Charlie Kirk: Aftermath, Gravedancing, and Manhunt

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
I wonder if the people bitching about Kimmel getting canned think Alex Jones being sued for a billion dollars was unjustified


I mean if spreading a conspiracy about an event from a decade+ ago is reason enough to turn you into an unplatformable social pariah then surely just straight up lying about an assassination that happened a week ago is more than enough to justify simply being dropped by one network? :smug:
 
barrow greeter said:
😌
View attachment 7931530
Click to expand...
Good.
Those Writers had their hands, and the producers didn't sit down and say "hey, this could potentially backfire. We shouldn't air this". The Bookers might be the only group who; while caught in the cross fire might not have had a hand in whatever was said online.

BUT THEN YOU LEARN YOUR ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. NOT JUST FOR YOURSELF BUT OTHERS!
 
Jose Beaner Luna said:
I will assasinate that doe with muh dick (consensually)
Click to expand...
Actual islamic content. Don't fantasize about Candace Owens, dude. You deserve so much more for yourself. Jesus Christ.
gaysexenjoyer said:
I wonder if the people bitching about Kimmel getting canned think Alex Jones being sued for a billion dollars was unjustified
Click to expand...
What if I enjoy both of these things and find them both hilarious?
Maybe Alex Jones a bit more because he actually holed himself up in his studio so they wouldn't take it from him. That was peak cinema tbh...
 
100% chance he's going to defend Jimmy

adam.webp
 
gaysexenjoyer said:
I wonder if the people bitching about Kimmel getting canned think Alex Jones being sued for a billion dollars was unjustified
Click to expand...
Or if the people who are bitching about ANTIFA being labeled terrorists think the treatment dished to the Proud Boys and the J6 "rioters" was justified.
 
Not really news worth it anyways but heres something
Screenshot_20250917_212936_X.webp
(A)
Jimmy, dressed down in a flannel shirt, jeans, sneakers and baseball cap, dashes into the backseat of the SUV with the help of his handler.
Click to expand...
Also seeing him rush like that is kind of funny because you know hes stressed the fuck out.
 
General Emílio Médici said:
What really fucked Kimmel is the fact his show went up on Friday By the the groyper theory had lost almost all steam and was only being parroted by either the completely uninformed or the dishonest. If he had regurgitated that take on the day of the shooting, or even the day after, he might be able to claim he was not aware and working off of the information that was out.

He knew it was shaky at best, but presented it as full and complete fact.
Click to expand...
Man, same people must've been writing his material as those wikipedia entries. The idea that he actually believes any of those things, or anything at all, doesn't even cross my mind.
I'm glad we reached the point where these fuckers are no longer safe from consequences of pushing vitriol and blatant lies. Like I said earlier, the line is finally being drawn.
 
COME ON OUT YOU RAPIST said:
Associating these things so closely with God seems like a misstep; the pagan Greeks also likely had theories similar to this, attributing their success to their own gods, and we saw what happened to them as they slowly crumbled due to many of the same problems harming the modern USA. (Women occupying positions of political power, foreigners in the military, an influx of barbarians, etcetera.) Locke had interesting ideas, but his theory you borrow from him where European society was uniquely protected because God wills it strikes me as a big folly.
Click to expand...
I've been extremely, excessively autistic on Locke elsewhere.

But to sum: my main reason with using Locke is because the US Bill of Rights, which would later form part of the constitution, was in-part lifted from the English 1689 Bill of Rights, which was written based on the political ideas of John Locke. Locke's entire impetus was on the premise that our rights were essentially God-given. God gave free will, so free will is good; God made man, so man is good. Attempts to restrict another's free will for reasons outside of preserving Man's image, property, or will were bad. This gives an objective moral foundation on which civil liberties are not just as important as life itself, but also makes it a moral duty to uphold them. It's less-so Christianity is central then, but Locke, but Locke's ideas were rooted in the premise of a Christian understanding of God.

I'm not religious myself (though I love the subject), so technically I would maybe considered intolerable under Locke's theory (he pre-dated the term "Agnostic"), but I focused much more on what he attributed to come from Atheism than Atheism itself: Promises, covenants, and oaths, which are the bonds of human society, can have no hold upon an atheist. The taking away of God, though but even in thought, dissolves all; besides also, those that by their atheism undermine and destroy all religion, can have no pretence of religion whereupon to challenge the privilege of a toleration. Non-Atheists: [As for other practical opinions, though not absolutely free from all error, if they do not tend to establish domination over others, or civil impunity to the Church in which they are taught, there can be no reason why they should not be tolerated.]

These issues aren't exclusive to atheists. They can be boiled down to:
(1) No respect for the fundamental connections of human society. (You could interpret this to anything from neighbourly politeness to the relationship of a parent to their child)
(2) No respect for agreements, treaties, or promises.
(3) Undermining or attempted destruction of other religions.
(4) Hiding under the guise of religion to benefit from the protection of tolerance.
(5) Hold beliefs that require they try to assert dominance over you.
(6) Expect immunity from punishment due to their beliefs.
If you substitute "religion" with "ideology" or "belief system(s)" or "points of view" then it's can be applied universally. All the issues you raised became problems back in the time of the ancient Greeks, or the Romans, because invariably the issues raised by Locke were violated in some way.

The importance of someone like Locke and Christianity to an extent is that they provide a general code to abide by as well as an argument to prove why using such a code not only makes sense but is also moral. People can point out problems, it's a piece of piss. But how to solve those problems, or prevent them from becoming an issue in the first place, is a far more important yet demanding task and I think Locke did a reasonably good job of it.
 
barrow greeter said:
😌
View attachment 7931530
Click to expand...
When a captain loses his ship, everyone who serves aboard it loses their livelihood. That's why it's the captain's job to keep it afloat. It's his responsibility if he runs it aground and it has to be scuttled. This is Jimmy Kimmel's fuckup and it's his fault his people lost their jobs.
whoishomermynameis said:
100% chance he's going to defend Jimmy

View attachment 7931568
Click to expand...
A good thing to keep in mind that the Jimmy Kimmel who was on Comedy Central watching Juggies jump on trampolines with Adam Carolla isn't the same Jimmy Kimmel who cries (or cried, lol) on ABC every time he's reminded Donald Trump exists. It would be interesting to see his take on this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom