The ricochet videos seems to have been scrubbed. Now, the narrative is that it was directly to his neck.

The moving black dot "wound" / spout of (AI-generated?) blood is strange, too. 10 min. before, Charlie adjusts the blood squib under his t-shirt.


Also, there was no bulletproof vest under his thin t-shirt.

Also, at 200 yards, the sound of the shot should've occurred >0.5 second after the appearance of the blood, but the videos (e.g., this one) show it ocurring simultaneously, as if he were shot point-blank.

So clearly a staged psyop.

the shot should've occurred >0.5 second

Actually, anywhere between 0s and 150ms, depending on the bullet speed. That's a bit short to tell in a video like this.

Correction: Depending on the speed of the bullet, the sound should've occurred between about 0 sec and 200 yd/(383 yd/s) − 200 yd/(3900 ft/s) = 370 ms after the arrival of the bullet. Maybe it was a slow bullet.

Also, if the bullet were only going as slow as the speed of sound (383 yd/s @ 90°F air temp), that would make it more likely for 30 fps cameras to capture it, but such bullet would go about 6 yd (19 ft) in one frame, so it's possible cellphone cameras couldn't capture it.

The ricochet videos seems to have been scrubbed. Now, the narrative is that it was directly to his neck.

The moving black dot "wound" / spout of (AI-generated?) blood is strange, too. 10 min. before, Charlie adjusts the blood squib under his t-shirt.


Also, there was no bulletproof vest under his thin t-shirt.

Also, at 200 yards, the sound of the shot should've occurred >0.5 second after the appearance of the blood, but the videos (e.g., this one) show it ocurring simultaneously, as if he were shot point-blank.

So clearly a staged psyop.

Yep

Absolutely agree the ideas on this thread are deranged. I do believe possible deep state involvement, Candace Owens has been examining the evidence, but the nonsense on this thread make me concerned for the mental health of fellow Catholics.

Yah yah we heard this gaslighting all through the COVID scam.

Candace Owen’s? Really? She just said in a recent video “I was a mason of turning point” or something along those lines. She is a paid ACTOR.

Evidently "Trads" are as susceptible to brainwashing, and their minds weak enough to be easily bent by nearly every new psy-op that they knee-jerk dismiss everyone who doesn't accept the latest mainstream narrative as "crazy", "kooks", "making Traditional Catholics look bad".

No, it is fools like yourselves who make Traditional Catholics look bad.  If/when history catches up to reality, you'll be exposed for the fools that you are and embarrassed for being enablers of the agenda.  People who question Oklahoma City, 9/11, 10/7, or the h0Ɩ0h0αx ... they were and still are derided the same way, even though, as the dust settles, and the weak-minded are able to be disentangled from the emotional manipulation through which anyone who questioned the official narrative were gaslighted as "kooks", "crazies" who "make Traditional Catholics look bad", in retrospect those of you who fell for the narrative will be the ones judged as fools, morons, and enablers of the crimes perpetraed by the globalists.

They employ the same tactics over and over again, where they create a psy-op that causes emotional trauma ... and then the weak-minded get manipulated in joining the chorus condemning those who can remain rational enough to see through the obvious bovine excrement, lies, and manipulation of the mainstream narrative as being "insensitive" and also "crazy".

I find it very sad that Trads, who should be enlightened by faith, which should provide a bulwark against such manipulation ... are, by and large, almost as easily taken in as the rest.

Now, if you come up with some facts to explain why this, that, or the other "theory" is correct or incorrect, that's absolutely fine and in fact necessary, especially since the powers that be also toss out a bunch of nonsense as "chaff" to discredit the correct explanation ... that's fine.  But to simply dismiss it by gaslighting with terms like "crazy" or "nuts" ... you're disqualified from any worthwhile input in the quest for truth, and need to take a seat on the sidelines.

100% that ... Charlie Kirk is not dead, or, at least, he was not killed on 9/10 the way they pretend (we can't preclude that they migth take him out later if they felt he might jeopardize the operation).  Erika Kirk's entire pathetic performance was at once absurd and evil ... bearing strong similarities to Robbie Parker's performance.

So, why did the "martyrize" Kirk?  Bondi tipped her (evil) hand when she ranted against how they were going to come down on "αnтι-ѕємιтєs".  So, by pinning it on some "Leftist College Student", they associate this staged event with the types of College Leftists who oppose and have opposed Kirk, aka, those who deplore the Israeli genocide in Gaza.  So they're going to associate oppositing the genocide with being "FOR" the murder of Kirk, and therefore as "hate speech", which they're going to increasingly crack down on.

Now, this time out, they realized that a straightforward fαℓѕє fℓαg would be too obvious, since more and more people are seeing through the Jews, so they were losing the propaganda narrative badly, especially among younger crows, where they could only try to pretend so long that murdering toddlers and using pregnant women for target practice while laughing about it constitutes a moral righteousness for which God will "bless you" if you blessed it.  Anybody with a modicuм of humanity and a tiny bit of that moral compass that comes from the natural law can see that as complete BS.

Interestingly, on the very morning of 9/10, the ADL publishet his ...
https://www.adl.org/resources/report/faculty-under-fire-antisemitism-and-anti-israel-bias-higher-education

So, they made this particular cui bono an oblique one, but to distract from the main agenda of exploiting it to crack down on "αnтι-ѕємιтєs", the new crop of fake "Anti-Semitic" gatekeepers, like Alex Jones, Owens, Carlson ... and even Stew Peters, have all been advancing the theory that Kirk had started to "turn on" the Jews, and that's why the Jews took him out.  That's utter rubbish.  Kirk was consistently backing the genocide.

At some point, however, all the Jew shill gatekeepers were exposed as frauds, since, as I said, you could only pretend genocide was a good thing for so long before people realize you're a bunch of lying shills ... so they were greenlighted to making certain criticisms of Israel, on the exact same points at the exact same time.  I mentioned how I thought hell had frozen over when Alex Jones came out and said Israel was heavily involved 9/11.  This was permitted since these shills were being exposed and losing all effectiveness, so if they were allowed to criticize Israel on these points, most of their followers would be stabilized, since "they can't be Israeli shills if they criticize Israel like this", right?  Same thing they did with Trump, where his base suspected him more and more, so the fake assassination attempt was calculated to re-engage the base with the same thinking, "Well, Trump must be an enemy of Deep State, since they just tried to kill him".  But these Jew gatekeepers also very subtly started shifting the criticism to Netanyahu, not Israel, and a few of them made the distinction explicitly (e.g. Tucker Carlson).  Therefore, just like with the old "scapegoat" ritual, they could transfer the sins of the Jews onto Bibi and throw him off the cliff, thereby absolving the Jews of the genocide.  They have no problem doing that and throwing even their own under the bus in order to save the agenda.