So it is now officially confirmed that the most influential right wing influencer was assassinated shortly after he decided he wasn't going to let himself be bullied anymore by the Zionist lobby. What a convenient coincidence.
Yeah, I was initially on the "maybe Israel, but prob'ly not" train. Now it's "almost certainly Israel, and it's going to take a lot of exonerating evidence to convince me otherwise."
*edit: also, there was never a point where it was "certainly impossible that it was Israel, you'd have to be a crazy conspiracy theorist to think that. Case is clearly 100% open and closed, it was a tranny lover." Anybody saying that has 0% of my trust on the subject, and has badly damaged their overall credibility IMO.
They'll commit genocide. They'll openly argue for the start of WW3 in the UN (of all fucking places). They'll arrest and torture anyone who says a single negative thing against them. They'll lie about their nuclear weapon stockpile. They've paid ZERO price for this.
Yet.. they wouldn't assassinate an up and coming American politician who is a friend of the current President? That's the sudden source of skepticism?
Nothing before the assassination made me suspect he was trying to leave or pivot away rather than conceding some talking points which were becoming unpopular to the point of becoming a detriment to keep bringing up. There's nothing unusual about having your puppet take the occasional shot at you to maintain credibility either.
I could see some utility in his death for the sake of pushing forward certain policies, yet even that seems to be less than I'd have expected.
It's not a matter of morality, he just seemed like the sort of asset that would be more useful to them alive than dead especially since nothing much of significance seems to have even come from his death when it could have been used as an opportunity for many things.
Even the messages in question have a tone of confusion as to why the jewish donors were pulling out and that was the only reason he even considered dropping support for Israel and jews as part of his platform. which while a sign of him having outlived his usefulness doesn't really explain what the plan going forward would be when everything seems to be moving in the same direction it would have had the money kept flowing.
I don't even think he was a politician or made any claims of wanting to become one did he? I thought his whole think was to serve more as a political funnel to the chosen candidate, was he attempting to stray from that role he was assigned or is it just speculation?
Same. My initial thought was that it was a random radicalized retard who legitimately believed anyone to the right of Colbert was a nazi. But evidence keeps piling up.
A video of him saying "Is the media totally presenting the truth when it comes to Israel?" to a more and more furious-looking Ben Shapiro. The clip cuts off him starting to talk about genocide in Gaza.
Point out to a leftist that Charlie Kirk literally just started talking about genocide in Gaza and was dead in less than 48 hours.
The obvious patsy and coverup by the FBI is what made me think of Israel as the most likely suspect. Bibi being the first one to 'mourn' Charlies death (before his death was even officially confirmed if I recall correctly) and immediately trying to make Charlie a Zionist martyr despite Charlie publicly calling out Israel in the preceding months is what convinced me.
Like I said before, whether they did it or not they want to take credit for it but on the down low.
They want everybody saying 'don't cross Israel or you'll get palm-gun murdered in plain sight' but without any actual proof that could blow back on them.
It is way worse than that. Watch his initial interview days later with Greta something or other on Fox I think it was.a he never even says he/Israel didn't do it. He just says (paraphrasing) "that's a crazy allegation. It's always blood libel against Jews! Remember the Holocaust? Holocaust! HOLOCAUST!". If I hadn't known better I'd have thought it was a deep fake because he looked guilty as sin in his response. But no. He actually gave the least convincing answer imaginable on live, International TV. That interview pushed me from 50% convinced it was Israel to 99% convinced it was Israel.
Yeah, I was initially on the "maybe Israel, but prob'ly not" train. Now it's "almost certainly Israel, and it's going to take a lot of exonerating evidence to convince me otherwise."
Some people here thought I was crazy for saying that it was unlikely, but not impossible that Israel did it. Something like 2%. I got suspicious because it looked like such a professional action, the massive security failures, because it took so long to catch him, and Netanyahu saying that he was praying for CK before he died.
