- cross-posted to:
- us_news@lemmygrad.ml
- usa@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- us_news@lemmygrad.ml
- usa@lemmy.ml
Kenny Klipz has the goods. This is the real thing, most likely.
BTW it's not behind paywall so do our guy some good and give him some traffic for the scoop.
You must log in or # to comment.
Even if this is all bullshit removed activity to trick people into thinking they found the right guy I'm gonna suggest that that stop releasing shit to the media that makes this guy look good and based every time someone tries to say "uhhhh guys he's a lib"
Something a criminal wrote to be put out as a press release that the press will only coyly allude to, rather than publish.
Not a manifesto, more a confession letter.
Not a diss, but I think especially with the words on the casings the act was enough of a manifesto.
I'm glad to see that fake one sucking off the constitution as the pinnacle of human rights was fake tho
to the feds, i'll keep this short, you guys are really cool. you all have really large penises and your wives aren't cheating on you. you, the feds, aren't the ones writing this manifesto, i am. i killed that guy and i am guilty. he was alive, i used a gun and shot him, and he is no longer alive. i did that with my hands. the same hands i am using to write this note. the note clarifying i am guilty.
There's no banger of a quote in here we can use, unlike "The Industrial Revolution and its Consequences".
The one about being the first to be brutally honest is pretty good
"Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty."
Goes pretty hard
To the Feds, I'll keep this short, because I do respect what you do for our country.
lmao
Suck off the prosecutor and FBI at the top. Really playing for that acquittal.
I hope that happens just for the full hilarity of it. Dude could just go on talk shows and joke about the time he was accused of killing a guy, possibly did it wink, and now he's free
He's able to write the New York Times best seller If I Shot that CEO.
Which will make it all the funnier when he kills again.
The media is going to say that he was Clearly Very Disturbed
I already heard someone describe him as “possibly having a mental health episode, perhaps a psychotic break” on the radio
A guy arrested for a high profile murder of a CEO is seeming stressed in police custody? Clearly a suicide risk, probably gonna stab himself right through the back, I bet.
He gave Ted's one a 4/5 like he has critique and room for improvement, and then he comes out with this, a 3/5 at best
- Show
you're not allowed to discuss this on reddit lol
https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1hbdezi/removed_by_reddit/and still can't buy Yahya Sinwar's novel on Amazon (but you can sure find wrecker-printed editions of the communist manifesto with a nazi swastika on the cover)
A Reddit link was detected in your comment. Here are links to the same location on alternative frontends that protect your privacy.
262 words describing an ideological outlook? Truly STEM graduate level writing.
He won't reiterate the arguments against private health care because he's afraid the stack overflow mods will remove it for being a duplicate.
Never have I heard a truer statement in my life. Most engineers I've known could sum up their ideologies in 14.
damn it's short. 262 words. definitely one of the reasons they are not posting it because anyone would read it and it isn't as crazy or wild as I thought.
the guy is pissed, he identifies the problem, and what makes it intractable at this point. that is not something power wants spread around, because it's easy to read and digest.
The dude might be brainwormed but he carried out an action of class war and his stated reasons are literally class war.
He's our guy. I don't care whether people found some history of him being suckered into right wing culture war bullshit. Yeah and? The entire working class is deliberately divided along those lines to prevent people from uniting behind this shit.
If you're waging class war you're on my fucking team, the rest of the shit can be sorted out. Hitlerites can fuck off because they're not waging class war for the proles they're waging it for the protection of the bourgeoisie. But this dude is not a Hitlerite.
I think things are going to polarize and start to sort themselves out. Look at how the hogs are responding to the right wing grifters - Ben Shapenis' followers are turning on him.
Edit: please note, all of my recent predictions have been wrong.
He's our guy. I don't care whether people found some history of him being suckered into right wing culture war bullshit. Yeah and? The entire working class is deliberately divided along those lines to prevent people from uniting behind this shit.
