Charlie Kirk is dead... A sad day in history

Yeah, the letter sounds almost “comically“ pretentious just as if someone wrote it specifically with the goal to corroborate key elements of the official narrative in mind. Sorry for having quite some problems believing that a young adult would write in that way and especially after what he supposedly did.

Yeah they read ridiculously fake, what 22 year old male says "my love" :lol: and all the FBI jargon words like someone else pointed out. I'll be very surprised if they are real. And why would he not confess??? When the FBI where reading out the info from the messages it just sounded so confusing, and they did that on purpose, sounded like absolute BS. Are they not supposed to give evidence in a clear and concise way?
 
One would think that at least for the time being it wouldn’t be the best idea to kill the supposed shooter, via a death penalty, because even if he was involved (which very well might have been the case) there are probably a number of important things not only “the FBI“ but also the public should find out and know from the suspect? Unless of course, someone has something to hide.
 
This kind of thought and attitude is exactly what the PTB/4D STO forces want, everyone highly emotional, divided and the us vs them mentality. Everyone needs to stop looking at this as a left vs right problem, because let’s face it there are wackos on both sides, and instead look at it as people being radicalized to the extreme by forces unseen such as their social media feeds. The more hate being spewed by both sides and the angrier and angrier people get this whole thing will become a self fulfilling prophecy of a civil war. The easiest and most cost effective way to destabilize a country is a civil war. Because if the country is dysfunctional enough it would do the work for the enemy. I’d say the US is pretty dysfunctional enough alright especially now. Try to keep looking at the bigger picture and from a higher perspective. Someone (something) is radicalizing these people and we need to recognize that. Let’s keep a clear head here folks and stop feeding the monsters. I’m sure there’s people on here who remember the movie Wargames. “The only winning move is to not play the game”

What I wrote was part of the picture, not the whole picture. We have since expanded and clarified this picture on this thread. What I wrote is still true though.

But let me be clear:

I don't believe that "the left" is starting an antifa war now, starting to shoot up right-wing personalities and so on. People who say such things on the right are hyperbolic, and "took the bait" of what is likely some kind of intelligence operation, one way or the other. I also see the danger that this sort of hyperbolic response furthers the goals of the social engineers, and in fact already does, insofar as it deflects from the Israeli and cosmic elephant in the room for example.

But by no means does that mean that "the left" isn't evil, ponerized, and the main driver of total reality inversion. If it makes you uncomfortable that I'm singling out "the left", substitute it for "the mainstream media, NGOs, academia, TV, Hollywood and all the people who believe those authorities, if even partly", but also ask yourself why me talking about "the left" makes you so uncomfortable.

As Laura wrote in The Wave, you cannot just "find the middle ground" when confronted with evil lies. That's how they get you, and that's how they got all the "normal" people, even if they themselves are not leftist radicals: "yeah well, this [latest leftist insanity] is a bit extreme, BUT... The murder of Charlie Kirk was clearly wrong, BUT... The right is equally bad! And also I'm afraid of a Nazi backlash, so let's meet in the middle mkay?"

Saying that there are bad people on both sides is trivially true. But you shouldn't use that as a "buffer" to engage in both-sideism, pretending that it's not the left that is the driver of insane lies and ponerization in Western society.

Note that the only commentators who make any sense are on the right. Also note there's no pro-Palestine leftie I'm aware of who blames Israel for the murder of Charlie Kirk, or even makes the connection. Instead, prominent ones like "Bob Vylan" are mocking his death and calling him names. Lefties "cannot go there" ideologically, because again, they are ponerized and believe a pack of lies.

I also don't understand how people can disagree with some loud-mouthed lefties getting their "just desserts" at the moment. In any half-functioning society, people who spread ponerizing nonsense based on an ideology of lies and spiritual evil would be policed, one way or the other. This doesn't mean I think this will "save the West" and it will all be great if only we crack down on lefties, especially if there are large gaps in understanding other crucial aspects of the picture, such as intel agency shenanigans, ponerology, the nature of our reality, etc. But to deny that it is a healthy response would be untrue.

