Thread 24715156

Books to teach leftists to use their words?

On one hand I think murder is bad but on the other I'd be absolutely laughing my my ass off if Hasan Piker was shot to death in public

>>24715156 (OP)
read that as "No Shitting Please" with some jeet seething on the cover being forced to use a toilet instead of his favorite shitting street

>>24715176
I have found myelf disgusted at those mocking and celebrating his death, though I did not consider myself a fan of Kirk's or the shabbos goy neo-conservatives at large; until I saw videos of him recently acknowledging the role of the Jew in all anti-white movements, and openly questioning Israel. I am now led to believe that Mossad were in fact responsible for his assassination. But put it like this and I actually do understand that response from leftists. I would find it so so funny and would genuinely laugh so hard to see Hasan meet a similar end. Though I think it has more to do with his smug attitude and arrogant personality than his views per-se, although I hate him for that also. But Hasan also does not have children or a loving wife, which makes the Kirk situation all the more sad and tragic.

>>24716324
I am a rightoid but I find all the handwringing about le evil left so stupid. /pol/ gloats over literal children dying all the time

>>24716327
>how are we doing today, fellow magachuds? great weather to bag a 50 pointer and load it up into the back of our g-150 truck, am i right?

>>24716334
I don't see what's so objectionable about my post.

>>24716334
nta but this doesn't make you look cynically wise, it makes you look like a disingenuous faggot at best and a total retard at worst. now go ahead and get upset and call me a tranny, or a joo, or a brownoid, or or or

>>24716324
He was to the last every bit as much of a shabbos goy as he could get away with. If he had to give ground on select instances this is just proof that we need to keep pushing our rhetoric.

>>24716327
Also a rightoid (or would be classified as one) and while I don‘t care about Charlie Kirk there‘s something about the manner in which leftoids go about this which ruins the fact that this was at first a funny instance of terminal American political brainrot. The self-appointed moral sanctimony leveled against somebody not being whatever brand of egalitarianism as a singular moral axis they picked up from Netflix or whatever—and the self satisfaction in their own presumed edginess—is just another tiresome instance of a large swath of society so pacified that it can only stew in glee at ostensibly random misfortune to offset its own cowardice. It‘s exactly what Nietzsche talked about as slave morality only with neoliberal sensibility superceding Christianity.

>>24715176
You need to understand that it's one side against the other now (has been for a long time, the right just wasn't paying attention). There will be no moralising over actions, just a long violent fight for hegemony.

>>24716355
Why are y'all killing people for talking?

>>24716369
>The self-appointed moral sanctimony leveled against somebody not being whatever brand of egalitarianism
You have to admit it is extremely fucking funny that Kirk said school shootings were the price for an unrestricted second amendment, and was killed in a school shooting

>>24715156 (OP)
>masculinity-praising gas-the-kikes righttards when their enemies use violence against them

>>24716373
Right wing terrorists have shot up places too lol. There have been several "I'm about the start the race war now!!" shootings. There have also been lefty political leaders shot. You people have the memory of guppies.

I don't even know if this is more common than it used to be. JFK, RFK, MLK, etc. They even shot Huey Long.

>>24716400
>national socialists
>libertarians (anarchists with a drawl)
>"right wing"

Call me when a monarchist or bushstan shoots up a place.

You animals have constantly been in the news for your heinous use of violence.
Luckily even reddit, judging by the comments, seems to be turning against you.
Promising stuff.

>>24716377
Good question

>>24715156 (OP)
If you have any kind of revolutionary philosophy, you can't renounce political violence and expect to succeed. The strange thing is that Charlie Kirk is a nobody. If this wasn't an op and the shooter is some kind of genuine radical, why go for a pundit instead of someone who wields actual power?

>>24716424
>The strange thing is that Charlie Kirk is a nobody
We're on day 2 of a national/international news cycle about this, anon. I think he was a retard but he wasn't a nobody

>>24716334
Retarded. Didn't engage with what he said just accused him of pretending to be a right-winger. Not everyone is the same or has the exact same cookie-cutter views no matter which ideology they subscribe to (with the exception of the contemporary left, they are literally not allowed to express views outside of the party line)

>>24716424
>revolutionary philosophy
It's called "christianity". It has been around the world for approximately 1992 years.

>>24716424
Something to be said of the viability of a target being in its attainability. He was literally doing the college campus table at the quad come debate me schtick. getting his throat ripped out with a bullet is the most relevant thing that's happened to him since biden got elected. Me and the other brain dead bloodthirsty lefties were joking that it was a r/tpusa mod who wanted to make their subreddit great again but we'll never know because he's gone.

>>24716424
>umm, killing this rando pundit with no power makes us look bad
>it was a falseflag psyop
no, little baby, leftoids are just deranged

>>24715156 (OP)
No books for that, there is only physical removal.

>>24716487
The subversion instinct works for Jews but it‘s too alien to Whites.

>>24716515
I may be a casual observer, but hitting a neck from 600ft seems beyond the abilities of an SJW barista reddit mod who was upset at his opinions on trannies. If I'm wrong, then it's total tranny victory

>>24716400
MLK is the only one of those which can be reasonably termed a right-winger and the smart money there is on FBI. Long was shot by a jew for fuck‘s sake.

