Leave or evil? Left arguments justify the killing of Charles Kirk

If you are like me and you are watching the news and social media for developments on the assassination of Charlie Kerk, you will also have also had a disturbing army of leftists on the Internet for the death of the conservative speaker. Some posts, which include people laughing and celebrating, have tens of thousands of young people. It’s not only comments, it’s Crazies mob that supports comments.

(An article from Brandon Smith Re -published from Alt-Market.us))

What I see in this mountain of flowing psychological disorder is emphasis. Many other analysts have warned for years that the struggle for the remainder of the Western world will happen on two fronts: globalization on top, and left -wing heel at the bottom. Although it is correct that globalization often awakens groups through NGOs and companies, they simply provide assistance to people who already have the will and intent to destroy the United States.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?

This means that the idea of ”the left -wing/right -wing” is no longer applied. At the bottom of the pyramid, there are millions of crazy people who have violent intentions who want to see you dead because you do not agree with them. They will not simply disappear because the worlds go. It represents a parallel threat.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is really fake and I have no patience for such stupidity anymore. Look at it in this way – the waking movement is the worship of death. In every worship, there are definitely people who are stupid people who do bad things because they are informed of that, but there are also many people who are consciously evil.

And if you want to see pure evil, take Gander in an endless group of strange reactions from activists to Kirk’s death. Unfortunate social media publications chanting to kill Kirk. Left leaders such as Ilhan Omar Yeloun Kirk mainly for his assassination. Democrats are trying to stop a silent moment of prayer for Kerk in Congress. Even witnesses report The left -wing demonstrators in Utah state chanted immediately after the shooting of Kirk. The terrorist list is the puzzling mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?

If you have any doubts about the nature of the progressive sect, you only need to see how they discover in the blood and may understand it. These people are not human, they are monsters, and now they feel very poetry because they believe they can get rid of political killings.

A major example is the many arguments they offer to justify the assassination of Kirk. Social media is widespread with them, thousands of jobs supported by hundreds of thousands of people. What I would like to do is break some of the most common arguments and determine whether ideas are backward or evil (or both). Let’s start …

Left Prosecution: “Charlie Kerk’s words were offensive and caused harm, so he was worth death.”

Diagnosis: backward and evil

The political left has long been dealt with equal to violence. For them there is no discrimination. This is the basis of the “wrong thinking” ideology. Charlie Kirk has never hurt a living spirit, and within the framework of the law, he had every right to express his views regardless of whether people were insulting or not. The mob has never led to the burning of the city bloc. He never organized a terrorist cell. He never called for violence. He has never punch. What he did most is to defend the right to self -defense.

If opinions are violence, anyone can kill their opinions. Thinking that you are fortified because you have “right opinions” may be the most ignorant assumption that a person can do, but the leftists are generally low intelligence personnel.

On the other hand, there is also the main agenda between elite groups to make a “hate speech” the subject of the government’s application. We have seen this in full swing in the United Kingdom last year as it becomes ugly. Anything can be set on hate speech, from spreading online jokes to national flag.

It is strange that only conservatives seem to be arrested due to the violations of speech. It seems as if conservative ideas are only banned.

The laws of hate speech are the entrance to collective oversight, and if progressive and global partners are unable to place these laws in their place, they decided to apply the color of the law through political violence so that conservatives are afraid of speaking.

Left Prosecution: “It is irony that Charlie Kirk was a supporter of the gun, then he was killed by a pistol …”

Diagnosis: backward

In fact, it is not a paradox at all. Kirk often pointed out that the majority of armed violence is committed by the leftists – in the left -wing cities under control and in the neighborhoods of minorities that mostly Democrats vote. If the leftists are removed from the equation, then weapons crimes (and crime in general) in the United States will decrease.

Charlie was most likely killed by my left (the evidence that has been issued so far indicates this). We will discover soon enough. If so, the assassination only supports his argument that the political left is the danger. No arms rights.

My left claim: “Where was the good man with a pistol to protect Charlie …?”

Diagnosis: backward

Good with weapons stop at at least 1.8 million crimes annually, according to investigative studies on DGU data (defense weapons use). But Kirk has never argued that the presence of good men with weapons made him lead. Goodness dies with weapons all the time, especially if they are targeted for political assassination. Venice is to give someone the opportunity to fight if they see the next threat. It does not make them invincible.

The Left’s claim: “If Charlie does not defend the rights of arms, it may be alive today …”

Diagnosis: evil

When the leftists present this argument what they really say is: “If you don’t give up your arms rights, we have the right to shoot you.”

Left Prosecution: “Kerk was saved by increasing control of the weapon that he opposed …”

Diagnosis: backward

The killing weapon was a basic fishing rifle. The type of firearms is not in any list of wishes for the prohibition of democrats.

If the leftists will present this argument, they will have to admit that their true intention is to ban all weapons, not only frightening “black rifles”.

My left claim: “Charlie Kerk lived with the sword and died by the sword …”

Diagnosis: backward

As mentioned earlier, Kirk never attacked anyone, never harmful to anyone, and only fought for the right to speak his views without control or threat. If the discussion poses a threat to the political left, their ideas should not withstand general auditing. In other words, they killed Charlie Kerk because he revealed their ideas as defective.

This is not “living next to the sword”, that is cute. The leftists do not really want to see the sword, which is why the media is currently scrambling to call for peace.

Left claim: “Kerk was radical and now it’s time to give up extremism and make peace …”

Diagnosis: evil

Let’s be clear, the vast majority of violence comes only from one side, and this is the Marxist/global progressive side. It is somewhat comfortable that the progressive suddenly wants peace after years of rhetoric and violent actions. Why do they do this? Because they know that revenge on a large scale is very soon. When the opponent has launched an aggressive war for years, then suddenly wants a ceasefire, this is usually about to be hurt and want to re -assemble their ranks.

Activists woke up to kick at least over the past decade and now they started realizing that they might get it. They strongly want our anger at the death of Kirk to fade over time.

Kerk was not radical in the lowest. He only talked about the facts of his best. The facts cannot be radical. The truth is not extreme. However, after being killed, I think the leftists will see many actual “extremists” in the near future.