See for yourself.
Warning: This post contains graphic hunting footage.
The official Charlie Kirk tale has it that he was shot in the neck with a .30-06-caliber Mauser. Despite being almost 120 years old, the .30-06 cartridge remains a favorite with hunters and marksmen. It proved itself in two world wars and has a solid reputation for cleanly taking down big game animals like elk, moose, and bear.
If you know anything about game animals, you’ll know they’re tough as nails. These aren’t creatures that sit on couches and surf the internet. Their whole day is spent sourcing food and evading predators in often unforgiving environments. They don’t have anything but their own bodies to help them do this.
Domestication softens, nature hardens.
Over 10 years ago, I was doing the long drive from Adelaide to Melbourne. Around 10-15 minutes after passing through Stawell, the sky was starting to dim. That’s the time of day when kangaroos start to come out. And so way up ahead, on this 100 km/h stretch of highway, I could see a small group of kangaroos on the opposite shoulder. Cars were coming in the opposite direction, and the roos were edging towards the road. The initial string of cars went past without issue, but the kangaroos were clearly taken with the idea of crossing the road.
The next car approaching in the opposite direction was a Ford Falcon, and one of the roos started edging perilously close to the road.
“Don’t do it!” I said.
He did it.
He hopped right in front of the Falcon, and the moment of impact occurred right as I was passing in the opposite direction.
“Shit!!” I said, and looked in the rear view mirror expecting to see mangled roo on the road behind me.
Instead, what I saw stunned me. The roo rolled on the asphalt, bounced back up on his feet, then hopped to the other side of the road. I don’t know what happened to him after that, but his movement looked fluid with no sign of injury.
If you get hit by a car at 100 km/h, bounce back up on your feet, and hop away from the scene, you are a certified stud, an absolute machine.
Wild animals are tough. Which brings me to the video below. I must warn that some viewers will find it upsetting, as it shows a beautiful deer being fatally wounded.
The guy who shoots the deer uses a .30-06-caliber rifle to do it. He shoots from 200 yards, the same distance from which Tyler Robinson allegedly shot Charlie Kirk.
If you can bring yourself to watch the video, note the way the deer reacts at the moment of impact. It instantly collapses and its head violently snaps.
The bullet strikes the deer’s lower jaw area, and exits through its upper back, right where its spine would be.
In addition to the presence of an exit wound, note the trail of blood on the ground.
No offence to Charlie Kirk, but he wasn’t a very robust or athletic specimen. Meaning, the bullet that took down that nature-hardened deer traversed an anatomical segment that contained more and tougher muscle and bone than Charlie Kirk’s neck could ever hope to contain.
Yet we’re supposed to believe Kirk’s neck did not even evince an exit wound?
Sure thing.
Instead of him collapsing and his head snapping back, as you would expect when the nerves passing through the neck receive such a violent impact, it is Kirk’s t-shirt that does some sort of bizarre boogaloo.
Instead of blood spraying everywhere, his t-shirt remains snow white. The people around him and the tent he was sitting in also remained unmarked.
It’s an impossible sequence of events.
Here’s the video of the deer being shot, followed by the clearly CGI-modified footage of the Kirk ‘shooting’. The footage begins a few seconds before the deer is shot - if you wish to skip this and the death throes, you can fast forward to 5:15 to view the bullet wound.
In all the videos I’ve watched there are soooo many anomalies. Of all the comments I have read no one who was there seems to have commented.
With everyone capable of watching in slow motion, how could they possibly think this could pass. The blood could have been an air squid and CGI. Love how there is no exit wound.
The 33 thing is weird too. How the 3 caps with 47 on them add up to 33 and the man hunt taking 33 hrs.
The shot of Tyler in his bedroom. On the computer is an image of 2 islands off the coast of New Zealand. Kash Patel saying “see you in Valhalla”. Guess what is on one of the islands. A resort called “Valhalla “! Hilarious.
The most compelling argument for an actual bullet, which I don’t think happened, is that it is an exit would from a bullet entering around his right ear.
diversion story just like the phone gun
Yes likely . When they give you A and then B and then possibly C, we know the truth is somewhere towards the end of the alphabet (agencies.)
> The most compelling argument for an actual bullet, which I don’t think happened, is that it is an exit would from a bullet entering around his right ear.
I hear you. Still doesn’t fit given all the other things we know. Including, for one example, how the bullet hole actually appeared before the rifleshot, on the victim’s t-shirt below his right shoulder, and moved across his t-shirt before jumping up onto his neck. Which sounds like 100% crazy talk but is caught on video plain as day.
Among other things.
The bullet hole jumping across the t shirt is clear as day on a video we have no way of knowing whether is was altered with CGI or not.
Videos lie. All the time. I’m not saying I know one way or the other and I think that’s the point of the video.
To fuel endless debate when none of us can know for sure.
Videos can easily lie. And ironically, that spot, I think, *is* itself an accident of CGI/AI used specifically to simulate a wound entry that wasn’t actually there.
In any case, this video is tacitly acknowledged as real by the official, mainstream “authorities” and media who show it and presumably use it in their own analysis of the events that day.
If this video — and the other, side-view video showing no bullet exit — were faked to make it look like Charlie *wasn’t* killed, then (1) it would still be evidence of official authorities and media presenting manipulated evidence to lie to the public, and (2) such fakery would be quadruply unlikely because it goes against the desired narrative that Charlie was killed. They want everyone (except truthers, whom they’ll probably attack as dangerous talkers later) — they want everyone to believe that the killing was real. So there’s miniscule to zero reason to suspect that they CGI’d a false moving spot into the video. It seems to me an infinitely greater probability that the spot was part of the CGI or AI tech whose job was to simulate an entry wound.
You said: “… I think that’s the point of the video. To fuel endless debate when none of us can know for sure.”
I agree. I think too many of the “mistakes” they make are too dumb and obvious once looked at by a critical mind. Either way, though, whether the moving spot existed in untouched video or was just added to fuck with us, both are damning proof of deliberate manipulation by supposedly noble and trustworthy authorities.
Yes, that’s my point as well and you’ve added depth with your comment.
Whether the dot was intentionally left in the CGI video or was a mistake, it has served its purpose.
Thanks for your thoughts. I think the point of this entire “event” is to take us one step closer to ripping out one another’s throats instead of Charlie Kirk’s.
I left a more detailed comment in this thread about how I speculate there were two effects. A real time in camera effect for the audience and a CGI video close up that was released.
I worked in film for years and saw this kind of “move magic” and trickery pulled off well. It’s not that hard. If I were making a movie where I wanted to convince different groups of different interpretations of the same “event”, I would use two methods. One for the believers the “event” is entirely real and one for the skeptics who want to believe it’s entirely fake so the two divided realities can fight it out among themselves for the ultimate goal of the perpetrators of the “event”.
A divided populace is so much easier to control. Ask any rancher why they divide large herds of livestock into smaller groups in separate corrals. Control.
Really well said, and I’ll look for your other comment in a minute. Thanks for the reply.
https://open.substack.com/pub/nicolacharlesaustralia/p/i-am-the-white-rabbit-the-crimes?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4uz6nj
Truth on all
Thanks, Rosslyn. I’m listening to this tonight.
Valhalla is also a code name for the US witness protection program.
There you go!
And a resort in NZ (I think…).
Yes.. 33 is a number very symbolic in freemasonry : the highest degree a free mason can achieve. They are satan worshippers
The 50 people closest to Kirk were probably all plants to shield the real people from seeing the fakery. Then there’s the jet owned by the Zionist billionaire that departed a half hour later from the airport which was 13 minutes from the “assassination”. The plane illegally turns of its transponder while heading south then turns it back while the jet was on the same trajectory. When you see the route it looks like it never stopped until you see the 26 minutes missing. IMO 26 minutes is long enough for the plane to land, drop off Kirk get back in the air and on route and turn its transponder back on. I’m convinced Kirk is still alive but he was rapidly loosing his following because of Israel’s genocide of Palestine. Kirks Zionist promotion was becoming irrelevant as people were waking up so they put him out to pasture with Epstein and some of the others whose rolls were no longer useful to globalist elite that created Isrealhell. If they wanted him dead they would have blown his head off in front of everyone to send a message
https://open.substack.com/pub/nicolacharlesaustralia/p/i-am-the-white-rabbit-the-crimes?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4uz6nj
Enjoy truth.
Refreshing !
Yes, this sh*t is incredibly almost funny.
And, the widow’s talk at the funeral is 33 mins long. Then the “G” ring in her hand.
https://open.substack.com/pub/nicolacharlesaustralia/p/i-am-the-white-rabbit-the-crimes?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4uz6nj
Serious weirdness. The quantity and nature of the anomalies breaks through all probabilities of chance/randomness. It’s great to see people notice, few as they are.
5:22 is a better mark if you want to go straight to the wound and skip the death throes.
Good point, I added a note in the article for people to skip ahead to 5:15 if they don’t want to see the moment of impact.
Dandy Candy just stated that she watched the video, the one where they’re treading all around the sacred ground and where one of the guys uses Captain C. James Kirk himself own chair to stand on to untie the video camera in the back of the (holy shit) show. And because she knows everyone over there at Toilet Paper USA, she recognises the tec guy. So she calls him and demands to see the video. He says he’s afraid for his life and his wife’s life. But he does so. Dandy Candy then states that there was NO BLOOD. None whatsoever. So, she asks. What gives? He says he can’t tell. Because he’s afraid for his blah blah blah. She will, she promises her audience, get to the bottom of who ‘murdered’ Charlie. Gah. She and Megryn always remind me of those girls at Catholic school who like to swear and smoke and gossip and hang out with the boys at the back of the bike shed.
I think they made the fakery obvious and amateurish in order to cause as much division as possible and to mock. I have unfollowed anyone who is still taken in by the whole nonsense. If someone can’t see that it is fake, then they are either part of the con or criminally gullible and stupid.
Uva Brain !
I strongly suspect there is an element of mockery in these psy-op productions, as in “look how obvious we make it, and most of the herd still don’t get it! Idiots!!”
Yeah, they’ve been laughing at the sheep with all of these hoaxes for a while now. I think it was the LA shooter where the perp’s last name was CIAnCIA. I think the script writers get bored and start mocking everyone with how much they can get away with.
I hope you realize that by handing you the term “sheep” to derogatorily refer to your fellow human being, you are falling for psyops as well.
Who with half a brain wants to be a “sheep” these days?
Not of small note, Jesus repeatedly called His people His sheep and Himself the Good Shepherd.
Evil alienating people from God in any way possible. Choose your poison. Satan offers a myriad of them for every taste.
God Bless.
Yes. Exactly. Taking pleasure in the blind sheeple. May we always seek wisdom ..
only trust in God Almighty.
By using the derogatory term “sheeple” to refer to other people, you are falling for a psyop as well. Where do you think that term may have originated?
Designed to deter anyone from wanting to join Jesus’ flock as one of His sheep. Think about it.
Satan offers millions of flavors of poison. One for every taste.
God Bless.
Sometimes I wonder whether they’re always leaving such easy clues for us to see in order to maintain us as a pawn in a longer-term play. In other words, for example, do they eventually plan to explicitly paint truthers as “an enemy,” “a danger” against which to sell the masses on further clampdowns of speech and pre-crime laws, etc.? Playing various groups against each other requires cultivating each group and keeping it “on ice” til needed.
Could be wrong, but I like to consider possibilities.
Or just elderly and somewhat isolated. My Dad wasn’t always this easy to manipulate, but now he’s a full time caretaker for my chronically ill Mom and spends the days with his favorite podcasters and news reports on in the background most hours of the day for company.
How much healthier is me seeking out content like this though? My heart tells me this is all utter bullshit, and truly, that’s all I *need*, but still I’m here because I just want to have some more mainstream-acceptable “evidence” (that I know can ALSO be faked) for the enthralled people in my life that I love even though I know it’s pointless. :/
Thanks, Anthony, for this very compelling video to show people who have great difficulty in taking on anomalies that completely undermine the narrative.
Why did the kangaroo cross the road?
To show humans who’s boss.
It wouldn’t surprise me if there was more damage to the car than the kangaroo.
It was an uplifting moment when I saw him hop back up. No matter how many times I see a kangaroo, and I see them routinely when riding off-road, I still feel a sense of awe.
Same with koalas and echidnas.
