Perfect. I can count on one hand the number of times I've got down on my knees to pray for a positive outcome of something and last night was one of them. I'm so sad.
It is so indescribably sad - for all sorts of reasons. Primarily for the family he has left behind.
I don't quite know where things will go from here - but it has shown us we have to turn around the dangerous and dark emotionality that has got us here. Exactly how we do that I don't know - the usual answer would be to hold Charlie Kirk himself up as a brilliant example of how to do that.
As I've just suggested in a recent comment here, you might consider that he had some clay feet, or was standing on some rather shaky ground that may be part and parcel of the general problem.
We all have clay feet and stand on shaky ground at times.
The thing about Charlie Kirk isn't his views, shaky or otherwise, but that he passionately believed the way to resolve our divisions and to bring people together, as human beings once again, was to talk, to debate, to thrash through ideas in a respectful way.
That's what he represented.
The shooter and, quite clearly, a large number of those we might describe as 'woke' who celebrated this assassination do not fundamentally believe this is the right way forward. That's a big problem.
I was very involved in conservative politics in Phoenix, AZ for several years during which time I met Charlie and heard him
speak several times. He was truly a gentleman and a decent, caring, open and honest man. He treated everyone whom he debated with respect and let them speak openly even when they were challenging him and denigrating him. He believed that the 1st Amendment was imperative for open discourse regardless if the parties agreed. He was a man of deep faith and I saw him touch so many young people here in AZ. Today’s assassination of Charlie will not end his work. It will awaken a million young Charlie Kirk’s to carry on his message. Charlie is alive within everyone’s hearts. May his family be granted peace and strength through these dark, dark days. RIP Charlie and THANK YOU.
"... we shouldn’t make political capital out of such a tragedy..."
Have you ever asked "them" why? Do it, the answer will be edifying in the extreme, and equally infuriating.
I'll drop a clue: it's the same answer, formulated differently, that teachers give when explaining why victims of bullying/assault/harassment shouldn't defend themselves or take justice on their tormentor.
Because if you're in a game of power politics, and you can convince the opposing sides that them doing and saying to you, what you're doing to them is wrongbadevil, then you and your opposition will be working towards the same end goal: your victory.
And I hate it is so, but my emotions won't change reality.
Another Australian here. My watch buzzed,l this morning, and and I looked down and saw "Charlie Kirk Assassin in Custody".
I sat down on my arse and cried. I'm a 63 year old ex soldier, and Ive been through hard times I can't begin to describe, but I still had a little weep.
I've followed this fine young man for about 5 years now, as he went into the lions den (aka US Uni campuses) and presented his arguments with grace and wit and logic. The last time I saw him was when he gave it real good to the wokesters at the Oxford Union a few weeks ago.
All he wanted to do was talk, and gently persuade people. And they shot him down like a dog in front of his wife and two little babies. No image has ever moved me as much as the picture of Charlie with his family, his beautiful wife, his daughter in pink with frilly shoes and his son wearing a party hat. What a man! What a deservedly proud and good man.
Charlie was the most moderate of conservatives. I think that his appalling public execution will bring out the less moderate, and deservedly so. If you try to talk to people and they shoot at you, your options are limited.
And meanwhile, if I was AOC or Mamdani or any of those other loonies in the US, I'd be keeping a real low profile.
So, so sad. His poor babies will never know their Daddy. 🙏😪
I agree that it looks like a professional hit. A long rifle at a distance fired once and accurately. That said, I just don't understand what the reasoning behind such an assassination would be. Who would pay to murder Charlie Kirk? If it turns out your supposition is right, that someone high up in the chain of political command ordered this murder, then America is inches away from civic breakdown, or civil war. On the other hand, the idea that a maniac, some lefty marinated in woke nonsense, like the crank who tried to kill Trump on the golf course, could pull this off, is equally difficult to grasp. No matter what, you can't loathe these people enough.
> "It is hard to convey my sense of shock, grief, and anger this morning. Charlie Kirk was a decent guy, a family man, brutally murdered doing what he loved doing. And what was that?"
A tragedy of course, though, as Stalin argued, (any) one death is a tragedy -- ask not for whom the bell tolls, and all that -- but a million is simply a statistic -- we're a dying breed, so to speak. Though that tends to raise the question as to who or what led to that particular tragedy -- somewhat "amusing" to note that a couple of potential candidates, or patsies for the perpetrator is someone in the "tranny" crowd, or maybe a BLM "enforcer":
"Alexander Dugin and the assassination of Charlie Kirk: .... In conversations with the Baron of Gates of Vienna, the most likely suspect for a patsy could be a tranny, or a dreadlocked black male since the story about the murder of a stunning Ukrainian refugee on a train recently was peaking at the time, and by a black male with dreadlocks."
Maybe somewhat ironic that Kirk's murder happened the day before 9/11, "proud towers" and all that ...