>>24716537
nta but gunfag here. it's both easier and harder to hit a target the size of a dinner plate (kek) at that distance than you think. Easier than you think in the sense that you don't need super special black ops call of duty military training, you just need a bit of practice time at the range. Also makes it easier if you have an optic which I think has been confirmed. Harder than you think in the sense that you do have to actually practice a bit, it's not a shot that someone with zero firearms experience could make. From what I've seen, they were between 100-200 yards away, bolt-action rifle (probably some kind of hunting gear, no clue what caliber), plus optic, no or little wind, and the shot itself makes me think they were aiming for his head but misjudged the drop. Probably zeroed their rifle at 100 yards prior.
>tl;dr; beyond the abilities of a SJW barista reddit mod, but something a SJW barista reddit mod could do if sufficiently motivated and somewhat practiced

>>24716550
>something a SJW barista reddit mod could do if sufficiently motivated and somewhat practiced
See thats the thing I don't think a SJW barista reddit mod would be sufficiently motivated in anything, much less in pulling off a shooting and evading capture. I still think it was some schizo rightoid with crazy politics that we don't know yet.

>>24716378
>live and die according to your principles
yes very funny, haha hehe hoho, a family man killed for speaking, what a knee-slapper

>>24716587
the ammo apparently had pro-tranny engravings but whatever helps you cope

>>24716424
It sends a message
>say what we want or we kill you
That's what all the gloating is about, controlling thoughts and words
Ironically a fascist tactic

>>24716614
The FBI is grasping at straws and going on a fishing expedition at the moment, rapidly apprehending and releasing random people, struggling to control the narrative. They can't find the shooter, look remarkably incompetant, and may well have planted evidence to get things back on track

>>24716424
The difference between dock worker commies starving for bread and upper-middle-class larping faggots (you, and the rest of those like you ITT) who are bored and want to paint a vision of a cathartic revolution with the blood of workers - is that genuine communists wait for the state to commit the violence first in a public manner, like shooting up a protest.

Of course, dopamine deprived perpetual students don't actually have any stakes, or families to take care of (like the genuine communists of old). All they want is stimulation, now RIGHT NOW! To feel something. Obviously this plays out very poorly as far as optics are concerned, as we are seeing currently.

I love how all /pol/niggers in this thread act like it's 100% confirmed the attacker is a leftoid, as if all the other previous attackers over the last few years were not either rightoids or mentally ill retards.

>>24716683
>they were mentally ill!

>>24716651
>genuine communists wait for the state to commit the violence first in a public manner, like shooting up a protest.
You mean wait for them to do it again? Such incidents are not unprecedented in American history, as I'm sure you know.

>>24716687
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Matthew_Crooks

>On January 20, 2021, when he was 17, he donated $15 to the Progressive Turnout Project, a liberal voter turnout group, through the Democratic Party donation platform ActBlue. His donation was made on the same day that President Biden was sworn into office. According to the Progressive Turnout Project, he made the donation in response to an email about "tuning into" the inauguration. He unsubscribed from the group's mailing list in 2022.

>Crooks had been registered to vote since September 2021, when he turned 18. He registered as a Republican,[54] and he voted only once (in the 2022 midterm elections).

>After the shooting, the FBI uncovered a social media account "believed to be associated with the shooter" with about 700 comments from 2019 to 2020. A public statement from FBI deputy director Paul Abbate described Crooks' activity on social networking services as including comments that "appear to reflect antisemitic and anti-immigration themes" and "espouse political violence".

>IT'S NOT A RETARD WITH INCOHERENT POLITICS. IT'S LE COMMIES!!!11!!

>>24716611
Incapable of recognising that something can be funny and tragic at the same time. Sub-90 IQ. You don't belong on this board friendo.

>>24716611
>how dare you he had a family
kek

>>24716651
>(you, and the rest of those like you ITT)
this

>random rightoid gets popped
>the "dude you're such a snowflake" crowd loses their minds

>tens of thousands of Palestinians are massacred, raped, and tortured
>lel dumb sand niggers

Will never feel empathy for the death of rightoids

>>24716714
>can't tell the difference between a warzone and an assassination at a college campus
>uses it to project his own selective empathy and justify violence
Retard

>>24715176
>murder is bad
But not when its leftists and normalfags, they proven that their life has absolutely zero value when they took experimental rushed genetherapy devoloped using lmm for goddamned flu.

>>24716706
>friendo
And neither are you.

>>24716895
>justify violence
It's just the price we pay for the 2nd amendment anon, no need to get upset

>>24716914
>can't tell the difference between a warzone and an assassination at a college campus
>uses it to project his own selective empathy and justify violence
>parrots other people in a way that demonstrates he can't think in terms of abstraction
Retard.

>>24716965
>selective empathy
That's a made-up New Age word, anon. It's okay, deep breaths

>>24716914
You are stupid so I will only copypaste what I wrote somewhere else, not worth any more time.

The guy I was replying to:
>The victim said that victims like himself are preferable to infringing on gun rights. People aren't saying the murder is justified, people are saying that by Charlie's own logic his death is a necessary consequence of gun ownership.

My response:
>No. It's a potential risk, that is to say, contingent, and contingency is opposite to necessity. This is like celebrating that someone dies in a car accident because we all desire or tolerate the use of cars "ahhh your mother died in a car accident? that's too bad, unfortunately, you support the use of cars".
>Moreover, the most important thing is that he has been killed, and not the weapon to kill him. If the murderer hadn't had a gun, there is a high chance that he would have killed him anyway with a knife or a handmade weapon, like the one used to kill Shinzo Abe.

