• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Charlie Kirk assassinated at Utah campus event

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trilobit said:
The page charliesmurderers.com, that collected thousands of people who had supported the assassination, has been blocked by my Swedish internet provider. I've never seen anything like it. Usually my browser warns me of some bad sites with viruses etc, but I've never ever seen my provider doing that before. Really strange.

Also, internetarchive has excluded it.

68JAhDtu9xHVSgab.png
Click to expand...
What ISP?

Bahnhof here and no problem.
 
Aesius said:
How does someone with 109 followers get such a viral reaction to their tweet? How does it get boosted enough to enter the algorithm?
Click to expand...
Elon says a lot but has a blind spot for the obvious botting on his platform. People need to start getting on his ass about it.
 
Aesius said:
How does someone with 109 followers get such a viral reaction to their tweet? How does it get boosted enough to enter the algorithm?
Click to expand...

I left Twitter when it stopped being about seeing a timeline of tweets from people I clicked "Follow" on and instead became a vessel of reactionary noise pushing "eNgaGeMeNt"
 
Trilobit said:
The page charliesmurderers.com, that collected thousands of people who had supported the assassination, has been blocked by my Swedish internet provider. I've never seen anything like it. Usually my browser warns me of some bad sites with viruses etc, but I've never ever seen my provider doing that before. Really strange.

Also, internetarchive has excluded it.

68JAhDtu9xHVSgab.png
Click to expand...

Considering the list went viral on twitter, it's not surprising. It's pretty much doxxing, which is illegal in many countries
 
Last edited:
Draugoth said:
Considering the list ent viral on twitter, it's not surprising. It's pretty much doxxing, which is illegal in many countries
Click to expand...
The title also totally invalidates the entire list. Its just not a list of Charlie's murderers. Im shocked thats what they went with. Close to as inflammatory as the people they're highlighting.
 
Just saw that video where Charlie Kirk had a respectful face to face debate with the oxford union president elect. Fast forward a few months later, and this guy is on social media celebrating his assassination. This is insanity.

 
dolabla said:
Just saw that video where Charlie Kirk had a respectful face to face debate with the oxford union president elect. Fast forward a few months later, and this guy is on social media celebrating his assassination. This is insanity.

Click to expand...

And they're not removing him as president.
 
It's a bit crazy Rogan had a guy also named Charlie on and they're talking about the JFK assassination when this happened. Weird times
 


Disgusting people.

dolabla said:
Just saw that video where Charlie Kirk had a respectful face to face debate with the oxford union president elect. Fast forward a few months later, and this guy is on social media celebrating his assassination. This is insanity.

Click to expand...


Twat is dressed like an absolute bag of shite. Enough already.
 
EviLore said:
And they're not removing him as president.
Click to expand...
There is a very sinister element plaguing academia. Whether it's DEI, or maybe who is funding the whole push..

I think everyone can see these old institutions have been utterly captured, in just about every western country.

I have a very worrying feeling that this has caused irreparable damage to western society, and something that will be felt years down the line. Maybe not even years, we're seeing it unravel before our eyes.

When you have this blatant middle finger on show in one of the most supposed prestigious institutions, you know you're in trouble.
 
I feel like this is worth a read.

--------------------------------

I began my "Truth & Consequences" speaking tour this week in Seattle and San Jose, and the assassination of Charlie Kirk was on everyone's mind. Before stepping onstage, I received texts from several friends who wanted to know the details of my security. One family member urged me to cancel the whole tour immediately.

Kirk was a political prodigy on the Right and adored by a younger generation of Republicans. While I never met him, and didn't follow his work closely, it was obvious that we weren't political allies. It should go without saying that I feel nothing but sadness for him and his family.

His murder was an especially terrible crime for several reasons—the fact that it occurred on a college campus in front of thousands of students, the manner in which it was immediately broadcast on social media, the presence of his wife and children at the scene, and the unavoidable sense that both the causes and consequences had to be political. Whatever the killer's motives, he dropped a match onto an information landscape that was ready to burn.

Since deleting my Twitter account nearly three years ago, I've generally ignored social media. However, in the last 48 hours I've spent enough time studying the response to Kirk's death to be further convinced that platforms like X and TikTok are destroying our culture. No metaphor does the problem justice. I've compared social media to a dangerous psychological experiment, a hallucination machine, a funhouse mirror, a digital sewer—but nothing captures the ludicrous insults, moral injuries, and delusions that millions of us avidly produce and consume online. If the medium is the message, the message is mass psychosis—and it will send us careening from one political emergency to the next. The fact that some of the most deranging and divisive content is being created (or amplified) by foreign adversaries—and that we have literally built and monetized their capacity to do this—beggars belief. We are poisoning ourselves and inviting others to poison us.

