Jimmy Kimmel show suspended after Charlie Kirk comments

[Occam's Banana]

You don't understand what I'm saying. What I'm saying to you is, just because the propaganda programmers and influencer bullshit artists flood the net with people that insane doesn't mean they're a significant portion of the population.

If by "significant" you mean "large" or "numerous", then they don't need to be a significant portion of the population.

In France, the instigators of and participants in the Terror were not a significant portion of the population.

In Russia, the Bolsheviks and Lenin's "useful idiots" were not a significant portion of the population.

In Germany, the Nazis and Röhm's brownshirts were not a significant portion of the population.

None of those groups needed the participation of most (or even many) people - they just needed it of enough people.

 

[nikcers]

If by "significant" you mean "large" or "numerous", then they don't need to be a significant portion of the population.

In France, the instigators of and participants in the Terror were not a significant portion of the population.

In Russia, the Bolsheviks and Lenin's "useful idiots" were not a significant portion of the population.

In Germany, the Nazis and Röhm's brownshirts were not a significant portion of the population.

None of those groups needed the participation of most (or even many) people - they just needed it of enough people.

I have seen numbers floated out there as lower than 3% to carry out a successful insurgency.

The revolution in 1776 started small but grew into a whopping 33% according to some reports.

I think it comes down to the fact that the huge percentages of people who have been polled in this country and that usually lean to the left who would not fight to defend the country if it were invaded.

This is a significant amount of the population and I have been studying this for a while and what it comes down to is we have a lot of people who don't have roots in this country and who don't consider themselves as American.

Jimmy Kimmel represents people like that. He has made claims that the US government is tyrannical and that he has Italian citizenship just in case he needs somewhere to run to.

Thats how most of them think. They wouldn't fight and die to protect America if it were truly threatened they would run and hide in another country.

So all it takes is a smaller percentage of people willing to fight and die for there to be a revolutionary change in government.

 

[jmdrake]

I agree on everything you said, except on this point.

To "us" they are making noise. And by "us" I mean any normiesexual who is politically to the right of Josef Stalin.

(And yes @jmdrake I include "normal" black folks in that as well. Your heads are in the guillotines as well as us White people.)

To them, they are working themselves up into, what they perceive to be a justified killing frenzy.

Genocide, gaining momentum.

It's happened so many times in the past, and "they" have made it very clear, that is what they intend to do, kill every last one of us, that I am flabbergasted at folks that refuse to take "them" at their word.

When they say they want you and your family dead, believe them when they say it.

I believe the only problem with your analysis is that it obfuscates what is "left" vs "right." Was Adolf Hitler really to the "right" of Joseph Stalin?

See: https://ronpaulforums.com/threads/was-nazism-fascism-left-wing-or-right-wing.572394/post-7313932



I looked at the factors that Metatron put in the video (thanks @Occam's Banana for sharing it) and Trump is very close to complete fascism.

 

[jmdrake]

//

 

[nikcers]

I believe the only problem with your analysis is that it obfuscates what is "left" vs "right." Was Adolf Hitler really to the "right" of Joseph Stalin?

See: https://ronpaulforums.com/threads/was-nazism-fascism-left-wing-or-right-wing.572394/post-7313932



I looked at the factors that Metatron put in the video (thanks @Occam's Banana for sharing it) and Trump is very close to complete fascism.

Fascism certainly requires a dictatorship and dictatorships typically don't let you have guns.

Modern Russia is closer to Fascism because the people are not allowed to have guns.

The party in power in the USA is the second amendment party. They are no where near close to taking the guns.

 

[Occam's Banana]

https://x.com/ComicDaveSmith/status/1969135423428706738

I oppose the FCC threatening ABC but not for libertarian or moral reasons. I oppose it strictly on strategic grounds. It’s a bad idea. We were already destroying Kimmel, no need to have the refs cheat now. It only gives the liberal media class a boost of energy.

I would morally and on libertarian grounds oppose the government pressuring a company to fire a comedian for telling a joke, no matter how awful or inaccurate the joke was.

That’s not what this is. Jimmy Kimmel stopped being a comedian years ago. He became a regime mouth piece willingly and knowingly. He is part of the cathedral.

This is closer to the CIA feuding with the FBI. It’s two criminal elements of the regime fighting, both of whom are enemies of liberty.

Full podcast on this today. [see video below - OB]



Dave Smith | Kimmel, Free Speech, and the State | Part Of The Problem 1306
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkJFXgYuaFc
{Dave Smith | 19 September 2025}

On this episode of Part Of The Problem, Dave discusses his new opinions about Jimmy Kimmel being fired for his Charlie Kirk comments, how this plays into the broader values of libertarianism, and more.

 

[Occam's Banana]

https://x.com/jeffreyatucker/status/1969031288884539503

For five years, some of us have been sounding the alarm about the government-directed attack on free speech that censored whole topics and communities in every possible venue.

It was totalitarian. We litigated, we exposed, we FOIA'd, we documented in great detail, we did what we could. The censorship has been far-reaching, top down, pervasive, well funded, and directed toward one end: political conformity.

