Kit Knightly – Off Guardian Sept 16, 2025

Since the assassination of Charlie Kirk last week the theories have been flying thick and fast.
The alleged shooter has been identified as a pro-transgender campaigner into furry internet culture and also a traditional Republican Mormon. He is both a leftist anti-fa agent and a far-right “Groyper” fan of Nick Fuentes.
Others suggest the alleged shooter, regardless of his politics, is just a patsy, and Kirk was killed by Mossad operatives for turning against Israel. People are analyzing video footage minutely looking for bullet paths and possible suspects in the security entourage.
Still others maintain Kirk was never killed at all, and the whole thing is a fake psy-op.
We have yet to receive the “official version” from on high but, when we do, you can be sure it won’t satisfy everybody, and debate will rage.
Thus far, there is only one certitude we can take away from the case – cancel culture is alright, really.
For years, the Republican position has been that leftist “cancel culture” – ruining lives and careers because of “offensive” social media posts – is ridiculous and morally wrong.
Not anymore, now massive social media campaigns are launched against anyone who celebrates, minimizes or even fails to adequately mourn the death of Charlie Kirk.
A searchable database of over 20,000 individuals celebrating Charlie Kirk’s murder will soon be available on our website.
It will be searchable by general location, employer, and industry type. Political violence can never be the answer.
— Charlie Kirk Data Foundation (@forcharliekirk1) September 12, 2025
Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m no fan of celebrating murder. And, indeed, would argue that those people posting videos cheering on the assassin are symptomatic of greater societal problems in various ways (being shocking for engagement, cheapening of human life and general disengagement from reality chief among them), but that doesn’t mean people should be doxed, bullied or fired.
Free speech needs to cover inappropriate jokes and just generally being a bad person.
Someone who used to espouse that belief is Elon Musk…

…but that hasn’t stopped him – or, at least, the person running his X account – from abandoning his commitment to absolute free speech in favour of the hysterical doxxing of anyone who doesn’t look sad enough.
Other high-profile rightwing talking heads are taking part:
Also, just reported you 🙂 everyone else should too. Screw “free speech” shut them down @elonmusk
— Lauren Witzke (@LaurenWitzkeDE) September 13, 2025
Free speech isn’t free from consequences. Tomorrow, we are filing a PRIVILEGED motion to censure Ilhan Omar and remove her from her committees. This will force a vote.
Half measures are not enough any more.
Ilhan Omar is not compatible with our American values. She has no… pic.twitter.com/SwTe0sML5b
— Rep. Nancy Mace (@RepNancyMace) September 16, 2025
Not since the death of George Floyd has performative moralizing been so important to keeping your job. A parallel that is likely anything but accidental.
This culminated, earlier today, with Attorney General Pamela Bondi announcing that “hate speech has no place in society”:
Pam Bondi now openly admits that the U.S. government will target anyone they label as using “hate speech.”
She says hate speech is not free speech and has no place in society, especially after what happened to Charlie Kirk. pic.twitter.com/tIP6po5vqz
— Shadow of Ezra (@ShadowofEzra) September 16, 2025
“Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences”? “Hate speech is not free speech”? These are the most absurd tenets of the anti-freedom “liberal” class, suddenly being embraced by the right wing. It’s yet another example of both “sides” backing the same broad policies for different reasons.
To complete the gaslighting world-inversion, those same people who would use those arguments to get people fired for racist jokes only two weeks ago, are suddenly bridling at them.
It’s just like the vaccines. Remember that? When Trump announced Project Warp Speed, and mainstream outlets were publishing warnings about “rushed” vaccines, only to totally flip when Biden “won” the 2020 election. They do it this way on purpose.
Republican or Democrat, under the right circumstances, both teams now agree that free speech doesn’t mean the freedom to say things that are morally wrong or factually incorrect or…whatever. Which is actually the antithesis of free speech. Everyone believes in free speech they agree with.
Ironically enough, Charlie Kirk himself provided a fine riposte to the “hate speech” talking point:

Whatever did or didn’t happen to the man, and whoever is or isn’t responsible, there’s no denying he got that right.
—
Support Off-Guardian:

LOL..
‘Cancel Culture’…
I suppose it’s a matter of perspective and how far one goes in the act of cancellation..
So you may as well go full tilt..
..because apparently its a viral phenomenon just like covid and very pertinent to both sides of an imaginary political divide that can’t help but agree on absolutely fucking everything…
that takes the imbecile, its grifting nature and what passes for its ideology, all the way from song and dance on the yellow brick road in what used to be Kansas, to an open casket funeral and bizarre social media rituals…
Curious is the recent preponderance of transgenders committing or associated with public shootings. A common denominator of this group would certainly be THERAPISTS. I would suggest that a competent investigator would be interviewing the respective mental professionals associated with these killers. They may also find a common denominator among these gurus, like engaging in the creation of Manchurian candidates. In the case of Robinson, his therapist may have already left for Tel Aviv.
Check out the photo of the scrubber beneath headline. Looks negroidal, like some quadroon.
They’ve ALL got their first wish, to end free speech. Every. Last. One.
@Anti Commie
yeah no doubt. as if zwog is ‘cancelling’ mulattoes and mongrels
It is lazy to use the Bible to back up your morality when there are always more rational arguments. These ones will often require a social view and not just talk of individual freedom. The latter, in fact, often has to be sacrificed