Somebody is compiling a public list of people who “support political violence online,” which seems to mean only people who are insufficiently upset about the assassination of Charlie Kirk, and only Charlie Kirk. It’s a curious list: they post photos of the “violence supporters”, but I noticed that most of them seem to be young and attractive men and women. I am forced by the empirical evidence to conclude that if you hated Charlie Kirk, you are probably very pretty (do not submit my name to their list, or you’ll ruin the streak.) Also most of the comments by these “haters” are mild — pointing out the Kirk was a radical 2nd amendment absolutist is enough to qualify you.
TPUSA has also long maintained a Professor Watchlist targeting people who speak against TPUSA’s agenda, which is a very strange thing for a free speech advocacy group to do. By the way, I’m on that list already. I wouldn’t want to not be on that list.
It’s weird how the worst people on the internet aspire to be List Lords.
While I abhor the killing of Charlie Kirk I am also appalled at the half dozen opinion pieces in today’s times, none of which refer to the appalling way he practiced politics, especially the piece by Ezra Klein ,a progressive, entitled “…Kirk practiced politics the right way”. If the Wikipedia article is correct Kirk regularly prompted conspiracy theories and lies, COVID 19 misinformation,election fraud misinformation, was racist, homophobic, antisemitic, a Christian Nationalist(against separation of church and state) etc., etc. in other words very much lile Trump. I hope no one similar takes his place of leadership.
Read The Wikipedia section “Political positions and activities”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Kirk#Political_positions_and_activities
we can disagree with someone and not wish for their death
we can argue with someone and not use rhetoric that incites violence
and just because we civilly disagreed with someone (and something bad happened) it isn’t our fault
the IRONY here is that the the people complaining about rhetoric today and making lists, how many of them supported Gabby Giffords and wanted to take the ‘temperature down’ about the rhetoric that many believed contributed to her being shot? or were they more likely to object to being censored/political correctness?
“Don’t tell me I can’t put crosshairs on political posters! no one is going to take that to mean to target them for violence”
I am not eloquent – below is what we should be hearing from everyone – we can argue, we should disagree we should ‘fight’ for what we believe in – via the political process and lawsuits, not via violence
Gavin Newsom (or his publicist) :
“We should all feel a deep sense of grief and outrage at the terrible violence that took place in Utah today. Charlie Kirk’s murder is sick and reprehensible, and our thoughts are with his family, children, and loved ones.
“I knew Charlie, and I admired his passion and commitment to debate. His senseless murder is a reminder of how important it is for all of us, across the political spectrum, to foster genuine discourse on issues that deeply affect us all without resorting to political violence.
“The best way to honor Charlie’s memory is to continue his work: engage with each other, across ideology, through spirited discourse. In a democracy, ideas are tested through words and good-faith debate — never through violence. Honest disagreement makes us stronger; violence only drives us further apart and corrodes the values at the heart of this nation.”
We should continue his work…of promoting white nationalism, theocracy, and the demolition of our democracy? That makes no sense.
Essentially, it’s a doxing site created to foment hate and violence.
I never paid much attention to Kirk. I knew he was a proponent of things I detested, but I wasn’t deep into the details of his positions. After his killing, I checked his Wikipedia page to see what I’d missed. Holy-Moly! He stood for everything I oppose. I tried to be charitable and looked for ONE thing I could agree with him on. Couldn’t do it.
Honestly, I think we dodged our own bullet with Kirk’s death. At age 35 he would’ve been eligible to run for president. In the current insane political atmosphere, I suspect he’d have had a good chance of winning. Kirk is the kind of Christian nationalist zealot who would make the lives of free thinkers a living hell. I think the shooter did us a huge favor.
I can abhor the violence – genuinely believe that the world is a worse place for him having been murdered – and still believe that the world is a better place without him in it. The phrase “Wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy…” comes to mind.
On the occasion, I attend anti-fascist rallies, and the fascists usually take pictures of people (possibly to scare them a bit). It doesn’t work at all, I’m zero scared. And once you are on a list, and there is no possibility to get un-listed, it may actually be an incentive to do more against the listers (because you figure that if they get to power, the list is their death list).
There is an entire underworld of neo-nazi death cults out there. The Order Of Nine Angles. The Maniac Murder Cult. No Lives Matter organization. And many bizarre internet based cult like organizations the delight in searching out mentally ill teen aged girls on line and exploiting them. Getting a teen aged girl to commit suicide is considered a praiseworthy accomplishment among some of these sick bastards. The founder of one of these organizations, 764, 15 year old Bradley Cadenhead who recently was sentenced to prison for 80 years for this. Many similar darknet orgs metastrasized from 764. We have a lot worse than trans people with guns to worry about. This a rather bizarre rabbit hole to fall into. Not to mention some bizarre and violent religious cults out there active today.
The FBI has released an image of the suspect shooter. He’s a young male wearing a black shirt with the US flag and an AR-15 rifle on it. He clearly identifies as a 2nd amendment gun-fondler either that or it was a “false flag” operation by Antifa. No points for guessing what TPUSA and hid fellow pundits will believe.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-11/fbi-says-charlie-kirk-search-continues-weapon-found/105764588
@notaandomposter @11
There is not a single part of that that is correct. Just as a for instance, the best way to honour CK’s memory would be to piss on his unmarked grave, adding to the pile of rotting fish heads and other foul refuse.
The ideas he had HAVE been tested through civil discourse. Over and over again. They are universally evil and are to be abhorrred, not listened to and debated again.