>>24716995
>This is like celebrating that someone dies in a car accident because we all desire or tolerate the use of cars "ahhh your mother died in a car accident? that's too bad, unfortunately, you support the use of cars".
It's so cute you thought this was a good rebuttal. This metaphor would work if the you [kirk] here had said many things along the lines of "car deaths are the price we pay to have a society with cars" whenever someone who had a relative who died in a car crash said there should be speed limits on the road. He got exactly what he advocated for, but like all conservatives, he never thought it would happen to him KEK
>if the murderer hadn't had a gun there is a high chance he would've killed him anyway with a knife
No, he wouldn't have gotten close due to Kirk's security
>or a handmade weapon like the one used to kill shinzo abe
Which only worked because the guy was able to get within spitting distance of him, which Kirk's shooter wouldn't have been able to do due to Kirk's security
>not worth any more time
Whenever you people start losing you act like you were always above playing. So predictable!

>>24716614
Are trannies not "schizo rightoids" that try to game the system by joining the other side – both women and "the left". They would be incels and nerds otherwise, but now all their masculine geek culture gets to speak as if from "feminine spaces" (the "terfs" were right). So cool to be arming themselves, the trannies. And of course you couldn't imagine it from a "husstuss" (socalled), a former sensitive little gay boy; but an agp loser, mais oui!

>>24717014
God you sound so condescending, you sound like a elementary school teacher telling the kids they have to eat their vegetables, like a priest telling you to pray every night, ultimately, like a modern day prude, which is what you retards are, incapable of independent thought and action.

>This metaphor would work if the you [kirk] here had said many things along the lines of "car deaths are the price we pay to have a society with cars"

Nobody says that because we all accept that fact implicitly, there's no debate around that, unlike with guns. If we understand the use of cars as a right, then we implicitly accept car accidents as an undesired contingency, and we may suggests some measures to reduce car accidents, but we never question the right to own and use a car. For Charlie Kirk it was the same with guns, even if you don't agree with him; for him, gun ownership is a right, and we may take action to reduce school shootings or whatever but school shootings would never make him question the right to own guns. Essentially, your shitty argument implies that no one can understand something as a right and fight and argue for it if that right is not already ingrained by a majority of people.

Pick a fucking book and read about ethical philosophy, retard, and I say that as an European libertarian (not American, I see all this bullshit with a whole another external perspective) who is not convinced of gun ownership. Get fucked and go talk that way to your childish leftist friends.

>>24715220
Lmao

>>24716377
Glowies hate free speech

>>24716971
>can't tell the difference between a warzone and an assassination at a college campus
>uses it to project his own selective empathy and justify violence
>parrots other people in a way that demonstrates he can't think in terms of abstraction
>can't understand basic concepts
>projects his seethe
Retard.

>>24716424
>If you have any kind of revolutionary philosophy, you can't renounce political violence and expect to succeed.
Facts, this exact point outs women pearl clutchers and fags/pacifists for what they are, impotent moralizers who will bow to whoever ends up coming to power after the current regime collapses/gets revolutionized. This is especially apparent with gun grabbing women who hate trump, stupid fools who cant think two steps ahead of themselves on the matter of mass disarming by the same federal forces they accuse of being literally Hitler 2.0. All these people would have been jubilant if Trump didn't move his head last year but are such cowards deep down they pretend otherwise.
>The strange thing is that Charlie Kirk is a nobody. If this wasn't an op and the shooter is some kind of genuine radical, why go for a pundit instead of someone who wields actual power?
Shooter was either a deranged tranny or a giga-groyper, or a glowie who did it to sow more division and punish kirk for bringing attention to epstein/israel matters.

All the le BASED “might makes right” BAPniggers talk a big game until shit actually gets real. They seriously deluded themselves into thinking that liberals were incapable of violence.

>>24715156 (OP)
What a stupid thread

>>24717063
>Shooter was either a deranged tranny or a giga-groyper
Those are the same thing thougheverbeit

>>24717052
>you sound just like my mommy I MEAN MY TEACHER I mean my daddy I MEAN MY PRIEST so you're wrong
You've seen bluehaired twitter trannies call this "tone policing" and laughed because you didn't think that existed, haven't you
>there's no debate around the car metaphor
>but guns different okay!!!
>they're different because... he said it was a right so that's different!
We accept all kinds of limitations on all kinds of rights all the time for the public good. You either know this, in which case you're a disingenuous tard and you know it, or you forgot about this, in which case you should stop pretending to be smart on the internet

imagine radicalising millions over some centrist controlled opposition goyservative
why are wingcucks so retarded

>>24716378
It wasn't a school shooting though, it was a political assassination.
It's not ironic or poetic or schaffenfreudic or whatever, and no, I don't think people who believe in the right to bear arms should be publicly assassinated.
>>24716369
>there‘s something about the manner in which leftoids go about this which ruins the fact that this was at first a funny instance of terminal American political brainrot
It probably has something to do with him being a milequist cuckservative, and every gay race communist on the planet acting like they just took out Adolf Hitler.
Normalfags are starting to notice that leftists actively want them dead in real life.

>>24716683
100% of the people celebrating his death are leftytroons, so it's a pretty safe bet it was a leftytroon.

>>24717115
>You've seen bluehaired twitter trannies call this "tone policing" and laughed because you didn't think that existed, haven't you

I didn't know the very syntagma of "tone policing" until you have mentioned it right now. I don't use twitter, I dont use instagram, nor facebook, I just use youtube and 4chan. But good try, you are showing that you are a chronically online twitter user.