The fact that Netanyahu felt the need to deny it is crazy. Now, maybe he's just trying to say "see how crazy these people are", but it's still very weird.
there was never a point where it was "certainly impossible that it was Israel, you'd have to be a crazy conspiracy theorist to think that
These days, it's crazy to preclude almost anything. I wouldn't say that it's completely impossible that Russia, or Ukraine, or Venezuela did it. Or anyone really.
What you're calling "failures" are gaps that Charlie's team chose to allow because they didn't take the threat of a sniper very seriously. They literally didn't close off the walk way above him, because even that wasn't considered much of a threat.
it took so long to catch him
Literally 2 days. Literally "the first 48".
Meanwhile, we actually have recordings of a Mossad assassination, it looks absolutely nothing like this, and involves nearly 30 operatives working in 4 or 5 different teams that even clean swept the murder scene to avoid detection.
Why hasn't the FBI released the full rooftop video of the supposed sniper? Why only the part where he already was in full sprint? Why did they cut him climbing onto the roof, assembling the rifle, shooting Kirk, disassembling the rifle and beginning to run away? He was in full view of the security camera.
The campus is covered in security cameras. His every step from the parking lot to the rooftop would've been recorded but we haven't seen any of that footage. Despite all speculations. Despite all claims of an FBI coverup. No security footage except that little tiny cut portion. No TPSU footage. It should've been very easy to debunk all theories and stop the speculations entirely. And yet... nothing.
Why hasn't the FBI released the full rooftop video of the supposed sniper?
The court case hasn't even finished. You haven't even seen the full video of Austin Metcalf's stabbing, and the FBI isn't even involved. Not everything is YouTube content.
Why only the part where he already was in full sprint?
There's several videos of him on the roof, several are also not on the roof. The one I saw of him running was because he comes from off screen.
Why did they cut him climbing onto the roof, assembling the rifle, shooting Kirk, disassembling the rifle and beginning to run away?
Literally no one has said that he disassembled the rifle. I have no idea where that crap came from, it wasn't even the police or the FBI. Some people are saying the assembled the rifle and changed his clothes 4 or 5 times, and there's literally no official claims of either of those things. There's an argument that he assembled it.
No TPSU footage
Literally already in the hand of the police and not being released because it's literally evidence. Why are you supposed to get it again?
It should've been very easy to debunk all theories and stop the speculations entirely. And yet... nothing.
No, because it would require someone to actually accept evidence when they have it.
No, they didn't, it's in the judicial process. The part that they released literally shows nothing because it doesn't show the stabbing.
Because it was cropped.
To answer your own question, it looks like that camera's angle was extremely wide, because it also goes off to the right another 30 to 40 degrees. It looks like it wouldn't fit on any normal screen. And that's assuming that the shooting position was that corner.
Now you're outright lying.
Where are you getting the disassembly from? All I've heard is that it is speculation that he may have done that. Nothing conclusive, even from the police.
Transparency in an extremely politically charged case
You're getting more transparency than you would ever normally get on any case. In a normal case, none of this would have been publicly released.
Dodging the question
You're literally just making shit up and claiming I'm not addressing things I'm literally addressing.
In the first day, it looked like a very professional hit. The headshot. The fact that the guy got away. The lack of security, or bypassing of security.
What you're calling "failures" are gaps that Charlie's team chose to allow because they didn't take the threat of a sniper very seriously.
That's a failure.
Literally 2 days. Literally "the first 48".
This was before he was caught. I had expected him to be caught immediately. And I still find it very strange that you can murder someone in front of thousands of people, and it will still take 2 days before you're caught.
Meanwhile, we actually have recordings of a Mossad assassination, it looks absolutely nothing like this, and involves nearly 30 operatives working in 4 or 5 different teams that even clean swept the murder scene to avoid detection.
They've done similar things in the UK and France, and you're right that none of them were murders of people in broad daylight in front of thousands of people.
Meet in the middle ground: The guy was a proxy sleeper by them. He thought he was doing it in the name of tranny sex, but was actually Just Following Orders (tm).
Now it's "almost certainly Israel, and it's going to take a lot of exonerating evidence to convince me otherwise."
You literally don't even have any direct evidence of Israeli involvement. There's no evidence that's going to convince you of Israel not being involved, because you weren't convinced into this with evidence.