Is he working class? I read his family owns nursing homes and radio stations.
(I haven't been very online past week just getting stuff here n there might be wrong.)
Pretty sure you were trying to respond to the post above mine.
100%, the class solidarity seen after what he did has momentum and it needs to keep going. that starts with looking passed whatever weird shit this dude thought about jacking off. he as far as i could tell, wasn't a hateful or bigoted person or anything like that. i can look passed basically anything else.
Good post. He's not the hero we wanted or even the one we deserved...but he is the one we have and he has my critical support. Its very different of course but in some ways I'm reminded of Julian Assange and the importance of not missing the forest for the trees.
Good post, though I think we should remain critical of his tactics. Mercin CEO's might get people to recognize each other, but it's never going to lead to systemic change that can only be achieved by organizing. I don't want dead CEO's, I want a different system that obviates them entirely.
I don't want dead CEO's
but it's never going to lead to systemic change that can only be achieved by organizing
No matter how much you organize, you're gonna have to off the CEOs at some point. They're not gonna hand over the reins peacefully and they are actively fighting against all materially significant "organising". Had Jeff Bezos been shot while Amazon was trying to crush unions, I am sure organising would become easier.
As an after effect, sure my Bureaucrats. I never said anything about nonviolence.
It's not the the end we desire. I think the distinction between ends and means is useful here (even if it's often stupid). Our goal is not to kill CEO's, and as a counterfactual (that would probably never happen), a CEO willing to surrender their company/wealth to employees or liquidate their for-profit insurance should not be killed, since they would not stand between us and our real goal/end.
a CEO willing to surrender their company/wealth to employees or liquidate their for-profit insurance should not be killed
Those who would do this already have. Unless it's at gunpoint. We do not have the capacity to demand it at gunpoint without being absolutely crushed at this point. There is no surrender option until leftist movements get much, MUCH stronger. Until then, there's no point crying over the deaths of the people who are slaughtering us from the boardrooms. This was an act of community defense.
I wish to live in a just and righteous society and as such part of my goal is that certain people see justice. A CEO giving up their company makes them no longer a CEO and thus out of the discussion. I do not believe in turning the other cheek. I won't say more because it's gonna amount to fedposting and that's bad.
As an after effect, sure my Bureaucrats. I never said anything about nonviolence.
You do not have to say the specific words to communicate their intent.
I think my posting makes it pretty clear I believe violence will be necessary in the ultimate transformation of society from the current mode of production to a more just one.
I just think that violence should be wielded strategically and by a mass movement, not by individual actors. I think even in a communistic state, violence should only be exercised in a collective fashion, never by an individual.
It is due to this commitment to violence exercised by many wills acting in concert that I reject the killing of individual CEO's by assassins. Because violence (not mere murder) and the authority to wield it stems from collective will.
Anything else arguing the individual authorized to murder is simply Nietzschean ubermensch shit, and we should generally reject it. Self-defense presents edge cases, and one might argue there's a kind of "self-defense" in this circumstance if one were so inclined, but an individual acting in self-defense won't ever change the system, so I think a point still stands here.
Ok, but, you can't deny the screaming voices of the proletariat right now in the wake of "the killing of individual CEO's by assassins". I mean, hell, we've got boomer white guys in Texas holding up DDD signs.
Not to spoil the fun but that sign guy was holding up Kamala Harris/anti-trump/anti-putin signs before the election. He's like a super deranged lib in Texas who went crazy and became a sign guy. I guess his posts weren't getting enough traction online....
I don't deny that voice and Lenin doesn't either (he speaks of the "revolutionary ardor" of the proletaritat). But we should always keep our eyes on the real prize - the transformation of society. I want a world where United doesn't exist, and until that proletariat is organized to actually dismantle the insurance system then killing CEO's might feel good but will not serve the actual end of transforming the system.