>MY TEACHER, MY PRIEST

I guest you are doing some sort of psychoanalysis by which the fact that I'm pointing out your smug wojak condescending tone and compare it to a priest means that I've been fingered by a priest or something. Not the case, but, again, good try, the FBI might hire you, maybe you even catch who the shooter is.

>>24717115
>We accept all kinds of limitations on all kinds of rights all the time for the public good.

I know it's the case, but that's loosely related to the matter. Online leftists' main argument revolves around the fact that, as Charlie Kirk died because of something whose implications included the death of innocent people, implications he was are of, his supporters have to swallow it up and not complain nor mourn his death. That's, again, stupid. The right to use your car is very tightened by law, yet everyone would understand that someone dying in a car accident is a tragedy even if he publicly acknowledged car accidents as a collateral effect to accept if we want to make use of our right. From Charlie Kirk's perspective, I repeat, from Charlie Kirk's perspective, it was the same with guns, as he condemned school shootings but thought that the right to defend oneself is more important, but that does not mean that he considered school shootings a necessary consequence to ignore, for him it was a contingent consequence like a car accident that we have to accept and work in order to reduce them to the minimal extent, and this is the case regardless of how limited or unlimited gun ownership rights are in the US. And I stress so much "for him" because, since you are fallacious retards, you are not judging the criminal act itself but its victim and his way of thinking, and if you are going to do that, at least have a minimal trace of dignity by telling apart what was the a priori right for him and what were the undesired collateral consequences to tackle. The key mistake and core of you leftists' moral disorientation is that you don't differentiate between intentions and consequences, most of you are vulgar, crass consequentialists who can't even conceive deontologism, that, perhaps, it's respectable to think there have to be some fundamental rights and allow evil as a collateral consequence to coexist with a greater good, without judging that allowance as evil itself.

But I understand, let's regulate society YOUR way, let's give everyone the same treatment, let's equate intentions with consequences for all of us. The only reasonable thing to do, then, is to obliterate planet Earth to oblivion, to erase humanity so that we maximize safety over freedom by accepting the total limitation of rights, as freedom always leaves room for injustice and violence to happen. Who else to blame apart from humanity for commiting the irredeemable sin of living and letting us to act the wrong way? Since advocating for gun ownership and letting the possibility to misuse them is a sin whose deadly punishment must be cheered and celebrated by the masses (or at least not mourned), let's ban guns, of course, but not only guns but also cars, eating, and breathing, as all of those things allow wrongdoers to incur wrongdoing. The highest "public good", as you call it, is the total annihilation of mankind.

>>24717187
>no argument
Thanks for not pretending this go-round, happy I was worth your time after all
>>24717222
>trips
Checked.
>his supporters have to swallow it up and not complain nor mourn his death
That's pretty much what he told his supporters to do when other people were killed. But since it's him, it's different, because things are always different to the chud when they affect the chud
>that does not mean that he considered school shootings a necessary consequence to ignore, for him it was a contingent consequence like a car accident that we have to accept
This would be a killer argument if Kirk hadn't incessantly advocated for more guns and dismissed calls for gun regulations. This was a classic Kirk move -- paint a policy decision (America's gargantuan rate of gun violence compared to the first world) as an inevitable consequence of existence itself, and when someone pointed out that, for example, restricting the sale of certain kinds of firearms would lower the gun death rate, he'd accuse them of "emotional hijacking" or similar and handwave them away. You fell for it, sorry
>The key mistake and core of you leftists' moral disorientation is [pseudointellectual sperging about ethics]
You fell for an entertainer's rhetoric and you're lecturing me about philosophy kek
>the only reasonable thing to do... is to erase humanity so that we maximize safety over freedom by accepting the total limitation of rights
Back to pretending like we don't agree to accept all kinds of limitations in all sorts of degrees of intensity on all kinds of rights all the time. This is exactly the kind of thing Kirk used to do, it's like he never got shot at all
>let's ban guns, of course, but not only guns but also cars, eating, and breathing, as all of those things allow wrongdoers to incur wrongdoing
In my left hand I have a machine designed to kill a roomful of people in less than 5 seconds. In my right hand I have a ham sandwich. You are very intelligent, so you know these two things are directly comparable and in fact the same thing

>>24715156 (OP)
>Please
This is not how you achieve your desired state of affairs.
Strength is the only way to communicate that violence is not an acceptable form of discourse.

>>24716327
>/pol/ gloats over literal children dying
So you mean all the disgusting evil leftists that have raided the site incessantly after 2016 when they swore an oath to never let a cartoon frog steal the election again?

>>24717317
>when we cheer kids dying it's heckin based shitposting
>NO YOU CAN'T POINT OUT THAT WE DO THAT THAT'S NOT REAL THAT'S A FALSE FLAG THAT'S MADE UP THAT'S FAKE NEWS
/pol/ isn't sending their best

>>24717323
>evil leftist desperately whines that he's not allowed to cheer dying kids or fathers
Utterly mindbroken evil faggot.

>>24717326
>realizes he's wrong, shifts the topic to something completely different
Every single one of you pulls the exact same moves and every single one of you thinks you're some kind of intellectual maverick
>um ackshually that's what you sai
Are you gonna do the /pol/ thing where you act like I was describing leftists and not ridiculing you next

>>24717273
If your principle is that Kirk did nothing to restrict gun distribution so he deserved to get killed by a gun, then its valid to mock you when you die in a car crash because you believed it's still ultimately worth it to have cars despite the deaths. I know lefoids don't have actual consistent principles so this is hard to understand, but at least try to engage the argument

Online leftists seem to have this score card in their head, dating back to whenever is convenient to them.

