Imagine this: You wake up to news that a conservative speaker — a man who spent his life advocating for faith, family, and freedom — has died under suspicious circumstances. Within hours, the radical left floods social media, not with condolences, but with celebrations. They mock his memory, sneer at his beliefs, and rejoice in his death. Some even openly say the world is better off without him.
What you’re witnessing isn’t just politics. It’s not disagreement. It’s not protest. It’s evil — and it’s rooted in the same godless, anti-human philosophy that animates much of today’s radical climate movement.
Make no mistake: the death of Charlie Kirk (or any similar figure, God forbid) and the violent celebration that follows aren’t isolated phenomena. They are symptoms of a deeper rot that’s infected the American left — a nihilistic worldview that despises God, America, truth, tradition, and life itself.
The Root of the Rot
Today’s climate radicals scream about “justice” and “equity” — but what they’re selling isn’t justice. It’s judgment. Not the righteous kind, either. It’s the judgment of man playing god, condemning the world as irredeemable and demanding its destruction so they can build their utopia — or more honestly, so they can wallow in its ruins.
These aren’t your granddad’s conservationists. These aren’t the folks who wanted to preserve hunting land or keep rivers clean. No, these are militant zealots who believe mankind is a virus and the Earth would be better off without us. And when they look at people like Charlie Kirk — Christian, conservative, pro-America — they see the enemy.
They don’t want to debate us. They don’t want to win us over. They want us erased.
That’s not hyperbole. That’s not partisan talk. That’s the worldview of radical environmentalism: that humans are the problem, Christianity is a myth, America is evil, and history is a crime scene.
The Shared Creed: Nihilism Dressed in Green
Let’s draw the connection plainly.
The radical left — whether climate anarchists, Antifa militants, or campus mobs — all spring from the same poisoned well: cultural Marxism with a green coat of paint. It’s the old religion of revolution and resentment, now disguised as “climate action” or “social equity.”
They don’t believe in God, so they worship the Earth.
They don’t believe in salvation, so they demand reparation.
They don’t believe in sin, so they invent crimes like “carbon privilege.”
They don’t believe in forgiveness, only cancellation.
They don’t believe in redemption, only rage.
What does that have to do with celebrating the death of a man like Charlie Kirk?
Everything.
Because when you teach a generation that truth is oppression, that tradition is hate, that gender is a construct, and that humans are the disease — what kind of fruit do you expect to grow?
They burn cities in the name of “justice.”
They blockade roads and throw soup on paintings for “climate.”
They vandalize churches and pro-life centers in the name of “rights.”
And when someone dies who stood for what is good, true, and eternal — they laugh.
Why? Because their belief system is fundamentally anti-Christian and anti-human.
From Gaia Worship to Gulags
Let’s be honest: the radical climate movement isn’t about science. It’s about control.
They don’t want to reduce carbon — they want to reduce you. They want fewer people, fewer babies, fewer farms, fewer cars, fewer freedoms. They worship the Earth, but they hate the people God placed on it. They hate your truck, your house, your Bible, your job, your kids. Most of all, they hate your freedom — because it reminds them of a moral order they rejected long ago.
Think I’m exaggerating?
- Climate activists openly call for “degrowth” — a euphemism for economic collapse.
- They demand carbon reparations, forced migration, and wealth redistribution on a global scale.
- They shut down power plants and pipelines while insisting we replace baseload generation with wind that dies when the sun sets and the wind calms.
- And they tell us, straight-faced, that this is “progress.”
Meanwhile, they ignore the real pollution pouring from China, the slave labor in Congo digging up cobalt for their EVs, and the carbon footprint of their own private jets to Davos.
Why? Because it’s not about the environment. It’s about ideology — a green excuse for red revolution.
Climate Martyrs vs. Conservative Corpses
Now let’s circle back to the spiritual ugliness we saw when Charlie Kirk was killed — or, in the real world, when any conservative voice dies or suffers tragedy. The response is always the same:
- When Rush Limbaugh died, they trended “#RestInPiss.”
- When Antonin Scalia passed, they cheered.
- When Steve Scalise was shot, they excused it.
Compare that to how they react when one of their own — a climate radical who chains himself to a pipeline or lights himself on fire in front of the Supreme Court — dies for the cause. He’s hailed as a martyr. His death is “tragic,” “heroic,” “a wake-up call.” They write poems. They start hashtags. They demand policy changes.
But if a Christian dies defending the unborn? Or a conservative dies defending the Constitution?
Crickets. Or worse — mockery.
That’s the divide we’re living in: a spiritual war, not a political one.
Reclaiming the Moral Ground
We must be clear-eyed about what we face.
This isn’t a debate over emissions targets or energy portfolios. It’s a war of worldviews — and one side believes human life is sacred, while the other believes it’s disposable.
One side says man is made in the image of God.
The other says man is a carbon-emitting parasite.
One says America is a miracle worth preserving.
The other says America is a cancer worth cutting out.
One says the answer is faith, family, and hard work.
The other says the answer is rage, retribution, and revolution.
And unless we reject that poison — boldly, publicly, and unapologetically — we will lose more than political debates. We will lose our country. We will lose our souls.
What We Must Do
- Call it what it is. Stop pretending these people are just “passionate” or “misguided.” They are radicals with a godless agenda.
- Defend truth without apology. We don’t need to moderate. We need to man up. Say the truth: fossil fuels built the modern world, and Christianity built Western civilization.
- Raise our children to stand. Homeschool them if you can. Teach them the Constitution, the Gospel, and how to use their voice before the world silences it.
- Build our own platforms. The mainstream media is lost. Universities are lost. Start Substacks. Build churches. Fund independent schools. Make noise.
- Pray like warriors. This is not a political movement. This is a spiritual insurgency. Put on the full armor of God.
Conclusion: Choose This Day Whom You Will Serve
The same ideology that sends mobs to block traffic and vandalize statues also cheers when a conservative dies. The same spirit that demands you turn off your gas stove and bow to climate hysteria also demands you shut your mouth, abandon your faith, and surrender your country.
This isn’t about carbon. It’s about control. It’s about chaos. It’s about evil.
And it’s time we say no.
America will not be saved by moderates mumbling about bipartisanship. She will be saved by patriots who know what time it is — and who still believe in the God of the Bible, the power of the Constitution, and the sacredness of every human life.
Charlie Kirk knew that. And whatever your opinion of him — agree with his politics or not — his life stood as a rebuke to the darkness now rising.
The people who laughed at his death aren’t just tasteless. They are dangerous. And if we don’t drive them out of power and influence, they will make sure we’re next.
This is a moment of choosing.
Choose truth.
Choose life.
Choose America.
Before it’s too late.
Terry L. Headley, MBA, MA, for the American Coal Council.
The Hedley Company is an energy communications and research firm that helps clients tell the truth about power—clearly, credibly, and fast. We specialize in coal, natural gas, and grid reliability, producing message frameworks, data-driven reports, investor and policy decks, and earned-media programs that move opinion and outcomes. Founded by T. L. Headley—former communications director for the West Virginia Coal Association and the American Coal Council—the firm blends newsroom discipline with industry know-how, using county-level data, RTO dynamics, and policy analysis to inform decisions. From crisis response to long-form research, The Hedley Company turns facts into strategy and strategy into wins. Based in Ona, West Virginia.
This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.
Hey everyone, welcome to McCarthyism 2.0, it’s gonna be even worse this time.
Hey , low IQ who still lives in the past.
What will you tell us next?
That the Beatles are no more.
McCarthyism 2.0 has started already under Obama,
when everyone with a dissenting opinion was instantly labelled racist,bigot,nazi.
When people of certain religious,ethnical or sexual backgrounds were not allowed to be criticized.
Even the GW Bush wars were no longer criticizable, because a mulatto who was always falsely presented as black did them.
It went on with a big tech crime cartel that simultaneously banned Alex Jones
up to that point when they even banned a president.
Then people were forced to take vaccines,to pretend that they can no longer tell men from women.
Everything combined on a scale 10 magnitudes above what McCarthyism has ever done, which was
very limited( and as we now see made very accurate prediction about the Hollywood cesspit)
But here you are being so smart in 2025.
Actually McCarthyism2.0 started way before Barack(a Svengali who was not even allowed to pick his own cabinet)
It started within science – climate to be more accurate.
People were fired,intimidated,they had to use fake names to publish stuff.
And contrary to McCarthyism of climate science the real McCarthyism was proven to be true
by a communist top propagandist Yuri Bezmenov after he escaped to the USA .
Do some research about the Frankfurt Schools (communist think tank) polymorphic perversion
and their plans to destroy the church and the west as both were considered by them the last 2 obstacles( the other 3, chinese,tzarist and Ottoman empire miraculously disappeared just before the Frankfurt School was created) in the way of communism.
Once you know about it and their critical theory
you will understand why you western guys such [now now, keep it mildly civil and safe for work–mod]
What an insane reply. I am surprised the moderators aren’t reacting to the use of a slur.
McCartyhism 2.0 is your reaction?
An answer you don’t like should be moderated?
Clown…
That’s the way the left works, they never want the rules they set for others, to be applied to them. Nihilism at it’s finest.
De-Nihilism!
I have to see it first.
I would say you reek of leftist cancel culture, and that is politely spoken. You stink of it…honestly get lost !
Also you might enjoy this.
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+vindication+of+Joseph+McCarthy.-a0475325530
Charles, I posted the same link. McCarthy was right.
It’s rarely talked about in history classes, but prior to the so called Hollywood black lists, there was another Hollywood blacklist. Only the first blacklist tried to destroy the career of anyone who wasn’t a supporter of communism.
Much like the left is today, they seek to destroy anyone who doesn’t agree with them.
Thanks, I hadn’t read that much about McCarthy’s successes before…with that said ‘2 things can be true’, that is to say McCarthy may have had his successes but he also had his SIGNIFICANT failures in attacking people for their beliefs and at times wrongfully attacked them. In the US/West ‘innocent until proven guilty’ isn’t just an idea. For someone with his power, even today, it must be embraced fully.
It is one thing to investigate someone for spying, totally another to investigate them for a belief regardless of how repugnant it may be.
So maybe McCarthy was overly demonized, especially by those who had something to actually hide, and yet I think he can still properly stand as an example of ‘abuse of power’.
Of course its asinine to apply the epithet of ‘McCarthyism’ here, the writer of the article has 0 power to impact the readers other than through the words. McCarthyism was much better applied to Obama’s directing of the IRS against journalists as just one example, many more exist on the Democrat side than I care to list.
Or Biden directing the DOJ to go after his opponents, or pressuring Google and other social media platforms to de-platform conservatives, or pressuring banks to close the accounts of conservatives or companies the left didn’t like.
Sure, it’s important to recognize that amidst all the hysteria, paranoia, and deliberate political repression of the red scare, there was a legitimate adversary in the Soviet Union underpinning the whole thing, and real domestic espionage occurring.
In some ways, that throws into relief how much more extreme the Trump admin’s attacks have become since Kirk’s murder. Now MAGA is calling for a sort of righteous holy crusade against… anyone who isn’t sad enough about Kirk’s death.
A holy crusade? Are you normally this paranoid, or is that just what’s on today’s talking points memo?
I haven’t seen anyone demand that everyone mourn, just anger towards those who mock and even celebrate Kirk’s death.
So shotting someone in the neck , isn’t extreme. WOW…
And going down the red scare route.. that is a truly pathetic analogy.
“anyone who isn’t sad enough about Kirk’s death”
Really despicable that you condone people actually CELERBATING Charlie Kirk’s assassination.
The far-left, that you are part of, IS the major adversary to civilised society…
They are trying to destroy western civilisation, and MUST be stopped.
How should they be stopped, d’you reckon?
Cockroaches scurry and skulk for cover when you shine a light on them.!
That is what Trump is doing….
And the Democrats are losing millions of registered voters…
… because no-one with any sense of decency or morality at all, wants to be one of them.
So the “major adversary to civilized society” that is “trying to destroy western civilization” and “must be stopped” should be stopped by… kinda doing nothing and hoping the Democratic Party just gradually goes away over a prolonged period? Got it. That makes sense.
Let me guess, you failed reading comprehension in third grade.
We aren’t far-left that constantly resorts to violence.
(AntiFa at it again, in Italy, ganging up with Hamas Palestinians terrorists)
As soon as the light is shone on them, the Democrat party will slide back into the fetid ooze it crawled out of.
The most effective way. Expose the far-left for what they are.
Thanks for helping so much.
Wonderful, I’m so glad to see you coming out so forcefully against political repression and retribution. I’m sure you’re as abhorred as I am at some of the actions the admin has taken in trying to go after people and institutions Trump doesn’t like.
Exposing people for what they are is now a form of repression?
Have you always been this desperate?
Using the power of the state to persecute political opponents like the Trump admin is openly stating they intend to do is unequivocally political repression. Doing literally nothing whatsoever, as Bnice is advocating, is not anything at all. It’s a very meek stance Bnice is adopting, and a huge backpedal from the fiery rhetoric of his earlier comment that said leftists were the greatest threat on earth to western civilization, but it’s nice to see he is against repression of this sort.
Good thing Trump isn’t doing that.
That you constantly lie about what others are doing is nothing unusual.
BTW, I find it fascinating that you find it acceptable for Biden to contact social media companies and demand that those who disagrees with the administration be de-platformed.
That you actually applaud Biden using the FBI and DOJ to go after political opponents, but you are aghast at Trump suggesting that the FCC actually do it’s job.
The only people Trump is repressing, are people who are in this country illegally. And socialists who want government to do things for them.
I should add for those who make a career out of mis-reading and mis-interpreting. That the only thing Trump is doing to those who want government to do stuff for them, is preventing government from doing those things.
Lol there we go. “Trump is engaging in political repression against people I don’t like so it’s fine.”
Trump isn’t engaging in political repression. Unless you are stupid enough to think that not getting free stuff is repression.
The left will gradually fade because they have nothing to offer other than the gnashing of teeth. Their only path to power is through violence.
You need to read 1984 for comprehension.
They will be beome irrelevant sycophants begging for handouts from those who work to succeed.
If begging was all they did, nobody would notice. Instead they are demanding handouts and threatening to assault those who don’t provide.
How should they be stopped
Not by violence, even though that’s what they want to do to us.
A crusade? Like the BLM led riots that ended up killing people and destroying property?
Show us videos of the groups of ten to hundreds of thousands of people mourning Charles Kirks murder where a single window has been broken, where encampments on college campuses were created to stop Jews and others from moving feely, where businesses were forced to close.
The left persecutes people with violence for what they believe. Trump supporters forgive the left for their sins and attempts to persuade people to become better.
Kirk was murdered in an isolated act of violence by a single individual who is now in custody awaiting trial. What would mourner’s of Kirk’s death be demonstrating against? Why would there even be a possibility of protests? That is completely irrelevant to the BLM protests, which were demonstrations against a systemic and ongoing problem.
Saying “show me where this orange looks like an apple. Oranges are better than apples” is a very silly thing to do. You know that.
Assigning collective blame is always one of the earliest moves in the totalitarian playbook. There is no individual agency, all members of a group are responsible for the actions of any member. It’s not hard to see how this goes.
The BLM riots were against a nearly non-existent problem and the immediate trigger was demonstrab;y not an example of the problem they were rioting to protest.
That the Kirk assassination was just one event is undeniable, however your delusion that it is just a one off event is not.
How many times have ICE facilities been attacked across the country during the last month or two.
ANd then there have been the numerous occasions over the last year when the far left has attacked other socialists for the sin of not being far enough left.
Police brutality and corruption is a very real and important problem. Floyd’s murder was a very understandable call to action against a systemic issue. The expectation that Kirk’s murder might somehow be a similar call against a systemic problem is simply false. Kirk was murdered by a lone individual acting on private intent. You agree with this, yet seem to have no issue with the government using the murder to assign collective blame to some ill-defined group they call the “radical left.” This is the exact framework under which political persecution occurs. It is, *exactly*, not for note what happened during the red scare hysteria.
isolated act of violence by a single individual
Like the isolated act by a single individual cop that spurred BLM?
Assigning collective blame
“defund the police”
Your “isolated act” occurred in the context of years of violent rhetoric from the left and years of screaming that Trump, and Republicans in general, are Nazis who want to round people up and kill them, along with “the only good Nazi is a dead Nazi”. The outcome was inevitable. And in the wake of it, the rhetoric has gotten even worse.
edit: I was considering joining this discussion, but after reading more of your comments, don’t bother to respond because it’s clear you have no desire to face any truth that’s not the party line. Your comment about what Kirk said proves it. Discussion with you is pointless.
None of you seems to be able to articulate the systemic issue you think Kirk supporters might want to protest that would enable any paralell comparison to the BLM protests. Leftism? Is that what you’d go with?
If only violent rhetoric causes political violence, and only the left engages in violent rhetoric, how do you explain the multitude of violent acts by right wing extremists over the past years? This whole attempt to “other” the left and paint them as enemies of the state is the exact totalitarian playbook in action. Violent apologism is a problem no matter where you look on the political spectrum.
Should I worry that a person who goes on and on about the evils of “Whyte boys”, might be a racist?
You asked me elsewhere in the thread for proof that Kirk has espoused white nationalist conspiracy theories, and then completely ignored the inescapable proof that was provided to you. Why did you do that?
1) Thank you for ignoring the question that was asked. It just confirms my suspicions.
2) I asked you for a source and the context, which you never gave.
I gave you timestamped sources with full context, you just ignored it.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/09/24/from-climate-radicals-to-culture-killers-the-same-poisoned-root/#comment-4114339
Saying something you’ve been paid to disagree with, is not evidence of evil. Though you are paid to believe that as well.
BTW, I love how you have decided that complaining about the left importing as many illegals as possible, is evidence that anyone wants a whites only country. But then again, you have decide those who disagrees with you are evil, and will accept anything, no matter how nonsensical that you can distort into agreement.
What slur?
I’d rather deal with a million slurs against me than have censorship and mealy-mouthed euphemisms that I have to look up online.
Do you always react so viscerally to the truth?
Hey denso – the Beetle’s good tunesmith work lives on in many performances, their mediocre performances are on tape, the mystical beliefs of some of the four are not new.
The Ottoman Empire was defeated in World War I – it sided with Nationalsozialistiche Germany, the victorious Allies broke it up with Britain and France being caretakers of areas near what today is Israel.
China was overtaken by Communists after Imperial Shinto Japan was defeated in WWIi, the Nationalists moved to Taiwan which morphed into the democratic society it is today.
When the Left got their martyr, they engaged in more than 500 violent riots, destroyed over $2 billion in property, and murdered 23 people.
When the Right had a martyr forced upon us … we started 62,000 new debate societies.
One of these things is not like the other.
This is an odd comparison, because George Floyd was not a “martyr” for leftism as he was not killed or tortured for his beliefs, BLM protests were overwhelmingly non-violent, and they involved people across the political spectrum.
In contrast, the US government has intentionally worked to create a martyr out of Kirk’s assassination, and have been using his death to foment an language of vengeance from their supporters and to ramp up their attacks on whatever they deem to be the “radical left.” Listen to Miller’s (*shudder*) speech at Kirk’s memorial – he is speaking of the “they” who killed Kirk, even though all evidence points to there having been a single individual who pulled the trigger.
No, George Floyd wasn’t a made into a martyr at all.
Estimated property damage nationwide: ~$1 billion to $2 billion (insured damage)
Damage in Minneapolis–Saint Paul region: ~ $500 million, ~1,500 properties affected
Estimated deaths associated with the unrest: at least 19 people in the U.S., with 2 in Minneapolis–Saint Paul during the peak period.
More than 10,000 demonstrations across every US state involving millions of people and lasting over a year, the largest protests in US history, producing a couple billion dollars in insured damages highlights just how peaceful these protests were overall. Thanks for really hammering that point home.
There is only one person trying to hammer a point home here, and you are too blinkered and stupid to see it (hint: mirror, reflection).
Dozens of violent protesters given $millions in civil awards through the courts while hundreds of business left to recover from the theft and destruction with no help.
All for a drug-addled thug that died of a heart attack while being justifiably detained.
That’s how little it takes to trigger the far-left into riots and massive destruction. !!
Peaceful ???? .. That limbo bar you are trying to squeeze under…is only an inch from the ground !!
They still claim he was murdered by police.
It is true he died in police custody, but he was not murdered.
The vast majority of those so called demonstrations were limited to 2 or 3 people.
Huh? Hundreds of violent people, vandalizing, assaulting, ….
In Seattle they tried to kill police by barricading doors to their neighbourhood office then setting the building on fire.
Keith – apparently for some people that didn’t happen or it wasn’t political or it was mostly peaceful, or some combination of that.
Ummm, O-Kayyy. I guess a path of destruction is non violent???
I guess your view, ALAN, is that if you distribute your malfeasance over enough people, then you can get away with murder.
“BLM protests were overwhelmingly non-violent”
WOW!!.. how delusional can a person be !!!
Every time AJ sets a new standard, he breaks it.
Not actually, Mark. We’ve seen this before. Here it is in the article.
“They don’t want to debate us. They don’t want to win us over. They want us erased.”
This is simply extreme socialism (either Nationalist or Marxist). It’s about the violent overthrow of everything. Alan indeed has a standard. Our problem is that his standard is utterly repulsive to all decent people.
Not delusional, just a flat out troll. Move along folks, nothing to see here-just a bit of a stench.
They are building statues to Floyd, he’s been all but canonized by the left.
Just which delusional world do you infest?
Not all BLM demonstrations turned violent. Just most of them.
The they includes all those on the left who radicalized the man who pulled the trigger. That’s how the left works, they set the stage and put the actors in motion, then seek to pretend that they had nothing to do with it.
Your ability to interpret every event, precisely as the party wants you to is amazing.
I heard no language of violence, those are your delusions.
BTW, I know that the left interprets all disagreement as hate speech, but most people aren’t that disconnected from reality.
Ffloyd’s death was a symbol of the system of police brutality that people wanted to protest against. He wasn’t killed for being a leftist or espousing leftist ideals, so he was not a martyr of the left. The protests that he sparked crossed political boundaries.
Something like 97% of the protests involved no violence or property damage.
I said language of vengeance, or retribution. The Trump admin wants to use Kirk’s murder as a vehicle of political repression. That doesn’t mean per se they intend to enact violence. That is why I first and foremost see what is happening as akin to the red scare era. And they’ve been more than happy to assign collective blame for Kirk’s death to literally any person or organization who has ever said or supported any kind of speech or language or ideal that might have been shared by the person who committed the murder.
What they are saying is “we are going after any institution that we perceive might foster the kind of radical ideals that the shooter had.” That is quite chilling.
All total nonsense, of course.
Floyd wasn’t “killed” he died of a drug induce heart failure while being justifiably restrained by police.
Massive amounts of damage to property ensured in the RIOTS that followed. Peaceful.. yeah, you are delusional.
Yes, they do need to root out violent murderers, zealots and ideologs
Two attempts on Trump, one on Charlie, numerous other cases of violence from the far-left all around the country.
Yes, its quite chilling to think what the far-left will do next. !
2018 – Pipe bombs mailed to prominent Democrats
2019 – Death threat against Rep. Ilhan Omar
2020 – Plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer by Wolverine Watchmen militia members.
2022 – Hammer attack on Paul Pelosi
2025 – Shooting of Minnesota Democratic lawmakers Melissa Hortman and John Hoffman
Yes, political violence is exclusively enacted by people on the left, never ever by right wing extremists.
Plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer by Wolverine Watchmen militia members. Literal entrapment operation by the FBI
Pipe bombs mailed to prominent Democrats weird lunatic mailed some road flares disguised as bombs, I think it was to CNN? This single one might be able to go in the right-wing column. Lunatic with a lot of stickers on his van if I remember correctly. More delusional than actually violent, but it qualifies.
Death threat against Rep. Ilhan Omar So the same thing every Republican gets every week.
Hammer attack on Paul Pelosi A leftist male prostitute and a very weird, and covered up encounter
Shooting of Minnesota Democratic lawmakers Melissa Hortman and John Hoffman by a Democrat ex employee of Tim Walz, who did it to advance the career of a Democrat.
Lol that was part of the defense for some of the conspirators, but each of the conspirators who claimed entrapment was convicted. Oops.
Agreed.
The point is not that Republicans don’t receive credible death threats, the point is that Republicans also make them.
You’ve fallen for disinformation. The perpetrator was a QANON, Pizzagate obsessed conspiracy theorist who publicly blogged about Donald Trump having the election stolen from him in 2020. He testified explicitly that he was motivated by these conspiracy theories.
The perpetrator was a registered Republican and Evangelical pastor who railed against gender theory and abortion. He was never an employee of Walts, he was reappointed to a 60-member nonpartisan advisory board by Waltz. His childhood friend said he was, ““a conservative who voted for President Donald Trump.”
So we are five for five right wing radicals engaging in political violence. Shall we dip into right wing religious violence over the same period? I don’t know if I have the time to compile such a huge list.
Whatever story the party issues, is the truth. Forget about the actual facts. Only the party is true. Long live Big Brother.
I see you assume that if anything bad happens to a prominent leftist, that it must have been a right winger that done it.
Then again, you’ve never proven yourself to be a deep thinker.
One of those might be a right winger, but only if you assume that anyone in a militia is a right winger. Most of the ones I’m familiar with are angry because they aren’t getting as much free stuff as they want.
Pelosi was attacked by his gay lover when Paul refused to pay up after being serviced.
The shootings in Minnesota were by a dedicated leftist who was PO’d over a political deal that didn’t include passing a bill he favored.
This is all easily checked, if you had ever bothered thinking for yourself.
Police brutality, while it did still exist was very, very rare and mostly a thing of the past.
Floyd died from a drug induced heart attack while resisting arrest, there was no police brutality in that case, nor was there in any of the other cases celebrated by the race mongers of the left.
As to suppressing their opposition, the left always accuses others of whatever it is doing and planning. Nobody takes a back seat to the prior administration when it came to suppressing those who opposed it.
The left can’t deny that their constant demonization of anyone who opposes them over the last generation, has led to an environment where marginally stable leftists look for a chance to kill those who “threaten democracy”.
It is the left who has accused Republicans of wanting to end democracy. It is the left who labels anyone who doesn’t believe that men should be allowed to compete on women’s teams, as worse than Nazis.
Where is Simon when you need a laugh. Maybe Alan and Simon are the same?
He’s popped up on another thread. His hatred of Trump is greater than his fear of making a fool of himself.
That must be why Chauvin was convicted of unintentional second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter.
There is a lot of whataboutism from the right in this moment. I doubt any of it is sincere. If you were upset about authoritarian actions by the Biden admin but view the Trump admin’s actions as a fair turnabout, you are a hypocrite. If you view Kirk’s murder as an unacceptable form of political violence but stayed silent when two Democratic lawmakers were murdered earlier this year by a right wing extremist, you are a hypocrite. And hypocrisy is coming in easy supply these days.
There is a problem with worsening polarization and radicalization and acceptance of violence and retribution on both sides of the aisle these days. The Republicans are currently in power, and a lot of MAGA people are cheering the president on while he calls for political repression.
“And hypocrisy is coming in easy supply these days.”
99.7% from the far-left.
Chauvin should never have been convicted. It was purely political.
He was justifiably trying to restrain a drug-addled thug.
That type always complains when being restrained. Just listen to the screaming banshees whenever a drunk or leftist resists arrested.
How was Chauvin to know Floyd had a heart problem.
Floyd caused his own death.
All you have to do is get a jury pool that is sufficiently Democrat and a conviction is assured. Just look at the travesties they put Trump through.