Koalas are funny little buggers. One time I was climbing through a town called Uraidla, rode past a koala trying to climb the trunk of a gum tree. He couldn’t get traction and kept sliding back to the ground, it’s like he was drunk or something lol
When they fight, they look like little sumos:
(Warning: video contains F-bombs)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2pA0CVGhkg
lol yeah animals are amazing! The kangaroo story made my day
Also I do adore koalas, had no idea they fought like sumo wrestlers! Do you have any thoughts on the Australian fires in late 2019/early 2020? I remember seeing videos of cyclists and motorists stopping on highway as fires burned in the distance – they were giving their water bottles to koalas like babies to drink out of. Poor koalas looked SO thirsty.
Suddenly covid happened and everyone promptly forgot about Aussie fires.
Were those “wildfires” truly “wild”? Or started…somehow…?
I have no doubt they were deliberately started. A neat corridor of fire up and down the East coast again falls into the category of “remarkable coincidence”, and I’m getting a wee bit weary of those.
Interestingly, as the fires kicked off, the NSW Police released a statement saying most of the fires were deliberately, only to quickly retract the statement and replace it with one supporting the official narrative, which was that the fires were caused by “dry lightening”.
How they verified these dry lightening strikes was never revealed.
During that fire season, I rode along the Mawson trail in the Adelaide Hills, and there was a spot where grass next to the trail was charred. That section of the trail borders a large expanse of forest, and to get to that forest you need to descend into a valley-like area.
So either dry lightening ignored the mass expanse of dry foliage and selectively targeted the area right next to the trail, or an arsonist tried to get a fire going there and then escaped on the trail. Going into the valley and successfully starting a fire would likely have been a suicidal endeavor.
Whether the damage I saw was caused by government actors or simply a nutter arsonist, I can’t say. But the pattern of damage on the East coast was just too coincidental to be taken as an organic occurrence. There’s a lot of dry foliage in Australia, wheat fields etc … that it largely escaped the wrath of ‘dry lightening’ doesn’t make sense.
As to the motive, there is a proposed east coast rail link and some folks assumed the fires were part of an exercise to clear a path for that.
https://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/ipl/corridor-preservation-east-coast-high-speed-rail
Others submitted that the fires were part of an exercise to force people off rural land and into urban locations, where they can be sheep-penned in 15-minute cities.
Kangaroo Island, a beautiful unspoiled spot, was also hit hard. I don’t know if you ever saw that heart-breaking footage of a koala crying over its dead friend – that was on KI.
KI is no stranger to large bushfires, but the 2019-2020 fires scorched almost half the island, including a lot of farming properties. Many of the farmers were uninsured, because they could not afford the exorbitant premiums demanded of them by insurance companies. So after the fires many had no choice but to sell their properties.
Another thing – it was long ago well-established that Australia is one the most fire-prone places on the planet. We should unequivocally be a world superpower when it comes to fighting fires.
Incredibly, we still do not have a federal fleet of fire-fighting craft. The country still relies largely on small aircraft and helicopters – and planes loaned from California – to fight bushfires!
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-15/are-bigger-water-bombers-the-answer-to-bushfire-woes/11705502
Firefighters were so poorly equipped during the 2019-2020 fires that they began crowd-funding to buy decent equipment – only for their superiors to warn them to stop.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/dec/12/volunteer-firefighters-in-australia-warned-not-to-crowdfund-for-equipment
Australia is, in many ways, a backward and poorly-run country. But there is absolutely no excuse for this. There is a point at which the incompetence argument becomes so ludicrous that you can only assume it is intentional.
Maybe they faked his death and he’s going to be “resurrected” soon …
Yes. Or come back his own evil twin. But resurrected is even better….just like how the antichrist will imitate the resurrection of Jesus.
Maybe Charlie is the first act.
What was the motive for getting rid of Kirk? As for his death, decades of movies have made people think every gunshot causes a ginormous spray of blood, just like every fender bender results in both cars exploding.
LOL. I’ve seen people bleed profusely from small cuts, Kirk supposedly got blasted with a .30-06 and his tee and surroundings remain squeaky clean?
No worries.
As for motive, you could ask the parasites that pulled off this farce, but something tells me they won’t be very forthcoming.
However, his ‘assassination’ seems to be doing a great job of further polarizing people from each other. Divide-and-conquer is one of the oldest military strategies, keep the people bickering among themselves instead of turning their fighting energies towards governments and the supranational organizations that control them.
Also, ignorance of motive is no excuse to ignore what is clearly evident before your own eyes. If I see someone pulling off a swindle, the fact I don’t know their motive doesn’t change the fact I am witnessing a swindle.
The burden of proof is on the theorist. I find the theories interesting but still just theories.
“The burden of proof is on the theorist.”
Correct. So those pimping this nonsensical theory that Kirk was shot with a .30-06 by a guy who never evinced any sign of wielding a gun really need to start fronting with some proof. Because so far they have NONE.
Those pimping the theory that you can be shot by a .30-06 that doesn’t sound like a .30-06 and suffer injuries inconsistent with that caliber really need to start fronting with some proof.
Those who maintain there is something so magical about getting shot with a .30-06 that your mouth and nose temporarily disappear, your hairline recedes then grows back again, a letter magically disappears then reappears on your shirt, and your tee remains pearly white despite a spurting bloody wound really need to start fronting with some proof.
“I find the theories interesting but still just theories.”
Great. But you seem to spend an inordinate amount of time here objecting to everything I’ve written, while offering zero in the way of a coherent rebuttal…
No need to take it personally, it’s not. You’re describing inconsistencies based on one vidya when there were probably 50 or more in the crowd with videocams on. We have no idea if Kash Pajeet even confiscated the crowd’s movies. Then there’s the question of why the young marksman would throw away his life and take the fall. He still gets his day in court, and all the objections you’re making will be used in his defense.
“You’re describing inconsistencies based on one vidya when there were probably 50 or more in the crowd with videocams on. ”
So where are they?
“We have no idea if Kash Pajeet even confiscated the crowd’s movies. ”
Why don’t you ask the Kashman, instead of coming here and trolling me with suppositions for which there are zero support? The FBI is only an email away.
