US Politics

Spindle said:
Why on earth would you do it in such a public way if you wanted him gone? If you were some trillionaire backer wouldn't you just have him killed off air some other time?

It was there because the only way a lone killer nutter is going to know where he is in the open.

The lack of critical thinking on here is incredible
Click to expand...
That depends on the motivation! If someone wanted to stoke division and unrest then doing it with cameras watching makes sense.
 
Forest Hillbilly said:
the FBI are doggedly determined, and I'm pretty sure they'll get the shooter within the fortnight.
Click to expand...

i reckon its a professional hit by a paid marksman. He has already disappeared without a trace.

If the cops arrest a fella , it will be like the fellas jailed for the Yorkshire Ripper killings......none of them were Sutcliffe. Or Lee Harvey Oswald.....who was probably at home in bed when JFK got shot.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
It's curious that this stricture about "hysteria" doesn't apply to criticism of Trump or his supporters whose every deed, thought and motive is not only questioned but unfailingly vilified.
Click to expand...
This criticism is also directed at Trump in particular and to many of his supporters.

Trump’s response has been predictable. He has fallen into the assumption trap more readily than others and is leading the calls for retribution and division.

What a President should do is spread calm and reassurance to the nation as a whole, assuring people that the shooter will be found and prosecuted.

Trump is leading the hysteria.
 
Last edited:
Wisbech Eagle said:
This criticism is also directed at Trump in particular and to many of his supporters.

Trump’s response has been predictably. He has fallen into the assumption trap more readily than others and is leading the calls for retribution and division.

What a President should do is spread calm and reassurance to the nation as a whole, assuring people that the shooter will be found and prosecuted.

Trump is leading the hysteria.
Click to expand...
QED. Feel free to criticise everyone on one side and state absolute facts with no concern about creating any hysteria while not allowing others to even speculate.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
This criticism is also directed at Trump in particular and to many of his supporters.

Trump’s response has been predictably. He has fallen into the assumption trap more readily than others and is leading the calls for retribution and division.

What a President should do is spread calm and reassurance to the nation as a whole, assuring people that the shooter will be found and prosecuted.

Trump is leading the hysteria.
Click to expand...

Trump said Kirk had been “an advocate of nonviolence” and “that’s the way I’d like to see people respond”.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
This criticism is also directed at Trump in particular and to many of his supporters.

Trump’s response has been predictably. He has fallen into the assumption trap more readily than others and is leading the calls for retribution and division.

What a President should do is spread calm and reassurance to the nation as a whole, assuring people that the shooter will be found and prosecuted.

Trump is leading the hysteria.
Click to expand...
"hysteria" - it's righteous indignation.

It is a typical reaction of the creatures on the Left; assassinations, white girls hacked to death on trains, thousands of children raped by organised gangs - it's just 'hysteria' to even mention these atrocities.

Ephesians 4:26: Be angry, and yet do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger
 
Last edited:
Teddy Eagle said:
QED. Feel free to criticise everyone on one side and state absolute facts with no concern about creating any hysteria while not allowing others to even speculate.
Click to expand...
Where is there hysteria in the criticism of Trump?

Listen to people like Michael Wolff, Jeffrey Sachs or John Bolton. All insiders with personal experience of either Trump, international politics or both. The criticism may be severe but it’s objective and informed. Not hysterical. Others may mock him but again not a trace of hysteria. Ridicule can be an effective way of making serious comments.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I hope people listen, that he takes his own advice and tones down the rhetoric which has been anything but that.
Click to expand...

The dangerous rhetoric from the Democrats caused the attempted assassination of Trump last year and also caused the successful assassination of Charlie Kirk this year. Were you one of the ones that wished the bullet had not missed Trump?

And they wouldn't even have a moments of silence for Kirk. That was their chance for unity and not to celebrate the murder of a husband and father.
 
eaglesdare said:
The dangerous rhetoric from the Democrats caused the attempted assassination of Trump last year and also caused the successful assassination of Charlie Kirk this year. Were you one of the ones that wished the bullet had not missed Trump?

