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

[gottathink]

Muddy the waters?! How about to totally eradicate the idea that an exploding mic took Charlie out! And gee, who is well identified with exploding devices? He was shot from the back! He was shot from the back! His security team rushed in to valiantly save his life! Do not question the obvious!

Yeah - don't think the public's buying it. Redacted is increasingly losing credibility with me as they do aid in the muddying of the water.

People can be right about some things and easily end up off track on others. Again, networking is key for everyone’s sanity.

 

[Moine]

In Candace's last video, she again referenced AZOV and oddities that might be associated. She indicated more on the subject would be presented next week, so she's apparently not scared off.

A little review on the Hebrew word AZOV reveals direct metaphorical connections to the CK affair, and Ukraine. This is not in anyway a diminishing force on the other forms of evidence of the relationship. Do note, the lambs of scripture, are replaced by men in reality.

Hebrew Word Study – Abandon – Ya’zov – יַעֲזֹ֤ב Yod Ayin Zayin Beth

Isaiah 55:7: “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.”

We are told to forsake out wicked ways. Therein lies our problem of theology, how can we forsake our wicked ways if we are just too depraved to even recognize our own wickedness and do we really have the ability to forsake our wickedness even if we do recognize it. Perhaps this verse is not really addressing that issue at all but something else.

Let’s examine this word forsake. Of course we all know it means stop doing wicked stuff. Forsake in Hebrew is ya’zov from the root word ‘azov. Yet, there is a school of thought that would suggest the root could be ‘azol l which is the same root that you get the word for the scape goat or the azezel. The scapegoat was the fall guy during the Day of Atonement when the high priest offered the sacrifice of a bull for his own sins and then took two goats to the door of the temple to deal with the sins of the nation. By lottery one goat was chosen, called the Lords Goat and offered as a sacrifice whose blood was sprinkled on the mercy seat in the Holy of Holies. This was to deal with the forgiveness of sins, the atonement for sins. The other goat was set free to wander off into the wilderness as an outcast. Although I did read in the Talmud where this goat was thrown off a cliff. This was the azezel he was the scape goat who was to deal with the guilt we feel for our sins. Being thrown off a cliff would fit the metaphor as guilt will lead us to destruction. In other words even when God forgives our sins, we could still live with regret. That was the purpose of the azezel or Scape Goat. As Christians, we see that Jesus not only was the Lord’s Goat who sacrificed Himself for our sins, but He was also our Scape Goat who took the burden of our sin, our feelings of guilt, remorse and shame and sent them out into the wilderness to be an outcast, to never be seen again or thrown off a cliff to bring this guilt to an end.

So when Isaiah tells the wicked to forsake their way, he is telling them to take all their wicked ways and place them upon the Redeemer who will not only make atonement for their wickedness, but will also remove the guilt that comes with it.

My grandfather once told me a family secret about my great, great grandfather who killed a man. The Revenuer had come to take over grandpa’s farm. Grandpa met him at the door with his shot gun and said: “You come on my land, I’m a shottin.” The Revenuer replied: “This is my land and I’m a comin.” Grandpa said: “Well, I’m a shottin.” And he came and Grandpa shot the Revenuer in the heart, shot him dead. Grandpa turned himself over to the sheriff who hated the Revenuer and he and his deputy went up and buried the Revenuer and told the U.S. Marshall, who hated the Revenuer more than the Sheriff that he died of a heart attack. They just didn’t say it was buck shot that attacked his heart. My Great Grandpa was never arrested for this crime.

When Grandpa told this story he was very clear to say: “Your Great Grandpa was never free, he prayed every day that God would forgive him for killing that man but went to his grave feeling God never forgave him.”