Speaking of political repression. This is repression that all leftists still celebrate.
In the minds of the left, mean words are so much worse than actual actions on their side. The two lawmakers were murdered by a fellow leftists who was upset at their failure to pass a bill that he supported. It really is amazing how good the left has become at pretending that everyone who does something bad is a right winger. Usually in the face real data. Then again, their ability to believe in the AGW myth in the face of voluminous counter data is also well known.
Trump has never called for repression, not that reality will stop the left from continuing their carefully constructed myths.
Would love for you to provide actual, documentary evidence of this contention. The shooter was a registered Republican, Evangelical Christian who ran a ministry in Africa where he railed against abortion and gender issues, who had a target list including numerous Democratic lawmakers, abortion providers, and abortion rights activists in his vehicle at the time of the shooting.
Here’s one
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/crime/2025/07/16/minnesota-lawmaker-shootings-hortman-hoffman-boelter-details/85235312007/
Your claims are, as usual, completely delusional. About what we have come to expect from you.
That story doesn’t mention his political leanings one way or the other.
He was a lefty for sure…this is Mn. I want to know where he got all his money.
The letter the shooter wrote to Patel does not indicate his political ideology. He claims he received special military training and was directed by Tim Waltz.
He was a registered Republican, an Evangelical Christian who ran a ministry in Africa where he railed against abortion and gender issues, who had a target list including numerous Democratic lawmakers, abortion providers, and abortion rights activists in his vehicle at the time of the shooting. His childhood friend describes him as, “a conservative who voted for President Donald Trump.”
He was a lefty for sure. Media has stopped that story.
Improper conviction IMJ, what police did not do correctly was believe the person saying he couldn’t breathe adequately.
Resisting arrest is not smart behaviour.
No, it was not brutality. It occurred because he RESISTED lawful orders from duly authorized police officers.
Your ultimate end point is that lawful orders from police CAN BE RESISTED without any consequences. In essence, being able to tell police “move on, nothing to see here”.
You need to learn about the broken windows theories of policing and reducing crime.
I can see you or family have never been a victim of violent crime. The effects are cumulative. Victims never lose their fear, ever. As new victims are added to the fold, the cumulative fear increases. Sooner or later, enough people are affected and begin to demand change. Much of the West is reaching that point.
You are on the losing side. All the far-left has left is increasing violence in their hope to gain power. It is a losing strategy.
Floyd’s death occurred because a police officer knelt on his neck for 9 minutes while he suffocated. The officer was convicted of manslaughter. You have no leg to stand on here. Resisting arrest should not be a death sentence carried out without trial.
And there you go with the lies again. If you look at the actual video, which I have, it is clear that the officers knew is on Floyd’s back.
As or that trail, trumped up evidence in front of a biased jury. Typical left wing tactics. According to the first autopsy, he died from a drug induced heart attack. That’s not murder.
Ah yes, the back, just above the shoulders and below the head.
Both the official Hennepin County autopsy and the autopsy commissioned by Floyd’s family concluded that his death was a homicide. So unless you are privy to some secret third autopsy, you’re talking nonsense.
Wrong on too many points. Not worth the powder.
Pro Floyd/BLM protests were certainly anything but non-violent, leaving a looted path of fire and destruction in their wake.
No one is so blind as one who refuses to see what is in front of them.
10 months of riots in Portland.
Part of the city occupied and declared a Free Zone.
Overwhelmingly non-violent? Right.
Yes, there were instances of violent clashes with law enforcement during the prolonged period of protests in Portland, along with looting/vandalism. The BLM protests overall were overwhelmingly non-violent. Pointing to incidences over 100 days of protest in a single city does not change this fact at all.
I doubt what you say.
What was antifa up t in Seattle, trying to kill police?
What happened in Ferguson MO?
Portland OR, where antifa vowed to keep causing trouble despite government having eliminated what they were protesting against? Indeed nihilistic violent people.
While positioned as ‘black’ versus white, rioters were vandalizing and burning anything they could, while decent people were protecting and rescuing without regard to skin colour.
BTW, what does ‘black’ mean? A large proportion of people who activists call ‘black’ are actually brown – people mix and always have.
AJ does seem to not like “whyte boys”.
Mainly because their martyr was a criminal drug addict douchebag.
So, what you are really telling us is that you do not believe in God.
He believes in the party. The party is a jealous god who will tolerate no other gods before it.
What an insane post.
Oh, wait. You are one of them.
Diagnosis without debate? When discourse fails violence follows – that’s why the left jumps to violence so quickly. Because their ideas by their own nature defy the laws of nature.
McCarthy was vindicated decades ago. He was right: communists HAD infiltrated the US government.
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+vindication+of+Joseph+McCarthy.-a0475325530
You are repeating the cover story that fell apart long ago.
Infiltrated from… where? Soviet Union? They openly rode in cheerleading from USA before Soviet Union had basic capabilities to infiltrate anything. So… the communists did not infiltrate «the US government», they grew up in US ruling class. After the New Deal Revolution, communists were the US government.
As to the “infiltrators”…
Then a new Party Line was introduced: «Stalin was never our friend!» Well, USSR had it too — on XX Communist Party Congress, when the blood-splattered clowns gasped in fake surprise and blamed their own misdeeds on the dead boss. What’s the difference? «We were always at war with Oceania!»
For a more recent rerun of this BS, see «The Church of Xenulogy had infiltrated FBI!!1» — did FBI have no background checks or internal security worth a damn? Duh, that’s silly. Obviously, what must have happened was: they were considered allies, as such allowed in… Then a conflict with other factions happened, they lost, gasps of fake surprise and a purge ensued.
Or «some ISIS video was faked by Pentagon», same deal.
First off, in many ways McCarthy was right.
Secondly, I just love the way you go for personal insult instead of actually dealing with the points raised. Then again, that’s all you have ever done.
Do you agree that those who celebrate the death of those who disagrees with them are dangerous radicals? If not, why? Is it because you agree with them?
I abhor and condemn political violence, and I condemn Kirk’s murder. People celebrating his assassination are glorifying violence, which I do not condone. But people are allowed to express themselves under the first amendment, and I believe they should be able to do that, even if I disagree with them. People glorify violence all the time, including people on the right. It would be quite hypocritical to, say, condemn someone for celebrating Kirk’s death while failing to condemn someone celebrating the violence in Gaza.
But I’m also not blind to who Kirk was, and I don’t think his life is worthy of celebration either. He trafficked in hate and bigotry, and openly spread white nationalist conspiracy theories.
“He trafficked in hate and bigotry,”
Total bovex !! He argues against hatred and bigotry. !
When a far-leftist says “conspiracy theories”, you mean “facts”
Socialists define anything the disagree with as hate.
A wise man once said, “There are none so blind as those who choose not to see.” AlanJ has made his choice, and he has chosen poorly. May as well move on.
Wow, thinking that Jews have a right to defend themselves is glorifying violence in Gaza. The left is becoming sicker by the year.
The image of Kirk is almost entirely based on lies. Most of the things the claims Kirk said, he never said. Other things were taken so far out of context that they are all but unrecognizable. For example, he stated that the 1964 Civil Rights Act was a good idea that was poorly implemented, which the left has claimed as a call for the return of slavery.
The people of Israel have a right to defend themselves, they don’t have a right to commit crimes against humanity in the process.
I’ve listened to Kirk and I’ve heard him espouse white nationalist conspiracy theories. There is no context in which spreading white nationalist conspiracy theories is acceptable. My image of the man is from listening to his radio show and watching his long-format debate videos that he himself posted.
They are NOT committing crimes against humanity.
They are trying to defend themselves by destroying Hamas and their Palestinian worshipers.
If Hamas takes all the food, and hides behind children in hospitals, how is that Israel’s fault.
Kirk was never a white nationalist, he just argued against people who wanted to destroy the US coming in illegally.
There is NO CONTEXT in which importing Islamic terrorist and criminals from around the world is in any way acceptable.. but that is what the Democrats did… and what Charlie rightly argued against
You listen to too much FAKE NEWS from the ultra-left cringe MSNBC, CNN and your far-left ideology gets in the way of rational thought.
One thing I have noticed about AJ, is that he never gives actual examples. He just makes empty claims, then when challenged jumps to new empty claims.
Not according to Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, FIDH, and ICC. The UN has gone further and declared that Israel is committing genocide.
Why would a not-white nationalist go around spreading white nationalist conspiracy theories?
The far left has always been virulently anti-semitic. None of the charges can be independently verified, not that any of those agencies has even tried.
Israel goes to great lengths, even putting it’s own soldiers at risk to avoid civilian casualties. On the other hand, killing civilians is the goal of your boys. Hamas’s charter calls for the eliminating of all Jews, first in Israel, then eventually the rest of the world.
I would love to hear what you believe white nationalist conspiracy is. Considering the whoppers you have already told tonight, this ought to be good.
“conspiracy theories?”
You are the one sprouting conspiracy theories. !
Everything Charlie says is verifiable with evidence..
That’s why he was so effective.
And the HRC, Amnesty, ICC, and particularly the UN, are all organisations that have been taken over by the very-far-left..
eg… look at Teddy, the UN chief.. an ultra-left radical socialist without a brain in his head, or even a remote connection to reality.
The grim picture he tries to paint of the world is because of stooges like him.
