Morman kid or Mossad either way he was shot by a white supremisist so the point stands
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
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.
This reminds me that every conversation about Charlie Kirk should begin and end with his final words:
“Do you know how many transgender Americans have been mass shooters over the last 10 years?” he asked.
“Too many,” Kirk quipped. The crowd clapped and cheered.
Five, the audience member claimed. “Do you know how many mass shooters there have been in America over the last 10 years?” the man continued.
Kirk leaned forward and picked up his mic before setting back into an upright position. “Counting or not counting gang violence?” he said.
A loud “pop” suddenly rang out.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/12/us/charlie-kirk-shooting-death-final-hours
God must have been tired of people misinterpreting Him and decided to lay it on real thick with this one
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.
Kirks point was that most school shooters are either transgender or gang members.
I think Kirk was saying trans shooters are more common if we remove gang violence from shooting stats (lower denominator).
Still bs.
He died of acute high velocity irony to the neck.
Think how lucky that blood was to not continue up into his brain, it was spared the suffering of making his thoughts into words.
And you can't make this up, he was literally in a tent that had the words "Prove me wrong" written in big letters
"Debate me br-"
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.
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....
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.
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.
I don't understand why you think this. These online echo chambers already exist. Why would it have to be the CIA that pushed him to do it? IMO, that's just conspiratorial thinking with no evidence.
4chan's Chris "Moot" Poole created /pol/ immediately after meeting Jeff Epstein
Just a coincidence.
Definitely not a coincidence. Epstein and Steve Bannon were working on a project to turn kids to the right. Even if you concede that the CIA is involved in the creation, that doesn't mean the CIA was behind the Charlie Kirk murder.
I just said it would be easy and I don't believe in it either. But I bet many of these echo chambers are run by government organizations.
Certainly many governments including the US, Israel, and Russia have been caught with troll farms, funding radical influencers, etc. I don't think it's far fetched to believe that a state actor is sowing discord within their own people. Just look at COINTELPRO for a good example of the FBI infiltrating and dividing leftist movements.
My main gripe is the jump from skepticism to conspiracy. Through a host of conspiracies, the right has eroded the concept of truth to the point that people only look to right-wing leaders for guidance. This is intentionally done to grab power from those that are more willing to deliberate evidence. I'm worried the left could fall victim to a similar fate if they get too ready to assume conspiracies must be true. If we assume without evidence, we could easily get swept up by a charismatic leader looking to tell us what we want to hear.
I agree, Kirk wasn’t minding the party line on Epstein list matters
If we are doing a conspiracy, I’d like add on; it was supposed to be AOC but the organization is inept.
Don't forget the irony of the "OwO what's this" in the casing
I truly believe that was etched after the shooting was done.
The whole pentagon religion thing is just them getting back at Mormons for poppin Charlie’s neck
I hope it's a sign that their coalition us fracturing
Theres only one correct way to debate reactionaries :3