Many times we as Christians make the same mistake my great, great grandfather made. We forget there is the Lord’s Goat and the Scape Goat. Sometimes we do not completely forsake, abandon or desert (azov or azel) our wicked ways. We may accept the sacrifice of the Lord’s Goat but if we spend our lives living in the guilt of our sins we have not accepted the azezel or the work that Jesus did as a scape goat, by also taking the guilt and shame of our sins and sending them away into the wilderness or over a cliff. Sometimes we as Christians will not accept the azezel of others who truly repent and receive the Lord’s Goat. We keep searching for the azezel and keep hanging the past sins of that person over his head. Sometimes we have to let God send that Scape Goat into the wilderness or over a cliff and also forgive. The Jewish Targum and the Book of Enoch mentions a fallen angel or demon named Azezel. That demon of guilt has been banished, let him remain banished.

 

[Beau]

I wish we could move on from this dismissal of George Webb.

Why do you interpret Arwenn saying to be careful of him as a dismissal? We should be careful of everything we read, but doubly so for someone who has shown to be less reliable in the past.

 

[Moine]

EDIT -- (apparently I still can't edit)

The scapegoat was the fall guy during the Day of Atonement when the high priest offered the sacrifice of a bull for his own sins and then took two goats to the door of the temple to deal with the sins of the nation.

I meant to include a reference to the Taurobolium of Roman state religion.

In the taurobolium ritual, the highpriest would stand in a pit. A bull would be led onto a platform above the pit and sacrificed by cutting its throat. The blood of the bull would pour down onto the priest, showering him in the blood. Afterward, the bull's testicles were removed and taken to the sanctuary as an offering. This ritual was performed as a replacement for the castration of high priests because the castration of Roman citizens was forbidden.

A bull was ritually sacrificed for the purpose of not only for the welfare of the state itself, but it was also conferring a purification or regeneration of an individual in particular, who was honored by the ceremony.

The taurobolium in the second and third centuries was usually performed as a measure for the welfare (salus) of the emperor, Empire, or community; H. Oppermann denies early reports that its date was frequently 24 March, the Dies Sanguinis ("Day of Blood") of the annual festival of the Great Mother Cybele and Attis; Oppermann reports that there were no taurobolia in late March. In the late third and the fourth centuries its usual motive was the purification or regeneration of an individual, who was spoken of as renatus in aeternum, "reborn for eternity", in consequence of the ceremony. While its efficacy was not eternal, its effect was considered to endure for twenty years, as if the magic coating of the blood wore off after that time, the initiate having taken his vows for "the circle of twenty years" (bis deni orbis). It was also performed as the fulfilment of a vow (votum), or by command of the goddess herself, and the privilege was not limited by sex or class. In its fourth-century revival in high pagan circles, Rutter has observed, "We might even justifiably say that the taurobolium, rather than a rite effectual in itself was a symbol of paganism. It was a rite apparently forbidden by the Christian emperors and thus became a hallmark of the pagan nobility in their final struggle against Christianity and the Christian emperors." The place of its performance at Rome was near the site of St Peter's, in the excavations of which several altars and inscriptions commemorative of taurobolia were discovered.

A criobolium, substituting a ram for the bull, was also practiced, sometimes together with the taurobolium.

Regeneration in this sense can mean not only a restoration of their bodies, but also of their spirits, and hence you get the whole eternal life thing, as denoted in the idea of a Kingdom of Heaven.

Going further back, this hits upon Cybelle or Magna Mater as the Romans new that deity, which proffers a mother goddess, or nature herself. This is not mentioning that the Vatican is undergoing efforts to "green" itself thoroughly. Round and round the carousel we go.

The Catholic Church and Stewardship of Creation

Father J. Michael Beers, Ph.D., S.S.L., Associate Professor in Historical Theology, Pontifical College Josephinum Dr. Russell Hittinger, Warren Professor of Catholic Studies, University of Tulsa Father Matthew Lamb, S.T.L., Professor of Theology, Boston College Father Richard John Neuhaus...

www.acton.org

 

[JEEP]

A little review on the Hebrew word AZOV reveals direct metaphorical connections to the CK affair, and Ukraine.