Whenever a tranny is misgendered, it’s one point against. He kills himself, that’s down 10 points. An election loss? 200 points. The opponent enacting any policy against them? 1,000 points.

They play catch up by beating up women, murdering kids and random conservatives, completely aware that they are not only losing more points, but have ejected themselves from the game itself.

Why keep score, why pretend play? Are you that weak and cowardly that you still must cling to intellectual and moral realm and go to bat for empty words and upvotes?

Admit you want total violence. Violence and power.

why do wingcucks do the thing where they pretend their ideologies aren't violent and they don't cheer the death of their perceived enemies

>>24717328
You're literally the evil fucking leftist who gloats when anyone gets murdered saying "N-NUH UH IT'S THE MEANIES ON POL". The ones who gloat when children are murdered are YOU LEFTIST TRASH.

Jesus christ, you could not be more fucking evil. I would be tolerant and peaceful to you but you deserve to be eradicated for what you have done and continue to do. That is justice.

Leftists are all getting fired lol

>>24717351
They're calling it the least likely to be renewed in 2026 domain name of all time

>>24717181
Why exactly should I not call for the death of someone who wants to rob me ("taxation") and put me in a cage if I don't obey his made up "laws" that I never agreed to? Leftists have the right idea.

>>24716651
I'd argue that was even the case during Kent State in 1970 but that's forbidden viewpoint to have where I live. Just a stone's throw from there.

>>24716895
>>can't tell the difference between a warzone and an assassination at a college campus
This counts as selective empathy too you idiot

>>24717356
I like your optimism that all leftists will be exterminated in the next three months and the domain name will no longer be needed.

>>24716696
Sounds like an average low information voter with unrestricted internet access

>>24717378
As opposed to you who wallow in shit.

>>24717378
Well, which is it: day of the rope now or emailing some HR lady that never checks her emails in the hopes of getting someone fired for edgy jokes? Seems strange to me to clutch pearls over people joking about political violence while also demanding further violence. Personally, I'm with picrel so I don't spend a lot of time tattling on people over jokes

i feel bad for his family. kirk himself was a shit head but he was also quite young. he might have matured and realised how much of an unhelpful pseud he was eventually. the whole thing is just going to add more fuel to the fire

>>24717402
I believe in destroying the lives of leftists by any and all means.

>>24715156 (OP)
Why am I supposed to feel bad for someone who deliberately lied about the genocide on a people, merely for some quick good goy points he can later leverage in politics?

You can help by expanding it.

>>24717433
>Why am I supposed to feel bad for someone who deliberately lied about the genocide on a people,
I keep seeing this, despite it being an established fact that Mr. Kirk was an outspoken critic of Israel and Israeli foreign policy. Concern trolling or deliberate forum sliding?

>>24717449
It's exactly what he was talking about when he said leftists try to use empathy as a weapon.
None of them give a shit about sandniggers on the opposite side of the planet, they're just stringing together whatever words they think will make you tolerate their latest assassination.

>>24717405
I feel slightly bad too but it’s alright, he did his job by having children and he left more of a mark than most men. It’s not a bad position to go out in. His family will probably be set too. Slightly worried about those kids seeing such a thing but hopefully they’ll grow up fine.

>>24717449
>it being an established fact that Mr. Kirk was an outspoken critic of Israel and Israeli foreign policy

Here's some of his tweets, of which I will be posting more until you drop your nonsense claim:
>''No, Israel is not starving Gazans.''
>''The deaths of women and children in Gaza are the fault of hamas.''

I'll keep my sympathy for people who suffer from the actions of people like him.

>>24717485
Full tweet:

Yesterday, Hamas tried to spark a holy war by claiming Israel bombed a hospital and killed 500 people. Now, it's increasingly clear that

1) It was a rocket, not a bomb
2) It was fired from Gaza, not Israel and not from a jet
3) The actual hospital is still standing, and
4) There is no proof of a massive 500-person death toll

When you make your rockets out of pillaged EU-funded water pipes, don't be surprised when some of them drop out of the sky and blow up your own people.

The question is, why did so much of the world immediate take HAMAS's word for it?

>>24717487
Based fuck Abrahamics and their gay holy wars I don’t care.

>>24717449
Not going to cry for someone like him after his insults on the Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him), the killings of palestinians, slavery and all the racist comments he made

>>24717537
what does this image mean genuine question

>>24717501
gazans are chuds who deserve to die for being bigots

>>24717543
They‘ve got a ways to go until reaching the Iranaryan position of legally forcefemming anyone a little fruity until it‘s unquestionably straight to put your dick in there, but it‘s a work in progress.

