RIP Charlie Kirk

Would you say it could be used as a reliable way to determine if someone is racist by whether they sing that song or not?
No. However, a nationalist (or racist) might feel comfortable singing it.
 
Before we go any further, I'm not celebrating his death. I'm just indifferent. I care more about the little school children's deaths that hardly receive any 2nd glance from the political elite, let alone some random black person. Kirk is just another statistic like those defenceless little boys and girls.
That goes for anything. People who obtain some level of celebrity status get more attention. It's always been this way. Did everyone care about the poor school children when it came to George Floyd?
You don't expect me to read the article now, do you?
It's hardly that long. You can assess the general tone by the first few paragraphs alone. Not answering is also an answer so you're free not to...
 
No. However, a nationalist (or racist) might feel comfortable singing it.

Ok, so kill the Boer is not a a reliable way to determine if someone is a racist then.

So the idea of promotion of death to a certain RACIAL group is not itself racist, according to you.

What would be racist then, if promoting murder of an entire race group is not racist?
 
Maybe we should ask WWII-era Dr Seuss that?

View attachment 1848148

Screw the Yanks and Dr Seuss. Are you telling me if I am proud of being South African, I love our national symbols and our sports teams, I want all Saffers to prosper and I want SA to be one of the best countries in the world I'm a fascist?

If so I will wear that label with pride! MSAGA! :love: :love: :love:
 
Before we go any further, I'm not celebrating his death. I'm just indifferent.

So you're indifferent to an act of murder? OK.

I care more about the little school children's deaths that hardly receive any 2nd glance from the political elite, let alone some random black person. Kirk is just another statistic like those defenceless little boys and girls.

But if you're indifferent to this murder, why would you not be indifferent to other murders?
 
I'm sorry but its often more the people on the left side who call everyone a Nazi or a racist or bigot.

I would like to introduce you to the "Truth Social" account of a certain "Donald J Trump", Who just so happens to be the Big Kahuna in charge of the Whole Shebang.

Your apology is accepted. Your assumption is rejected.

:ROFL:
 
How nice to leave the bottom part of the post out where I am asking "What kind of a world will you be left with where there are ONLY Christians?"

Its amazing how idyllic a picture you guys have painted yourselves of a Christian-only state whereas an Islam-only state seems barbaric and oppressive.

The rest of us are screaming: "Making a Christian version of The Taliban is a bad idea!"
Pardon Monsieur ...

Since you are clearly the expert and I am not, I have a question. Is there not something like bearing false witness?

Something like preaching love and tolerance here, keeping up to date as events unfolded, then running back to the politics thread and posting shyte leaving out crucial facts, then showing up here again to do the same? Or is that hypocrisy? Or both?

Are you "the tolerant left"?

 
That goes for anything. People who obtain some level of celebrity status get more attention. It's always been this way. Did everyone care about the poor school children when it came to George Floyd?
George Floyd was killed by a whire police officer at the height of a volatile period. His death was hijacked by sections of society with political motive. Same with Kirk's death. It was amplified by people with keen interest in American politics.
It's hardly that long. You can assess the general tone by the first few paragraphs alone. Not answering is also an answer so you're free not to...
 
I would like to introduce you to the "Truth Social" account of a certain "Donald J Trump", Who just so happens to be the Big Kahuna in charge of the Whole Shebang.

Your apology is accepted. Your assumption is rejected.

:ROFL:

But it's more enlightened people on the left who call everyone a racist, bigot, phobe, nazi etc. People who are well educated.
 
Screw the Yanks and Dr Seuss. Are you telling me if I am proud of being South African, I love our national symbols and our sports teams, I want all Saffers to prosper and I want SA to be one of the best countries in the world I'm a fascist?

If so I will wear that label with pride! MSAGA! :love: :love: :love:
National pride on independence day and sports events is one thing

Enforcing said national pride on other people by force or tanks.... Now that might cross the line a bit, eh?

1757932391043.jpeg
 
National pride on independence day and sports events is one thing

Enforcing said national pride on other people by force or tanks.... Now that might cross the line a bit, eh?

You are reaching. National pride is national pride. I'm proud to be a Saffer every which day of the week
 
So you're indifferent to an act of murder? OK.

But if you're indifferent to this murder, why would you not be indifferent to other murders?

I definitely would be very indifferent to the murder of, say, Adolf Hitler? Please, I'm just using a contrived example, and it not being applicable to the murder of Charlie - I think it's terrible - but there definitely is space to view crime with more- or less apathy. Empathy even?

Another example, murder of Pol Pot? Cool. Murder of Mother Teresa? Terrible!
 
My opinion is that the system it was fighting has been (largely) dismantled. In the absence of a system, what is it fighting? It has a different meaning now which is different from meaning it conveyed in the " good ol' days". I'd say banish it to the hallways and lecture halls of academia.
It was always hatred of white people, and calling for their death. It wasn't a complex, subtle metaphor. And we actually have a legal case to prove it:

176. The applicants testified that, although they did not act on the orders or instructions of APLA or the PAC that day, they believed they owed loyalty to the same cause. Nofemela and Peni had attended lectures by APLA operators on political matters and had received elementary lessons on the handling of arms and ammunition. As members of PASO, they were active supporters of the PAC and subscribed to its political philosophy and policies. By stoning company delivery vehicles and making it difficult for them to make deliveries in the townships, they were taking part in a political disturbance and contributing toward s making their area ungovernable. Thus their activities were aimed at supporting the liberation struggle against the state.

177. The Amnesty Committee carefully considered why it was that Ms Amy Biehl, a private civilian, was killed during this disturbance. It concluded that part of the answer could be found in the fact that her attackers were so aroused and incited that they lost control of themselves and became caught up in a frenzy of violence. While giving his evidence, one of the applicants said that they all subscribed to the slogan ‘one settler, one bullet’. This meant that they believed that every white person was an enemy of the black people, and saw Amy Biehl as a representative of the white community. They believed that by killing civilian whites, APLA was sending a serious political message to the government of the day. By intensifying their activities, they believed that they would eventually increase political pressure on the government to such an extent that it would be compelled to hand over political power to the majority of the people of South Africa.

https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/reports/volume6/section3/chapter4/subsection16.htm

In fact the only reason why the monsters who killed Amy Biel are not in prison is because it was a deemed to be political violence, and for some reason killing random civilians because they were white was deemed to be an acceptable crime for amnesty.
 
George Floyd was killed by a whire police officer at the height of a volatile period. His death was hijacked by sections of society with political motive. Same with Kirk's death. It was amplified by people with keen interest in American politics.

Floyd should not have been killed (it's doubtful the killing of Floyd was an actual murder) and Kirk should also not have been killed (murdered). Difference was that Floyd was combating a cop at the time, Kirk was chatting to someone in a debate. While combating cops things can go the wrong way because of the nature of wrestling or struggling, but there is no expectation of a sniper bullet when having a peaceful voluntary conversation.
 
I definitely would be very indifferent to the murder of, say, Adolf Hitler? Please, I'm just using a contrived example, and it not being applicable to the murder of Charlie - I think it's terrible - but there definitely is space to view crime with more- or less apathy. Empathy even?

Another example, murder of Pol Pot? Cool. Murder of Mother Teresa? Terrible!

Mother Teresa? May she rot in hell!
 
I definitely would be very indifferent to the murder of, say, Adolf Hitler? Please, I'm just using a contrived example, and it not being applicable to the murder of Charlie - I think it's terrible - but there definitely is space to view crime with more- or less apathy. Empathy even?

So Kirk is a Hitler then?

(Setting aside that killing of Hitler by a belligerent would not have been murder but armed combat).
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X