There have been no crimes of any kind, much less against humanity.
Exact quote along with a source. Given the way you have greatly distorted all of your claims so far, your word alone has no value.
Leftist have long claimed things like, if you don’t think kids should be allowed to under go sex mutilation surgery, you hate gays.
If you don’t think babies should be killed before they are born, you hate gays.
If you think that racial preferences have retarded race relations, you are a racist who wants to bring back the days of slavery.
That isn’t a position held by any human rights group. Israel has leveled every residential housing unit in Gaza, bombed daycares, hospitals, refugee shelters, maternity wards, schools. They have systematically denied access to food, water, electricity, humanitarian aid. If these things don’t meet your bar for crimes against humanity then you may not have any humanity yourself.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Replacement_conspiracy_theory
In the exact words of the man himself, quoted verbatim:
“The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different.”
“‘Great Replacement’ is not a theory, it’s a reality.”
“The American Democrat party hates this country. They wanna see it collapse. They love it when America becomes less white.”
The whoppers keep getting bigger and bigger. Who cares about reality, who cares what the actual facts on the ground. Whatever the charge against the Jews is, it must be true.
All the homes in Gaza are not wiped out, and many of the ones that are were taken out by Hamas. Israel has never bombed hospitals, daycares or any other civilian targets. It has been Hamas who intercepts relief supplies so it can feed and clothes it’s soldiers first,
Can you come up with another explanation for why the left has completely opened our borders to anyone who wants to come in?
That’s factually wrong. The UN, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, and even the International Criminal Court have all found that Israel has deliberately struck civilian infrastructure in Gaza, including hospitals, schools, refugee camps, and aid convoys. These are not fringe claims, they’re documented by the world’s most authoritative investigative bodies.
Hospitals:
https://www.who.int/news/item/22-05-2025-health-system-at-breaking-point-as-hostilities-further-intensify–who-warns
https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/03/20/gaza-israeli-military-war-crimes-while-occupying-hospitals
Schools:
https://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/photos/education-under-attack
Israel has instituted a deliberate campaign of starvation by cutting off vital food supplies:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/18/israel-starvation-used-weapon-war-gaza
65,000 Palestinians have been killed since hostilities began, with more than 80% of the casualties being civilians:
https://www.ochaopt.org/content/reported-impact-snapshot-gaza-strip-10-september-2025
https://www.unrwa.org/resources/reports/unrwa-situation-report-188-situation-gaza-strip-and-west-bank-including-east-jerusalem
UN Commission of Inquiry from Sept 16 concludes genocide.
*crickets*
As Israel completed the encirclement of Gaza City, they recorded Hamas attacking an UN convoy.
Israel blocking aid? No.
Hamas starving the Gaza non-combatant population? Yes.
In addition, the aid transferred by the US/Israeli organization in July, August, and half of September was twice what 2 different UN agencies said was needed.
Yes. Israel’s strategy is to claim the right of self defense while shifting blame. They insist mass civilian deaths only occur because Hamas hides behind “human shields.” But under that logic, every civilian is treated as a legitimate target and that’s how genocide is carried out.
Nearly 3% of Gaza’s pre-war population has been killed. Once the death toll reaches the tens of thousands, the notion of “surgical precision” to spare civilians isn’t just implausible. It is propaganda.
The Hamas Health casualty lists were updated. It is interesting that the total was reduced by a coupe of thousand. It is particularly interesting that the demographics revealing over 70% of the casualties were military age males. Women/children dropped from the previous 70% to 30% in the latest update.
Hamas-run health ministry quietly removes thousands from Gaza death toll, researchers find | Euronews
Hamas quietly slashes Gaza death toll amid latest Israeli offensive | Fox News
In addition, prior to every strike, Israel notifies the people in the area that a strike is imminent and tells them to evacuate. The latest is Gaza City. Reports from Gaza non-combatants are that Hamas prevented evacuation blocking roads with armed terrorists.
“Military age” does not equal “combatant.”
In Gaza, most of the population is young, and under international law they are civilians unless actively fighting.
Also, there is independent research showing that over half of those killed are women and children. For example, a peer reviewed study in The Lancet (one of the world’s top medical journals) found both that women/children make up the majority of fatalities and that the official death toll is a severe undercount.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)02678-3/fulltext
Well, even some of the so-called “safe zones” people were ordered to flee to, like al Mawasi, were bombed nearly 100 times.
That is a stupid definition, and if your rant is any where close to true, that would mean that fighters who are on R&R acan’t be attacked. Fighters travelling too and from the combat zone can’t be attacked.
Most of Hamas fighters are young enough to be considered children.
Do you believe that women can’t be Hamas fighters?
Independent research means it was put out by Hamas.
My point was simply that being a military age male doesn’t automatically make someone a fighter. The Fox News piece treated it as if it did, which is one reason its analysis isn’t very solid.
None of that is “white nationalism”.
So Charlie is stating FACTS.. not conspiracy.
Thanks for the clarification !!
Do YOU want to live in an Islamist state.. why not move there.. don’t bring it to the USA. !!
Do you really DENY that the French are being over-run by illegal immigrants that are predominately from Islamist countries..!
It is not a conspiracy theory.. It is actually happening.
“It’s not a white nationalist conspiracy theory, I believe it too!” That’s… concerning.
Everyone who doesn’t believe as the party instructs is a problem.
How Big Brother of you.
And using the very leftist Wiki as a source, that’s just funny !!
It agrees with the party, there fore it cannot be wrong.
Mr. J: Thank you for, once again, posting left-wing talking points that are so easily deconstructed here, even by non-political commenters. Your comments demonstrate that reasoned discussion cannot be had with a leftist who simply circles back to the talking points no matter how thoroughly debunked those points have become. I certainly appreciate that your lefty paymasters have sent in one of its weakest agents (you) to help immunize us against your disease. You’re like a vaccine!
You haven’t proved anything. The Democrats have given away their goal of open borders by decrying the Republicans plan to not count illegal immigrants in the cencus and use them to apportion House of Representatives seats.
Why should non-citizens be used to determine who represents actual citizens?
From Our Genocide (B’Tselem report, p. 21–22):
When a bomb hits, Hamas combatants would know their position is compromised: the enemy has means to strike again. From a military perspective, remaining in the same spot after being hit and exposed is suicidal.
The IDF knows that. As such, it is clear the second strike wasn’t about precision. It was about maximizing civilian death and terror.
Israel claims it only targets Hamas fighters. Yet, IDF soldiers themselves admit the rules of engagement were so vague that it meant anyone could be shot.
“ that it meant anyone could be shot.”
Anyone in Gaza could be a Hamas fighter.
They hide amongst the citizens.. they disguise themselves as citizens.
They often ARE the citizens, just dressing up for ceremonial occasions, like beheadings etc.
“targeted two top Hamas military wing operatives, including its leader, Muhammad Deif, and involved two successive bombings, was the deadliest strike on the “humanitarian zone””
So you admit that the Hamas leaders were hiding in the “humanitarian zone” Well done. ! 🙂
If “anyone could be Hamas,” then by your logic every man, woman, and child in Gaza is a target, which means there are no civilians left. That’s exactly the mindset behind genocide.
Almost 3% of Gaza’s pre-war population is already dead. That scale of killing makes the “precision” narrative mathematically impossible. Would you call a surgeon who kills 1 in 30 patients a success story?
Israel claimed Hamas leaders were there. But were they really “hiding” in the same spot 96 more times after the first bombing? Wouldn’t that be daft for any trained fighter?
That is the strategy of Hamas, hide among the civilians, that way when civilians get killed, the useful idiots of the world will start demanding that Israel stop defending itself. Meanwhile Hamas deliberately targets civilians, and the same useful idiots bend over backwards to excuse or even defend the actions.
Face it, the goal here, both of the palestinians and the left in general, is to kill as many Jews as possible. Hopefully all of them some day.
No one is denying Israel’s right to defend itself. What it doesn’t have is the right to commit atrocities in the process.
The “human shields” argument gets trotted out constantly, but it can’t explain away the reality of nearly 3% of Gaza’s pre-war population killed in under two years.
At that scale, the notion of surgical precision with a few tragic side effects isn’t credible. It is mathematically impossible.
Hamas live in the tunnels like cockroaches, they live amongst the civilians.
Set up a “humanitarian zone” and Hamas look for the best building there to set up in….. and make sure they can scurry back underground at the first sign of trouble.
So the enemy hides in tunnels. Brilliant plan: bomb the surface flat over and over. Because if the rats are in the basement, you obviously burn down the whole house to get them.
“An analysis by the BBC”
Now that is totally hilarious !! BBC.=> British B***sh** Corporation.
As soon as the “humanitarian zone” was established.. Hamas moved in.
Its what they do. !
At least Muhammad Ghrab’s kids will be well fed for a while.
B’Tselem organisation itself has links to failed far-left political groups and to Hamas.. so will never post descriptions of the atrocities carried out by Hamas Palestinians.. you know like on the 7th October. !.
“An analysis by the BBC”
+100
Smear.
That’s the usual justification. But if militants really were there, they’d flee after the first strike, as I’ve already pointed out. The IDF surely knows this. Yet that same area was bombed almost 100 times.
They did acknowledge October 7 and how horrific it was. Nobody disputes that. But Israel does not have the right to ethnically cleanse an entire population in response.
