Over the past few days since the murder of Charlie Kirk one thing has become clear for those who are paying attention. And that is that nothing is clear!
Confusion abounds as “millions” of influencers, commenters to podcasters, and social media followers all chime in with their opinions. From the outset, we ourselves sensed that something smelled fishy about what we were told had happened.
For example, one of the first things we saw was the “doorbell” video supplied by the Hollywood gossip channel TMZ. They had their logo watermarking the whole video. First question: How did Harvey Levin, founder of TMZ, and his crew obtain this video so quickly?
The first video purportedly shows a young man walking across a street a short distance from the University campus and it appears that he has a limp, or as was later determined, he must have had the rifle stuffed down one leg.
Because a later video—shortly after the shooting—shows a young man—dressed differently—who is walking behind the house across the street and then shows him coming out from that house and he is running with no discernible limp.
Certainly, we have all seen the video of the alleged shooter coming over to the edge of the roof of a campus building with a backpack, and jumping about 15 feet to the ground and scurrying off up a small hill down to a busy street and then crossing the street. Second question: Where was the rifle at this time?
People have suggested that since a screwdriver was found on the roof in the locations where the kill shot allegedly came from, that the shooter had quickly disassembled the Mauser rifle and stuffed it in his backpack. Really!? That makes no sense!
First of all, it could not be disassembled within the minute or less which transpired from the time the shot rang out until we see the alleged shooter (Tyler Robinson) jumping off the roof.
And there are many more “oddities” which cause me to say that many things don’t add up; there are many reasons to be skeptical.
Other theories are that it was a false flag. That Kirk was actually killed, but Tyler was a troubled young man who was part of the “Trantifa” movement, and he was a patsy for the real expert who fired the fatal shot. By this theory, the black hats are trying to cause the conservative “right” to react and get violent, leading to massive civil unrest.
Another theory is that it was a false flag, but different in that the white hats learned of the plot and with Charlie’s help, stage the whole thing, and that he will never be seen in public again, and there’s more to that theory, but that is sufficient for today.
The weirdest one I have heard is from one of our correspondents in North Dakota who reported that there is a podcaster that she watches or listens to who tried to make a case that President Trump ordered the hit!
To me, that flies in the face of all the testimonies of POTUS himself, of his sons and Vice President J D Vance, who were all quite close to Charlie. I did not ask our correspondent, but I would immediately strike that podcaster from my list of ones I would listen to.
There are more theories contributing to the confusion, but I will only mention this one last as a segue to leave you with some places to start if you care to. Most curiously, this comes from a Jewish source who suggests the possibility that Charlie was taken out by Mossad or agents of the Israeli state.
I had never heard of Max Blumenthal until the past few days, but I read his story which is headlined:
Charlie Kirk refused Netanyahu funding offer, was ‘frightened’ by pro-Israel forces before death, friend reveals
Here is a brief excerpt. QUOTE:
A Trump insider and longtime friend of Charlie Kirk tells The Grayzone how the assassinated conservative leader’s turning point on Israeli influence provoked a private backlash from Netanyahu’s allies that left him angry and afraid. END QUOTE
Here is a link to the story. By Max Blumenthal and Anya Parampil.
Lest some readers think this is immediately suspect because a Jew is alleging very serious crimes by his “fellow Jews.” However, this is not without precedent because Max Blumenthal is a “non-Zionist” Jew.
Moreover, there have been many non-Zionist Jews who have exposed Zionism and the Israeli state as being evil. The two factions have very serious differences. For example, I have a book in my library of 904 pages, written in 1978 by the late Alfred Lilienthal exposing Zionism. Here is a picture of it:
I would recommend our readers to read the article cited above first. It will give you a better background then to watch the podcast—which just came out—of Judge Andrew Napolitano interviewing Max regarding this same subject matter. There are important things in the article which do not come up in the Napolitano interview.
Here is a short synopsis of the interview from the website. QUOTE: Max Blumenthal (with Anya Parampil) investigates recent claims that Charlie Kirk, the high-profile conservative commentator and founder of TPUSA, had begun pushing back against pro-Israel influence—and as a result, was being pressured, intimidated, and even offered funding by Israeli leaders or wealthy Zionist backers in exchange for staying in line. Our conversation centers around these allegations. Zionists Rebuffed by Charlie Kirk. END QUOTE
Here is the link to the interview. Judge Andrew Napolitano - Max Blumenthal Reports: : Charlie Kirk and the Israel Lobby!
There is much more that I intend to share, but that is sufficient for today. Rest assured, God has everything under control. And He told us not to fear.
Matthew 10:26 Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known.
~END~