Even these texts are not direct evidence of an Israeli assassination. It's not even indirect evidence of one.
Notice Gizortnik moved the goalposts. First it was "the texts were probably fake", and now that it turns out they're real he pretends his complaint was "well it doesn't PROVE that the guy who was afraid someone was going to kill him right before he was killed was killed by the group he said he was afraid was going to kill him".
And here we have the left doing the usual of pretending to not understand simple things. One would think he would look at his downvotes and accept that it doesn't work, but jews are a very stubborn people.
You literally don't even have any direct evidence of Israeli involvement
No shit, Sherlock. All I have is an official story that's pretty clearly bullshit with a whole bunch of gaps that do not need to be gaps if they'd just tell the truth.
I've seen nothing to indicate lies from the police on this. And again, you're re-stating my point: you didn't arrive to your conclusion by evidence. You're not going to be dissuaded out of it by evidence either.
How about the rifle owned by his grandfather with an empty casing in the chamber?
You literally have a smoking gun and a confession, and this evidence has been soundly dismissed, but the lack of evidence showing Israeli involvement is wildly conclusive...
Yeah, that's a lie. It is reported that a family friend who happens to be a detective "recognized" him on the news and told him to turn himself in. His family is hiring the most powerful defense lawyers in the country at the moment.
How about the rifle owned by his grandfather with an empty casing in the chamber?
They did "find" this rifle in the woods. No proof it was ever taken onto campus or that it shot Kirk or that he pulled the trigger.
He probably wasn't even anywhere close to becoming actually anti-semitic. Only critical of Israel. But an incredibly influential voice like Charlies turning against Israel would've killed Israels stranglehold over the US in the long term. It is also very likely that it would have caused irreparable damage in the short term.
I think that's the reason why he was assassinated.
EDIT: Also his entire career was financed by the Jewish lobby. They really don't like their golems turning against them. So making an example of him could have also been a reason.
I still think antifa killed him, because they are murderers.
The "greatest ally" might simply have withdrawn the protection, and left the door open for a crazy person.
Just like how they are able to command the Pentagon itself. Or how they were seriously involved in 911 as dancing Israelis with cameras and a van depicting the scene. The FBI let them go, because they were not Muslim.
Antifa are coackroaches. They're incompetent and try to stay out of the limelight. Murdering someone at a public event that's being livestreamed isn't exactly their modus operandi.
And well Tyler is an obvious patsy. Charlie was shot from behind and the FBI is covering it up. They wouldn't do that for some Antifa guy.
Antifa started as a Jewish terrorist organization. Fighting alongside the Nazis in pre-war Germany.
They do murder people and have many political targets. They call any opposing person a "nazi" to justify a murder. There are many psychopaths among the crazies. Some capable and trained. Their tactics is to hide among the puppets. And creating confusion is a main part of their tactics too.
Check out Andy Ngo about how they work. Also other journalists like Tim Pool and WeAreChange have been target of their violence. The terrorist organization has many different people who do different roles. Some are screamers and some are killers.
Fighting against the nationalist opposition in Weimar Germany you mean.
They do murder people and have many political targets.
They try to. Usually they're too incompetent to succeed. But yes they're extremely violent and will usually attack perceived 'Nazis' in groups. Because they're cowards.
Some capable and trained.
Believe me. If they were as capable as they were in Weimar Germany a lot of people would actually be dead and not just end up in the hospital. Especially in the US because of the 2A. They certainly try to kill people but fortunately they usually fail at it because they're generally cowardly and incompetent idiots.
They are still dangerous and deserve to be classified as terrorists as they literally are terrorists but you don't have to blame them for something they didn't do and let the actual culprits get off the hook.
The political left didn't kill Charlie even though they wanted to and gleefully celebrated his murder. They dropped their masks fully and showed themselves to be the evil, violent and inhuman creatures that they are. Charlie not having been killed by Tyler doesn't change anything about that.
One thing is certain: TPUSA misrepresented Kirk's positions regarding Israel in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, twisting the narrative so the shekelsniffers could wring the most benefit from his death.