Lastly, I admit that I'm not without emotions about this issue, partly because I have grown up with these leftist talking points, and am still confronted with them in my life, while being forced to "go along to get along". People believe such an enormous mountain of lies that they don't see it, and the leftist brainwashing has been going on for a very, very long time. It takes its toll.

But that's okay, we all have our backgrounds that make us more sensitive to certain issues. Feeling these emotions can actually motivate you to think these things through clearly, and to stand up to them, as long as you avoid becoming obsessed with one particular "part of the picture" at the exclusion of the others, and as long as these emotions don't bait you into doing unwise things. That's the beauty of a network: we all have things that are dear to our hearts for one reason or another, and so we all contribute to understanding the bigger picture in our own ways.
 
I think it is very good that Candace keeps reminding people of a thing called gaslighting and how this has and is being used, not seldomly it seems, especially in big events such as 9/11. We know from our own reading on psychopathy that this is one of the most effective and primary things psychopaths do to normal people. I don’t know if Candace is making such a Psychopathy connection or not. Be that as it may, given that, it might be a good idea to reexamine again how gaslighting works and what if anything of what is currently going on might be a something that is similar?

Grok summarizes Gaslighting as follows:

Input: Summarize the most common gaslighting tactics and the effects they have on normal people.


Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation where someone causes another person to question their reality, memory, or perceptions. Below is a summary of the most common gaslighting tactics and their effects on typical individuals:Common Gaslighting Tactics
  1. Denial: The gaslighter denies events or conversations ever happened, even when evidence exists (e.g., "I never said that").
  2. Minimization: Downplaying the victim's feelings or concerns (e.g., "You're overreacting" or "It's not a big deal").
  3. Deflection: Shifting blame or focus away from their actions (e.g., "You're the one who's always causing problems").
  4. Trivializing: Making the victim's emotions or experiences seem insignificant (e.g., "You're too sensitive").
  5. Countering: Questioning the victim's memory or version of events (e.g., "That's not how it happened").
  6. Withholding: Pretending not to understand or refusing to engage (e.g., "I don’t know what you’re talking about").
  7. Twisting Information: Presenting false or distorted information to confuse the victim (e.g., rewriting past events to favor the gaslighter).
  8. Projection: Accusing the victim of the gaslighter’s own behaviors or flaws (e.g., accusing the victim of lying when the gaslighter is dishonest).
  9. Using Affection as Manipulation: Alternating between kindness and cruelty to keep the victim off-balance (e.g., "love-bombing" followed by criticism).
Effects on Normal People
  1. Self-Doubt: Victims begin to question their memory, judgment, or sanity, often feeling confused or "crazy."
  2. Low Self-Esteem: Constant invalidation erodes confidence, making victims feel worthless or incompetent.
  3. Anxiety and Depression: The stress of being manipulated can lead to chronic anxiety, depression, or emotional exhaustion.
  4. Isolation: Victims may withdraw from others, either because they feel ashamed or because the gaslighter discourages outside connections.
  5. Decision-Making Paralysis: Fear of being "wrong" can make it hard for victims to trust their choices or instincts.
  6. Dependency: Victims may become reliant on the gaslighter for validation or a sense of reality, trapping them in the dynamic.
  7. Emotional Trauma: Long-term gaslighting can cause lasting psychological harm, including trust issues or difficulty forming healthy relationships.
These tactics are often subtle and escalate over time, making them hard to recognize initially. The effects can be profound, undermining mental health and personal agency. Awareness and external support (e.g., therapy, trusted confidants) are critical for recovery. If you want more details or specific examples, let me know!
 
Last edited:
Yes, I'm wondering where this belief that "everything's fake" is coming from. Can't these people deal with reality? I just don't know what to think about it. I know a person in Australia who's going on and on about it. Upon reflection, I think they have a need for validation, attention and for "being right". I'm sure there must be many reasons for thinking everything (out of the ordinary) is fake. Potentially specific to the individual.
I think they’re maybe just watching some trashy conspiracy nut jobs on the internet and don’t really have much of a clue about how things work and who pulls the strings.

Both my mother and my sister questioned me if I thought Charlie was really killed, there isn’t much I could point them to that would convince them one way or the other. These crazy conspiracies are like a program that runs for people who only have taken a little nibble from the banana to keep them dumbed down.

They both were suddenly awoken to some of the evils on the planet during COVID times which was shocking and world view shattering for them which caused them to see and think that everything that happens is a lie. The biggest problem is that they don’t follow the paper trail backwards, are unable to connect the dots to past events so then are left swimming in a world of doubt, mistrust and suspicion with conflicting ‘evidence’ and opinions causing real confusion and befuddling, rendering them unable to apply any real discernment towards what’s in front of them.

So instead of applying any critical thinking it’s easier to believe nothing, suspect everyone, and assume we are all being hoodwinked about absolutely everything.
It’s not ego or attention seeking, just plain old ignorance (not wanting to deal with reality) and getting caught up watching and reading from the wrong people.
 
I see that clips of Owens's podcast from yesterday (Sept 16th) have been posted here, so here's the whole thing. Incredible, and a sign of the times, that the PARENTS of the 'lover/roommate' of Tyler Robinson, Lance Twiggs, personally reached out to Owens over the weekend because they don't trust the media, and that they did so because they believe their own son's role in this is being brushed under the rug:


Also, while he has addressed the assassination elsewhere, like on Megyn Kelly's show and with JD Vance, here's Carlson's first monologue on Kirk. Primarily a eulogy, Carlson also backed up Owens's response to Netanyahu politicizing the event, and shared some of what he knows about what Kirk was going through this summer. Given that Owens 'outed' Jewish billionaire Bill Ackman's 'Israel-First retreat' in early August, Carlson also expanded on his criticism of Ackman at the TPUSA event in June:

 

Even if this text message exchange was convincing in its style and punctuation etc. there's so many ridiculous things in there. Someone who is trying to conceal their involvement in a shooting is concerned about how they're going to get the weapon back to their house? They are up to date on the fast moving news coverage, following events like Zin being arrested?

Says to their purported boyfriend 'my Dad has been pretty diehard MAGA' like they've never discussed that before.

Thinks that this message exchange can just be deleted? "I will have left no evidence" except this exchange confirming all the key findings of the investigation conveniently laid out. Especially the motive (Why did I do it?, How long have you been planning this?)

Here's how I'm planning to evade capture before turning myself in willingly (which he then doesn't do).
 
Also, while he has addressed the assassination elsewhere, like on Megyn Kelly's show and with JD Vance, here's Carlson's first monologue on Kirk.
I thought Scott Adams' segment with Tucker last night was excellent. He spoke on his training as a hypnotist and how those with Trump Derangement Syndrome are living in a 'Hitlerian bubble' which is how they are socially engineered to engage in violence and hate against the Right. It was an incredibly astute breakdown of what's going on with leftists.

 
I see that clips of Owens's podcast from yesterday (Sept 16th) have been posted here, so here's the whole thing. Incredible, and a sign of the times, that the PARENTS of the 'lover/roommate' of Tyler Robinson, Lance Twiggs, personally reached out to Owens over the weekend because they don't trust the media, and that they did so because they believe their own son's role in this is being brushed under the rug:

[…]

Indeed! And it should be emphasized that Candace at least in the first episode of covering what is happening in detail (I haven’t watched the second one yet) has managed to avoid the many pitfalls that have already been laid out in this drama and instead followed a very sensible and also very dangerous line of injury and questioning. And all that despite her doing it live and obviously being very personally emotionally affected by the whole situation and probably not having such a good network we are privileged to have. It can’t be understated how difficult it is to achieve something like that under such circumstances! I hope she will continue to stay on course, stays safe, and doesn’t fall for the many pitfalls.
 
Last edited:
Unbelievable what we are witnessing. From the above article.
These are not ceremonial figures. These are state lawmakers. They write laws on antisemitism, divestment, and education. They control budgets, shape curricula, approve programs. Their presence is a signal. Domestic policy is being shaped abroad. State-level decisions will now reflect foreign priorities. Political alignment is no longer reactive—it is being pre-programmed. If a state passes a resolution tomorrow condemning a boycott or funding a program, these trips are part of why it will pass.