@3 I meant
A vile man, proudly and unthinkingly wrong about everything, hateful and cruel and working to make the world a worse place. No great loss to society. No loss at all, really. If it were only irredeemably awful people like him who ended up killed by gun violence then it wouldn’t be a problem to society.
Unfortunately it’s not just pathetic fascist wastes of space who suffer from this scourge. So better to work towards ending it, even if that does carry the unfortunate consequence that suppurating arseholes like this man are safer too.
There is a large swarm out there of far right neo-nazi accelerationist organizations. Some preach violence and murder to spark civil unrest, race wars and uprisings. Google “terrorgram” for these sorts of things.
I saw those photos this morning.
The people at the rally were all white, Mormon, young, right wingnuts. In the Orem-Provo area, that is completely generic.
They all said that he blended in well and no one would look at him twice.
A young, fit, clean cut male.
They also said there was minimal security at the site.
.1. He could have been a right winger with some sort of grievance against Charlie Kirk.
Or he could have been someone who just had personal problems and was going out with some headlines.
.2. Or he could be someone on the left end of the spectrum who decided Charlie Kirk needed to die bad enough to end his own life with him. Even if he is taken alive, he is looking at life in prison or possibly a death penalty.
Could be one of Charlie Kirk’s hate targets, Trans, gay, normal person, educated, etc..
We don’t have the data to tell these alternatives apart right now.
We just have to wait until more evidence shows up.
In addition to the excellent points made by cheerfulcharlie @9 and @14, you could check out the excellent podcast by Molly Conger called “Weird Little Guys” for way too much information about the intellectual swamps from which Kirk’s assassin almost certainly emerged.
I’d bet good money that, should the FBI take a break from Epstein-file-Trump-name-redacting and endless loyalty polygraphs and catch the actual shooter, he’ll be some form of disturbed and terminally online right-winger with an inscrutable grudge against charlie kirk and an interest in accelerationism. Most likely a disaffected groyper (Nick Fuentes follower) who is frustrated that Kirk refuses to be antisemitic enough in his bigotry, and who thinks that killing Fuentes’ enemy Kirk will push the narrative rightward and also remove Fuentes major competitor for the minds (and wallets) of impressionable young men. But as noted above there are dozens of different edgy right-wing-nihilist groups that fetishise violence and the only thing they hate more than minorities and the LGBTQ+ are each other. Just like both Trump shooters were weird little guys, my money is that this guy is too.
I think we should just not bother to talk further about the guy. He had a squalid little life and a squalid little death. I suppose it’s tragic, but given the daily butcher’s bill paid in America for the Second Amendment, I think it’s unfortunate that we’re spending any time at all thinking about this useless skin-tag instead of actual innocent victims of violence. Personally, in the event that any of the right-wing-leaners in my life bring him up again, I’m just going to ask them if they know the names of any of the other people shot at schools that day, and what opinions they have about those. If they’re only concerned with this one school shooting, I think I can just disregard any concerns they have about violence as disingenuous and self-serving.
Middle Tennessee State University dean fired over Kirk comments
Matthew Dowd’s firing begins flood of people facing consequences for their comments on Kirk’s death
Well, OK.
I have empathy but I won’t waste any on Charlie Kirk.
He is dead. Good.
He was just another Alex Jones.
Spreading hate, violence, and lies for money.
He never had an original or worthwhile thought in his life.
That was my eulogy for Charlie Kirk. You could put it on his grave stone.
Of course, he was a horrible person. He tried very hard to be one.
.1 He once said Blacks were better off as slaves. He said that women should never have gained the right to vote. He hated everyone but a few fundie white males.
.2. He was also rather stupid.
He never had an original thought in his life.
He just repeated the common hates of the right wing christofascists over and over again.
A parrot or an AI could have done the same thing.
Great writeup here:
https://aftermath.site/charlie-kirk-death-political-violence-new-york-times-eulogy
Empathy, derived from the Greek, is actually a new word that only became common in the early 20th century. See Google for details. But the Bible claims God is merciful. just, and compassionate. And commands we be likewise. Which amounts to the same thing.
#10 and #15: That black shirt portrayed an eagle over the flag, not a weapon. It was identified as a Veterans Support group shirt.
“we can disagree with someone and not wish for their death”
Sure, but that ship sailed when the fucking fascists started wishing for my death
If he didn’t want to get shot they should have respected other people’s lives
@10, 15, 22
Several images of the T-shirt
It does indeed appear to be an eagle in front of the US flag, with white and yellow text proclaiming “Land of the Free” and “Home of the Brave” or something similar.
When the rule of law is dismantled before your eyes, and guys like Kirk hold “civil discourse” about how you should be killed or subjugated, eventually people are going to go into violent self defence mode.
I hate that there are so many news reports painting Charlie as into civil discourse, as if all he was arguing was the choice of pizza toppings.
I’m just going to point out again: it seems very unlikely to me that Kirk was killed because he had hateful beliefs. Recent history suggests it is much more likely that he was killed by someone who didn’t find his beliefs hateful enough. He may have died because he associated with hateful people, rather than because he was himself hate-filled.
Leftists don’t ‘own’ Kirk’s death, even if one of us killed him. But we sure as hell don’t ‘own’ it if he was killed by some fascist internet-sewer dwelling online weirdo as a part of some esoteric grudge. Remember: both of Trump’s would-be assassins were longtime republicans with extreme views.