They basically sold his corpse before it was even cold, to collect their 30 pieces of silver.
Taking everything in, I DON'T think Israel and it's organisations DIRECTLY assassinated Charlie Kirk.
I DO think Israel focused mischaracterisation of him and encouragd extreme opinion of him through media and social media so people would have more extreme negative views of him that may justify violence against him.
Basically, Israel is doing more Radio Rwanda than grassy knoll...
Its way too easy to get a random Leftie retard to commit violence for you that it would be idiotic to directly implicate yourself by directly doing it. Just hype up some random idiot, lay out enough incompetence that they can get through, and the job gets done (or the message across).
Its the same thing that happened with Trump's assassination attempt, he just got lucky (or saved by God) that the kid missed the kill.
With all the various factions in our government (and international factions like Israel who've infiltrated) there will never be truly "undeniable" evidence. Even if they come out and say things directly and take full responsibility, half the country would say it was a lie, psyop and actually X behind it.
If we are being honest with ourselves, almost no official story would satisfy us. Even if the evidence was strong, it would only be taken if it was exactly what we wanted it to be and that would be regardless of evidence not because of it.
Its a symptom of our society being not even low trust but outright no trust in anything. For good reason, but still.
I don't want an official story that will satisfy everyone (impossible, utopian). I want an official story that will satisfy most reasonable people (extremely possible).
For example, the sinking of the Costa Concordia is a well-documented, clearly-sourced, easily understood historical event.
The magic bullet that keeps turning up with JFK, RFK, MLK, and now Kirk might as well be an Israeli child spitting on you four times. Or maybe a couple of those are purely Hoover. Who knows. If they were actually going to give us a reasonable explanation they would all be thrown out of office.
His first real argument is to defend Israel of course. Absolutely gross what they're doing with TPUSA. TPUSA was never really Our Guys (they did really good work in some ways, but were controlled opposition or whatever in others), but it's a shame, as soon as Charlie broke with that he gets killed, and all his people drag TPUSA back to what it was, against the wish's of their "friend," Charlie Kirk.
This Kolvlet dude is a snake, and talking out every possible side of his mouth.
I'd rather TPUSA die with Charlie, than be turned into a disgusting skinsuit.
The fuck? The texts came out so late and were so blatant that I thought the whole angle with them was meant to be used to discredit those suspecting jewish involvement and even if they were legit I would have expected denial or silence from TPUSA. This narrative has taken an unexpected twist
Charlie Kirk was assassinated by a gay communist who stole a rifle from his grandpa in the name of "antifascism". His feelings about Israel had nothing to do with it. You failed a skill check and were oneshotted by reading about Jews online a few years ago.
No the dude is clearly saying, and reasonably so, people can have multifaceted opinions. If ive called my boss an out of touch dumbass in private it doesn’t mean Ive gone off the plantation and got fired as part of an elaborate business unit coup.
So it is now officially confirmed that the most influential right wing influencer was assassinated shortly after he decided he wasn't going to let himself be bullied anymore by the Zionist lobby. What a convenient coincidence.
Yeah, I was initially on the "maybe Israel, but prob'ly not" train. Now it's "almost certainly Israel, and it's going to take a lot of exonerating evidence to convince me otherwise."
*edit: also, there was never a point where it was "certainly impossible that it was Israel, you'd have to be a crazy conspiracy theorist to think that. Case is clearly 100% open and closed, it was a tranny lover." Anybody saying that has 0% of my trust on the subject, and has badly damaged their overall credibility IMO.
They'll commit genocide. They'll openly argue for the start of WW3 in the UN (of all fucking places). They'll arrest and torture anyone who says a single negative thing against them. They'll lie about their nuclear weapon stockpile. They've paid ZERO price for this.
Yet.. they wouldn't assassinate an up and coming American politician who is a friend of the current President? That's the sudden source of skepticism?
You know why you can never leave the mafia, right?
Nothing before the assassination made me suspect he was trying to leave or pivot away rather than conceding some talking points which were becoming unpopular to the point of becoming a detriment to keep bringing up. There's nothing unusual about having your puppet take the occasional shot at you to maintain credibility either.