Very interesting. However, what I believe is factual is the Azov battalion are Nazis, and the CIA is composed of Nazis and I believe the Cs confirmed that. Something else that sticks in my mind, and I don't remember at all where I saw or read it, was the most vicious Aryan Nazis - picture tall blond hulks of extremely muscular males - were all homosexuals. They didn't have a shred of empathy, compassion, or decency. Vicious, unrepentant killers - and yes, rapists too.

If Azov has gotten a foothold in our country, this needs to be found out and exposed. We're getting plenty of propaganda about al-Qaeda cells being a thing again that reinforces the whole Muslims are still the enemy and threat - be afraid, very afraid! And remember how BB fingered them first thing in his quick response to Charlie's death.

No, just like Russia, the odds are we have a Nazi problem as well and nobody's supposed to know that. Funny how Larry C. Johnson of Sonar21 said they were present in the J6 crowd - along with those 274 FBI agents. Nobody was supposed to know about that either.

 

[Moine]

Very interesting. However, what I believe is factual is the Azov battalion are Nazis, and the CIA is composed of Nazis and I believe the Cs confirmed that.

Heritage means most. Every group that I include below, is of Caucasian descent, being of a Keltoi/Germanic/Slavic/Nordic, or Turko/Mongolic genealogy.

If I count correctly, you have six factions in the US alone. Conservative Zionists in the East. Liberal Zionists in the West Coast. Cowboys (upstart Germans) in the South. Yankees (old-time German colonists in the North East and Center). Patriots (really old-time English/Scots [and thus German ---> Celtic] in the East Coast). And .... Mormons around the deserts, between the mountains. If you like reading up on George Orwell's 1984 or Animal Farm, or perhaps Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, well then I can recommend Hill Country, by Janice Woods Windle. The handlers of national affairs have deep roots, and some of them are presented in Windle's novelization (non-fiction), and it's mirrored in the utopian ideals of Edward House's Phillip Dru: Administrator (who was meddling in local affairs of the previous novel).

Their covert history runs deep, and I can suggest Eyes Wide Open, on YT, as a means of trawling through the trivia if you'd like.

There is also a seventh hidden faction, via Roman Catholicism, which was running rampant in the West and in the South, Center and North, long before the original English colonial settlements in the East were established. I can recommend Professor Hamamoto and Leuren Moret as a start on that one. Many of the aforementioned factions, are sent to institutions of this one, for their high school, or university educations. It's a hidden influence that few "normies" realize exists.

They all work together when their interests converge, and they fight among-st another when they're feeling left out. However, they all subscribe themselves to notions of an ethno-religio-centric empire.

 

[JEEP]

Heritage means most.

There are many on this forum who have delved deeply into the roots of the peoples on this planet. It's not my area of expertise at all, but I find it quite fascinating and what you're contributing as well. For a long time, I was under the impression that my family line was German, but my mother, who was into genealogy, said my father's side came from an area that eventually became Switzerland. They left that area for America because of repeated attacks from the French. My maiden name is Lutz and I always heard that pronunciation with a short U was Polish, and a long U was German. My married name is very much German as my husband's parents made a trip to Germany to visit their ancestral roots. They came back with cuckoo clocks and a German stein as gifts. My husband and son also made a trip to Germany a couple of years ago. My son's wife's father has a relative in Germany, and they, and by sheer coincidence the wife's brother, met up with him on their trip. Her maiden name is Hahn, which I believe is a fairly common name in Germany as is Lutz? I might add, in regard to the Missing 411 material and a seeming connection to German heritage, I did become concerned about my son's safety although he was a bit older than the young men disappearing and turning up dead. I'm wondering about my grandson now who's 14. I did mention the 411 material to him, but don't know if it sank in. They very much like to hike and camp in the woods, although it's been shown that strange abductions can happen anywhere.

I got the impression from what Laura or someone else said, that in actuality, we all (Caucasians?) came from Russia! Maybe I have that wrong, but that's what I thought was determined.