This was not diplomacy. It was theater. It was not inquiry. It was performance. It was not balance. It was instruction. Every meeting, every site visit, every handshake pushed one lesson: total support, unquestioned and codified.

And the real danger is here. Lawmakers will carry this forward. Curricula may shift. Budgets may be rewritten. Resolutions may pass faster. Public debate may be muted. Support that looks symbolic today becomes policy tomorrow. Support today is law tomorrow. People will look back and realize what happened, and it will be too late.
why don't they move US capital to Tel Viv or Jerusalem? All this charade of 'democracy' is over in front of the world and people will 'suck it up' in other distractions that will inevitably follow.

They already even destroyed evidence on the ground by ripping apart and putting a pavement at the place of Kirk's assassination. That is 'right-hand' man of President of most 'powerful' country. Trump blustered like a Tiger with all those Tarriffs and now some body publicly executes his own man in front of college kids in his own country, he couldn't even keep the evidence until investigation is complete. But it is what it is and had been like that for more than a century since Zionist program went hyper drive, just 'guardians'( nationalities, roles) has changed and but the goal is still same.

Symbology of 'man behind the curtain' was used for long. initially, USA, then deep state and then Soros and so on. Now Bibi steps out in front of the world in that role. Will we see people running the show from that portal in middle east also gets exposed? I am not counting on it though.
 
I don't think this has been posted, but it is from Vigilant Fox from 2 days ago and about the reactions from the killing, not least reactions by some democrat talking heads like Whoopi Goldberg. Here is the link and below the quick summary with the most interesting. Whoopi Goldberg Looks Visibly Distraught With a Warning to Future Assassins

#10 - Whoopi Goldberg looks visibly distraught as she utters a warning to future assassins.

Watch her closely.

She realizes that the leftist who killed Charlie Kirk just ignited a movement across America that could spell the end of everything she stands for.

#9 - Bill Maher delivers a brutal message to those on the left who don’t care about the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
#8 - Charlie Kirk’s producer drops INSANE numbers on what his death has sparked in terms of TPUSA chapter interest.

“At this point we’re over 37,000 inquiries just through our website, TPUSA [dot] com, saying, I want to get involved and start a chapter.”

“And to put that in perspective; right now we have 900 college chapters, official college chapters, and 1,200 high school chapters. And about 3,500 total.”

“So 37,000 is enormous.”


#3 - RFK Jr. brings the house down at Charlie Kirk’s vigil.
#1 - Fourteen-year-old boy blows away RAV’s Ben Bergquam with powerful words about Charlie Kirk.

It is understandable why there is a war to capture/distract/confuse the dominant narrative and to challenge the anger/energy in ways that doesn't disturb the interests of the PtB.
 
As others have said, that may be where things are going to go anyway, and there's nothing we can do about it, but I was directing my comments at members here who might have been susceptible to falling into that mindset and in that way investing their energy into a negative dynamic.
Looking up the origin of the terms "left" and "right" in a political context, Grok informed me that it goes back to the French revolution less than 250 years ago, specifically a colloquial reference to a political position for or against the revolution, reflected in which side of the room in the French National Assembly the opponents or supporters of the revolution or monarchy would sit on.

So if the revolutionists had sat on the right side of the room, each of those terms would likely have the meaning of the other today. Seems quite arbitrary, yes?

I note also, in the first edition of Ponerology, Lobaczewski uses the term "left" or "leftist" in a political context a grand total of four times, and "right" mostly in terms of liberties - eg. human rights. For a 300+ page book on the political implications of psychopathology, that's impressively neutral language.

It seems people are going to use whatever vocabulary they want for any number of reasons, such as whether they think it's true, whether they think it's the most effective way to communicate with the politically retarded, or for the 'ontological relief' it provides against having to adjust their vocabulary to more nuanced and accurate terms.

