SOME interesting analysis of the Charlie Kirk story by Anthony Colpo can be found here.
[T]he villain is always smart enough to evade detection and shoot someone from a distance, but always dumb enough to leave helpful clues about their identity and motives.
He concludes, after reviewing a number of inconsistencies:
If you still believe this nonsensical tale, I really don’t know what to say, except that you are the exact kind of person who emboldens evil people in power to do evil things. After all, stupid stunts require a stupid audience to be believed.
There will be much more and much worse deception to come. It’s only going to get worse. That’s because millions of people either fall for this without examining the details or refuse to call it out.
Liars are emboldened by the credulous, the apathetic and the silent.
— Comments —
Zeno writes:
Thank you for your comments regarding the Kirk story., which gets stranger by the day.
Charlie and Erika seem a completely artificial couple. Everything about them looks like a performance, even their supposed Christianity (although evangelicals can be strange and very Jewish-centered — in this case, not only do they keep the Jewish Saturday Sabbaths, but one of the most shared pictures of the couple was taken in Jerusalem.) So I don’t have much trouble believing that his death was a performance too.
If you peruse their social media, there are many pictures and videos of them with their supposed children, but the children appear always seen from the back. It’s not even evident that they are always the same children. The way they hold them, too, it’s as if they were props. It could be that they don’t want to show their faces for privacy reasons, but in that case why show the children in social media at all.
The way they smile and talk, too, seems very artificial. Perhaps it’s because they basically lived all their lives under public light, after all she was Miss Arizona USA (a pageant owned at the time by Trump) and Kirk was promoted since he was 18 (by a Trump-friendly billionaire). Perhaps there are people who are really like that, especially in such an environment. Who knows? Still, it’s an odd couple.
As for Kirk’s beliefs, I can make no heads or tails of it. I did not know anything about him before this event. I assume most people hadn’t even heard of him. But now it’s clear that the event is being used to promote legislation against free speech, as well as other police-state measures (Antifa being declared a “terrorist organization” and so on).
Then there is the issue that he was (supposedly) taken to the hospital in a private car by his friends (they didn’t have any paramedics or ambulance on campus for such a huge event?), that no normal protocols for shootings were followed, etc.
I guess in this age of total media manipulation, we can’t conclusively prove one way or another if any event is “real” or “fake”, and we certainly can’t trust any video or photograph as “evidence”. But if Trump’s shooting was a hoax (and that one certainly looked like one), then there is no way to believe that this one was real, given the many similarities in both events, and the fact that the Kirks were so close to the Trump team.
Laura writes:
I would love to cross-examine this guy in a court of law for just one hour.
His story is filled with inconsistencies and ridiculous improbabilities.