 

[hiker]

Btw, I just noticed that Jason Goodman, who has partnered with George Webb in the past, is on the Redacted show presenting nonsensical evidence of how CK was shot from the back. I wouldn't be suprised if JG is on the Zionist payroll to muddy the waters.

I watched that Redacted episode but gave up before it ended. It seemed to go against the actual evidence (and C’s point of view), and furthermore, I got bad vibes about Goodman’s demeanor and disposition; he came across as a ”snake oil salesman” and somehow fake (in my opinion).

 

[Aeneas]

I watched that Redacted episode but gave up before it ended. It seemed to go against the actual evidence (and C’s point of view), and furthermore, I got bad vibes about Goodman’s demeanor and disposition; he came across as a ”snake oil salesman” and somehow fake (in my opinion).

I agree. His theory doesn't explain the movement of the shirt and certainly not the part of the shirt which is to Charlie's right. Goodman says the bullet came out of Charlie's throat in the front and then goes into the shirt (15:18 mark on video). Why would the bullet somehow fall down into the shirt at close to a 90 degree angle and then make all the movement that is observed.

Goodman says that the first video he got had 20 frames per second. Then he somehow got hold of another copy which had 30 frames per second. He then postulates that it would fit with that both came from an original which would have filmed it at 240 frames per second, because 20 and 30 are easily divisible into 240. I guess he does that to counter the claim that at 20 or 30 frames per second, a bullet would look like a long streak, so with this assumption of his, it now fits as the superoriginal video had 240 and of which only every 12th or 8th image was taken out to make the 20/30 frame video. He has worked in Hollywood his whole life, which is not exactly an endorsement especially given the tribe's hold on that place.

No cigar, and not even close.

 

[RedFox]

His theory doesn't explain the movement of the shirt and certainly not the part of the shirt which is to Charlie's right. Goodman says the bullet came out of Charlie's throat in the front and then goes into the shirt (15:18 mark on video). Why would the bullet somehow fall down into the shirt at close to a 90 degree angle and then make all the movement that is observed.

The most amusing part to me was that he states that (as others have pointed out), if you watch the video of the projectile, it moves Away from Charlie - not towards him (as his theory states).
He dismisses this as a video encoding problem - which is theoretically possible, but highly unlikely. I've seen that sort of encoding faults years ago - videos would stutter/glitch.

he came across as a ”snake oil salesman” and somehow fake (in my opinion).

Yup - a 'magician' or hypnotist. Presenting the Truth, with a twist (or two) to turn it into a lie.

 

[JEEP]

Mike Adams of Natural News:

Charlie Kirk’s Assassination: Mass Hypnosis, Positive Hallucinations and Why the Globalist Regime Needed Him Removed

The Assassination of Charlie Kirk: A Fabricated Narrative, Eerie Hollywood Parallels, and the Unanswered Questions That Demand the Truth​

The assassination of conservative leader Charlie Kirk on September 10, 2025, has become one of the most suspicious and hotly debated events in modern political history—not because of what actually happened, but because of what didn’t happen.

Despite the official narrative blaming a lone shooter named Tyler Robinson, forensic evidence, witness inconsistencies, and bizarre coincidences suggest a meticulously staged operation designed to manipulate public perception. No credible evidence places a rifle in Robinson’s hands, no recovered bullet has been shown to the public, no exit wound was documented, and no reliable footage shows any shooter at all.

Instead, what emerges is a pattern of mass psychological manipulation, where witnesses claim to have seen events that never occurred—a phenomenon known as "positive hallucination," often exploited by intelligence agencies to shape public belief.

Compounding the strangeness, the assassination bears an uncanny resemblance to the plot of a 1998 Nicolas Cage film, Snake Eyes, raising questions about whether the event was scripted in advance.

Meanwhile, independent forensic analysis points to a shooter far closer than the official claimed distance, with audio and visual clues suggesting the fatal wound may not have been caused by a conventional rifle bullet at all.

The official story relies entirely on the public’s willingness to accept a narrative with no verifiable evidence​

Witnesses claim to have seen Tyler Robinson fire a high-powered rifle, yet not a single person observed a muzzle flash, a bullet, an exit wound, or even Robinson handling a firearm before or after the event.

No security footage places him near the scene with a weapon, and no confession or physical proof ties him to the act of the crime. Instead, what exists is a vacuum of facts filled by the FBI’s rapid push to convict a patsy—a tactic reminiscent of past false flag operations where authorities manufacture guilt rather than pursue genuine leads.

The absence of hard evidence is particularly glaring given the high-profile nature of the assassination.

If Robinson were truly the shooter, where is the campus video footage of him carrying a rifle? Where are the ballistics reports? Where is the forensic chain of custody? Where is DNA evidence linking him to the rifle that was "found in the woods?" The answers are nowhere to be found, replaced instead by a media-driven frenzy that has convinced millions they witnessed something that never happened.

This is not an investigation; it is a psychological operation, designed to embed a false memory into the collective consciousness while the real perpetrators remain hidden.

The phenomenon of "positive hallucination" explains how otherwise rational people can swear they saw events that never occurred​

Studies on eyewitness testimony have long demonstrated that human memory is malleable, easily influenced by suggestion, repetition, and authority figures. Police lineups, for example, have been proven no more reliable than random chance, as witnesses frequently pick someone—anyone—to satisfy their subconscious need for resolution.

In the case of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the media and government agencies have exploited this psychological vulnerability on a mass scale. By repeating the same details—the rifle, the distant shot, the lone assassin—they have effectively implanted a false narrative in the minds of the public.

The FBI’s role in this cannot be understated; the agency has a documented history of fabricating evidence, from fake texts to doctored recordings, all to secure convictions that serve political agendas.

Here, the agenda is clear: silence a rising conservative leader and discredit his movement by framing a convenient scapegoat.

The official story is nonsense​

The lack of genuine investigation suggests the FBI is not interested in justice, but in reinforcing the illusion they’ve crafted. Independent forensic analysis tells a radically different story from the official account.

Of particular interest is the absence of an exit wound; a close-range shot from a smaller caliber weapon could easily lodge in the body, whereas a high-powered rifle round from a distance would have exited, leaving a catastrophic wound. These findings suggest the assassination was an inside job, carried out by someone with close access to Kirk—perhaps even within his security detail.

The implications are staggering: if the shot came from nearby, the official narrative is not just wrong, but an outright lie designed to obscure the real killers.

Similarities to "Snake Eyes" film​

The eerie parallels between Charlie Kirk’s assassination and the 1998 film Snake Eyes add another layer of suspicion to an already dubious event. The similarities are too precise to dismiss as coincidence.

- In the movie, a character named Charles Kirkland is assassinated at a live event with a shot to the left side of his neck—exactly where Kirk was struck.

- The film’s assassin is a boxer named Lincoln Tyler, nicknamed "Tyler the Executioner," while the man arrested for Kirk’s murder is Tyler Robinson.

- The film was partially shot at Donald Trump’s Taj Mahal Casino, and Trump himself was a close ally of Kirk, whose organization, Turning Point USA, was instrumental in mobilizing youth votes for the president.

- The film’s tagline—"Believe everything except your eyes"—seems almost prophetic, as if warning viewers that what they are told to see is not what actually occurred.

- Even the timing aligns: Kirk was killed in September, during the "Year of the Snake," while the film’s title itself is Snake Eyes.

- Most chillingly, the movie’s hurricane is named Jezebel, the same name as the feminist publication that publicly cursed Kirk just before his death.

These connections suggest either an astonishing coincidence or something far more sinister: a premeditated script, executed in real life.

Someone wanted Charlie Kirk removed... but why?​

Charlie Kirk was more than a political figure; he was the architectural force behind the MAGA movement’s youth engagement, a unifying voice for conservative values, and a thorn in the side of globalist elites. His assassination was not merely the killing of a man, but an attack on the ideological resistance he represented.

