Check out this bit from a PJ Media article:
Without much warning, the Sinclair Broadcast Group halted plans to broadcast a tribute to Charlie Kirk in the same time slot as the suspended "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" show. According to reports, multiple local ABC affiliates received a number of credible threats to their people and facilities prior to Friday’s scheduled airing of the tribute.
This is the left: using violence and threats of violence to shut down free speech and influence the political process. Right now, it may only be terrorism, but at what point is terrorism so wide spread that it should be classified as civil war?
- More leftist terrorism: "Woman accused of arson at El Paso church before Charlie Kirk vigil"--El Paso Times. Marynka Zarina Marquez has been arrested for the arson with the intent to damage a house of worship, that being an evangelical church the night before a Charlie Kirk vigil was scheduled to take place.
A rainbow-colored paper plate allegedly left at the scene had been written in black marker, "C Kirk is in hell with nothing but (words blurred out)," reported Channel 7-KVIA, showing a photo of the plate shared by Beth El Bible Church's building manager.
Ian (aka Lawdog) over at The Bugscuffle Gazette makes the case (from extensive firsthand experience) against wanting a civil war or revolution. Can't say as I disagree.
ReplyDeletehttps://thelawdogfiles.substack.com/p/you-say-you-want-a-revolution
I don't think it matters if you want it or not, we're just bit players on a universal scale. Everything is ultra-local where you may have some small pull.
DeleteEverything else is both fake and gay.
I don't want it. Just thinking about the surge in what is clearly politically motivated violence and wondering what would be the demarcation between the political violence and civil war.
Delete