In any case, can't say much about any possible connections to any "Ukrainian refugees", "sweet young things" though they may be, or to any "dreadlocked black males" -- who, according to a BLM adjacent speaking about the Sweeney jeans/genes kerfuffle, apparently prefer big butts to big boobs. However, Wikipedia's article on Kirk certainly provides something in the way of a possibly smoking gun in the tranny department:
Wikipedia: "Kirk argued against gender affirming care for transgender people, saying, 'We must ban trans-affirming care — the entire country. Donald Trump needs to run on this issue', according to Media Matters.[108]
Kirk stated that 'there are only two genders' and that 'transgenderism and gender 'fluidity' are lies that hurt people and abuse kids'."
Given that so many rather thuggish if not psychotic transgender ideologues get their knickers in twist at being disabused of their delusions, one might consider that a pretty solid motive to "take out" Kirk:
"Trump signs executive order to curtail gender transition for people under 19; Move is latest push by Trump to reverse policies set by the Biden administration to protect transgender people"
Though I kinda think Kirk was barking up the wrong tree, or was at least contributing to the transgender clusterfuck -- a classic, one for the history books, on par with tulip manias -- with his rather dogmatic insistence, no more than an article of faith, that "there are only TWO genders". Though at least partly right, at least from the viewpoint of feminist orthodoxy -- lab-leak phenomena and all that -- since they will assert, scientifically tenably, that there are two TYPES of genders, masculine and feminine, each of which is a SPECTRUM -- a binary spectrum, so to speak:
"How The Jews Conquered Ireland; Most at the forefront of the battle to save our nation have worked this out by now. Those who still deny it are most likely in their pockets"
Perfect. I can count on one hand the number of times I've got down on my knees to pray for a positive outcome of something and last night was one of them. I'm so sad.
Thanks Anneliese
My prayers didn't work last night either.
It is so indescribably sad - for all sorts of reasons. Primarily for the family he has left behind.
I don't quite know where things will go from here - but it has shown us we have to turn around the dangerous and dark emotionality that has got us here. Exactly how we do that I don't know - the usual answer would be to hold Charlie Kirk himself up as a brilliant example of how to do that.
As I've just suggested in a recent comment here, you might consider that he had some clay feet, or was standing on some rather shaky ground that may be part and parcel of the general problem.
We all have clay feet and stand on shaky ground at times.
The thing about Charlie Kirk isn't his views, shaky or otherwise, but that he passionately believed the way to resolve our divisions and to bring people together, as human beings once again, was to talk, to debate, to thrash through ideas in a respectful way.
That's what he represented.
The shooter and, quite clearly, a large number of those we might describe as 'woke' who celebrated this assassination do not fundamentally believe this is the right way forward. That's a big problem.
I was very involved in conservative politics in Phoenix, AZ for several years during which time I met Charlie and heard him
speak several times. He was truly a gentleman and a decent, caring, open and honest man. He treated everyone whom he debated with respect and let them speak openly even when they were challenging him and denigrating him. He believed that the 1st Amendment was imperative for open discourse regardless if the parties agreed. He was a man of deep faith and I saw him touch so many young people here in AZ. Today’s assassination of Charlie will not end his work. It will awaken a million young Charlie Kirk’s to carry on his message. Charlie is alive within everyone’s hearts. May his family be granted peace and strength through these dark, dark days. RIP Charlie and THANK YOU.
God I hope you are right. When I listened to him I admired his vast knowledge but more his deep faith. We should all be more Charlie Kirk.
"... we shouldn’t make political capital out of such a tragedy..."
Have you ever asked "them" why? Do it, the answer will be edifying in the extreme, and equally infuriating.
I'll drop a clue: it's the same answer, formulated differently, that teachers give when explaining why victims of bullying/assault/harassment shouldn't defend themselves or take justice on their tormentor.
Because if you're in a game of power politics, and you can convince the opposing sides that them doing and saying to you, what you're doing to them is wrongbadevil, then you and your opposition will be working towards the same end goal: your victory.
And I hate it is so, but my emotions won't change reality.
His assassination is making news here in Aus.
Especially in the younger cohorts, they are very much angered.
Another Australian here. My watch buzzed,l this morning, and and I looked down and saw "Charlie Kirk Assassin in Custody".
I sat down on my arse and cried. I'm a 63 year old ex soldier, and Ive been through hard times I can't begin to describe, but I still had a little weep.
I've followed this fine young man for about 5 years now, as he went into the lions den (aka US Uni campuses) and presented his arguments with grace and wit and logic. The last time I saw him was when he gave it real good to the wokesters at the Oxford Union a few weeks ago.
All he wanted to do was talk, and gently persuade people. And they shot him down like a dog in front of his wife and two little babies. No image has ever moved me as much as the picture of Charlie with his family, his beautiful wife, his daughter in pink with frilly shoes and his son wearing a party hat. What a man! What a deservedly proud and good man.