Kirk’s ability to inspire millions—particularly young conservatives—made him a prime target for those seeking to dismantle the anti-globalist movement. His death, however, may achieve the opposite effect. Rather than silencing his influence, it has amplified it, transforming him into a martyr whose legacy now fuels the very movement his killers hoped to destroy.

The globalist establishment fears nothing more than a decentralized, ideologically driven populace—one that rejects their narratives, resists their control, and demands sovereignty. Kirk embodied that resistance, and his murder was meant to decapitate it. Yet in doing so, his killers may have ensured that his message spreads faster than ever.

The question now is whether the truth behind his assassination will surface, or if the fabricated narrative will succeed in burying it forever. The broader implications of Kirk’s assassination extend beyond one man or one movement. It represents a critical test of public perception in an era where reality is increasingly manufactured by those in power.

If a high-profile murder can be staged, if witnesses can be manipulated into "remembering" events that never happened, and if forensic evidence can be ignored or suppressed, then no event—no matter how significant—can be trusted at face value.

The puppetmasters consider the world to be their stage to carry out psychological theater on the minds of the masses​

The techniques used here are not new; they are refined versions of the same psychological operations employed in false flag attacks throughout history. The difference now is the scale and speed at which these operations can be deployed, thanks to mass media and digital manipulation.

The assassination of Charlie Kirk may ultimately be remembered not for the details of the crime, but for what it reveals about the fragility of truth in the modern world. If the public accepts this narrative without question, it sets a dangerous precedent: that those in power can eliminate their opponents, fabricate the evidence, and rely on the masses to fill in the blanks with their own hallucinations.

For those seeking the truth, the path forward requires skepticism, independent investigation, and a refusal to accept official stories at face value.

The inconsistencies in the Charlie Kirk assassination are too glaring to ignore, and the stakes—freedom of thought, political resistance, and the integrity of justice—are too high to surrender to manipulation. The first step is to recognize that what we are told to see is not always what exists. The second is to demand real evidence, not manufactured consensus.

And the third is to understand that movements cannot be killed by bullets when their ideas live on in the minds of the people. Charlie Kirk’s legacy is now a rallying cry for those who refuse to be deceived. The question is whether enough people will wake up to the illusion before it’s too late.

What's not brought out in this article is that Charlie had to finally recognize that his heretofore rabid belief in the righteousness of Israel was undeniably a fraud. He could not reconcile his beliefs with the brutal reality of Israel's slaughter of innocents nor it's excruciating grip on his own country's government - even to the extent of controlling the president he personally helped to elect. To his credit, he held to his core values and refused to compromise even in the face of extreme Zionist pressure and financial defunding. And thus, a martyr was born - a martyr who most likely will accomplish far more in his death than could have ever been achieved in his life.

Any similarity to some such other human sacrifice merely coincidence . . . maybe. Irony most certainly comes to mind.

 

[axj]

Just a note to be a bit careful about George Webb, it’s debatable just how reliable/trustworthy he is. Niall replied earlier in this thread about him:

I am not familiar with George Webb, but it is interesting that he has coincidentally the same last name as Whitney Webb and that she is also warning people about him:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1215066539839434753

 

[Benjamin]

I don't know if this is relevant but I'm just letting my mind run around a bit. One thing I think of when I think of 'Kirk' is Star Trek and Captain Kirk. Gene Roddenberry was a futurist and, specifically, for the movie Star Trek: The Motion Picture shows a clear belief in transhumanism.

While it was subjected to furious rewrites, the ending that is known seems to only exist because of these two points:

During the rewrite of the final scenes, the studio executives clashed with Roddenberry about the script's ending, believing that the concept of a living machine was too far-fetched. The executives consulted Asimov: if the writer decided a sentient machine was plausible, the ending could stay. Asimov loved the ending...

A final draft of the third act was approved in late September 1978, but had it not been for a Penthouse interview where NASA scientist Robert Jastrow said that mechanical forms of life were likely, the ending might not have been approved by the studio.