We cant transform shit until the CEOs are done. The proletariat doesn't need to be organized they need to be angry. We are at the agitation phase of the game. Phase one is revolution phase two is forming a communist government. Both the Bolsheviks and the Communist party of China only came into being after a ideological split of the revolutionary parties they were part of.
I think even in a communistic state, violence should only be exercised in a collective fashion, never by an individual.
I think in a communist society it should without a doubt be wielded in a collective fashion.
It is due to this commitment to violence exercised by many wills acting in concert that I reject the killing of individual CEO's by assassins.
We don't live in a time where many wills are able to act in concert, for many reasons. The individual liquidation of CEOs is a net benefit, propaganda of the deed and all that.
Like a wise man once said, "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good"
The tactic of (essentially?) turning himself in (if accurate, of course) was certainly pretty stupid and worth criticizing.
But propaganda of the deed is good. Dead CEOs is a way to move toward that different system. Cut away the pretense that this is not a violent system, or that the opposition to it cannot be violent.
critical of his tactics
yea he should be in indonesia rn
MF had five days. He could have gone out into the woods and set everything used in the killing on fire, then went home and been like "I've been CAMPING for the past week what did I miss?" and lived his whole life free and clear.
he should have debated the CEO on reddit if he wanted to change hearts and minds. violence solves nothing. the CEO will live forever in our hearts.
but it's never going to lead to systemic change
I think if it happened enough you'd get either gun control or healthcare. Assuming people are doing it with homemade weapons then it'd have to be a healthcare reform solution but I'd guess they'd try gun control first (then someone gets shot over it and they realise they can't).
Not system change though, you're correct there.
I was thinking about that too, and it's fucking hilarious that now it's a fully republican-led system and they're faced with either doing gun control or doing healthcare
Oh yeah, we might get some reactionary (in the quite literal sense) legislation that might be "good" in certain respects.
However, we would likely not abolish the profit motive through CEO assassinations.
I sure hope they ban firearms. Dude was a stem student, if not a 3d printed glock it would have been a :the-doohickey:
I don't want dead CEO's, I want a different system that obviates them entirely.
Porque no los dos?
If the one happens during the course of the other, everyone can have a little treat.
Mercin CEO’s might get people to recognize each other, but it’s never going to lead to systemic change
Depends how many, to be fair. Of course it should be zero because murder is bad and wrong.
Opening
"On Violence."Yeah, I think murder is wrong. I think that there's a better way. It's called Violence.
he didn't get systemic change, but if you asked me if i'd rather this CEO be dead or alive after what he's done it's not even a question, i want him dead just like he killed all those other people. him being gone alone is a good deed done. will it change anything? no. he's gonna be replaced if he hasn't already been. did he get what he deserved? we all agree he did, so that's a good thing.
damn it's short
Well, yeah, the cops only had so much time to write it on the drive to the mcdonalds
262 words.
actually at the end he's like "and thats why its actually really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really cool to kill ceos"
This still seems pretty not real. This is basically a note saying "I did it, it was me and only me and the proof is I own a computer (I work in engineering so you won't find any "real" evidence). I did it because I hate United. Anyway I know nothing, have no message to send, and couldn't possibly write more bye now"
Even if this really came from the police, if you wanted to convict somebody with very little effort, this would be the perfect evidence to "find". That in reality makes no sense to actually write.
I mostly agree with you, but on the other hand this reads like something I would write if I didn’t trust myself to properly intellectually represent my beliefs. Very “I’m a dummy but this was the right thing to do. Go read a book about it”
That part seems pretty fine, but the "yeah I did it, also feds are cool, also vague mention of vague evidence the public doesn't know about so it'll sound more real" is what makes the alarm bells ring
The spiral notebook, if present, has some straggling notes
that "if present" seems really unnatural, awkward, and the kind of thing a cop would say
I mean he is still alive and presumably going to stand trial.
If they Epstein him though I'd say he definitely didn't do it.