>>24717342
You sperged out because someone reminded you that you cheer when kids die lmao
>you deserve to be heckin eradicated!!1!!
You'll do nothing

>>24717335
>missed the point entirely
I'd almost prefer it if you went back to pretending to be smart. Let me explain it to you as if you were a small child. I can be your daddy -- sorry, I mean teacher, sorry -- and you can be the student. If I built a career out of traveling around the country and telling people "car crashes are the price we pay for having cars, there is nothing at all we can do about cars crashing, nothing whatsoever, nothing at all, and if you think there is something we can do then you're an idiot," and I dismissed car crash victims' families who suggested things like 'speed limits' or 'stop signs' or 'merge lanes' as libtards trying to emotionally manipulate carchads, and then I died in a car accident because a speeder blew through an intersection without a stop sign, then yes, it would be valid to mock me. This is exactly what happened to Charlie Kirk with guns. You are going to read this, realize I'm right, and get very, very upset. Please select your next response from the following options
>oh yeah? oh yeah? well you're a TRANNY
>oh yeah? oh yeah? well you're a JOO
>oh yeah? oh yeah? well you're a BROWNOID
>oh yeah? oh yeah? well you're a WOMAN
>oh yeah? oh yeah? well I'm gonna KILL YOU

>>24717539
nta but I'll give you a genuine answer. some scientists did a study where they tried to figure out where different people placed their outermost sphere of moral concern -- ie, what's the furthest thing from them that they cared about. they found a bunch of correlations, and one of them they found was that left-wingers cared about things very distant from themselves, like wild animals, and right-wingers mostly cared about their families, ie the things closest to them. the scientists made a heat map of concentric circles to visualize the data, with "myself" at the center and some shit like "space rocks in another galaxy" at the very rim.

/pol/tards seized on this and went "ha! this proves leftoids don't care about their own families" but that isn't what the study said. (A /pol/tard will read that and get very upset, watch.) The rings are inclusive, not exclusive, meaning that the left-wingers in the study cared about everything from wild animals down to domesticated animals down to pets down to strangers down to you get the picture, while right-wingers cared about their families and themselves and not much else. (can't recall what the actual rings were but just giving you the general thrust.)

>>24717440
>four people allegedly fired
Kirk status: AVENGED

>>24717666
>leftist gets literal satanic digits
Can't make this stuff up lmao.
Anyways, nice gish galloping. Of course you falsely liken it to a random car crash as opposed to saying
>if he advocated for car ownership then someone deliberately ran him over with a car then he would deserve mockery
because that would be an honest analogy but you "people" are incapable of arguing in good faith and you realize how deranged you would sound if you flat out just admitted you want mass graves

>>24717788
>>24717666
>I got trips
Checking myself.
>gish gallop!!!! gun on purpose car accident that's different!
This is the problem with arguing with retards. You have to make everything very clear and very simple or they get confused and that makes them mad. Intention isn't the issue at hand here; the issue at hand in the analogy is that reforms like speed limits, stop signs, etc all make car crashes less likely, and when they occur in spite of those things, they're less deadly. In terms of guns, this means that bans on assault rifles (like the one Clinton did in '94) make mass shootings less likely -- way harder to shoot a dozen people with a revolver -- and when mass shootings occur in spite of assault rifle bans, they're much less likely to involve lots and lots of death. Intentionality doesn't enter into this calculus.
>but Kirk wasn't shot with an assault rifle so
The assault rifle ban referenced above is a clear, simple example to illustrate the point, and is not meant to be a complete policy solution. I'm also not suggesting that mass shootings (or shootings of any kind) would stop completely if we instituted another ban on assault rifles. Even Kirk knew that was retarded.
>but INTENTION it's about INTENTIONALITY
It's not. Read my paragraph again.
>you said calculus that means you're a utilitarian monster who [more pseud sperging]
Don't talk about things you don't understand as if you understand them, it makes you look insecure. Referring you to our earlier exchange about limiting rights where you looked like a retard so you dropped that point
>you just said that Kirk knew that was retarded so you admit he's right
No. Kirk acted as if gun legislation of basically any kind was retarded because people would shoot each other with legal/illegal guns anyway. Kirk is retarded because nobody's saying gun legislation would stop all shootings of all kinds, but lead to them happening less frequently, and be less bad when they do happen. You're retarded because you don't understand this.

>>24717273
>You fell for an entertainer's rhetoric and you're lecturing me about philosophy kek

I didn't fell for anything. I already said I'm not American, I didn't even know him before his death. But anyway you claim the right to dismiss a moral argument which I'm sure puts all of you in a compromising position to answer, it's like talking to a wall.

And, by the way, the guy who you answered to afterwards wasn't me.

>>24718063
didn't fall*

The right fantasizes about btfoing opposition the way a random troon shooter just did but they lack discipline and can therefore only vicariously experience it through watching Israel's genocidal campaign in Gaza.

>>24717383
>Gets butthurt over literal objective facts, so the dumb faggot resorts to ad hominem non-arguments. Says I'm "the low information" voter here
Top kek. I accept your concession

>>24717181
Lmao yeah as if you disingenuous niggers never do that

>>24718091
No matter how much they disagreed with them politically and religiously, I have to give it to 4chan that they valued every single Israeli life that was lost on October 7th. Big respect for that.

>>24718109
4chan, more like 4Yehudim

>>24716911
>you don't belong on this board
>and neither are you

Jesus Christ lmao

>>24717811
> Intentionality doesn't enter into this calculus.

It enters from the very moment that you are judging the victim because of his ideas that, you think, lead to certain consequences.

>>24717222
This post, again, refutes all your shitty consequentialist babble. But you didn't tackle the ethical question, nor will you do, because you are focused on the myopic "he tasted his own medicine" take, whose moral level is akin to a Disney Channel's moral at the end of an episode.

>>24717811
>Kirk is retarded because nobody's saying gun legislation would stop all shootings of all kinds
Kirk literally said being able to own guns necessitates tragic gun deaths and lefties are mocking his death on that basis, meanwhile you're now saying that lefties essentially hold the same position
>But we want to ban more guns than him so we're better! Not all guns!
We both know if the only guns you were allowed to own were handguns and he advocated for keeping handguns then he was killed with one you would still be dabbing on his grave. This is all besides the point anyway, because his 2A advocacy is just one of dozens of things leftists are using as justification for saying he deserved it when it's clear that they (probably you) love when right wing people die and will immediately pounce to mock their death which, as a modern widespread political phenomenon in the west, is uniquely left wing.