More disturbing still, the effects are self-reinforcing. Part of the reason for this is algorithmic—these platforms have been designed to raise the amplitude on our tribal hatreds, because this maximizes engagement. But the algorithms in our brains are little better: Seeing another person (or what appears to be another person) gleefully dance on a slain man's grave, it is easy to conclude that they represent some significant faction of American society—and to feel the outrage appropriate to such a terrible discovery.

President Trump is a creature of social media, and his presidency would be unthinkable without it. Unfortunately, his address to the nation in response to Kirk's murder evinced all the wisdom of an angry tweet. Rather than speak in a way that would be expected of a normal president, he produced a dangerous piece of gaslighting—suggesting that the threat of political violence in America came exclusively from the Left and ignoring recent examples of rightwing attacks, including those carried out in his name. Rather than calling for calm and unity, he accused his political opponents of being accessories to murder. And most ominously, he implied that the full power of the federal government would soon be turned against them.

It was the behavior of an arsonist, pretending to be a firefighter. Of course, some will insist that this observation just heaps more fuel on the fire. But serious criticism of President Trump and Trumpism isn't part of the problem of hyperpolarization in America—no more than serious criticism of the far Left is.

When Elon Musk announced to his 225 million followers on X that "The Left is the party of murder," he wasn't describing our political reality, but he was greatly damaging it. And when he posted, "If they won't leave us in peace, then our choice is fight or die," he joined a deranged chorus of prominent people on the Right who seem committed to viewing Kirk's murder as the first shot fired in a civil war.

And who, after all, are "they"?

No morally sane person, Left or Right, supports political assassination—or feels anything but horror over it.

Kirk's killer is now in custody, and from the details that have been released, he doesn't appear to be the far-Left golem conjured by the Right. He is a Utah native who grew up hunting with his Republican parents. We don't yet know why he did what he did, but there is a very good chance that he represents no cause beyond his own mental illness. As for the frequency and character of political violence in America, we shouldn't delude ourselves about it. It isn't at all a common form of murder, nor is it more prevalent on the Left.

There is no "party of murder" in this country. And insisting that there is just adds energy to yet another moral panic. Social media amplifies extreme views as though they were representative of most Americans, and many of us are losing our sense of what other people are really like. Many seem completely unaware that their hold on reality is being steadily undermined by what they are seeing online, and that the business models of these platforms, as well as livelihoods of countless "influencers," depend on our continuing to gaze, and howl, into the digital abyss.

Get off social media.

Read good books and real journalism.

Find your friends.

And enjoy your life.

-- Sam Harris

-------------------------------

There are things in there I don't agree with, but he is 100% right about social media. It is destroying our culture, and western societies.
 
Last edited:
JayK47 said:
I feel like it should be posted, word for word. We will see if he is right and people realize what is going on. We will see if people still remember in 2026. I sincerely have my doubts.
Click to expand...
I doubt it as well tbh. The economy is the #1 issue every election barring something like a pandemic(which effects the economy )for a reason. Something like this needs to happen like right before an election for it to really impact it, especially nowadays. People have the memory of a goldfish and there will be a thousand crazy things going on between now and any election. It's been 4 days and most normies are already moving on tbh. So imagine 1 year. Yet alone 4.

For both sides there have been things that felt like they would change the world but really fizzled out faster than either side anticipated( in the minds of normies)
 
EviLore said:
And they're not removing him as president.
Click to expand...
He is facing disciplinary proceedings.

After he appealed to like-minded life members on X, Mr Bokhari [Oxford Union life member] said he had been contacted by more than 200 individuals who shared with him their membership numbers, and said they would support such a motion.

However, it is understood that a motion of no confidence cannot be submitted until the start of term on Oct 12.

Under union rules, once the motion has been submitted, 150 members must sign it within 48 hours, writing both their name and membership number.

If this threshold is met, a four-day period follows to allow for open debate.

Then all members – both student members and life members – get to vote in a poll, which asks whether the office holder should be removed.

For the motion to pass, two conditions must be met: at least two-thirds of those voting must say yes, and at least 150 people must vote yes.
Click to expand...

Source
 
Dr.Morris79 said:
I think everyone can see these
Click to expand...
I think normies are still pretty oblivious or uninformed about how deep this very insidious scheme goes. On the entertainment side, people pointing out things like "race bending," the "uglifying" of characters, as well as the use of pronouns, among other things, were met at best with skepticism… and we all know what kind of adjectives were used to denigrate, invalidate, and mock those opinions and the people expressing them

Dr.Morris79 said:
I have a very worrying feeling that this has caused irreparable damage to western society, and something that will be felt years down the line.
Click to expand...
That was the idea. They were running...I think a 20-50 year scheme (if I remember correctly) to change demographics and basically the entire culture.
 
clem84 said:
I feel like this is worth a read.