I could see some utility in his death for the sake of pushing forward certain policies, yet even that seems to be less than I'd have expected.
It's not a matter of morality, he just seemed like the sort of asset that would be more useful to them alive than dead especially since nothing much of significance seems to have even come from his death when it could have been used as an opportunity for many things.
Even the messages in question have a tone of confusion as to why the jewish donors were pulling out and that was the only reason he even considered dropping support for Israel and jews as part of his platform. which while a sign of him having outlived his usefulness doesn't really explain what the plan going forward would be when everything seems to be moving in the same direction it would have had the money kept flowing.
I don't even think he was a politician or made any claims of wanting to become one did he? I thought his whole think was to serve more as a political funnel to the chosen candidate, was he attempting to stray from that role he was assigned or is it just speculation?
That was my first inkling of, "maybe Israel, actually." The lady definitely protested too much.
Same. My initial thought was that it was a random radicalized retard who legitimately believed anyone to the right of Colbert was a nazi. But evidence keeps piling up.
Me, 25 days ago: https://communities.win/c/KotakuInAction2/p/1AR0LQYCAg/x/c/4eWbTlOKGoO
If you really want to mess with a lefty point out he had started publicly calling out Israel this week.
https://archive.is/https://x.com/IanCarrollShow/status/1966096255064461612
https://x.com/IanCarrollShow/status/1966096255064461612
https://archive.is/I9XKS
https://x.com/pumphouse7873/status/1966100358867910742
A video of him saying "Is the media totally presenting the truth when it comes to Israel?" to a more and more furious-looking Ben Shapiro. The clip cuts off him starting to talk about genocide in Gaza.
Point out to a leftist that Charlie Kirk literally just started talking about genocide in Gaza and was dead in less than 48 hours.
The obvious patsy and coverup by the FBI is what made me think of Israel as the most likely suspect. Bibi being the first one to 'mourn' Charlies death (before his death was even officially confirmed if I recall correctly) and immediately trying to make Charlie a Zionist martyr despite Charlie publicly calling out Israel in the preceding months is what convinced me.
Like I said before, whether they did it or not they want to take credit for it but on the down low.
They want everybody saying 'don't cross Israel or you'll get palm-gun murdered in plain sight' but without any actual proof that could blow back on them.
It is way worse than that. Watch his initial interview days later with Greta something or other on Fox I think it was.a he never even says he/Israel didn't do it. He just says (paraphrasing) "that's a crazy allegation. It's always blood libel against Jews! Remember the Holocaust? Holocaust! HOLOCAUST!". If I hadn't known better I'd have thought it was a deep fake because he looked guilty as sin in his response. But no. He actually gave the least convincing answer imaginable on live, International TV. That interview pushed me from 50% convinced it was Israel to 99% convinced it was Israel.
Some people here thought I was crazy for saying that it was unlikely, but not impossible that Israel did it. Something like 2%. I got suspicious because it looked like such a professional action, the massive security failures, because it took so long to catch him, and Netanyahu saying that he was praying for CK before he died.
The fact that Netanyahu felt the need to deny it is crazy. Now, maybe he's just trying to say "see how crazy these people are", but it's still very weird.
These days, it's crazy to preclude almost anything. I wouldn't say that it's completely impossible that Russia, or Ukraine, or Venezuela did it. Or anyone really.
Nothing about this attack was professional.
What you're calling "failures" are gaps that Charlie's team chose to allow because they didn't take the threat of a sniper very seriously. They literally didn't close off the walk way above him, because even that wasn't considered much of a threat.
Literally 2 days. Literally "the first 48".
Meanwhile, we actually have recordings of a Mossad assassination, it looks absolutely nothing like this, and involves nearly 30 operatives working in 4 or 5 different teams that even clean swept the murder scene to avoid detection.
Why hasn't the FBI released the full rooftop video of the supposed sniper? Why only the part where he already was in full sprint? Why did they cut him climbing onto the roof, assembling the rifle, shooting Kirk, disassembling the rifle and beginning to run away? He was in full view of the security camera.
The campus is covered in security cameras. His every step from the parking lot to the rooftop would've been recorded but we haven't seen any of that footage. Despite all speculations. Despite all claims of an FBI coverup. No security footage except that little tiny cut portion. No TPSU footage. It should've been very easy to debunk all theories and stop the speculations entirely. And yet... nothing.
Why, Giz?
The court case hasn't even finished. You haven't even seen the full video of Austin Metcalf's stabbing, and the FBI isn't even involved. Not everything is YouTube content.
There's several videos of him on the roof, several are also not on the roof. The one I saw of him running was because he comes from off screen.
Literally no one has said that he disassembled the rifle. I have no idea where that crap came from, it wasn't even the police or the FBI. Some people are saying the assembled the rifle and changed his clothes 4 or 5 times, and there's literally no official claims of either of those things. There's an argument that he assembled it.
Literally already in the hand of the police and not being released because it's literally evidence. Why are you supposed to get it again?
No, because it would require someone to actually accept evidence when they have it.
Because they tried to cover it up. Irynas murder has shown quite clearly why.
Because it was cropped.
https://x.com/Niall_Diarmuid/status/1968955433097306176
Now you're outright lying.
Transparency in an extremely politically charged case.
Can't accept evidence that doesn't exist.
Like always you're dodging the question and trying to derail the conversation.
No, they didn't, it's in the judicial process. The part that they released literally shows nothing because it doesn't show the stabbing.
To answer your own question, it looks like that camera's angle was extremely wide, because it also goes off to the right another 30 to 40 degrees. It looks like it wouldn't fit on any normal screen. And that's assuming that the shooting position was that corner.
Where are you getting the disassembly from? All I've heard is that it is speculation that he may have done that. Nothing conclusive, even from the police.
You're getting more transparency than you would ever normally get on any case. In a normal case, none of this would have been publicly released.
You're literally just making shit up and claiming I'm not addressing things I'm literally addressing.
In the first day, it looked like a very professional hit. The headshot. The fact that the guy got away. The lack of security, or bypassing of security.
That's a failure.
This was before he was caught. I had expected him to be caught immediately. And I still find it very strange that you can murder someone in front of thousands of people, and it will still take 2 days before you're caught.
They've done similar things in the UK and France, and you're right that none of them were murders of people in broad daylight in front of thousands of people.
Meet in the middle ground: The guy was a proxy sleeper by them. He thought he was doing it in the name of tranny sex, but was actually Just Following Orders (tm).
You literally don't even have any direct evidence of Israeli involvement. There's no evidence that's going to convince you of Israel not being involved, because you weren't convinced into this with evidence.
Even these texts are not direct evidence of an Israeli assassination. It's not even indirect evidence of one.
We already don’t believe you, Bibi. You don’t have to keep convincing us.
Notice Gizortnik moved the goalposts. First it was "the texts were probably fake", and now that it turns out they're real he pretends his complaint was "well it doesn't PROVE that the guy who was afraid someone was going to kill him right before he was killed was killed by the group he said he was afraid was going to kill him".
Next on the menu, “Here’s why it’s a good thing the texts are real…”
"I thought people on this thread were interested in truth"
Where exactly did I say that the texts were fake?
Why would the PM of Israel talk to you?
Ouch, low IQ moment right here.
So we're now moving from "Giz is a jew" to "Giz is literally Benjamin Netanyahu" in levels of retardation?
Wow.
Damn, you really are a retard
And here we have the left doing the usual of pretending to not understand simple things. One would think he would look at his downvotes and accept that it doesn't work, but jews are a very stubborn people.
I don't have to be popular to be right. I don't accept morality or truth via consensus.
What are you, a woman?
No shit, Sherlock. All I have is an official story that's pretty clearly bullshit with a whole bunch of gaps that do not need to be gaps if they'd just tell the truth.
So why would they lie?
God you're so tiresome.
"whole bunch of gaps", yeah... like the shooter.
I've seen nothing to indicate lies from the police on this. And again, you're re-stating my point: you didn't arrive to your conclusion by evidence. You're not going to be dissuaded out of it by evidence either.
The "text messages" from "Tyler Robinson" are enough evidence of lying to anyone with a brain
The confession to his father was also a lie too?
How about the rifle owned by his grandfather with an empty casing in the chamber?
You literally have a smoking gun and a confession, and this evidence has been soundly dismissed, but the lack of evidence showing Israeli involvement is wildly conclusive...
Yeah, that's a lie. It is reported that a family friend who happens to be a detective "recognized" him on the news and told him to turn himself in. His family is hiring the most powerful defense lawyers in the country at the moment.
They did "find" this rifle in the woods. No proof it was ever taken onto campus or that it shot Kirk or that he pulled the trigger.
Damn. I thought the whole story seemed far fetched, that charlie kirk wasn't close to noticing, and that the texts were Candace grift.
Jews really are the worst problem we have.
He probably wasn't even anywhere close to becoming actually anti-semitic. Only critical of Israel. But an incredibly influential voice like Charlies turning against Israel would've killed Israels stranglehold over the US in the long term. It is also very likely that it would have caused irreparable damage in the short term.
I think that's the reason why he was assassinated.
EDIT: Also his entire career was financed by the Jewish lobby. They really don't like their golems turning against them. So making an example of him could have also been a reason.
Ya he was very influential in young Conservative spheres, too dangerous to go out his lane for them.
I still think antifa killed him, because they are murderers.
The "greatest ally" might simply have withdrawn the protection, and left the door open for a crazy person.
Just like how they are able to command the Pentagon itself. Or how they were seriously involved in 911 as dancing Israelis with cameras and a van depicting the scene. The FBI let them go, because they were not Muslim.
Antifa are coackroaches. They're incompetent and try to stay out of the limelight. Murdering someone at a public event that's being livestreamed isn't exactly their modus operandi.
And well Tyler is an obvious patsy. Charlie was shot from behind and the FBI is covering it up. They wouldn't do that for some Antifa guy.
Antifa started as a Jewish terrorist organization. Fighting alongside the Nazis in pre-war Germany.
They do murder people and have many political targets. They call any opposing person a "nazi" to justify a murder. There are many psychopaths among the crazies. Some capable and trained. Their tactics is to hide among the puppets. And creating confusion is a main part of their tactics too.
Check out Andy Ngo about how they work. Also other journalists like Tim Pool and WeAreChange have been target of their violence. The terrorist organization has many different people who do different roles. Some are screamers and some are killers.
Fighting against the nationalist opposition in Weimar Germany you mean.
They try to. Usually they're too incompetent to succeed. But yes they're extremely violent and will usually attack perceived 'Nazis' in groups. Because they're cowards.
Believe me. If they were as capable as they were in Weimar Germany a lot of people would actually be dead and not just end up in the hospital. Especially in the US because of the 2A. They certainly try to kill people but fortunately they usually fail at it because they're generally cowardly and incompetent idiots.
They are still dangerous and deserve to be classified as terrorists as they literally are terrorists but you don't have to blame them for something they didn't do and let the actual culprits get off the hook.
The political left didn't kill Charlie even though they wanted to and gleefully celebrated his murder. They dropped their masks fully and showed themselves to be the evil, violent and inhuman creatures that they are. Charlie not having been killed by Tyler doesn't change anything about that.
One thing is certain: TPUSA misrepresented Kirk's positions regarding Israel in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, twisting the narrative so the shekelsniffers could wring the most benefit from his death.
They basically sold his corpse before it was even cold, to collect their 30 pieces of silver.
Fear is a hell of a drug. Very few people are actually willing to sacrifice their own life and possible the lives of their family for a cause.
Might have something to do with his sketchy pageant queen wife.
Forgiving his “killer” was a huge red flag.
Taking everything in, I DON'T think Israel and it's organisations DIRECTLY assassinated Charlie Kirk.
I DO think Israel focused mischaracterisation of him and encouragd extreme opinion of him through media and social media so people would have more extreme negative views of him that may justify violence against him.
Basically, Israel is doing more Radio Rwanda than grassy knoll...
All the leftist propaganda is financed with Jewish money, so they literally are the origin of the assassination.
Probably they didn't want him dead, only canceled, and now they face leaks that may show that Jews lie and manipulate with money...
Maybe one day it will come out that it was not 6 millions and that old trains couldn't possibly move so many people...
Why would the FBI make that tranny lover leftist their patsy then? It is obvious that Charlie was shot from behind. Why the coverup?
Right-wing patsies are for when Israel is at peace. Left-wing patsies are for when Israel is at war.
The left does a great job of subverting America, but they can't be relied on for direct financial and military support.
Its way too easy to get a random Leftie retard to commit violence for you that it would be idiotic to directly implicate yourself by directly doing it. Just hype up some random idiot, lay out enough incompetence that they can get through, and the job gets done (or the message across).
Its the same thing that happened with Trump's assassination attempt, he just got lucky (or saved by God) that the kid missed the kill.
If the trigger puller was indeed an antifa tranny then the evidence should have been undeniable.
With all the various factions in our government (and international factions like Israel who've infiltrated) there will never be truly "undeniable" evidence. Even if they come out and say things directly and take full responsibility, half the country would say it was a lie, psyop and actually X behind it.
If we are being honest with ourselves, almost no official story would satisfy us. Even if the evidence was strong, it would only be taken if it was exactly what we wanted it to be and that would be regardless of evidence not because of it.
Its a symptom of our society being not even low trust but outright no trust in anything. For good reason, but still.
I don't want an official story that will satisfy everyone (impossible, utopian). I want an official story that will satisfy most reasonable people (extremely possible).
For example, the sinking of the Costa Concordia is a well-documented, clearly-sourced, easily understood historical event.
The magic bullet that keeps turning up with JFK, RFK, MLK, and now Kirk might as well be an Israeli child spitting on you four times. Or maybe a couple of those are purely Hoover. Who knows. If they were actually going to give us a reasonable explanation they would all be thrown out of office.
“CaNdAcE iS cRaZy!”
What the fuck is Mark Dice's problem.
Gotta get those character assassinations in if they get too close to the truth.
The only reason they would confirm these texts is to avoid a lawsuit triggering discovery. So it’s almost definitely much worse.
Full video.
His first real argument is to defend Israel of course. Absolutely gross what they're doing with TPUSA. TPUSA was never really Our Guys (they did really good work in some ways, but were controlled opposition or whatever in others), but it's a shame, as soon as Charlie broke with that he gets killed, and all his people drag TPUSA back to what it was, against the wish's of their "friend," Charlie Kirk.
This Kolvlet dude is a snake, and talking out every possible side of his mouth.
I'd rather TPUSA die with Charlie, than be turned into a disgusting skinsuit.
They're real? Looked like a troll photoshop. Well Netanyahu better get ready for a fun spin cycle.
The fuck? The texts came out so late and were so blatant that I thought the whole angle with them was meant to be used to discredit those suspecting jewish involvement and even if they were legit I would have expected denial or silence from TPUSA. This narrative has taken an unexpected twist
Charlie Kirk was assassinated by a gay communist who stole a rifle from his grandpa in the name of "antifascism". His feelings about Israel had nothing to do with it. You failed a skill check and were oneshotted by reading about Jews online a few years ago.
Thank you comrade
"You were tricked into your belief system and don't have the intelligence to realize it, but I do."
Thank you redditor, you may go now.
Laura "Saw Puppet" Loomer's twatter feed is going to be highly entertaining for the foreseeable future.
BRB. Getting popcorn.
Watch the whole video. This is cut quite short.
Yeah, because it goes to the proof of the headline.
No the dude is clearly saying, and reasonably so, people can have multifaceted opinions. If ive called my boss an out of touch dumbass in private it doesn’t mean Ive gone off the plantation and got fired as part of an elaborate business unit coup.
Who "fired" him is up for debate, but he was definitely going off the plantation. Dude literally said he was leaving the pro-Israel side.
If not a government, a disgruntled donor.