And they wouldn't even have a moments of silence for Kirk. That was their chance for unity and not to celebrate the murder of a husband and father.
Click to expand...
There was, and is, no dangerous rhetoric from the Democrats. It’s entirely imaginary. They have been remarkably restrained, far too much in my view. The criticism is well founded, well reasoned and carefully explained. Coming from insiders, who are informed and professional.

All the divisiveness comes from Trump and the boneheads he has assembled to act as his sycophantic props.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Where is there hysteria in the criticism of Trump?

Listen to people like Michael Wolff, Jeffrey Sachs or John Bolton. All insiders with personal experience of either Trump, international politics or both. The criticism may be severe but it’s objective and informed. Not hysterical. Others may mock him but again not a trace of hysteria. Ridicule can be an effective way of making serious comments.
Click to expand...

People like Jeffrey Sachs and Bolton also have criticism of people with your politics.

A lot of that is also severe.

So take account of that....but you won't.

So neither should Trump care what the likes of you think.

And he won't.
 
eaglesdare said:
He was shot in the larynx region which is the voice box area I think? And possible transgender and anti fascist ideology engraved bullets.

Sounds like they really wanted to silence his voice and what it represents. He was tipped for future presidential elections years from now. Sounds they were pro actively putting a stop to it.

The guy has reached millions and he was on the battleground on campus in Universities where woke idealogy thrives. They had to put a stop to it.
Click to expand...
Did the shooter have accomplices then?
What precise knowledge do you have about more than one killer?
Blimey. I'd contact the American security services if I were you.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
There was, and is, no dangerous rhetoric from the Democrats. It’s entirely imaginary. They have been remarkably restrained, far too much in my view. The criticism is well founded, well reasoned and carefully explained. Coming from insiders, who are informed and professional.

All the divisiveness comes from Trump and the boneheads he has assembled to act as his sycophantic props.
Click to expand...

I believe earlier in this thread I among others provided you with evidence of the democratic dangerous rhetoric.

The Democrat party couldn't even let the silence stand without injecting division in Congress.

Did you want the bullet to miss Trump last year?
 
Ouzo Dan said:
30-06 is a pretty standard hunting round,

There's two theories running around in my head

I've seen a slowed down version of the video & there is the suggestion that the bullet hits Kirk's body armor & ricochets up into his neck, i am assuming Kirk was likely wearing some kind of low profile level 3 armor under his clothes, this would be designed for considerably smaller rounds such as 9mm or 22lr, no doubt being prepared for a shooter who fancied having a pop with a handgun at closer range.

30-06 would punch right through that armor, it's unlikely the bullet would ricochet, however there is no exit wound (that I'm aware of) so the theory does have some merit as a human neck offers little in the way of mass to stop a hunting round.
Ultimately it's hard to tell in the video if the bullet strikes his armor, tumbles & hits his neck.

My other theory

It was supposed to be a headshot you're looking at the drop of the bullet over X distance, no shooter is going to risk missing in this situation by going for the throat, you're going for the larger mass.
Much like what I said in the Trump assassination attempt, you need to factor in how much the shooter would be shitting himself, you'd be shaking uncontrollably, the fact the bullet almost missed Kirk & hit his Carotid lends weight to the above.

My gut tells me this is yet another radicalised Democrat, using his Dad's hunting rifle, he would have got some firearms training through an antifa mercenary group (see Andy NGO)
However by no means is he the marksman some are making him out to be.
Click to expand...
The assumptions on this site are incredible. What about ex-military?

What the truth is we just don't know.
Probably best if we trust your gut, of course.
 
Matov said:
As to Charlie Kirk, RIP. Definitely one of the good guys and now a martyr. In many ways a throw back to a bygone era where civilised debate was possible and you could attempt to reason with those you opposed.

That door must now be acknowledged as being firmly closed.
Click to expand...
JFK, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King
 
georgenorman said:
Whoever he is, he probably shares many of your views.
Click to expand...
My days! You just can't stop your mindless attacks, can you? A non-stop barrage.

Wisbeach the murderer vibe. Excellent. keep on going, my man.

So you not only know who the perpetrator is but also his /her views.

You're a special case indeed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top