--------------------------------

I began my "Truth & Consequences" speaking tour this week in Seattle and San Jose, and the assassination of Charlie Kirk was on everyone's mind. Before stepping onstage, I received texts from several friends who wanted to know the details of my security. One family member urged me to cancel the whole tour immediately.

Kirk was a political prodigy on the Right and adored by a younger generation of Republicans. While I never met him, and didn't follow his work closely, it was obvious that we weren't political allies. It should go without saying that I feel nothing but sadness for him and his family.

His murder was an especially terrible crime for several reasons—the fact that it occurred on a college campus in front of thousands of students, the manner in which it was immediately broadcast on social media, the presence of his wife and children at the scene, and the unavoidable sense that both the causes and consequences had to be political. Whatever the killer's motives, he dropped a match onto an information landscape that was ready to burn.

Since deleting my Twitter account nearly three years ago, I've generally ignored social media. However, in the last 48 hours I've spent enough time studying the response to Kirk's death to be further convinced that platforms like X and TikTok are destroying our culture. No metaphor does the problem justice. I've compared social media to a dangerous psychological experiment, a hallucination machine, a funhouse mirror, a digital sewer—but nothing captures the ludicrous insults, moral injuries, and delusions that millions of us avidly produce and consume online. If the medium is the message, the message is mass psychosis—and it will send us careening from one political emergency to the next. The fact that some of the most deranging and divisive content is being created (or amplified) by foreign adversaries—and that we have literally built and monetized their capacity to do this—beggars belief. We are poisoning ourselves and inviting others to poison us.

More disturbing still, the effects are self-reinforcing. Part of the reason for this is algorithmic—these platforms have been designed to raise the amplitude on our tribal hatreds, because this maximizes engagement. But the algorithms in our brains are little better: Seeing another person (or what appears to be another person) gleefully dance on a slain man's grave, it is easy to conclude that they represent some significant faction of American society—and to feel the outrage appropriate to such a terrible discovery.

President Trump is a creature of social media, and his presidency would be unthinkable without it. Unfortunately, his address to the nation in response to Kirk's murder evinced all the wisdom of an angry tweet. Rather than speak in a way that would be expected of a normal president, he produced a dangerous piece of gaslighting—suggesting that the threat of political violence in America came exclusively from the Left and ignoring recent examples of rightwing attacks, including those carried out in his name. Rather than calling for calm and unity, he accused his political opponents of being accessories to murder. And most ominously, he implied that the full power of the federal government would soon be turned against them.

It was the behavior of an arsonist, pretending to be a firefighter. Of course, some will insist that this observation just heaps more fuel on the fire. But serious criticism of President Trump and Trumpism isn't part of the problem of hyperpolarization in America—no more than serious criticism of the far Left is.

When Elon Musk announced to his 225 million followers on X that "The Left is the party of murder," he wasn't describing our political reality, but he was greatly damaging it. And when he posted, "If they won't leave us in peace, then our choice is fight or die," he joined a deranged chorus of prominent people on the Right who seem committed to viewing Kirk's murder as the first shot fired in a civil war.

And who, after all, are "they"?

No morally sane person, Left or Right, supports political assassination—or feels anything but horror over it.

Kirk's killer is now in custody, and from the details that have been released, he doesn't appear to be the far-Left golem conjured by the Right. He is a Utah native who grew up hunting with his Republican parents. We don't yet know why he did what he did, but there is a very good chance that he represents no cause beyond his own mental illness. As for the frequency and character of political violence in America, we shouldn't delude ourselves about it. It isn't at all a common form of murder, nor is it more prevalent on the Left.

There is no "party of murder" in this country. And insisting that there is just adds energy to yet another moral panic. Social media amplifies extreme views as though they were representative of most Americans, and many of us are losing our sense of what other people are really like. Many seem completely unaware that their hold on reality is being steadily undermined by what they are seeing online, and that the business models of these platforms, as well as livelihoods of countless "influencers," depend on our continuing to gaze, and howl, into the digital abyss.

Get off social media.

Read good books and real journalism.

Find your friends.

And enjoy your life.

-- Sam Harris

-------------------------------

There are things in there I don't agree with, but he is 100% right about social media. It is destroying our culture, and western societies.
Click to expand...


Brilliantly said by Sam. It's been what I've been trying to convey in this thread myself but he's said it much more succinctly than I was able to.
 