No one in the mainstream media cared and you know why? Because they were the censors and thrilled to play that role. Not even the Supreme Court could be bothered. It's still going on now: YouTube and LinkedIn reliably remove posts about vaccine injury.

Now some lying loser late-night bubble dweller gets his show canceled and I've heard more about free speech than at any point in years. These same people had nothing but cheers when Alex Jones, every Covid skeptic, and even the sitting US president was silenced. Now these same people are suddenly channeling John Stuart Mill. The hypocrisy is astounding. This is next-level Orwell stuff.

 

[Occam's Banana]

 

[Anti Federalist]

I believe the only problem with your analysis is that it obfuscates what is "left" vs "right." Was Adolf Hitler really to the "right" of Joseph Stalin?

Defining those terms are always difficult.

I probably should have said Chairman Mao.

Or perhaps Pol Pot or Enver Hoxha, both of whom complained that Mao was not communist enough.

 

[Anti Federalist]

For five years, some of us have been sounding the alarm about the government-directed attack on free speech that censored whole topics and communities in every possible venue.

It was totalitarian. We litigated, we exposed, we FOIA'd, we documented in great detail, we did what we could. The censorship has been far-reaching, top down, pervasive, well funded, and directed toward one end: political conformity.

No one in the mainstream media cared and you know why? Because they were the censors and thrilled to play that role. Not even the Supreme Court could be bothered. It's still going on now: YouTube and LinkedIn reliably remove posts about vaccine injury.

Now some lying loser late-night bubble dweller gets his show canceled and I've heard more about free speech than at any point in years. These same people had nothing but cheers when Alex Jones, every Covid skeptic, and even the sitting US president was silenced. Now these same people are suddenly channeling John Stuart Mill. The hypocrisy is astounding. This is next-level Orwell stuff.

 

[Occam's Banana]

 

[Occam's Banana]

 

[Anti Federalist]

If by "significant" you mean "large" or "numerous", then they don't need to be a significant portion of the population.

In France, the instigators of and participants in the Terror were not a significant portion of the population.

In Russia, the Bolsheviks and Lenin's "useful idiots" were not a significant portion of the population.

In Germany, the Nazis and Röhm's brownshirts were not a significant portion of the population.

None of those groups needed the participation of most (or even many) people - they just needed it of enough people.

Yeah, I meant to make that point as well.

Sometimes those brushfires of the mind run out of control.

 

[Anti Federalist]

 

[Anti Federalist]

 

[Anti Federalist]

 

[jmdrake]

Defining those terms are always difficult.

I probably should have said Chairman Mao.

Or perhaps Pol Pot or Enver Hoxha, both of whom complained that Mao was not communist enough.

So why is Trump trying to mirror Mao and why are Republicans either cheering him on or being strangely silent or (in your case) mentioning it for a little bit then moving on to your "real enemy" which are the liberal/transqueer/wokism crowd? Seriously, it wasn't Obama, Biden or Harris who started taking permanent equity stakes in U.S. companies. And it seems like the transqueers are being set up to be the new "sand-n******" scapegoats. 9/11 being an inside job is now almost mainstream. But you know what else is? The idea that we're being lied to about Charlie Kirk's killer. At this point Michael Savage, Candace Owens, and even Steve freaking Bannon have come out and said the official story is complete BS. From the fact that the rifle is suspiciously missing from the video where the "shooter" escaped from the roof to the fact that the Discord messages seem scripted. Oh...but we're going to ram through gun control in the name of taking it from trans people. (And the shooter wasn't trans but MAYBE dating one). We're going to applaud the FCC getting Jimmy Kimmel suspended because.....well I'm not sure exactly. All because we think socialism in America is going to necessarily go the way of Cambodia as opposed to the way of Norway. "They hate us for or freedom.....so give up your freedom...." Yeah...I heard that in 2001. I didn't think I'd ever hear such a position advocated here.

The further this mess goes, the more it is clear that the agorists are right. @PAF, @CCTelander, @acptulsa and others, everybody who doubted your approach owes you and apology whether they are ready to admit it or not.

 

[jmdrake]

"Charlie Kirk is dead because of what people were saying on the Internet."

BULLSHIT!

 

[Voluntarist]

 

[Madison320]

Yes. I was trying to explain the argument.

In my opinion, the better strategy here is to fully prosecute the bastards who were involved in the big tech censorship! And eliminate the defense of "passive" censorship, where the government says, "This is a nice website you have; it'd be a shame if something happened to it".

To me, that'd be a better deterrent than using their game against them.

I agree and I know you were just explaining their position, not yours.

But I have 2 questions.

Do you think "biden big tech" and "trump fcc" were violations of the 1st amendment?

I think they both clearly are. I think that thing that bothers me the most about this whole topic is that people are constantly blurring the lines between govt censorship and private censorship. Govt censorship lessens your rights. Private censorship does not. So the only question should be "was the government involved" when there's a case of censorship.