Mr. Paidtroll: You would not know a reliable source if it hit you between the eyes. Please keep posting here so we may expose your lies and bias, just like Mr. J.
Nice Palestinian talking points, not a word of which is true.
The key to the definition is “intent.”
Nothing in that report identifies intent. Unclear rules of engagement, tactical mistakes, etc., do not define intent.
So, those thousands of rockets fired by Hamas into Israeli civilian neighborhoods over the past 3 plus decades was unintentional and Hamas is totally innocent?
Hamas forcing non-combatant persons into the danger area or blocking their attempts to evacuate is all on Israel?
Israel has announced each strike via broadcast and pamphlets. If the non-combatants do not leave or are forced to stay does not constitute Israeli genocide. The agreed to Articles of War are clear on this.
Israel declared war after the Oct. 7 attack.
Hamas did not prior to the Oct. 7 attack.
There is a lot of suffering in Gaza. There is no denying that. The magnitude of the suffering depends on who you listen to. There is no balance in reporting. There is a lot of unverified claims and accusations that are stated as factual.
Many of the civilian casualties resulted when the home made rockets fired by Hamas failed and fell in Gaza instead of Israel. BTW, these rockets are not accurate enough to target military targets, and there is no evidence that they even try to. Their one and only purpose is to kill civilians, yet you have no problem with that.
It does. The report also undercuts Israel’s claim that it’s only targeting Hamas officials while sparing civilians. That makes the narrative a lie. And if it’s a lie, you have to ask: what exactly are they trying to hide?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/new-deputy-defense-minister-called-palestinians-animals/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intent_and_incitement_in_the_Gaza_genocide
The intent looks pretty clear. In these above links you’ll find statements from Israeli officials openly dehumanizing Palestinians as “animals.”
Dehumanization is a classic marker of genocidal intent.
To be clear: everyone agrees Hamas is a terrorist group, and October 7th was horrific. They’re not the “good guys” here. But acknowledging that doesn’t erase what Israel’s own leaders are saying and doing.
Israel has given time for real Palestinians to leave the area.. but Hamas won’t let them
They need their human shields.
Not according to the report I cited.
You are not a historian I see.
Did the Allies bomb civilians in German cities like Dersden and Hamburg? We’re those crimes against humanity?
How about fire bombing Tokyo? Was that a crime against humanity?
How about Sherman’s march through the south? Did he commit crimes against humanity?
Was the attack against the twin towers a crime against humanity?
Did Hamas commit a crime against humanity by murdering 1200 Israelites?
Arguably, yes. It’s my belief that the bombings were not justified and constituted crimes against humanity. There are nuanced legal arguments around the term “war crime” that are not necessary to litigate. The campaign was abhorrent and ill-justified.
See above.
Debatable. Most of the campaign served a legitimate military purpose. Were crimes committed during the campaign? Almost certainly.
Obviously.
Obviously.
Prove it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-defence_in_international_law#:~:text=7%20References-,Article%2051%20of%20the%20UN%20Charter,maintain%20international%20peace%20and%20security.
Same old cod swollop. Why don’t you post some links of Charlie Kirk saying the things you think he expressed. That would help to support your insane rants.
I provided direct quotes above, ignored by everyone except Bnice, who has expressed his endorsement of the white nationalist conspiracy theories referenced.
You provided what you claim to be direct quotes.
No source, so no one can check to see if you are lying again.
No context, so no one can check to see if the quote means what you want it to mean.
When I provided you a source, you waved it away as “Palestinian talking points.”
They are.
If you can’t supply an unbiased source, shame on you.
You wrote: “Face it, the goal here, both of the palestinians and the left in general, is to kill as many Jews as possible. Hopefully all of them some day.“
You also wrote: “Independent research [from the Lancet] means it was put out by Hamas.”
I agree. Clearly, you’re the ultimate arbiter of what counts as unbiased.
“The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different.” At 3:08
“‘Great Replacement’ is not a theory, it’s a reality.”
“The American Democrat party hates this country. They wanna see it collapse. They love it when America becomes less white.” at 2:30
Sources and context.
Every point is a statement of fact !!
What is your point ??
That people are not allowed to state the facts.. because you don’t like those facts ??
Do you DENY the massive uncontrolled illegal invasion on the southern border?
Some parts of the country have already been taken over.. I think it was Minnesota, where the Somali guy said.. “this city is ours”.
UK being over-run, with parts of London wanting to implement Sharia law.
Yes.. The Great Replacement theory, IS well alive and happening now.
This is the basis for Mr. J’s smear of the deceased, hardly evidence of white nationalism. I remember you as the guy wishing bad things for grandchildren. You’re a reprehensible loathsome liar.
AJ appears to be capable of only binary thinking. Don’t expect him to understand any nuanced position. Either you agree with him or you’re a racist.
More blatant stupidity from AJ.
USA has a right to protect its borders from illegal immigrants, and to choose who is allowed into the country.
To DENY that open immigration is causing problems in basically every country where its allowed, is to be in total acceptance of the violence that is happening around the world because of it.
Charlie DID NOT endorse “white” nationalism.. he endorsed “nationalism”.. protection of one’s country, which AJ seems to think isn’t allowed.
AJ is the one putting the racist overtone to it.
“Great replacement theory” is a white nationalist conspiracy theory first espoused (and named) by Renaud Camus in 2010. The fact that you personally believe a white nationalist conspiracy theory does not make it any less than what it is. Kirk believed and espoused this theory, borrowing the exact language used by other white nationalists who spread it.
If your defense is, “the white nationalists are right!” Well, that’s not a great reflection on you darling.
Look up the term “Demographics are destiny” a mantra of leftists for years.
Not at all exclusively. The phrase has been used across the political spectrum, and often just in a descriptive sense. For example, China’s population is aging rapidly, and that demographic shift will shape its economy in the coming decades by slowing growth.
The phrase “demographics are destiny” has been used by commentators to describe broad population shifts and how they affect voting. That’s not the same as “Great Replacement theory.” Replacement theory doesn’t just notice demographic change, it frames it as a deliberate plot to undermine or erase white people, which is why it’s a white nationalist conspiracy theory and why it’s cited by extremists.
When Kirk repeated that language, he wasn’t just making a neutral demographic observation, he was borrowing rhetoric with a specific, conspiratorial meaning in white nationalist circles.
Funny how only dogs hear dog whistles.
“Great Replacement” isn’t a dog whistle, it’s the literal name of a conspiracy theory coined by a white nationalist and embraced by white nationalist groups. The term is a hound baying.
Good boy. Sit.
Mr. Rotter: It’s the only way to talk to Mr. J, who has been trained, well, ill-trained, to “speak”.
I’m not here to judge anyone for their kinks, Charles, but I don’t really consent to participating in yours.
Mr. J: We know what you are here for, the influence of your handlers is pretty evident. When you comment here, aren’t you consenting? To “participate”?? Mislabelling it “kinks” doesn’t change the fact, you consent to post here. You are getting dumber by the post.
Hey everyone, welcome to the push back on McCarthyism 2.0…check your facts Alan, its the left that demonizes anyone who doesn’t agree with you. Its the left that riots when a man tragically dies in police custody after committing a crime & high on drugs but celebrates the death of a man who did nothing more than debate in an open forum..BILLIONS of dollars in damage after George Floyd died, celebration when Charlie Kirk died AND no riots from his supporters at all…
“no riots from his supporters at all…”
On the other hand, there were a number of instances of mourners being attacked and having their displays destroyed.
You are one of the very people described above.
And it doesn’t seem to worry you in the least.
Or you are ignorant of your own self.
As long as it’s those he doesn’t like who are being attacked, don’t expect AJ to complain.
Put your mask on and shut up you authoritarian…lol
Libertine is more accurate.
People, stop debating this troll. He spews nothing by verbal diarrhea, which is both fowl smelling and a toxic cocktail of idea pathogens. His sole purpose is to cause you all to waste your time debating his indefensible positions. I’m not a bible thumper, but there are some real pearls of wisdom about dealing with human attitudes therein – such as “cast not your pearls among swine”!
People, stop debating this troll
Agreed. I started to engage above, but after seeing more of his comments realized that it’s pointless.
AJ either doesn’t have a day job, or this is it.
McCarthyism 1.0 was storm in a teacup, badger-baiting of a short-sighted pawn against the entire US aristocracy.
The net result of which was usage of smoke and mirrors to cover up the simple fact that USA and Soviet Union were in bed from the day 1 (of the latter). Which did not really stop, of course, Noblesse de Robe merely adapted some formalities of the “kayfabe”.
So… what would this one cover up?
It’s the Marxism-based antis who are behaving like McCarthy was did their ancestors.
BTW, McCarthy was party correct though probably OTT, look for Ayn Rand’s testimony to Congress about communists in Hollywood, with examples – she saw the horrors of Communism growing up in the Soviet Union then became a screen writer in Hollywood. Her first novels were set in severely collectivist societies: Anthem and We The Living, a movie was made of the latter (you can buy the movie on DVD etc.).
Wild story of censorship:
The [Fascist] regime in Italy allowed production of We The Living because it was against Communism.
Eventually it woke up the the reality that the movie was about totalitarianism thus against Facism as well, so blocked it.
Later Ayn Rand heard that the movie existed and put her lawyer onto searching for it. Much later her heir and fans obtained copies, cleaned them up, and edited out pandering to censors of the time when made. Worth watching.
They’re no different than any other Intolerant Extremist Religion.
“Believe as I do, Pray as I do and do as I say or you’re going to Hell and I’ll see you out the door and send you there myself if you Don’t Conform.”
All religions are not the same. Clearly, the author is not anti-religion; he boldly proclaims Christianity. He calls climate alarmists “radicals with a godless agenda”. Christians believe in a loving God. They do not demand that you “pray as I do” or “conform” or else. Atheism is not the cure for the violence, anarchy, and anti-humanism prevalent today. It is the cause.
Atheism isn’t the cure or the cause.
Never said “All religions are the same.” Re-read my post.
At least the heading
They’re no different than any other Intolerant Extremist Religion.
Tell me which religion(s) don’t tell their partitioners that you must follow church doctrine or face eternal damnation?
Catholics must confess, repent, and do acts of contrition or face damnation. (3 our fathers, 4 hail Mary’s and the stations of the cross). Since no other religion follows this requirement they must be doomed to damnation also.
To Muslims the west are infidels, to their extremists the west must bend the knee or face destruction.
Shall I continue?
So you think eternal damnation is violence by Catholics here on earth?
Every denomination of Christianity has their own precepts. As far as I know, none take up hammer and sickles to force non-believers to change their beliefs.
No Christian religion that I know of takes up arms against their brothers either except in hymns. Onward Christian Soldiers marching as to war. Unless you count war against the demonic influence as in exorcism.
Likely the reasoning by the Catholic Church for the 150,000 accused and subsequent 50,000 executions during the Inquisition. And the 100,000 accused and subsequent 60,000 executions during the European Witch hunts. And the 200 accused and 25 executions/deaths in Salem Mass.
Christians believe in a loving God. They do not demand that you “pray as I do” or “conform” or else.
Not exactly as there are exceptions.
For the record I too am not anti religion. All religions have some form of morality at their core, some form of the same 10 commandments forming their morality. Nor am I anti Christian. I was raised in a Protestant household and my wife is Baptist. Most of the Christian religions require you accept Christ as your personal savior or you might not be accepted into Heaven. Those who don’t face purgatory and potential eternal damnation.
Agreed about atheism.
The other side is dangerous, there’s no sense denying it.
“The Long March Through The Institutions” will continue unabated while ever ideology supplants rationality.
And as per my hypothesis –
rationality and ideology cannot occupy the same mind space at the same time.
(it’s undeniable though that ideology and hypocrisy CAN occupy the same mind space at the same time.
and almost always do.)
Every moment in time is unique. Therefore, the rationality you speak of cannot be measured in any future timeframe, but is always constrained to results from the past.
Ideology and hypocrisy have no such restrictions, which makes them both extremely popular with humans who always require some sort of measurement to make rational decisions.
Remember, humans want hope and change as politicians constantly remind them. But what they actually get is not what they wanted.
All that anyone can really do is to realize that people who want to reduce your standard of living are not your friends.
https://youtu.be/UDfAdHBtK_Q?si=kJEca0Z9r4lmjkco
When logic, reason, and evidence hold no power to persuade, you’re not in the secular realm anymore–this is a perverted and inverted quasi-religious cult masquerading as a “political movement.”
Great article–but it needs to name it—> These are not “Democrats,” these people are ideologically possessed Communists.
Perhaps libertines is a better definition.
Sounds right, perfect.
Too bad it was not given to DJTrump in advance of his UN speach.
It’s a mental illness. It spreads like the flu.
My desired reply is much too long to post.
Suffice it to say, spot on and it’s about time, past time, that humanity rise up and oppose the insanity.
I hate to say it, but there will be a lot more dead before this insanity is defeated.
2 people killed by a sniper outside an ICE facility in Dallas this morning.
I believe you are correct. At my age it is probable that I will never see the new age of reason and humanity.
While not directly related, there is a connection in that those who despise civilization have set as one of their goals, the release of all prisoners from all prisons.
Last week a young woman was killed in a sub-way by a person who had been arrested `14 times for violent crimes and was having mental issues, as even his family admits.
This morning, a man was attacked and stabbed on a subway by a person unknown, who fled into the crowed after the train came to a stop.
When you have reached the point where people fear for their lives every time they go into public, your society is nearing collapse.
Do not go quietly into the dark, go armed.
The fear effects of crime is cumulative. If kept at a low level, not enough fear accumulates to result in a major blowup. As crime increases, more and more fear accumulates until it can no longer be ignored. If police can’t control it, the people themselves will.
It has taken the courageous raising of voices in opposition to the nearly overwhelming inertia of leftism infecting media, government, the arts and sciences, education, academia, and even many religions to open the eyes of the quiet masses of good people to see that “they that be with us are more than they that be with them.” I hope that this is a great awakening that emboldens the quiet, good people to stand up and voice their rejection of the vile, cynical, and misanthropic ideas of leftism rather than a brief pause in the march of Western civilization off the cliff.
+100
Could have left off the “radical” qualifier. It’s redundant.
WUWT tends to focus on the scientific matters, rightly so. But we needed to hear this.
Powerful, and true.
None of this would be happening without the support of the media and its’ demonizing of Conservatives.
As a libertarian atheist I MOSTLY agree with this post but clearly too much ‘christian god’ for my taste. Yes Charlie Kirk proudly wore his christian beliefs on his sleeve BUT his arguments, politics and debate style were grounded in the enlightenment, scientific inquiry and open discussion. While I do not and will not advise those of the christian belief system that they are wrong for their beliefs and if that brings them comfort in the face of this tragedy than that’s a good thing…but the push back to those replacing their christian god with a belief in Gaia/earth/nihilism is to argue in favor of embracing humanity…I was raised Catholic & know that plays a significant role in how I approach the world, e.g. of all the ‘beliefs’ I was taught the one that sticks with me is “Love your neighbor as yourself”…it isn’t grounded in a magical spiritualism but in an everyday view of how the world can best develop and embrace human differences…
So to those on the right/conservatism that also embrace christianity I encourage you to focus on that 1 ‘command’, use that to reach out & embrace others who don’t believe as you do in other respects to form a ‘coalition of the free’. Rather than use your christian faith in a way that may push people away, use the teachings of your savior to engage in a human focused view of the world that can encompass those who don’t believe (in a religious sense) as you do.
There are many things I agreed with Charlie Kirk on, others not so much, or at least the arguments for how society should deal with problems weren’t always as obvious as he’d have liked to believe. I can only hope the decedents of his philosophies embrace the ‘enlightenment’ focused aspect at least as much as his christian beliefs.
The grounding comes from Christianity. The enlightenment did not spring from philosophers minds unbidden. Their exposure to Christianity and it’s precepts based on rules laid down in the Bible laid the base.
The Bible, both New and Old Testaments, is one of the most important books about a just and proper society and how that society should operate.
Perhaps I shouldn’t engage this as I was only hoping to advise that Christian followers of Charlie Kirk (admittedly likely a majority) would do themselves and the rest of us that ‘mostly’ agreed with Charlie’s efforts a favor by not restricting their grouping to those that support their particular religious beliefs….I stand by my statement having seen many videos of Charlie Kirk debating abortion where he made it clear his position was based on science NOT his religious beliefs. That his scientific & religious beliefs coincided is for him a happy coincidence.
You are oddly correct that the Enlightenment philosopher’s beliefs were partially due to an ‘exposure to Christianity’ but certainly not in the way you think. The Enlightenment was an almost complete rejection of the unscientific, unreasoned, intolerant, dogmatic beliefs of Christianity of the time. Without the enlightenment Christians would still be burning witches, locking up individuals they disagree with, believing the earth is the center of the universe and wholly making life terrible for the rest of us. It is a good thing that Christianity embraced enlightenment thinking of reason & tolerance. However, that they now think it was of their making is troublesome.
Voltaire did not preach ‘religious tolerance but only if your christian’, he meant it to apply to Jews and Muslims, and any other religious belief system, though he wasn’t particularly supportive of atheism so even he did not have perfect ‘tolerance’ for ‘freedom of belief’.
Again, I encourage those of Charlies followers that are of the Christian belief system to keep the tent of freedom of expression, thought, tolerance, and reason open to all and not devolve in to the ‘religious right’ of the ’70s & ’80s…do that and the worm will turn and we’ll be stuck with the Democrats again…
Through my studies of human societies throughout the ages, one thing stands clear.
All humans need, absolutely need to believe in something greater than themselves.
It can be science. It can be a Supreme Being (of one definition or another). It can be simply the good of the many outweigh the good of the few.
Without a belief in something greater, the individual devolves into selfishness, greed, and ultimately an uncompromising position that too often leads to violence.
“All humans need, absolutely need to believe in something greater than themselves.”
I don’t disagree.
“Without a belief in something greater, the individual devolves into selfishness, greed, and ultimately an uncompromising position that too often leads to violence.”
It is not at all that ‘cut & dried’, the thing, thought or circumstance that is ‘something greater’ can easily devolve in to driving selfishness, greed and and an ‘uncompromising position that…leads to violence’. Heck, we’re witnessing that right now…do you truly think that Tyler Robinson didn’t believe in something ‘greater than himself’, or any of the nutjobs that think their brand of violence is ‘justified’. BLM/George Floyd riots, school shootings by racial supremicists…pretty much any violence that can’t be directly identified as ‘self defense’ can likely be traced to having an ‘uncompromising position that…leads to violence’.