Last edited:
ChorizoPicozo said:
I think normies are still pretty oblivious or uninformed about how deep this very insidious scheme goes. On the entertainment side, people pointing out things like "race bending," the "uglifying" of characters, as well as the use of pronouns, among other things, were met at best with skepticism… and we all know what kind of adjectives were used to denigrate, invalidate, and mock those opinions and the people expressing them
Click to expand...
Aye true, but even the normies are rejecting it, box office takings are through the floor, the race bending has become a trope and most AAA is in the pan, its definitely being noticed somewhat.

ChorizoPicozo said:
That was the idea. They were running...I think a 20-50 year scheme (if I remember correctly) to change demographics and basically the entire culture.
Click to expand...
I know, it's just so bloody depressing when you think about it.

I'm quite concerned as my lad is now coming of age where Uni is on the agenda, his mums really wanting him to go, and I know full well what the Uni's are like here :messenger_unamused:

I'd rather he just learnt a trade.
 
Trilobit said:
The page charliesmurderers.com, that collected thousands of people who had supported the assassination, has been blocked by my Swedish internet provider. I've never seen anything like it. Usually my browser warns me of some bad sites with viruses etc, but I've never ever seen my provider doing that before. Really strange.

Also, internetarchive has excluded it.

68JAhDtu9xHVSgab.png
Click to expand...

Test it with a VPN just to be sure.

I don't even like to comment in cases like this but the entire thing is so sad. I was thinking the we were beyond that point already. The scene of Erika exiting AF2 completely teared up cuts to the heart.
I hope that at least this case will make people stop dehumanizing political opponents with labels as harsh as they were using. This kind of thing can no longer be trivialized.
 
Last edited:

The messages do not shed light on a possible motivation for the shooting, which has been fiercely debated by people trying to ascribe blame to a political side. A police officer wrote in an affidavit that Mr. Robinson had recently discussed Mr. Kirk's upcoming event in Utah with a family member, and that the two had "talked about why they didn't like him.

People who knew Mr. Robinson over the years said that he was extremely intelligent, followed current events, and spent much of his time online or playing video games. He was registered to vote but was not affiliated with a political party and appeared to have never voted in an election; his parents are both registered Republicans.

After Mr. Robinson joked that the gunman was his look-alike, another user suggested that the group could turn Mr. Robinson in and get the $100,000 reward that the F.B.I. was offering.

"Only if I get a cut," Mr. Robinson responded.

Someone posted, "Whatever you do, don't go to a mcdonalds anytime soon," a reference to the arrest of Luigi Mangione, who was found at a McDonald's restaurant and charged with the killing of a health insurance chief executive in Manhattan.
Mr. Robinson agreed and offered a supposed joke of his own, writing "better also get rid of this manifesto and exact copy rifle I have lying around."

When another user suggested that the killing of Mr. Kirk would lead President Trump to send the National Guard to Utah, the suspect replied, "in a red state??? nah CLEARLY the shooter was from california."

Around that time, several news outlets reported that ammunition found near a rifle at the scene included engravings referencing "transgender ideology." The truth, ultimately, was that the engravings included the phrase "hey fascist! CATCH!" as well as lyrics from an antifascist Italian folk song and a reference to a sexual meme about a "bulge."
But at the time, before the exact phrasing of the engravings was publicly known, the suspect sent messages that suggested he was closely following the news.

"I heard the ammo had somethin about trans stuff on it, but they aren't releasing photos or exact quotes," he wrote. He added: "and also the claim wasn't backed by the official fbi, just some dude in the briefing room."

A few minutes later, he joked: "I'm actually Charlie Kirk, wanted to get outta politics so I faked my death, now I can live out my dream life in kansas."

Mr. Robinson's messages on Discord appeared next to his avatar, which was from a Garfield comic and depicted the confused face of Garfield's owner, Jon Arbuckle.
 
I've been calling social media the root of most societal problems for ages. I abandoned FB and Twitter over 10 years ago. The problem is that its easier to hate on these platforms since you are anonymous, on your sofa and you don't see the person in real life so you won't have any affinity with another which might change your tune. This creates a much colder society.

And if it so happens and you are kind of unstable, a loner, bit of a loser or easy to manipulate, chances of radicalizing via socials are a high possibility. You'll usually see a lot of parotting on these platforms and viscious attacks if you disagree so yeah.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Charlie Kirk... WTF?
1
2K
AJUMP23 replied
Mass shooting at Brown campus & MIT physicist murdered [update: shooter down]
8 9 10 11 12
578
3K
dave_d replied
Utah becomes first state to target VPN use in age-verification law
News 
24
95
ReBurn replied
Dominoes in Utah explodes
25
2K
GateofD replied
  • Locked
Leading nuclear scientist assassinated... another new rabbit hole
1
408
RJMacready73 replied
Top Bottom