The murder of Kirk is a dreadful and abhorrent act of violence. Period. But the politicization of it and the beatification of Kirk by Trump and his followers is appalling, however anticipated it was. Kirk was not a politician, certainly not an elected one, but he was an effective communicator. Unfortunately, he generally communicated some pretty unwholesome opinions, ranging from transphobia, extreme anti gay rhetoric and criminalisation of abortion in virtually every instance (comparing it to the Holocaust), to being an advocate of the Great Replacement Theory. He was no MLK, that's for certain!
He wasn't even an effective communicator, judging by how he got dogwalked at the Cambridge Union a few months ago That's the thing with Turning Point: their main faces are utterly dogshit communicators, best summed up by Candace Owens' "Hitler wanted to Make Germany Great Again" comment at a TPUK event Says it all that he tagged along for VD Jance's trip to Greenland a few months ago, too
He called Martin Luther King Jr, "awful". "He's not a good person. He said one good thing he actually didn't believe." "We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s." He did call on the Department of Justice to release all of their files related to Epstein, though. Just happened recently, actually...
please log in to view this image I'm sure all the conspiracy guys are going to be all over this one, right? Right?
He was - at least to millions of gullible US youth. If he wasn't then Trump most likely wouldn't be in the White House. But audiences outside the States are probably more challenging.
And there we see 'Western Values' One Charlie Kirk is worth more than 60,000 Palestinians. 45,000 gun deaths on average every year in the US of A 24 in the UK, times that by 6 to roughly equal relative populations 144. That might be a clue that something is wrong in the Land of the Free where you very much need to be brave. 44,000+ deaths is apparently a price worth paying to preserve the right of gun ownership.
Brazil have sentenced Jair Bolsonaro to 27 (and a bit) years in jail for trying to orchestrate a coup Hey, America, want to give that a try?
Jim Jeffries, an Australian stand up, on gun laws in the US is some of the best stuff that I've ever heard. The problem with the gun lobby... ....no sense of humour.
It looks like Charlie Kirk's shooter was one of their own. Tyler Robinson was recognised by his pastor. They appear to be Mormons. The pastor told his dad, who is a 27-year veteran of their sheriffs department. His son confessed and they handed him in. The Mail, of all papers, has a bunch of photos of Robinson and his family. Lots of guns, lots of Trump, lots of 'Merica. He literally wore a Trump Halloween costume in 2017. please log in to view this image None of this is definitive, of course. I'm sure more information will come out over time. People have been scouring his mum's social media and it's family + guns for years. Reading some more and he was definitely into far-right online circles.
I'm going to put this here, but it's sort of politics and football. Not sure who scheduled tomorrow's activities, but they slipped up. Tommy Robinson's rally is in London starting at 11am. Every Premier League London club is also playing in London. I highly doubt that this is a coincidence. Charlton also host Millwall at 12.30pm. Good luck to any police having to deal with this ****. Enjoy the overtime.
The ****er's an online edgelord who wrote memes on his bullet casings. The one that killed Kirk had a furry roleplaying reference. Two others had references to games, specifically Helldivers 2 and Hearts of Iron 4. The last said, "If you read this then you're gay LMAO". There's a lot of talk about Kirk and Nick Fuentes' followers doing the rounds. Groypers. Online trolling neo-Nazis that are heavily into meme culture. We'll see how this plays out.
Sums up BBC Verify that the bloke who set it up is confidently telling people he has no idea what he is talking about ↑ → ↓↓↓ is a Helldivers 2 reference please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
Here is a good example from the editor of The National in Scotland. 'I remember learning about Peter Mandelson's connections with Jeffrey Epstein in 2019. An episode of Channel 4's Dispatches reported – in great detail – how the pair were close friends, and even reportedly continued to have business dealings as Epstein served time for sex offences. I recall very clearly the image of Peter Mandelson shopping with the child trafficker in the Virgin Islands, Epstein leaning over a table approvingly as his friend tried on a new belt. A few years later, I'm sure I also read about how an internal JP Morgan report from 2019 detailed the pair's close relationship – including how Epstein referred to Mandelson as "Petie" and allowed the Labour peer to stay at his Manhattan property while he was in prison for soliciting prostitution from a minor. It was therefore very surprising for my colleagues and I when Peter Mandelson was appointed as the UK's new ambassador to the US in the new Labour Government last year. please log in to view this image In the time since, we have reported on stories about Mandelson's links to Epstein. That includes him telling a journalist from the FT to "f*** off" for asking about Epstein, and how he apparently regretted his relationship with the notorious child trafficker. You will not be surprised to learn that our small team based here in Glasgow does not have close links with the British establishment, or the world of American financial services, and thus uncovering new materials about Mandelson and Epstein's relationship has not been a likely scenario for us. Our reporters have not had opportunities to address Mandelson face-to-face. But what about the well-connected cliques of London's biggest newspapers, who all suddenly found the ability to take down Mandelson with newly published emails and details this week? Besides a small handful of journalists for the likes of Channel 4, the FT and Novara Media, few with access to Mandelson seem to have challenged him on his connections in the past year. Why is that? It seems it would have been a relatively easy story to score for a journalist with the right sources, given the speed at which multiple outlets managed to get their hands on these emails in the wake of the "birthday book" publication this week. It really has been incredible to witness the sudden determination to publicise Mandelson's connections from the right-leaning media ... once it was possible to strike a solid blow on Keir Starmer with the information. please log in to view this image It reminds me of the sudden toppling of Boris Johnson over so-called new partygate information from the media, many of whom, it is reasonable to assume, knew about what was going on long before the infamous pictures and details made the front pages. The whole saga demonstrates the murky world of British political journalism. Damaging stories only become useful when the time is right, and the motivation is there to expose the person in question. Starmer should be under serious scrutiny over his judgement in this case. But why is it only happening now? Why is Fleet Street suddenly able to dedicate all resources to uncovering the latest sordid correspondence between Epstein and Mandelson? Where has this energy been? The situation poses many questions for us regarding the wider operations of the media. Who gets to hold sensitive information, and who gets to decide how, and when, it is used? When does a story truly become news? I will leave it up to you to ponder those questions as we observe the inevitable fall-out for Starmer in the coming days.' please log in to view this image
My own observation is that wherever I go in the world, the Values of ordinary people are pretty much the same. What the handful of people who control the media and the message say and want is an issue where it differs from this but I don’t think Values differ in different parts of the world.