Well, free will and all that. One good thing is that the PTB's divisive narrative seems to be getting a very thorough flogging this time around. There's a good deal more critical thinking out there, even if not quite "thinking in unlimited terms", osit.
 
( WARNING , shows graphic images ) By now most know about the official narrative re. Kirk's assassination , this video somehow counters the narrative that the killing shot came from the front at a rooftop somewhere at 200 yards ( ~182 meters ) and posits that the bullet came from C.K's right , and that the visible carotid artery blowout that we see is an exit wound . Seems more plausible than official narrative at his point.

Outside the overton ( Zeb Boykin and Josh VanDerNoord) @ youtoube

 
I note also, in the first edition of Ponerology, Lobaczewski uses the term "left" or "leftist" in a political context a grand total of four times, and "right" mostly in terms of liberties - eg. human rights. For a 300+ page book on the political implications of psychopathology, that's impressively neutral language.

That's probably because a deceitful manipulation of others is devoid of morality. I've seen descriptors in Procopius of Caesarea's alleged Secret History that forego moral or political dimensions for two reasons: 1) the political situation over in Byzantium during Justinian's reign became completely untenable, and 2) the two majority factions wore their colors (blue/green respectively) as gang affiliations, as it's basically what they became. A selection of Chapter 7 goes as such:

7. OUTRAGES OF THE BLUES

The people had since long previous time been divided, as I have explained elsewhere, into two factions, the Blues and the Greens. Justinian, by joining the former party, which had already shown favor to him, was able to bring everything into confusion and turmoil, and by its power to sink the Roman state to its knees before him. Not all the Blues were willing to follow his leadership, but there were plenty who were eager for civil war. Yet even these, as the trouble spread, seemed the most prudent of men, for their crimes were less awful than was in their power to commit. Nor did the Green partisans remain quiet, but showed their resentment as violently as they could, though one by one they were continually punished; which, indeed, urged them each time to further recklessness. For men who are wronged are likely to become desperate.

Then it was that Justinian, fanning the flame and openly inciting the Blues to fight, made the whole Roman Empire shake on its foundation, as if an earthquake or a cataclysm had stricken it, or every city within its confines had been taken by the foe. Everything everywhere was uprooted: nothing was left undisturbed by him. Law and order, throughout the State, overwhelmed by distraction, were turned upside down.


First the rebels revolutionized the style of wearing their hair. For they had it cut differently from the rest of the Romans: not molesting the mustache or beard, which they allowed to keep on growing as long as it would, as the Persians do, but clipping the hair short on the front of the head down to the temples, and letting it hang down in great length and disorder in the back, as the Massageti do. This weird combination they called the Hun haircut.

Next they decided to wear the purple stripe on their togas, and swaggered about in a dress indicating a rank above their station: for it was only by ill-gotten money they were able to buy this finery. And the sleeves of their tunics were cut tight about the wrists, while from there to the shoulders they were of an ineffable fullness; thus, whenever they moved their hands, as when applauding at the theater or encouraging a driver in the hippodrome, these immense sleeves fluttered conspicuously, displaying to the simple public what beautiful and well-developed physiques were these that required such large garments to cover them. They did not consider that by the exaggeration of this dress the meagerness of their stunted bodies appeared all the more noticeable. Their cloaks, trousers, and boots were also different: and these too were called the Hun style, which they imitated.

Almost all of them carried steel openly from the first, while by day they concealed their two-edged daggers along the thigh under their cloaks. Collecting in gangs as soon as dusk fell, they robbed their betters in the open Forum and in the narrow alleys, snatching from passersby their mantles, belts, gold brooches, and whatever they had in their hands. Some they killed after robbing them, so they could not inform anyone of the assault.

These outrages brought the enmity of everybody on them, especially that of the Blue partisans who had not taken active part in the discord. When even the latter were molested, they began to wear brass belts and brooches and cheaper cloaks than most of them were privileged to display, lest their elegance should lead to their deaths; and even before the sun went down they went home to hide. But the evil progressed; and as no punishment came to the criminals from those in charge of the public peace, their boldness increased more and more. For when crime finds itself licensed, there are no limits to its abuses; since even when it is punished, it is never quite suppressed, most men being by nature easily turned to error. Such, then, was the conduct of the Blues.

