LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

‘Expose Charlie’s Murderers’ Website Receives Over 50,000 Submissions of Leftists Celebrating Murder of Charlie Kirk

Baztrachian

Baztrachian

Ars est celare artem
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Posts
1,550
Full title:

‘Expose Charlie’s Murderers’ Website Receives Over 50,000 Submissions of Leftists Celebrating Murder of Charlie Kirk — Declares Itself the ‘Largest Firing Operation in History’​

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...-website-receives-50000-submissions-leftists/
A website dedicated to exposing the sick leftists celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk has received over 50,000 submissions.

Expose Charlie’s Murderers is seeking to hold leftists accountable for their violent rhetoric following his murder.

“This website is a lawful data aggregator of publicly-available information,” it states. “It has been created for the purposes of public education.”


“We seek to collect and archive instances of individuals promoting or glorifying of political violence, much like archive.org or archive.is.
 
LLCox said:
Annnd the Right continues to play dumb. Y'all crack me up.
Click to expand...

What's really funny is that you come here, waltz around and give a few dismissive sniffs from your snooty nose, and then leave thinking you've changed the world because you graced us with your presence.

The reality is that barely anyone noticed you prance around the room before you left in with a haughty toss of your feather boa over your shoulder. No adoring fans, no paparazzi, no autographs, just you and your empty existence.
 
HisArpy said:
What's really funny is that you come here, waltz around and give a few dismissive sniffs from your snooty nose, and then leave thinking you've changed the world because you graced us with your presence.

The reality is that barely anyone noticed you prance around the room before you left in with a haughty toss of your feather boa over your shoulder. No adoring fans, no paparazzi, no autographs, just you and your empty existence.
Click to expand...
He's simply putting you and your "elk" (sic) are subject to fact-checking and subsequent ridicule.

You might recall I did that to you last Friday when you breathlessly claimed that there were over 100,000 Fentanyl deaths in 2024

Like most things that come out of your mouth, your claim did not hold up to even cursory scrutiny. Simply put, you made up a number.

Facts have their well-known pesky "liberal bias".
 
HisArpy said:
The reality is that barely anyone noticed you prance around the room before you left in with a haughty toss of your feather boa over your shoulder. No adoring fans, no paparazzi, no autographs, just you and your empty existence.
Click to expand...

Such a weird rant. 😆 Are your dreams filled with LLCox in a feather boa?
 
HisArpy said:
What's really funny is that you come here, waltz around and give a few dismissive sniffs from your snooty nose, and then leave thinking you've changed the world because you graced us with your presence.

The reality is that barely anyone noticed you prance around the room before you left in with a haughty toss of your feather boa over your shoulder. No adoring fans, no paparazzi, no autographs, just you and your empty existence.
Click to expand...

So are you auditioning to be my groupie. You sound needy.
 
MajorRewrite said:
Such a weird rant. 😆 Are your dreams filled with LLCox in a feather boa?
Click to expand...

Not at all.

My dreams are of you, LLcucky, and all the left of the trolls here, signing off and leaving us alone.

Alas, they are dreams and not reality. Something I can accept. Unlike you and the rest of the Lit trolls.
 
HisArpy said:
Yes, you have it wrong.

Free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.
Click to expand...

Free speech means the government shall make no laws or take any actions that restrict the freedom of speech.

This does not apply to private organizations.

Facebook, Instagram, and etc. can restrict speech as they wish. Including conservative speech.

In this case it means that publicly celebrating a murder is offensive to many organizations both public and private and those organizations in some cases have the right to dismiss people who do this. Other organizations have an obligation to do so.

In any case they are acting as they believe they should. I imagine some of the people who've been dismissed from their jobs may try to take this to court.

I have serious doubts that a judge will rule that people have a right to celebrate murder and a right to encourage more murders.

This is because judges often factor into such misbehavior and judges of all biases tend to cover their own asses. Judiciously.
 
DeluxAuto said:
You mean Charlie supporters have it wrong, Derpy.
Click to expand...

No, I meant what I said. That you cannot understand that is on you and no one else.
Baztrachian said:
Free speech means the government shall make no laws or take any actions that restrict the freedom of speech.

This does not apply to private organizations.

Facebook, Instagram, and etc. can restrict speech as they wish. Including conservative speech.

In this case it means that publicly celebrating a murder is offensive to many organizations both public and private and those organizations in some cases have the right to dismiss people who do this. Other organizations have an obligation to do so.

In any case they are acting as they believe they should. I imagine some of the people who've been dismissed from their jobs may try to take this to court.

I have serious doubts that a judge will rule that people have a right to celebrate murder and a right to encourage more murders.

This is because judges often factor into such misbehavior and judges of all biases tend to cover their own asses. Judiciously.
Click to expand...

Free speech isn't unlimited. Speech can be censored if it falls afoul of the law.

Hate speech, incitement to riot, things like that, can be stifled. What's left is still subject to consequences. "Fire in a crowded theater" is still subject to civil suit. (And it could be subject to criminal prosecution depending on the facts.) Same with defamatory speech, civil responsibility/consequences. This extends to obscene speech too. Which is the category of speech that glorifying Kirk's death falls under.

This doesn't depend on where the speech is made, only that it's made and there are consequences to those who make it. Anyone who attempts to fight their termination from their job over it, will not only lose but they're going to pay the costs of their former employer's defense of their frivolous lawsuit.

My advice for anyone in this situation is to take your lumps and learn from them.
 
HisArpy said:
No, I meant what I said. That you cannot understand that is on you and no one else.


Free speech isn't unlimited. Speech can be censored if it falls afoul of the law.

Hate speech, incitement to riot, things like that, can be stifled. What's left is still subject to consequences. "Fire in a crowded theater" is still subject to civil suit. (And it could be subject to criminal prosecution depending on the facts.) Same with defamatory speech, civil responsibility/consequences. This extends to obscene speech too. Which is the category of speech that glorifying Kirk's death falls under.

This doesn't depend on where the speech is made, only that it's made and there are consequences to those who make it. Anyone who attempts to fight their termination from their job over it, will not only lose but they're going to pay the costs of their former employer's defense of their frivolous lawsuit.

My advice for anyone in this situation is to take your lumps and learn from them.
Click to expand...

Incitement to commit violence can be restricted.

"Hate speech" in particular cannot be restricted in the US by the government. This is because 'hate speech' is in the eye of the beholder and the government needs to be blind in this matter.

As we see in Europe the problem with limiting 'hate speech' is that it only applies to people the government doesn't like.
 
Baztrachian said:
Incitement to commit violence can be restricted.

"Hate speech" in particular cannot be restricted in the US by the government. This is because 'hate speech' is in the eye of the beholder and the government needs to be blind in this matter.

As we see in Europe the problem with limiting 'hate speech' is that it only applies to people the government doesn't like.
Click to expand...

Hate speech is in essence a conspiracy between speaker and adherents to violate the civil rights of someone else based on factors such as race, ethnicity, sex, country of origin, etc.

As such it can be restricted.
 
HisArpy said:
Hate speech is in essence a conspiracy between speaker and adherents to violate the civil rights of someone else based on factors such as race, ethnicity, sex, country of origin, etc.

As such it can be restricted.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you live but it cannot be restricted in the USA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SkyBubble
Okay, Now Leftists Are Posting Hit Lists of the People They Want to Murder Next
5 6 7
Replies
174
Views
729
DeluxAuto
DeluxAuto
Back
Top