V'ger, or Voyageur 6, is a fictional NASA probe the was believed to have been lost in a black hole. It was apparently found by an alien race of intelligent machines who interpreted it's programming to mean "learn all it can and return to its creator". The probe accumulates so much knowledge that it becomes sentient and returns to Earth. This sounds like AI.

The two crew members, Ilia and Decker, are the ones who end up fulfilling V'ger's mission. Ilia (pronounced in the movie as eye-LEAH-ah, but looks a lot like Ilya, Illja, etc. (aka: Illion) which is derived from Elijah) gets killed (or digitized and assimilated? aka: Tron meets Borg?) by a plasma probe and later returns as the Ilia robot- a replica body with Ilia's original consciousness becoming part of the "V'ger AI" which does the speaking through V'ger's Ilia probe- to learn about the "human infestation" on the Enterprise. Decker was previously in love with Ilia and still longs to be with her. At the finale, V'ger needs to merge with "the creator" directly in order to transmit all its information and fulfill its mission to which Deckard volunteers. The human merges with the machine, transforming into ???, and disappears to which the rest of the 'away team' witness and conclude as a "birth".

Originally a Southern Baptist, Roddenberry (memory of berry bushes and farie folk) later rejected religion and, while he wasn't a true Atheist, became a humanist. He was also an antisemite.

He had a similar disdain for Judaism. Despite working closely with Jewish writers and stars such as Shatner, Nimoy, and Koenig for the series, Nimoy said of Roddenberry, "Gene was antisemitic, clearly," qualifying that Roddenberry was anti-religious, seeing Jews as a religious group, adding "but I saw examples not only of [Roddenberry] practicing antisemitism, but of him being callous about other peoples' differences as well.” As with Christianity, Roddenberry similarly dismissed that there were any deliberately Jewish principles or allusions included in Star Trek, telling a journalist, "You Jews have a lamentable habit of identifying those characteristics in a society that you deem positive and then taking credit for inventing them.”

Would this be enough to attack Roddenberry albeit in a very distant way? Shatner (94) as Captain Kirk is the last surviving member of the original cast whose Jewish grandparents all came from Ukraine and Lithuania. Could Charlie Kirk be considered a captain of sorts?

Speaking of Disney, Tron: Aries is about to be released and, instead of humans being digitized and manifesting in the computer world, the digital world is coming into the physical one. The obvious next step in the storyline or is the idea of 'our saviour' being introduced?

Tron: Ares follows a highly sophisticated program, Ares, who is sent from the digital world into the real world on a dangerous mission, marking humankind's first encounter with A.I. beings.

Just musing.

 

[WhiteMountain]

I am not familiar with George Webb, but it is interesting that he has coincidentally the same last name as Whitney Webb and that she is also warning people about him:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1215066539839434753

Not sure if they are related, but Whitney is WAAAAYYY MORE CREDIBLE. George has been around for awhile and was doing a lot with Jason Goodman when they were with "Crowdsource the Truth" when I first remembered seeing them I think it was around 2017 or so around the Vegas shooting. That pair broke up and each exposed all the shady stuff the other was doing, pretty embarrassing, and don't particularly trust either to know who was more right than the other, but I thought Jason's case was more compelling. George has a tendency to make a lot of claims that are hard if not impossible to backup and in some cases ludicrous. I firmly consider George Webb to be a disinformation agent to throw people on all sorts of rabbit trails to confuse people.

 

[axj]

Originally a Southern Baptist, Roddenberry (memory of berry bushes and farie folk) later rejected religion and, while he wasn't a true Atheist, became a humanist. He was also an antisemite

The way you phrased it makes it sound like he did something wrong, when it seems to be quite the opposite. I would also refrain from using the trigger word 'antisemite' in any context - it is inaccurate and has been basically weaponized for nefarious goals.

As to the symbology of Kirk and Star Trek, it could be a factor too - as in "killing the bright future" that Star Trek used to portray.

I did not know that both Shatner (Kirk) and Nimoy (Spock) are Jewish.