The charlie kirk shooter was not immigrant or trans or minority, just a WHITE

[Baller234]

i have never condoned violence against anyone

no, i just won't be pressured into feeling sorry for a man that spread hate.

"I don't condone violence, but boy he sure did deserve it!..."

Also this is coming from a guy who said he would rather have violent criminals free to roam the streets than lock them all up in prison. Because only squares and racists are in favor of prisons.

Take that ukranian girl for instance. Clearly her death was her own fault. She should have learned self defense.

Your words, not mine.

[Off the Court]

"I don't condone violence, but boy he sure did deserve it!..."

Also this is coming from a guy who said he would rather have violent criminals free to roam the streets than lock them all up in prison. Because only squares and racists are in favor of prisons.

Take that ukranian girl for instance. Clearly her death was her own fault. She should have learned self defense.

Your words, not mine.

Nope those are your words.

You strawman way too much

[highwhey]

"I don't condone violence, but boy he sure did deserve it!..."

Also this is coming from a guy who said he would rather have violent criminals free to roam the streets than lock them all up in prison. Because only squares and racists are in favor of prisons.

Take that ukranian girl for instance. Clearly her death was her own fault. She should have learned self defense.

Your words, not mine.

jeeze dude. get some help, seriously.

[Baller234]

Nope those are your words.

You strawman way too much

HIGHwhey is this correct? Did you not say these things? Did you not say that it's on every citizen to learn self defense because you would rather not have violent criminals kept in prison?

Would you like to correct the record for your friend here or should I find the post myself?

[highwhey]

HIGHwhey is this correct? Did you not say these things? Did you not say that it's on every citizen to learn self defense because you would rather not have violent criminals kept in prison?

Would you like to correct the record for your friend here or should I find the post myself?

you're making yourself look like a fool trying to make up things i did not say. i said i support prison diversion programs for NON-VIOLENT individuals. i also said that any large city with have violence and crime and as such, you have to accept that and learn to not be a little b1tch about the world.


feel free to find the post where i said charlie kirk deserved it, i have never once said that and never will. you are a pathetic man and insincere in your attempt "defend" charlie kirk. anyone that sincerely cares about him would not make up stuff like that.

[Baller234]

you're making yourself look like a fool trying to make up things i did not say. i said i support prison diversion programs for NON-VIOLENT individuals. i also said that any large city with have violence and crime and as such, you have to accept that and learn to not be a little b1tch about the world.


feel free to find the post where i said charlie kirk deserved it, i have never once said that and never will. you are a pathetic man and insincere in your attempt "defend" charlie kirk. anyone that sincerely cares about him would not make up stuff like that.

Sorry you're not fooling anyone. I saw you post a laughing emoji when he was shot and then you instantly edited the post once you saw the severity of it and saw he would die. I already told you I would gladly do a ban forever bet if the mods could prove it.

And yes the fact that you're just willing to "accept" crime means you condone it. There are plenty of neighborhoods throughout the U.S. that have very low crime. Obviously a larger city will have a higher volume of it due to the larger population, but that still wouldn't account for the insane ratio. The RATIO of crime is the concern.

The governor of Illinois was asked recently about Chicago, "Would you ask your friends to ride the train after midnight"... and he gave the exact same answer you just did. He said "look in a city you're going to have crime..."

https://x.com/theblaze/status/1962931828584505408

^ As you can see, retards flock together.

The fact that the governor is admitting his own trains aren't safe, and not just admitting but ACCEPTING it, is a colossal failure of government. As if crime is just something we have to tolerate and can't do anything about.

A real leader would have answered "Absolutely, we take great pride in making sure our trains and our streets are safe." But that would mean actually doing something about it. It doesn't mean you're going to have a 0% crime rate, but it does mean you're putting in the effort. If the fukking governor is saying on record that even he doesn't feel safe in his own state, that is an admission of failure and he should resign immediately. As a citizen I definitely would not feel confident in his abilities or his leadership.

So please stop acting like you don't condone crime. Not only do you condone crime, you enable and tolerate crime. You mock and tease at the thought of everyday working people feeling unsafe. It's just an imaginary made up issue fueled by their own racism.


tl:dr

HIGHwhey is a lying fagg0t who posted a laughing emoji when Kirk was shot and condones crime.

[Patrick Chewing]

Anyway, the shooter was a fascist White Liberal. The biggest enemy of the human race. Besides the Muslims.

[ShawkFactory]

Of course you didn't like him cause he made your side look stupid.

Do us both a favor and watch more of his videos. I think you all need it.

I've watched plenty and I don't think you comprehended most of what I said

I explained the reason why he made them look stupid. It wasn't him actually being right or wrong. He was just good at what he did and had a massive home field advantage every time. He engineered it this way too and that's why I don't like it because rigging the game in this manner and having people too stupid (or to be nicer and say what I actually feel..too willfully ignorant) to see what he's actually doing has real-life effects.

His whole goal was to argue against people not equipped to argue with him. Throw him in a room with someone who knows all of these specific debate topics AND tactics? Shit goes down very differently. But he wasn't actually interested in that and that's why I didn't respect him. To his credit he would occasionally engage with those people, but he would cut or edit most of it and he certainly wouldn't make it a point to headline that about how he "OWNED THIS LIB", so most supporters of his don't even know it happened.

It's kind of like that Whatever podcast.