“Then there’s the question of why the young marksman would throw away his life and take the fall. ”
I’ve already explained to you that lack of apparent motive does not negate evidence of an obvious hoax.
But if you’re so keen to know why people would get involved with these psy-ops, why don’t you ask Lee Harvey Oswald, Jack Ruby, Timothy McVeigh, Martin Bryant, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, James Gargasoulas and all the others who got life or death sentences for their participation in staged mass-trauma events?
No one’s trolling you and no one’s paying me to advance any particular narrative. What amazes me about conspiracies is theorists are willing to believe in complicated plans requiring a Hollywood number of things to go right, but that, say, two asshole teens couldn’t just shoot up their high school. Isn’t it one of the goals of the CIA to make everything a psy-op?
For a guy not being paid to be a pest, you sure are good at being a pest.
You offer nothing even resembling a shred of evidence to justify the countless absurdities in the Kirk narrative, just incessant “but, but” rhetoric about motive. Oh, and something about every car in a Hollywood crash blowing up.
Gotcha.
“What amazes me about conspiracies is theorists are willing to believe in complicated plans requiring a Hollywood number of things to go right,”
Says the guy defending a ridiculous tale in which a guy allegedly gets shot and his t-shirt loses and then regains a letter, his hairline recedes and grows back again, his mouth and nose disappear, his pinky ring changes fingers, and he shows no exit wound despite being hit with a .30-06.
Oh, and he maintains all this extra-terrestrial bullshit was caused by a guy who was never seen with a gun.
LOL
When your explanations are far more ridiculous than the so-called conspiracy theories you are trying to debunk, it’s time to sit down and have a good chat with yourself.
“two asshole teens couldn’t just shoot up their high school”
Not without help:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PkqW7KGCCo
Now, I’m going to kindly ask you to stop trolling. I think you’ve made it clear you intend to give the information I’m presenting no credence. That’s fine – I can’t convince everyone.
The question is why you keep coming back to argue? I wouldn’t mind if you were making earnest contributions, with something in the way of evidence that supports the official narrative.
But you do not. And it’s getting old.
Your next post will contribute something useful to the discussion of why there are so many absurdities in the Charlie Kirk story, or it will be your last here.
This is not a playground for trolls and spooks.
I worked in Hollywood for many years and the neck wound is not a difficult effect to accomplish or pull off nearly perfectly by any competent SFX crew. I’ve watched the equivalent executed many times in camera on film which is highly sensitive in comparison to phone video cameras and under the scrutiny of professionals with trained eyes to spot any mistakes.
This is not a wish and a prayer to hope a number of Hollywood things go right. It is accomplished through expertise and planning. Failure is ingrained in Hollywood as “not an option”, the same as in this instance.
As for why only one video has been presented and pretty rapidly, it could easily be because they accomplished an effect in real time to the audience and had a video and only one available to the internet for broadcast.
And the “red herrings” that run amok in this case serve their purpose as well.
For instance releasing only one closeup video leading to confusion while the truth slips away on a flight to NZ or some other destination.
None of this is difficult. It only takes planning and rehearsing.
This is exactly how a film is shot and produced. I used to do it every day.
Why do *you* think “they” killed him? Too popular? Too powerful?
To further the agenda toward dissolution of America and the rest of the world for global rule.
I think Kirk was made and funded and guided and promoted to be both popular and powerful to serve their plans. He wasn’t “killed” because of those things. He was “killed” at the peak of those things to serve his purpose.
Charlie Kirk, his wife, Trump, Vance, et al, are players in this game who are compensated to one degree or another for their loyalty and game playing.
Kirk’s death is promoting many things such as a variety of hatred for many groups one to the other to keep the world population divided until the time is right in their plans to bring the divisions under one global umbrella but that will take a great deal of suffering and defeat perpetrated on the people of the world to accomplish.
Two of the most immediate agendas being furthered under the “blanket” of Kirk’s “death” is the abolishing of free speech and prosecution for exercising that right and gun control. By painting the “shooter’s” lover as transsexual on the heels of the Catholic school shooting ostensibly perpetrated by a transsexual they are floating the idea publicly of banning transexuals from gun ownership. If this is accomplished, group after group after group will be systematically banned until all guns are banned.
Once the American public is unarmed……well….you can imagine.
I think those are good questions. The young shooter may be playing a simple role for a large lifelong payout.
Once he’s played his part will any of us be capable of knowing what becomes of him? Not likely.
His options are limited. Death penalty, suicide in prison.
> your hairline recedes then grows back again
You’re the first person I’ve seen mention this. I noticed that too and it was very strange/suspicious.
I think Mr E was the first to publicly point this out (that I’m aware of), so credit must go to him.
Another thing that seems to be getting overlooked is the way Kirk holds onto the microphone after supposedly being blasted with a .30-06. The deer’s reaction shows how unlikely that is.
Anyone who gets nailed in the neck is going to immediately and involuntarily drop whatever they’re holding. Unlike a bad actor, who has to remind themselves, “ok, it might be a good idea to drop the mike about now!”
I’m not much experienced in some of this, but that sounds right.
Also interesting of course was the anticipatory, “get ready” closing of the eyes just before the “trigger” was pulled on this.
Though it’s worth noting Mr. E propagates the idea that virtually every famous person is a male to female or vice versa post op trannny.
Which not only stretches credibility to its limits, but also makes one wonder what sort of agenda is being pumped?
I’m not sure and never have been after watching Mr. E for many years on other platforms (he has only recently appeared on SS) that he isn’t CO.
Thanks for posting. I must confess I’m not familiar with his other material/claims – I can only comment on the video he posted, and the anomalies he points out are present in the color version of the ‘graphic’ footage that quickly appeared on the net after this alleged ‘shooting’:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Kaz3ThWLKkuT
I agree that claiming every Tom, Dick and Swift is a post-op transsexual, without any compelling evidence, isn’t helpful to the skeptic cause.
I’ll say this and let it go because each person will decide for themselves what’s up –
I began watching Mr. E on YT likely a decade ago and I wondered then how he was passing the censors. Then he was on Bitchute and others. Now he has appeared on Substack when I never saw an interest in writing from him and he posts cute animal videos to win friends, which, again, I hadn’t previously known him to have an interest in and now I see many people quoting him and paying attention to him as if he’s trustworthy.