Charlie was the most moderate of conservatives. I think that his appalling public execution will bring out the less moderate, and deservedly so. If you try to talk to people and they shoot at you, your options are limited.
And meanwhile, if I was AOC or Mamdani or any of those other loonies in the US, I'd be keeping a real low profile.
So, so sad. His poor babies will never know their Daddy. 🙏😪
LSWCHP
Charlie Kirk’s assassin is not in custody. Given that it was a professional hit, his assassin may never be known.
I agree that it looks like a professional hit. A long rifle at a distance fired once and accurately. That said, I just don't understand what the reasoning behind such an assassination would be. Who would pay to murder Charlie Kirk? If it turns out your supposition is right, that someone high up in the chain of political command ordered this murder, then America is inches away from civic breakdown, or civil war. On the other hand, the idea that a maniac, some lefty marinated in woke nonsense, like the crank who tried to kill Trump on the golf course, could pull this off, is equally difficult to grasp. No matter what, you can't loathe these people enough.
I quoted the incorrect news headline that arrived on my phone. It was widely reported at first that the shooter was in custody.
Here in Australia, I woke to the tragic news that Charlie Kirk had been killed.
He was a GOOD man, it’s heartbreaking.
Dammit.
I looked at my watch. His children will be waking up, and looking for their Daddy.
Dammit.
Beautifully put rigger. This was a truly barbaric act. We can only hope it does trigger some reflection from the left.
> "It is hard to convey my sense of shock, grief, and anger this morning. Charlie Kirk was a decent guy, a family man, brutally murdered doing what he loved doing. And what was that?"
Shocking. "Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_N._Welch
A tragedy of course, though, as Stalin argued, (any) one death is a tragedy -- ask not for whom the bell tolls, and all that -- but a million is simply a statistic -- we're a dying breed, so to speak. Though that tends to raise the question as to who or what led to that particular tragedy -- somewhat "amusing" to note that a couple of potential candidates, or patsies for the perpetrator is someone in the "tranny" crowd, or maybe a BLM "enforcer":
"Alexander Dugin and the assassination of Charlie Kirk: .... In conversations with the Baron of Gates of Vienna, the most likely suspect for a patsy could be a tranny, or a dreadlocked black male since the story about the murder of a stunning Ukrainian refugee on a train recently was peaking at the time, and by a black male with dreadlocks."
https://vladtepesblog.com/2025/09/11/alexander-dugin-and-the-assassination-of-charlie-kirk/
https://www.actforcanada.ca/p/vladtepes-blog-september-11-2025
Maybe somewhat ironic that Kirk's murder happened the day before 9/11, "proud towers" and all that ...
In any case, can't say much about any possible connections to any "Ukrainian refugees", "sweet young things" though they may be, or to any "dreadlocked black males" -- who, according to a BLM adjacent speaking about the Sweeney jeans/genes kerfuffle, apparently prefer big butts to big boobs. However, Wikipedia's article on Kirk certainly provides something in the way of a possibly smoking gun in the tranny department:
Wikipedia: "Kirk argued against gender affirming care for transgender people, saying, 'We must ban trans-affirming care — the entire country. Donald Trump needs to run on this issue', according to Media Matters.[108]
Kirk stated that 'there are only two genders' and that 'transgenderism and gender 'fluidity' are lies that hurt people and abuse kids'."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Kirk#Death
Given that so many rather thuggish if not psychotic transgender ideologues get their knickers in twist at being disabused of their delusions, one might consider that a pretty solid motive to "take out" Kirk:
"Trump signs executive order to curtail gender transition for people under 19; Move is latest push by Trump to reverse policies set by the Biden administration to protect transgender people"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/28/trump-executive-order-transgender-transition
Though I kinda think Kirk was barking up the wrong tree, or was at least contributing to the transgender clusterfuck -- a classic, one for the history books, on par with tulip manias -- with his rather dogmatic insistence, no more than an article of faith, that "there are only TWO genders". Though at least partly right, at least from the viewpoint of feminist orthodoxy -- lab-leak phenomena and all that -- since they will assert, scientifically tenably, that there are two TYPES of genders, masculine and feminine, each of which is a SPECTRUM -- a binary spectrum, so to speak:
https://lascapigliata.com/2018/03/27/how-conflation-of-sex-and-gender-became-a-tool-of-transgender-ideology/
Are you sure this was not just another piece of theater?
You think this is theatre? Good grief.
Look at the footage:
https://gemmaodoherty.substack.com/p/is-the-charlie-kirk-video-legit
More:
https://gemmaodoherty.substack.com/p/proper-charlies-glitches-in-the-matrix
Even JFK was fake:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/ask-not-what-your-country-can-do
The Lizard People did it ...
"How The Jews Conquered Ireland; Most at the forefront of the battle to save our nation have worked this out by now. Those who still deny it are most likely in their pockets"
https://gemmaodoherty.substack.com/p/how-the-jews-conquered-ireland