>>24717323
/pol/tards are scum.

>>24718133
>intentionality enters because it
No, it doesn't.
>consequentialist babble!
More pseud sperging. Like I said, don't talk about things you don't understand
>>24718263
>Kirk literally said being able to own guns necessitates tragic gun deaths and lefties are mocking his death on that basis, meanwhile you're now saying that lefties essentially hold the same position
>you just said that Kirk knew that was retarded so you admit he's right
Christ, you people are so predictable. No, that's not what I'm saying. You can see that here:
>Kirk acted as if gun legislation of basically any kind was retarded because people would shoot each other with legal/illegal guns anyway. Kirk is retarded because nobody's saying gun legislation would stop all shootings of all kinds, but lead to them happening less frequently, and be less bad when they do happen. You're retarded because you don't understand this.
Can you read?
>if Kirk advocated for something different than what he advocated for then things would be different!
Sure, I guess
>you're mocking his death and you love when right wing people die and you can't do that you can't that's not allowed IT'S NOT IT'S NOT ALLOWED REEEEEEEEEEEEE
You people can't play this card anymore. You could've played it a decade ago, maybe, maybe, as recently as 5 years ago, but not anymore.

>>24718277
It was probably a bad idea to shoot the guy who's job it was to convince cuckservatives to not become as right wing as us.

>>24718072
There's actually no specific person on the left that we dream of killing, because you are all equally worthless and infinitely expendable.
Meanwhile, you think the final boss of thebonly thing standing in the way of normalfags embracing gay race communism is some milequist cuckservative podcaster.

>>24718300
>actually the point is that he didn't call for the same exact nebulous restrictions that we believe in and no I won't say what those are because again I just make things up as I go and yes I will deny that lefties literally want to ban all guns and are saying that because Kirk didn't then its funny he got shot by one
>You people can't play this card anymore. You could've played it a decade ago, maybe, maybe, as recently as 5 years ago, but not anymore.
You guys or whatever pronoun makes you not murderous literally just project onto the right and use your projections as the justification for acting like nazis. You straight up admitting you do want millions dead of course reveals how insincere all your prior points were but this will be totally lost on you while you continue to claim the right, who literally and objectively do not act this way as a group, actually do and are making you do it

>>24715156 (OP)
you mean israel?

>>24718318
The whole thing is stupid because he was killed with a fudd-tier bolt action hunting rifle.
Any gun restriction that would have banned that would have effectively banned all firearms, because it doesn't get any more civilian normie tier than what he used.

>>24716377
why not?

>>24718318
>nebulous restrictions that I won't say
I gave a specific one. An assault rifle ban, modeled on the one Clinton passed in '94. Waiting periods also good. There's like half a dozen that would help.
>lefties wanna ban all guns they takin muh guns muh freedums muh gundums
Can't believe people still seriously say this lmao
>you have pronouns!
"Oh yeah? Oh yeah? Well you're a TRANNY" so predictable
>and you're projecting and shit! and you want millions dead!
Never said anything about wanting millions dead, but it's very funny you lob this at me immediately after the projection line
>the right doesn't do this!
Yes, they do, all the time, and you know it. Here's how they reacted to the attempted murder of Pelosi's husband. You are going to get upset and say that this isn't the same thing because of some retarded reason. Just go to twitter, find some right-wing accounts, and search for what they said about the MN shooting, or Pelosi, or any prominent incident where someone on the left was killed.
>>24718326
We know from the data that most shootings are crimes of passion/crimes of opportunity. Kirk might've been saved if Utah had a waiting period, because I'm guessing that the shooter decided to kill Kirk only a week or two prior to him coming to Utah. Do I know that for sure? No, I'm just speculating. But I don't see any reason to think (at least, not at this point) that the shooter was planning this for months and months. A waiting period would've meant that he wouldn't have received the gun in time to kill Kirk.
>inb4 he would've just gotten it from a criminal meme
Can you, specifically you, get a gun from a criminal? Like, right now. If I gave you a thousand bucks and told you to buy me a firearm on the black market within 24 hours, do you know someone who will commit a felony by selling you a gun? The vast majority of people don't. It's harder than you think to get a firearm like that. Besides, criminals can't wave a magic wand and have a gun appear through the power of crime. Criminals get their guns from all sorts of places, but the people they get their guns from get them from Bass Pro Shops, or Walmart, or a gun show. Make it harder for guns to enter into general circulation at the source, that leads to less criminals reselling guns because there are fewer guns, that leads to existing black-market guns becoming prohibitively expensive, that makes it much harder to get an illegal gun. Granted, you need several years of nationwide gun legislation before you start seeing large effects like this, so this wouldn't have worked for Kirk.
>so you admit gun control wouldn't have saved him so there
Like Kirk said -- here I agree with him -- there's no possible legislative scheme that will end all forms of gun violence forever. That's retarded. Like I said earlier, it's retarded to think that means we can't take steps to make gun violence less common and less deadly.