Well…anyone who spends years trying to convince viewers everyone in the public eye is a post-op transsexual is pressing an agenda. Whether a private one or an orchestrated one, IDK and it matters little.
I’ve been fairly sure for years the transsexual population was being set up politically to be used for some purpose or another and I think anyone can see as the aversion and hatred for this group has escalated this trans psyop is already serving a variety of political ends.
The most current and I think important one being GUN CONTROL. It will start with banning transsexuals from gun ownership and rapidly move from group to group. Disarming Americans is a necessary and difficult endeavor to reaching the globalists’ goals.
So…I see Mr. E promoting the idea everyone we see is a post-op trans for years and now here he is involved in this psyop where the shooter supposedly has a trans lover and Mr. E is one of the first persons known to have released this CGI doctored upclose video.
Hmmm……..
you must be slow or new to the game
Just asking ..is this the official video? Where did it come from
One of many unanswered questions.
Hi Colette,
the video featured in this article is an analysis by Mr E of footage that appeared on the Internet “almost instantly” after the footage. It’s the so-called ‘graphic’ footage the mainstream media pretends it doesn’t want you to see but made sure to mention widely:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Kaz3ThWLKkuT
As for where it came from, no doubt from the same place the absurd Charlie Kirk shooting story came from.
If that shooting was truly an open public event, there should be dozens of different videos available online.
But there aren’t.
Kirk fancied himself as a bit of a rock star and loved the sound of his own voice, so if this was a genuine event, and not a staged farce, he would have had a film crew capturing the event to facilitate more of his “Prove Me Wrong” and “Watch Charlie Kirk DESTROY [insert name of demographic hated by people dumb enough to worship Trump]!” YouTube fodder.
But no such footage is available.
If this was a genuine event, then there would be abundant CCTV footage of the shooting AND the shooter.
But there is not.
All we have are images in which the shooter does not have a gun.
Please hit me up anybody if you are able to locate the *official video, which is sanctioned by the State as they assert that Charlie Kirk was shot to death.
I have plowed through a few of them, but we have also been warned about “misinformation” online and so I do wish to see the official State evidentiary files.
> The burden of proof is on the theorist. I find the theories interesting but still just theories.
Your premise is screwy:
The “theorists” *are* proving their points.
What’s happening is that the perps, co-conspirators, and true believers are refusing to acknowledge them. That’s a completely different issue.
If you want to take this route, you will have to address many more questions:
Who was the doctor who declared Charlie dead?
How many people at the hospital and elsewhere saw the body?
Witnesses at the scene?
Alternate videos?
Blood at the crime scene tested?
Rifle tested?
People’s hands close to Charlie tested for gunshot residue?
Mystery plane?
On and on.
No. This isn’t true. I don’t have to address those questions. If I did, it would mean that authorities could literally get away with any scam they feel like pulling by not letting us into the autopsy room, or into their filing cabinets, or into their back rooms.
We’ve got an event pulled off in front of our own eyes (so to speak). The bad guys present as proof of a murder two or three videos, based on which they expect us to accept their narrative as true.
No one can be expected to waltz into places and disprove every assertion the authorities make. It’s much simpler than that.
In the real world, contradictions are impossible. They literally cannot exist. Two mutually exclusive statements cannot both be true at the same time.
The only thing that honest people have to prove is a single, essential, foundational aspect of the official narrative in order cause the whole structure to tumble. If you can prove, for example, that a high-powered rifle round that they claimed went through the neck of a victim but never came out the other side, you’re done. Assuming your evidence is clear enough.
(Since we’re relying on video put out by the authorities and mainstream media, we have every right to assume this video as our evidence. If it turns out that the guys behind this event altered those videos in order to mislead us into believing that the victim was *not* killed, that wouldn’t make any sense. And it would prove something just as bad anyway, which is that our authorities have wilfully manipulated video footage to lie to the public.)
Anyway, not only do we *have* that foundational contradiction solidly nailed, we also find *numerous* other contradictions and weirdnesses that belie the official narrative. True events don’t have myriad contradictions and unlikely weirdnesses. Fake ones do, for the same reason that they say you’d better have a damned good memory if you want to get away with a lie.
Another example. The moon landing.
If you want to disprove that the moon landings happened, you don’t have to address every bullshit utterance of “But what about this? What about that? Okay, what about this other thing?” You only have to disprove one single foundational “fact” of the missions and you’re done, if it’s clear and solid. Just as with the CK shooting, however, you never have to content yourself with just one founding contradiction nailed; there is so much evidence and so many other proofs of lies in the Apollo missions that it’s child’s play. Assuming an honest child.
https://theunexpectedworld.substack.com/p/american-moon
Charlie Kirk is dead, felled by an assassin’s bullet. The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the punkass they caught committed the crime. The Charlie LIVES crowd doesn’t even like Kirk and can’t explain a motive for his death, other than he was becoming too popular for the rulers–secret or otherwise–to control.
You can imagine all the scenarios you like. I enjoy a good conspiracy theory myself, but ‘Charlie LIVES’ isn’t one of them.
I hear you. You’re convinced by what you’ve seen or heard.
Concerning motive, there are excellent motives for the event, having nothing to do with Kirk pissing anyone off. (1) The creating of an intensified, trigger-happy, civil-war-ian environment between Left and Right is one of them, but the most definitive motive seems to be (2) to justify green-lighting a new, next-level, universal, AI-powered surveillance society with Red Flag laws designed to silence all voices of truth. Motive? Check. Done.
Beyond that, I can only repeat what I said higher up in the thread: “The truthers *are* proving their points. What’s happening is that the perps, co-conspirators, and true believers are refusing to acknowledge them. That’s a completely different issue.”
A government already wicked and powerful enough to enforce a surveillance/police state doesn’t need an excuse or staged event for its existence.
It’s not merely surveillance. They do already see everything we all read and write and reply to.
THE NEW THING that this event seems to be justifying is the classification of certain *speech* as futurely “dangerous”; certain speech as a future danger in the form of inciting others to do bad things, or in the form of suggesting that the speakers themselves may do bad things, and therefore shutting down, cancelling, ruining, or arresting people FOR TALKING.
For example, they’ve already been attempting to cancel people who are merely rude and angry (cheering the alleged death of the present victim). Also on the menu will almost certainly be: (1) criticizing or expressing suspicion about any aspect of Israel’s motivations or actions in the world, (2) the expression or spreading of anti-vaccine sentiment and information, (3) the expression or spreading of “conspiracy theories” about false flag events such as faked assassinations or attempted assassinations, etc.
This pre-crime state hasn’t existed before, and it looks currently to be right around the corner now, due exclusively to this faked event and possibly others that they’ll pull in the near future to really cement the acceptance of the masses.
This is one of many reasons why it matters that people use their minds and gather up enough intellectual honesty and emotional bravery to not just jump aboard the bandwagon of the credulous.
Thanks for a thoughtful answer.
Welcome, Ben.
That’s the point and that’s how the truth stays in the shadows.
That round or bullet will vaporize flesh.
The video link to the deer shooting is broken.
Ya. In theory, shouldn’t his head have popped off?
I wish that white tail were armed and dangerous.
Then the grate white hunters would cry like the b*tches that they really are.
Fake bada$$e$.
Says the one crying in the comments section. lmao
I’d easily make your eyes weep and your nasty cunt wet.
Killing a creature for food should be a reverent act.
But, some dumb fucks giggle like skool girls.
Make America red and brown again.
Those were real men.
What color are snowflakes again???
Get help
Get lost.
Settler Colonialists = Nazis.
Again. Get help loser.
So long shit stirrer.
The Charlie Kirk incident is obviously a hoax, we just need more people to see this and wake up. And to switch off the TV.
Splashing blood gush to the front at the entry wound was ridiculous!
On Redacted there was an interview with an FBI whistleblower who seemed quite knowledgable who went into extensive detail. His opinion was that the bullet hit CK’s chest and went through the lightweight protective vest (meant to stop no more than a close pistol shot), hit his sternum area was deflected and exited through his neck. The neck was not the entrance wound.
Absolutely anything to give cover to a too-obvious contradiction.
https://substack.com/@cmcardinale/note/c-157512116
Desperation explanations like this are incredibly transparent. This is the third I’ve heard. They just hope that if words come out of the mouth of “a trusted expert,” the public will buy them even though they make no sense. Like the single bullet theory with JFK where the bullet made left and right turns inside and outside human bodies in order to explain away multiple shooters.
With this attempt to explain away the lack of an exit wound in Kirk’s rearward side, there would be an obvious entry through the chest area of the shirt, and we’d also have to believe that a high-powered .30-06 rifle round lost enough inertia from the minimal and merely hypothesized body armor not to penetrate the sternum, but instead to ricochet off it, upward, traveling up through the neck and then doing a sharp-angled turn to come out of the front of that neck. Everything about this “explanation” is wilful dishonesty.
Ever hear of bullets tumbling when deflected?
> Ever hear of bullets tumbling when deflected?
Of course. Plain physics. But I don’t understand what bringing that up is intended to explain.
Bullets tumble after being deflected by some hard object, but they tumble in whatever straight line they’re deflected into until they hit something else that deflects them again.
Kind of like the asteroid in the movie Armageddon, which tumbled about a couple of its axes while nonetheless continuing to travel in its straight-line trajectory.
Given the speed/power/mass/inertia involved, bullets don’t bounce off mere jugulars and muscle at 110-degree angles, tumbling or not; nor would they exit leaving a small, clean hole. A tumbling exit would almost guarantee an uglier, larger, messier exit wound.
I’m not a ballistics expert, and so I’m open to being educated on this, but I’ve got a good grasp of logic, basic physics, and probabilities, and so statements like these stand out to me as a desperate reaching rather than sensible objection.
Firstly, Redacted is controlled op.
Secondly, the “Magic Bullet Theory” is an old hat trick used as far back as the JFK assassination.
The real question is, why are you prone to falling for this kind of psyop?
Ok, Mr More-Conspiritorial-than-thou you have seen the line of the vest under his shirt and Kirk’s shirt blowing upward and his neck and face expanding before the neck wound appears. I am sure you have a better conspiracy to give us about that. Please enlighten us. And please explain how bullets dont tumble when they hit obstructions. You are breaking new ground here.
He seemed quite logical………to you, and your logic skills are clearly lacking.
Wow! your psychic skills must be over the top. Without even watching it you can tell.
No my physics skills are though
If you felt initially felt bad for the Roo that got hit by the car, why not feel horrible for the deer gunned down by a redneck?
Yup. Forty + years of hunting and taking at least 60 deer and I nearly laughed out loud when the official narrative was released on the shooter position and gun.
Great post. Thanks. Used it as part of a response to a comment elsewhere:
https://substack.com/profile/258155015-cm-cardinale/note/c-158162688
Though CGI is a possibility, it wouldn’t be hard to produce the effect of the neck wound “in camera” as it’s called in film jargon. Which means, in part, in real time.
I worked in film for many years and saw up close similar effects executed (pun intended) that looked seamlessly and completely real. Any competent SFX crew could pull it off and are used to doing these things in front of critical audiences (the director and crew) under pressure and perfectly convincingly because film is a very sensitive medium and picks up all details. There is no margin of error in film. It’s too expensive to fail when each minute on set can equal 40,000 dollars a minute in costs to the production and why SFX people get paid a lot of money.
Special Effects are also less prone to error and ultimately less expensive than CGI as well as being much more realistic overall. It would be easy for an SFX crew who were used to the professional scrutiny of other film pros, to convince the”eyes” of an amature crowd what they were seeing was an actual assassination. Most people have no previous reference in their life experience by which to evaluate the veracity of the fake effect.
I wondered as well from the beginning why there was no exit wound as there most certainly would have been if an actual 30.06 bullet had ripped through a man’s neck. That to me was a clear “give away” the shot was fake. He was “shot”. Blood spurts. He falls backwards and no one clearly see what happens after he falls. Just like Trump behind the podium. An even more simple effect to pull off.
The obfuscation of the “victim” directly following the shock of the “shot” covers for any additional scrutiny and possible mistakes in execution and simplifies the execution of the effect.
Which is exactly how a film shot would be blocked for shooting.
Also, it’s really next to impossible to accurately analyze anything shot on an insensitive pixelated phone camera. The recordings are subject to many anomalies depending on the recording capabilities of the phone camera. Things can appear one way and then “disappear”, etc., due to the camera’s lack of sensitivity.
The video released could have been doctored with CGI and that’s why there is only one close up video while the event could have been executed by SFX pros.
Also it’s worth noting which group of people are in charge of Hollywood and the professionals who work in it.
I’m really appreciative you’ve taken the time to present this obvious and simple fact. It closes the case in my view.
Thanks for the article.
Yours is the most informative comment I’ve seen in a week of non-stop coverage and opinions. Thank you for it.
I invite you to read my (free) long (not really) post on substack called “Kirk post-production meeting” somewhat amusing.
Me, again. Mike Mekash? Walking behind CK into the ‘auditorium’. Wearing the baseball hat and lumberjack shirt. Stands in the background while the performance is going on. Presses the remote squib detonator. What do you think?
I haven’t examined that aspect and am so satisfied in myself that the entire thing was a psyop. You may very well be correct in the method of how the “blood” was activated.
New Longer video: Here is your answer -YouTube may block you.
You will notice the sound of the shot is nowhere near the sound of a 30-06 shot. AI could probably tell us what type of round this record sound would fall under.
Here it is again…Watch the Brown Shirt Man apparently/may shoot Charlie with a modern high tech palm pistol and then vault the Barrier – Pay attention and you’ll see him run right to Charlie on the ground….
https://rense.com/general98/video-2.mp4
Why isn’t the FBI looking into the Brown Shirt Man as an important ‘Person Of Interest’?
Why isn’t the FBI looking into the Brown Shirt Man as an important ‘Person Of Interest’?
The Answer: because he was part of Charlie Kirk’s ‘Security’ Team. Yet never once did this so-called security person even look at the crowd.
What is the name of Charlie’s CURRENT Security Team? Not even AI knows! The Shaffer Security Group, Most probably a Deep State company, was with him from 2015-2022 – Charlie was surrounded by 5-6 unnamed Security people!
New footage emerges Mr. kirk being rushed to hospital…
We still have seen any CCTV from the Hospital of Mr. Kirk being pushed or carried in the ER. Have you located any?
Shocking footage emerges: CHARLIE KIRK’S BODY rushed to hospital. No footage of Mr. Kirk at the hospital.
Why?
No blood on the ground. There is no image of BleedStop being applied to Mr. Kirk’s neck. Not sure you could stop the bleeding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HZEGplwWRw
“Yes, a person can bleed when they have been shot and killed. The extent of bleeding depends on the severity of the injury, the type of bullet, and the location of the shot. In cases of severe arterial wounds, a person could bleed out in as little as three minutes if the bullet hits an artery. Prompt medical attention is crucial to manage bleeding and prevent further complications.”
https://www.calendar-canada.ca/frequently-asked-questions/how-long-does-it-take-for-a-gunshot-wound-to-bleed
**************
Some people believe it was all a staged event…no taped off crime scene. No Forensic done at crime scene. As many have said – “nothing adds up.” Maybe a new CIA Orion project? Many theories are online.
Video shows Kirk’s security carrying Charles to the SUV in this video. No blood is seen falling or on the ground? Did Mr. Kirk already bleed out?
That’s a wrap? The crime scene that wasn’t has already been covered up the stage area of Charlie Kirk’s death with concrete.
https://old.bitchute.com/video/TnJHf0fRoilf/
There are multiple videos of the shooting…I believe there are 4 making the rounds.
His shirt puffs up because his lapel mic cord to his earpiece as well as the battery pack. There’s a YouTube with a Marine I believe that explains that & debunks the whole ballistic vest. The ‘hose’ seen around his neck/chest area belongs to his earpiece/mic. You can see his mic blow out of his ear as the bullet hits.
Blood can & does weird things. The gushing blood is most likely all the blood exiting his head through his blown external & internal jugular veins and carotid artery. If his brain stem &/or spinal cord were also catastrophically damaged by the shot, his heart would have quit pumping relatively quickly. The high pressure of the blood in the carotid artery and the gravitational pressure of the blood in the jugular veins would create a large volume quite quickly that would decrease almost as rapidly once his heart stopped functioning.
His hand on the mic maintained its grip due to a reflex in the body that draws the hands up and makes them look like claws. Similar to the pugalistic pose of a burnt body. When the nerves to the arms/hands are damaged they draw up towards the upper chest and the hands sort of clench. It isn’t until the muscles lose their tone that the hands relax, but they frequently stay drawn in towards the body.
The ring he wore was a jointed flip ring. Many of his other videos show him constantly flipping it open and closed as he was on ‘stage’. I believe the video shows the ring flying off his hand.
Similarly he most frequently put the microphone down between replies…sometimes between sentences. It was one of his known quirks just like the ring & the copious amounts of water he would drink on ‘stage’.
I believe the videos are poorer quality for zooming in on something like this that happened in milliseconds. If this was a psy-op and a cgi hoax, wouldn’t the technology be better & have clearer images? I mean we see closeups of people being shot realistically on tv and movies all the time. Surely if this was a hoax set up by people with money and power they would have used better technology to really sell the death. To me, the lack of quality is actually more of a sign that Kirk really is dead because of this. If you’re going to fake something and have the technology, then you’d use the technology to keep questions like this from popping up.
I’m not sold on the 30.06 nor the palm gun from the guy in brown nor the whatever gun from the guy in white diagonally behind Kirk. I’m not sold on the suspect either. However, just because I’m not sold on it doesn’t make it false. The breaking down of the gun then re-assembling it several times seems illogical. Different people of interest have likely been questioned and released or dismissed well before anything was publicized. So brown-shirt may have been interviewed quickly and found believable. Same for any of the others.
Depending on the caliber of the round (if we assume it cannot be a 30.06), the lack of an exit wound doesn’t bother me much. I don’t buy into the wound we see being an exit wound instead of an entry wound though. His body’s reaction to the impact indicates to me that he was hit from the front based on the way the impact site blows backwards while the rest of his body flexes and curls forward around the impact site. Kind of like the Pillsbury Doughboy’s reaction when he gets poked. Yes, the impact site/wound *looks* large, but it’s almost impossible to tell how much of that is cavitation and blood spatter. Entrance wounds *do* produce spatter even when they’re not contact shots or involving arterial spurting. Without arterial spurting the blood spatter is usually more of a mist, but the decimation of his jugular & carotid would make that mist much less obvious because the spurting is *so* excessive.
That said, I am a bit confused that there wasn’t an obvious blood pool, but I haven’t seen footage of the ground. I’m not as confused by the lack of blood on the guys carrying him or the lack of a blood trail to the vehicle. The gushing from his neck immediately upon impact would result in a large pool. However, if his head was somewhat elevated as they carried him and his heart had stopped beating, he wouldn’t have a lot of blood making it out of the wound after the initial spurting. Gravity and the lack of heart pumping would keep his bodily blood from rising to his neck to leave a blood trail.
I am thoroughly confused though by the lack of crime scene integrity. Seems like the scene wasn’t secured and wasn’t investigated very well. Even simple crime scenes require security and investigation. Perhaps in the heat of the moment most of his security team went with him in the SUV and no one was left to guard the scene. Crime scenes are contaminated all the time by people with both good and bad intentions. Sometimes even investigating officers ruin crime scenes. When there’s question of the victim needing medical intervention, the first responders frequently contaminate the scene. However, it seems like the police would have been notified and sent someone asap to secure the scene.
I’m not terribly surprised to not have a clear medical examiner/coroners report. Red tape, privacy issues, and such often slow the release of such documents.
I’m not terribly surprised his team loaded him in an SUV instead of waiting for an ambulance or some ‘on-scene medic’ to arrive. Depending on the availability of a medic or ambulance, in some cases 911 recommends loading someone into a private vehicle to either meet the ambulance closer to the hospital or to go the whole way if doing so would shorten the amount of time the patient/victim had to wait for treatment. My personal experience with anaphylaxis and other medical emergencies bears this out.
I think his security team was caught with their pants down and unprepared for such a nuclear option of assassination. So I don’t think an ambulance would be on-site nor would a medic necessarily be nearby. Kirk & his team were young & healthy and unlikely to experience a medical emergency…barring this occurrence obviously. So they probably wouldn’t have a medical team on standby or nearby.
FTR I was trained in blood spatter analysis as a forensic biologist. I worked several murder scenes, but I was primarily a lab analyst & personally worked approximately 400 cases a year (rapes, murders, assaults, any crime with biological evidence).
On the whole though, I don’t think anything the FBI, police, or medical examiners office will be sufficient to quiet any of these theories. If you think they’re lying about one thing, why would you believe they’re telling the truth about something related to that?
I apologize if the above comment was earnest and honest opinion, but from what I know and how I know it, this is River-in-Egypt territory. Gray-area doubting. Could-be’s. Failure to take notice of the mountain of anomalies, including the accumulated, infinitesimal odds they represent of this being real.
Just a few things:
1. “The ring he wore was a jointed flip ring. Many of his other videos show him constantly flipping it open and closed as he was on ‘stage’. I believe the video shows the ring flying off his hand.”
ABOUT THE RING ISSUE: For anyone interested in earnest criticism/analysis, check out the section on “The ring” in the following post. An opening ring has nothing to do with the ring appearing on the wrong finger.
https://theunexpectedworld.substack.com/p/initial-thoughts-on-the-charlie-kirk
2. “I believe the videos are poorer quality for zooming in on something like this that happened in milliseconds. If this was a psy-op and a cgi hoax, wouldn’t the technology be better & have clearer images? I mean we see closeups of people being shot realistically on tv and movies all the time. Surely if this was a hoax set up by people with money and power they would have used better technology to really sell the death. To me, the lack of quality is actually more of a sign that Kirk really is dead because of this. If you’re going to fake something and have the technology, then you’d use the technology to keep questions like this from popping up.”
THE CONTRARY IS TRUE. In movies, they’re not required to do their magic in real time, in front of a live audience, and with the threat of uncontrolled videos making a shambles of their claims. Live hoaxing would be MUCH more difficult than Hollywood magic done with the benefit of multiple takes, computer graphics and editing before release, etc.
3. WHAT VIDEOS SHOW RING AND MIC JUMPING OFF THE BODY? This one’s a minor matter, but I’d like to to verify the claim that one can see the mic pop out of the ear and the ring pop off the finger. Neither of these have anything to do with proving this event as fake, but I’d like to know what such a claim is based on. Because I didn’t notice it.
Again, I regret suggesting that the OP was a deliberate attempt to undermine the truth if that’s honestly not what it was intended to be. Maybe it was an earnest attempt to be strictly open to all possibilities and not to jump on bandwagons on either side. But this has the appearance to me of deliberate resistance being put into the circuit of dissent to reduce the flow of the truth.
Have you looked for the other videos of the shooting? Have you looked for the other videos showing how Kirk frequently flipped his ring between his pinkie and ring finger? Have you looked at any of the other analysis videos showing the mic wires puffing his shirt? Believe what you want, but I’ve seen various videos that explain these things while still questioning the overall narrative. I apologize, but I’m not going to go looking for all these videos just to satisfy someone in a combox. They’re readily available on Substack, YouTube, BitChute, and other platforms like them. I’ve actually run into them just by scrolling through Substack, not looking for them.
Sure, movies have time on their side and no live audience, but people in the business say that most of those video shots are done in one take. I’ve seen videos questioning whether the one video mentioned/shown in this article could be some AI or at least manipulated video. So I still believe the technology is there to have made the video better if it is a hoax video.
Although, if it is a hoax, again, the ring, the shirt puff, the letter on his shirt, etc, etc would be (maybe not the ring or letter) noticeable enough that they should have been prepped and fixed beforehand. Because, if it *is* a hoax, there was a LOT of prep work that would have gone into it. There would have been endless test runs and debugging because the whole point was for it to be ‘live’ in front of cameras. Even the criticism of the ‘actors’ being poor quality would have been something that those with the money & power enough to pull a hoax like this would have avoided through more preparation. A hoax like this isn’t set up overnight or by people without money & power. I maintain that knowing this was to be a nationwide if not worldwide event, anyone setting out this kind of hoax would be better at it than this.
https://open.substack.com/pub/nicolacharlesaustralia/p/i-am-the-white-rabbit-the-crimes?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4uz6nj
Australians need to know truth.
We are in great troubles.