Charlie Kirk is dead... A sad day in history
- Thread starter Beau
- Start date
I have watched Candace last episode. Remember that Candace and probably very few consider the exploding “microphone“ theory as a serious possibility. We have a special possible insight here on the forum.
It is interesting to me that she is honing into the idea that “a, or the, shot“ probably rang out quite close to Kirk and that people on the ground supposedly heard 2 shots as well. Further, she is saying now that it is a fact that “the bullet“ didn’t shoot through Kirk and that “a bullet“ was recovered and/or seen still in his flesh at a specific point at the back of his neck.
If there was some kind of explosion “from a microphone“ that caused his neck injury, you would expect to hear “a shot“ pretty (if not very) close to Kirk, right? Is that what people heard and Candace is now honing into (without realizing it)? