I have no idea what you’re talking about. I’m not reframing anything. Fanatical leftists are shooting people bc they can’t engage in serious debate. Better to let words fight then actually commit violence but the left can’t make that distinction. This was a cruel, demonic act of cowards who are possessed by forces beyond their understanding.
Discussion
Fanatical right wingers have done it too. Its not fuckinhg left and right or red and blue. It's the fucking government pitting the people against each other so they can keep raping our kids and robbing us blind. But hey, yeah, let's blame politics and not the politicians.
Blame the actor not some amorphous other. I’m just saying majority of police violence acts are blue to red. Not my fault libtards are mentally weak and easy to manipulate by politicians.
Like I said, both sides have acted in this manner. Again, you're being blinded by red/blue rage bait.
I am not. Charlie Kirk has not committed any violence. Just preached the word of God and tried to descale the eyes of college-age kids. For that he gets murdered. I think the rage is justified.
There's no proof he hasn't committed violence, but there is proof he has participated in group violence, which is open to debate whether you'd call it "committing" violence
What the fuck is “in group violence”? Violence can only be committed by individuals. Fuck off with that nonsense.
I notice how you said "individuals," plural
Did you mean what you said? Plural individuals? Like, a fucking group maybe?
Lmao let me dumb it down: an act of violence can be attributed only to an individual. Not to someone that individual has listened to.
And this connects to the context you're replying to in some way? How?
You brought up Kirk engaged in group violence. That is not a thing.
It's when a group of creatures (in this case people) perpetrate violence together. Try to keep up
Again, that is not a thing. Be specific, what exact act has Kirk done that could be considered violence? If you cannot state that, he has not committed any violence. If you’re claiming he’s a member of a “group” you have to define the members of the group and prove how each of them has committed violence. If you cannot, your claim has no merit.
Group: Nazis
Exact acts: voting, sending dollars, etc.
Am I gonna have to repeat this again?
Lmao have a good day man, I hope you think hard about what you’re attributing to a “group” and how you define them. Make sure it’s not an idea someone else put in your head.
Kids in Gaza are walled in and starving.
Charlie Kirk supported that, with words and also materially with actions.
That's what I call being a Nazi / a member of the Nazi group.
By that definition hamas would also be part of this group. They are walling in and starving (stealing food aid) from civilians. Would they be nazis too?
Any members of Hamas participating in walling in children and starving them are Nazis. Yes.
Unlike the Israeli authorities, I have no evidence that includes many, if any, members of Hamas.
😉👌
Weird time to post those emoji you fucking Nazi creep
Now I’m a nazi? Look at this group definition widening even further… not a problem at all. Re-evaluate your mental models. Make sure it’s not a demonic idea proliferating with your consent.
Humans are the ones with dangerous ideas, not demons.
Anyway, re-evaluating 👀
We have no evidence the shooter was someone incapable of engaging in serious debate