the back and forth about shooters. An audience member said five for transgender shooters (the numerator), then asked Kirk how many mass shooters total (the denominator)?
So the audience member was trying to disagree with Kirk to suggest the transgender shooters are a small proportion?
And the Kirk comes back with the gang violence question to suggest what?
I’m genuinely confused here, no agenda, just literally don’t understand the transcript.
Twenty years from now, no one will remember the name Charlie Kirk except for us nerds. That's the best legacy we could hope for for such a horrid human being.
I'm always going to think this was the cia, or some other group. They use clowns and don't care what happens to them. In this case I think kirk was a write off and the kid that shot him was manipulated into doing in an organic way.
The real game will end lives for theater and this was exactly that.
He started talking shit about the poor downtrodden snowflake victim Israelis and got shot afterwards. Then Netanyahu puts out a video thanking Americans for the money they extorted from us, which has never happened as far as I recall, and firmly let everyone know that it was absolutely not them who was responsible for his death.
I'm convinced that Israel had something to do with it. He didn't get in line when the rest of the clowns fell into place. Then his handler aka his wife tried to convince him to get with the program, he refused. Fighting ensued, they were going through marital problems at the time (text message evidence).
Then whatta you know, his now widowed wife takes over his business, goes on tour with fake ass tears (videos of her dropping them in before going on stage), and brings in none other than her ex boyfriend to run Toilet Paper USA with her....
And it would be quite easy too, lock him in information bubble and slowly manipulate him to do it. Considering levels of surveliance it would be easy to set pieces in real world and in internet.
Calling Kirk's murder a "debate loss" is so fucking funny. Esp the discourse around debate celebrities in general.
I can't fucking stand Slavoj Zizek but the way he broke Peterson's brain by just agreeing with him back when people gave a shit and JP was at the height of his chud intellectual celebrity -- so much so that he spiraled into benzo addiction and dropped from the public spotlight for a year and a half was hilarious.
But the phrase, "he will never recover" is so prevalent in these asinine YouTube debate wank spaces. And yet truly, thankfully, CK will never recover
25 Comments
shrek_is_love@lemmy.ml · 72 pts · 64d
This reminds me that every conversation about Charlie Kirk should begin and end with his final words:
https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/12/us/charlie-kirk-shooting-death-final-hours
ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml · 44 pts · 64d
God must have been tired of people misinterpreting Him and decided to lay it on real thick with this one
wabasso@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 64d
I’m confused about the back and forth about shooters. An audience member said five for transgender shooters (the numerator), then asked Kirk how many mass shooters total (the denominator)?
So the audience member was trying to disagree with Kirk to suggest the transgender shooters are a small proportion?
And the Kirk comes back with the gang violence question to suggest what?
I’m genuinely confused here, no agenda, just literally don’t understand the transcript.
someonesmall@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 64d
Kirks point was that most school shooters are either transgender or gang members.
can@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 64d
I think Kirk was saying trans shooters are more common if we remove gang violence from shooting stats (lower denominator).
Still bs.
wabasso@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 60d
So dumb. Even if they are over represented what then? Like further oppression and alienation is going to help. But anyway thanks for clarifying.
can@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 60d
It was never going to not be dumb.
culprit@lemmy.ml · 49 pts · 64d
He died of acute high velocity irony to the neck.
Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 63d
Think how lucky that blood was to not continue up into his brain, it was spared the suffering of making his thoughts into words.
daggermoon@piefed.world · 29 pts · 64d
Twenty years from now, no one will remember the name Charlie Kirk except for us nerds. That's the best legacy we could hope for for such a horrid human being.
IAmYouButYouDontKnowYet@reddthat.com · 22 pts · 64d
I'm always going to think this was the cia, or some other group. They use clowns and don't care what happens to them. In this case I think kirk was a write off and the kid that shot him was manipulated into doing in an organic way.
The real game will end lives for theater and this was exactly that.
ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 17 pts · 64d
He started talking shit about the poor downtrodden snowflake victim Israelis and got shot afterwards. Then Netanyahu puts out a video thanking Americans for the money they extorted from us, which has never happened as far as I recall, and firmly let everyone know that it was absolutely not them who was responsible for his death.
Can't imagine what happened there.
BeUnique@lemmy.zip · 10 pts · 64d
I'm convinced that Israel had something to do with it. He didn't get in line when the rest of the clowns fell into place. Then his handler aka his wife tried to convince him to get with the program, he refused. Fighting ensued, they were going through marital problems at the time (text message evidence).
Then whatta you know, his now widowed wife takes over his business, goes on tour with fake ass tears (videos of her dropping them in before going on stage), and brings in none other than her ex boyfriend to run Toilet Paper USA with her....
reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net · 5 pts · 64d
I agree, Kirk wasn’t minding the party line on Epstein list matters
mecen@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 64d
And it would be quite easy too, lock him in information bubble and slowly manipulate him to do it. Considering levels of surveliance it would be easy to set pieces in real world and in internet.
tacosanonymous@mander.xyz · 3 pts · 64d
If we are doing a conspiracy, I’d like add on; it was supposed to be AOC but the organization is inept.
omgboom@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 64d
And you can't make this up, he was literally in a tent that had the words "Prove me wrong" written in big letters
teslekova@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 64d
"Debate me br-"
Etterra@discuss.online · 7 pts · 64d
Say hello to my 7.62mm debate skills.
ICastFist@programming.dev · 17 pts · 64d
Don't forget the irony of the "OwO what's this" in the casing
AngryRobot@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 64d
I truly believe that was etched after the shooting was done.
Danarchy@lemmy.nz · 9 pts · 64d
The whole pentagon religion thing is just them getting back at Mormons for poppin Charlie’s neck
fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 64d
I hope it's a sign that their coalition us fracturing
Formfiller@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 64d
Morman kid or Mossad either way he was shot by a white supremisist so the point stands
Juice@midwest.social · 9 pts · 64d
Calling Kirk's murder a "debate loss" is so fucking funny. Esp the discourse around debate celebrities in general.
I can't fucking stand Slavoj Zizek but the way he broke Peterson's brain by just agreeing with him back when people gave a shit and JP was at the height of his chud intellectual celebrity -- so much so that he spiraled into benzo addiction and dropped from the public spotlight for a year and a half was hilarious.
But the phrase, "he will never recover" is so prevalent in these asinine YouTube debate wank spaces. And yet truly, thankfully, CK will never recover