[Patrick Chewing]

I've watched plenty and I don't think you comprehended most of what I said

I explained the reason why he made them look stupid. It wasn't him actually being right or wrong. He was just good at what he did and had a massive home field advantage every time. He engineered it this way too and that's why I don't like it because rigging the game in this manner and having people too stupid (or to be nicer and say what I actually feel..too willfully ignorant) to see what he's actually doing has real-life effects.

His whole goal was to argue against people not equipped to argue with him. Throw him in a room with someone who knows all of these specific debate topics AND tactics? Shit goes down very differently. But he wasn't actually interested in that and that's why I didn't respect him.

It's kind of like that Whatever podcast.

I recommended you to watch more of his videos because most of his videos weren't about making young Liberals look stupid, they were about educating those on facts, whether it be current American law, or about biblical scripture, or about history. You say it would be a different outcome with a prepared Liberal and I would say it would be the same. Charlie would educate, or at least attempt to educate, whilst the Liberal would deny, deny, deny, and paint this evil narrative against Charlie and call him all these evil things which is what got him killed. Look at what is happening to Stephen King now. That Downs Syndrome-looking weirdo is doing an apology tour all over Twitter because he made an accusation about Charlie and it ended up that he was wrong. THIS IS WHAT LIBERALS DO. They do not play fair, so I have no idea how in the world you think it would go down "very differently" with a prepared Liberal. I'm curious what shit going down very differently actually looks like to you because you cannot make up alternative facts to go up against Charlie. And he encountered plenty of intelligent, well-spoken individuals on his tours.

[highwhey]

Sorry you're not fooling anyone. I saw you post a laughing emoji when he was shot and then you instantly edited the post once you saw the severity of it and saw he would die. I already told you I would gladly do a ban forever bet if the mods could prove it.

And yes the fact that you're just willing to "accept" crime means you condone it. There are plenty of neighborhoods throughout the U.S. that have very low crime. Obviously a larger city will have a higher volume of it due to the larger population, but that still wouldn't account for the insane ratio. The RATIO of crime is the concern.

The governor of Illinois was asked recently about Chicago, "Would you ask your friends to ride the train after midnight"... and he gave the exact same answer you just did. He said "look in a city you're going to have crime..."

https://x.com/theblaze/status/1962931828584505408

^ As you can see, retards flock together.

The fact that the governor is admitting his own trains aren't safe, and not just admitting but ACCEPTING it, is a colossal failure of government. As if crime is just something we have to tolerate and can't do anything about.

A real leader would have answered "Absolutely, we take great pride in making sure our trains and our streets are safe." But that would mean actually doing something about it. It doesn't mean you're going to have a 0% crime rate, but it does mean you're putting in the effort. If the fukking governor is saying on record that even he doesn't feel safe in his own state, that is an admission of failure and he should resign immediately. As a citizen I definitely would not feel confident in his abilities or his leadership.

So please stop acting like you don't condone crime. Not only do you condone crime, you enable and tolerate crime. You mock and tease at the thought of everyday working people feeling unsafe. It's just an imaginary made up issue fueled by their own racism.


tl:dr

HIGHwhey is a lying fagg0t who posted a laughing emoji when Kirk was shot and condones crime.

[highwhey]

I recommended you to ---

don't you weigh 400 POUNDS?



see that, i just pulled a charlie kirk on you

[ShawkFactory]

I recommended you to watch more of his videos because most of his videos weren't about making young Liberals look stupid, they were about educating those on facts, whether it be current American law, or about biblical scripture, or about history. You say it would be a different outcome with a prepared Liberal and I would say it would be the same. Charlie would educate, or at least attempt to educate, whilst the Liberal would deny, deny, deny, and paint this evil narrative against Charlie and call him all these evil things which is what got him killed. Look at what is happening to Stephen King now. That Downs Syndrome-looking weirdo is doing an apology tour all over Twitter because he made an accusation about Charlie and it ended up that he was wrong. THIS IS WHAT LIBERALS DO. They do not play fair, so I have no idea how in the world you think it would go down "very differently" with a prepared Liberal. I'm curious what shit going down very differently actually looks like to you because you cannot make up alternative facts to go up against Charlie. And he encountered plenty of intelligent, well-spoken individuals on his tours.

There are certain areas where he was very knowledgeable. Again..most of it was related to theology. There were also plenty of things that he chose to talk about that he was putting his theological beliefs in a box where the didn't necessarily belong to those who oppose his viewpoints, and had points themselves.

He was not overly strong from a sociological standpoint and often ignored advances, or changes if you don't think it's advanced, that have occurred in that area. He wasn't well adept at science either and would generally strawman it and switch the subject when others got into the weeds there.

And he encountered plenty of intelligent, well-spoken individuals on his tours.

Sure. And I'm not trying to say that everyone he spoke to was a dumbass. More so that it was usually on his turf in an environment that was beneficial to him to control as he wished. You said it was HIS tour, right? Most people, even well-spoken people are going to get a little shook in a heated debate with these things against them. Because they don't debate in front of crowds for a living.

And I'll end with: there are PLENTY of liberals that aren't what you, PatrickChewing, think of liberals as.

[Baller234]

The truth hurts.

It's never too late to admit you were wrong. We're all human. We all make mistakes.

You're running out of cards to play.

[BurningHammer]

Anyway, the shooter was a fascist White Liberal. The biggest enemy of the human race. Besides the Muslims.

[BurningHammer]

The truth hurts.

It's never too late to admit you were wrong. We're all human. We all make mistakes.

You're running out of cards to play.

Another