What he said is actually worse than my vague portrayal of it, IMO. He justified all Israeli violence against innocent Palestinians because his perspective is that Hamas "started it" on 10/7. He literally said that Israel bears no responsibility. Nevermind that Israel killed Palestinians regularly in the years leading up to 10/7. A year before 10/7 they killed a bunch of kids and tried to blame it on Hamas. Finally admitted it when faced with facts. Why didn't Kirk or anybody on the right think that murderous aggression justified Hamas retaliation? They are fine with it when the shoe is on the other foot.
And if we take his point to its logical conclusion, then one can just argue that the liberal who shot Kirk is absolved because he was retaliating for the conservative killing two Dems in June, because to him that's the starting point.
Nope, better just to not condone any form of political violence.
View attachment 772615