My point being is simply having a belief in something greater than yourself is insufficient to ensure any individual grows up to be a happy, productive, member of society. Heck, in truth I’m not positive its even a ‘necessary’ condition, I’m certainly willing to believe its likely so for most people but I think I could make a cogent argument that a ‘selfish’ person can be a happy, productive member of society.
They all are. I mean, any religion long-living enough to shape behaviour stereotypes of an ethnos is built upon advice that was reasonably adaptive. In its circumstances, that is taken in the proper context. Ethics in general are necessarily adaptive. See the musings of Taleb on it. Yes, even the classic Greek (at least the parts not debased into… fanfic).
If you want to see comments of an atheist on the Right on an atheist on the Left, see Mencius Moldbug, How Dawkins Got Pwned.
And here is my issue. This is a false dichotomy.
I’m an atheist. I’m with the Right right up until they start waving Bibles around. I consider myself to be mostly Objectivist, but even there I have fundamental disagreements. I take a strong pro-life stance, and I’m strongly in favour of traditional marriage. Make some room in that tent of yours for those of us that share the same values, even if we don’t share the same beliefs.
You’ve said more succinctly what I tried to express above…though I would say I’ve learned to not much mind the ‘waving of the Bible’ IF it is applied in the proper context such as for helping people of a certain belief system deal with horrific events…when used invalidly as done in the article it can push away otherwise potential allies…For example, its easy to rewrite that little bit as
One side says humans have inherent value to be preserved and supported.
The other says man is a parasite.
One says America is a miracle worth preserving.
The other says America is a cancer worth cutting out.
One says the answer is family, and hard work.
The other says the answer is rage, retribution, and revolution
I took out the ‘carbon-emitting’ because that’s only one quality of the left viewing humans as parasites…they demonstrate many more…
I would argue my version is closer to what Charlie Kirk promoted in his debates. Yes he was christian and that was easy to tell but he didn’t pound people over the head with it to support his arguments.E.g. it is reasonably easy to promote the ‘nuclear family and hard work’ vs the alternatives without resorting to religion and Charlie mostly did it that way…
I’m with you on all of that. Well said.
No one forces you to join in worship of a spiritual God. The Bible is an instructional book about how a just and compassionate society should be created. The God in the Bible need be nothing but a scientist telling a creation how they should act.
But that’s the very point!
You are confusing the Right and the Conservatism. The Conservatives are not a force pulling somewhere, they are but a passive drogue, which cannot ever stop the active Left. By design. The worst are actors playing a fake opposition act as a job, the “best” are fools buying into it genuinely.
Was he wrong about this?
The Clown “Right” in the USA Overton Window (in the copycat states it’s more complicated, but of similar nature) is either Dropout Left or Moral Hipsters (those sometimes overlap). Both of these are allowed because they can only do two things: make noises keeping the Left fired up and consolidated, or waste time and energy of everyone else until people give up.
The Failed Left is useless: they have dropped out because they lost the drive to continue. Otherwise they would still swim after Cthulhu with the rest of Left, even if not among the first. Thus, they bumble «swimming to the Left was the greatest thing ever until Buoy #51, but from #52 it Gone Terribly Wrong», make faces, and cannot do anything.
The Moral Hipsters make up tiny elitist sects for admiring their imaginary superiority (self-gratification). By construction, those could not organize to do anything even if they were willing. The self-proclaimed Only True Chosen, of course, paint it as a virtue: the world is evil, so if they are few and weak, it “proves” they are True! Some take their ideals of “One True Right” from the Left of 50-100 years ago — anything goes if sufficiently exclusive. Hence my label “hipsters”.
Only the Right which does not inhabit either rabbit hole could even theoretically, maybe sometime, become an actual driving force.
Hence all the flailing about the imaginary “Alt Right”: «there is something over there! it broke out of the allowed pattern of walking caricatures! what if it consolidates?! it’s the end of the world!»
Of course it is! False dichotomy is bread and butter of any fake opposition that is not a footnote. Can you even imagine the latter without the former?
It’s the circus kayfabe. If you are not a fan of the fat angry clown, you must be a fan of the thin moping clown. Otherwise, you may be seen as not getting along with the show itself. Then the fat angry clown stops beating the thin moping clown with a stick, and they gang up on you. While they do have their own interests, they both agree that the show must go on!
Wow. What a clarifying essay on the roots of the crazy ideas and behavior displayed daily by leftists. The seemingly inexplicable rhetoric and actions of leftists is easily understood. Fundamentally, it’s the result of a conscious choice to reject God, good, morality, and humanity. There are many reasons why people choose that path, from defiant, willful rejection to apathy to ignorance. Underlying the bewildering plethora of leftist ideologies is a desperate effort to deflect the natural cognitive dissonance and guilt that results from violating the Christian-based morality that has fostered the rapid growth of freedom and prosperity in the Western world over the last few centuries. Leftists try to substitute their own moral framework that often rejects objective reality to try to normalize an ever expanding variety of deviant behaviors. When you excuse those behaviors and dismiss real mental illnesseses like gender dysphoria by, in one example, making biologically impossible claims like that men can become women and vice versa, you know you’ve descended into the madness that is the ultimate destination of leftist ideology, whether intended or not.
As comedian Shayne Smith observed in his personal transformation from avowed leftist to faithful Christian, “I was living in a fantasy and when you pursue fantasy, reality becomes the enemy.”
https://youtu.be/p461FtBRA6I?t=1088s
If hatred is the strongest human emotion and people get addicted to it, then they probably become nihilists.
2 things come to mind in reading both the post & comments:
1) Evil is not an abstract concept
2) Critical thinking is of the upmost importance when trying to make sense of our world
Good article, agree with the points. I’m still thinking that Yuri Bezmenov gave us this game plan years ago. The enemies of the free western world have been poisoning our children’s minds for decades. They have marched through the institutions and now hold power in many areas of society. These 2 or 3 generations of citizens have been disconnected from their family, from their faith and from moral values that were responsible for the flourishing of the free world. I think we’re seeing the fruition of the communist plan to defeat us from within.
Only a tiny minority of the population globally listens to these kooks in the 1st place and even fewer are willing to accept new environmental taxes and/or make major lifestyle changes to combat a non-problem. Just a few days ago some head case in South Africa proclaimed the Rapture was imminent on Set. 23 or 24, and a small number of dolts prepared for the event by selling off their possessions. Did it occur yet and will it ever? Yet there are dupes around who are convinced civilization, the planet and everything in between are doomed unless serious measures are taken to combat what is just another urban myth.
Charlie targeted his crusade to save young men like the one that killed him. The shooters/killers are largely male. Ask WHY. I suggest that men still have the need to “be someone”. I offer that the women’s movement, “take your daughter to work” and all similar programs made it possible/preferrable for women to become the majority in college, become more employable (maybe justifiable or maybe because it is what society expects), etc. The result is that men/boys have been pushed into the background. This has resulted in men/boys migrating to the fringes. The more unstable ones become “trans”, become the leaders of the radicals and some become shooters.
The speculation seems to have a ring of truth to it.
Sadly, there is very little to trust in any research or study into the hypothesis.
Resistance is futile. You will be assimlated.
Unfortunately, while a lot of truth is being put forward, the reality is the Great Reset cannot happen until after the Great Collapse.
It took the Dark Ages to get humanity back on the path to enlightenment, which led to modern civilizations.
I so hope I am wrong.
I remain hopeful, but I fear you may be right.
It’s ironic, isn’t it. The far left has been working for the collapse of law and order, since they view law and order as standing in the way of their perfect society.
When in fact law and order is the only thing protecting them from the demons they want to unleash.
“If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept Barbarism.”
Thomas Sowell
“It is always the simplest ideas that lead to the greatest consequences. My idea, in it’s entirety is that if vile people unite and constitute a force then decent people are obliged to do the same; just that.”
Leo Tolstoy
You attack my car, and I’m going to assume you intend to kill me, and react accordingly. There should be a law that when a mob threatens you, that’s good enough to take extreme defensive measures. Against a mob, you have no chance if you wait until they are in your face; even against 2 or 3 people, you have no chance. Any court that says you have to wait until they physically strike you is living in a dream world.
You attack my car, and I’m going to assume you intend to kill me
Anyone who saw what happened to Reginald Denny knows that. But he’s been largely forgotten.
They are death cultists. They want to cut down on the basic building block of life on Earth, claiming they know the exact miracle amount of it that must be in the atmosphere at all times, which is nutty. Clearly, from the geological record, they are totally wrong, and it’s hard for them not to know that. One must conclude that they just want life to end on Earth. One would find it hard to believe that they haven’t been curious enough to read about the levels of CO2 that existed in the past. Actually, one would think they would wonder where FOSSIL fuels came from in the first place. Oh, yeah, biological matter that did not return to the biosphere because it was trapped by geological processes. What would be the end result of that if those compounds continued to diminish and never were returned to the life cycle?
web1_vka-eby-17915.jpg (960×640)
Eby is the Premier of BC Canada who is pushing for more LNG exports but is vehemently against another oil pipeline to the coast.
He is slippery, keeps claiming there are no proposals for another oil pipeline – never mind that a group of tribes has been working toward one in the area of NW BC that the blocked Northern Gateway plan was.