>>24718355
The right does not en masse celebrate political executions of lefties across all major social media channels while sanctimoniously mocking anyone that calls them freaks for it. No one even heard of the state representatives dying and the average conservative who did didn't relish it, but you're free to show me the thousands of tweets and reddit and instagram and facebook posts with hundreds of thousands of affirmations from rightists where this did happen. Paul Pelosi didn't die and there were a ton of shady details about the attack, and questioning the details of it while the left uses it as an opportunity to villainize the right isn't the same as lockstep mockery of assassination of a debatebro, as you know. But you're going to continue pretending like the action and the responses are equivalent without letting objective reality interfere with your carefully arranged headcannon
>no one actually wants to take guns lol get a grip lol!
>if Kirk had only said this specific restriction before dying then we wouldn't be acting this way I swear!
I know you don't even actually believe what you're saying so this is useless but I've got nothing better to do at the moment
>Never said anything about wanting millions dead
You ridiculed the idea that you're not "allowed" to "love" when right wingers die, clearly implying you do. Here's the part where you deny that before reinforcing it several lines later

>>24718355
We can start by disarming all leftists.

Just to be clear, we all know the difference between a private citizen having an opinion, and someone trying to wield the state to enforce an opinion, right?

>>24716651
>another online hamas larper
Yawn

>>24716327
You’re right but they’ll never concede

>>24718375
>the right doesn't do this!!!!
Yes, they do. I gave you an example of sitting congressmen/politicians/media figures on the right doing it and told you exactly how to find more. When that leftist anti-police activist's BF got killed, right-wing twitter made memes of him dying for weeks and weeks. As far as I know, they're still taunting her with them. But you won't think this is comparable for a retarded reason
>pelosi not the same because he didn't die they were just asking questions that's not mocking just questions teehee
Picrel is mocking. Right-wingers do this all the time; do something, get called out on it, teehee just asking questions teehee DO YOU HATE FREE SPEECH HUH JUST ASKING QUESTIONS teehee, always the same playbook
>I'm not saying it was a conspiracy but bro the pelosi attack was a conspiracy bro
Log off /pol/
>You don't even actually believe what you're saying
Yes, I do. The '94 assault weapons ban led to a gigantic drop in shooting deaths. You are retarded, so you think me saying "I would like national gun regulation akin to that, or other forms of regulation like waiting periods" is equivalent to me saying "I want to snatch every single gun of every single type out of every single person's hands"
>you think that if kirk had mentioned this one thing one time then
No, that's not what I think. You're upset and it's making you more retarded than you usually are. Go read my posts again
>You never said you wanted millions dead but have you considered that you secretly meant that you did because because because I'm upset you can't say that!!!
Okay

>>24718662
>Yes, I do. The '94 assault weapons ban led to a gigantic drop in shooting deaths
This is clearly bullshit. Homicide was already going down from a peak in 1980, and there was even a relative peak in 2001 (still during the AWB). The AWB ended in 2004, and the homicide rate has remained roughly the same ever since, so unless they all switched to knives I don't see how that checks out at all.

https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1966506669845696513/vid/avc1/1280x720/V4yu_TvB5Xt-4AHP.mp4

lmao, the guy was the perfect picture of a terminally online leftoid. if he weren't in jail, he might be posting here right now

>>24716408
>moving goalposts at the speed of sound
Rightoids are intrinsically uncivil, violent, dysgenic creatures and have no place in a functional society.
Seethe, deflect, mald and deny as hard as you want, untermensch.

Reddit is shocked and appalled, they’re talking about doubling down on therapy after seeing the vid which is omnipresent.

Major optics L for tankies. (Side note: your base isn’t steel stampers or miners anymore you retards, its chai caffe baristas and bespoke bicycle shop owners and 10th year of grad school enjoyers, graphic violence is counterproductive.)

>>24718686
Holy based. All the assassinations, all the murdering and political gangbanging is done by /us/.

>>24718662
>oh the right doesn't support assassination of leftists? Then how come they weren't appalled when Paul Pelosi was attacked by a homeless guy or whoever tf he was? And how come /pol/ was making fun of the victims in a case no one's ever heard of? HUH!?!
Smartest lefty
>My standard for gun control actually is representative of the left at large. You would know this if you weren't retarded
True, sorry
>I actually don't harbor the desire for death despite doing everything I can to justify it
Cool anything else?

>>24718621
this

>>24718672
I'm talking about mass shooting deaths, which I thought was clear from context. You're right that it didn't lead to a major drop in all shooting deaths
>>24718734
>you claim the right supports violence against the left, and yet you give two recent, prominent examples of this happening EXPLAIN
What?
>oh so you speak for every single person on the left now huh
No?
>I've decided you want to kill millions of people so you have to say sorry
What?

>>24718761
>>24718662
Why are you doing this? There can't possibly be any benefit for either of you in this. You should know that every single person reading this thinks that you're both retarded, then you should stop posting and go outside.

>>24718775
both of those are me anon and I'm doing this because I enjoy arguing

>>24718782
Oh I see. Carry on then.

>>24718621
I don't care about the difference, my opinion is literally the only one that matters

>>24718802
(You)

>>24718621
It‘s that the latter has balls.

>>24717097
Huh

>>24718693
Are these dysgenic creatures in the room with us right now? Because I guess thats what it boils down to. Its about whether someone can obtain sex is what matters in politics. Everything else is secondary.

>>24716327
I’m convinced a lot of the people gloating are shills, false flags, deranged leftists, and Feds.
I HATE that shit. I don’t gloat over dead children.
It’s trivially easy to make a controversial thread like that there that gets lots of (you)s and discredits people on the board while waging their own form of psychological warfare on anons there.