Some of the opposite party joined this faction so as to get even with the people of their original side who had ill-treated them; others fled in secret to other lands, but many were captured before they could get away, and perished either at the hands of their foes or by sentence of the State. And many other young men offered themselves to this society who had never before taken any interest in the quarrel, but were now induced by the power and possibility of insolence they could thus acquire. For there is no villainy to which men give a name that was not committed during this time, and remained unpunished.

Now at first they killed only their opponents. But as matters progressed, they also murdered men who had done nothing against them. And there were many who bribed them with money, pointing out personal enemies, whom the Blues straightway dispatched, declaring these victims were Greens, when as a matter of fact they were utter strangers. And all this went on not any longer at dark and by stealth, but in every hour of the day, everywhere in the city: before the eyes of the most notable men of the government, if they happened to be bystanders. For they did not need to conceal their crimes, having no fear of punishment, but considered it rather to the advantage of their reputation, as proving their strength and manhood, to kill with one stroke of the dagger any unarmed man who happened to be passing by.

No one could hope to live very long under this state of affairs, for everybody suspected he would be the next to be killed. No place was safe, no time of day offered any pledge of security, since these murders went on in the holiest of sanctuaries even during divine services. No confidence was left in one's friends or relatives, for many died by conspiracy of members of their own households. Nor was there any investigation after these deeds, but the blow would fall unexpectedly, and none avenged the victim. No longer was there left any force in law or contract, because,of this disorder, but everything was settled by violence. The State might as well have been a tyranny: not one, however, that had been established, but one that was being overturned daily and ever recommencing.

The magistrates seemed to have been driven from their senses, and their wits enslaved by the fear of one man. The judges, when deciding cases that came up before them, cast their votes not according to what they thought right or lawful, but according as either of the disputants was an enemy or friend of the faction in power. For a judge who disregarded its instruction was sentencing himself to death. And many creditors were forced to receipt the bills they had sent to their debtors without being paid what was due them; and many thus against their will had to free their slaves.

And they say that certain ladies were forced by their own slaves to do what they did not want to do; and the sons of notable men, getting mixed up with these young bandits, compelled their fathers, among other acts against their will, to hand over their properties to them. Many boys were constrained, with their fathers' knowledge, to serve the unnatural desires of the Blues; and happily married women met the same misfortune.

It is told that a woman of no undue beauty was ferrying with her husband to the suburb opposite the mainland; when some men of this party met them on the water, and jumping into her boat, dragged her abusively from her husband and made her enter their vessel. She had whispered to her spouse to trust her and have no fear of any reproach, for she would not allow herself to be dishonored. Then, as he looked at her in great grief, she threw her body into the Bosphorus and forthwith vanished from the world of men. Such were the deeds this party dared to commit at that time in Constantinople.

Yet all of this disturbed people less than Justinian's offenses against the State. For those who suffer the most grievously from evildoers are relieved of the greater part of their anguish by the expectation they will sometime be avenged by law and authority. Men who are confident of the future can bear more easily and less painfully their present troubles; but when they are outraged even by the government what befalls them is naturally all the more grievous, and by the failing of all hope of redress they are turned to utter despair. And Justinian's crime was that he was not only unwilling to protect the injured, but saw no reason why he should not be the open head of the guilty faction; he gave great sums of money to these young men, and surrounded himself with them: and some he even went so far as to appoint to high office and other posts of honor.

The rest of the book has significant similarities to other "themes" which many here might be able to pick out, if not the exact chapter denoted.

But the particulars of one's group affiliation, or association, become increasingly mute and worthless, the further said person rises up in a hierarchy of power and/or authority -- their mental gymnastics begin to resemble the requirements of mathematical game theory, rather than any Biblical anecdotes of moral standards. In the West, we say "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". However in the East, the Russians have a more apt saying: "the fish rots from the head down" -- you can look like a normal person, yet something about you stinks, lol.
 
Back
Top Bottom