Funny I'd believe he did it, if they were to epstein him
The only situation would be if luigi is also in on it lol the only thing he disputed was the 10k in cash and that his backpack was waterproof. Not a "Faraday cage" lol
I think people are making outrageous overestimations of how competent the NYPD is. The idea that they essentially hired some deep state actor to pretend to be the guy to cover their asses while branching the conspiracy outside of state lines and fooling another department is so ludicrous to me like if they were gonna do that they would at least wait another month or two in case they find the real guy.
I think this whole thing is fun but the grasping at straws is pretty wild to me like the eyebrow thing was already refuted perhaps we just want the guy to be our Lenin and we’re mad that he’s actually just a techbro weirdo?
Lots of magical thinking going on IMO but I would be very hyped if I’m wrong about this
Let us have our HexAnon fun for once, OK?
Now if you’ll excuse me, I still have dozens of internet articles about digital compression that I have to read tonight to prove that the eyebrows were not the same!
I agree lol. Like if this was a setup then wtf does luigi get out of this, because he would clearly be in on it.
Ultimately he's a weird guy who did a cool thing. I wish people wouldn't focus so much on him and instead focus on the discourse and environment it created. I don't really care what he thinks, people are rabid for this to happen. And that's good. It's pretty clear this is the guy who did it and that's fine, on to the next one
Yup. Regardless of dude it has clearly done a good bit of work in letting people realize they can do things like openly advocate for a health insurance CEOs death. I doubt these people would have explicitly reprimanded someone for mentioning it before, but people just openly screaming about it now. A good environment!
Regarding the "he only disputed the cash" bit:
My understanding is that this isn't the murder trial, so none of the other items would have been brought up because they aren't relevant to the hearing. The only thing this hearing was for is whether he should be held behind bars and for how long, and the cash was relevant to make that determination because it was being argued that the cash (and in particular the fact that part of it was foreign currency) indicates that he's a flight risk and is trying to flee the country. That was being used as the basis for asking the judge to rule that he should be held without bail pending trial.
This wouldn't be the time or place for disputing the facts of the case because there is no case at this moment. No trial has occurred, and this courtroom doesn't even have jurisdiction to hold a trial for this case. The New York prosecutors office would need to make a request for extradition and he would need to be tried in a New York court.
So the fact that he only disputed the cash doesn't necessarily mean he is admitting the rest belonged to him. It's just as likely that the cash is the only thing that was disputed because it was the only thing that was presented as being relevant to make a decision regarding bail, and the other items weren't commented on because they weren't relevant to the matter being discussed.
If someone has more knowledge on everything that was presented in court and can comment further on the matter, feel free to correct me!
I just saw CNN's reporting on the hearing, and they only refer to it as foreign currency and didn't give specifics.
I don't know if other sources give more detail.
To be clear: the only thing being reported on is that he disputed the 10k in cash and his backpack. I'm increasingly starting to think this isn't a frame up job but afaik we have no idea what he said or did not say about the manifesto or the gun...or whether or not he was even questioned about those things in the first place.
To the Feds, I'll keep this short, because I do respect what you do for our country.
if I hadn't seen his Twitter already Id have a hard time believing you could get to the point of gunning down a CEO and still respect the fedsHis family deaths and his own surgery give him a personal experience with the insurance issues that have probably driven this. I can see "the feds are good" and "I despise and want to kill health insurance CEOs" co-existing if you haven't read other theory. The main principle of his radicalisation is his lived experience, not books, so he has all the brain worms but the material conditions have still driven him to this.
If he actually has any time behind bars (i.e. before he is Epsteined), I'd be shocked if he retains his respect for the pigs through it.
So we know he was very much not a liberal (Jreg type of guy, every extreme at once) but it strikes me as a liberal thing to say. Checks and balances, maybe he likes that the feds track down corruption (lol)?
stay losing.
but also 
fucking stemlords
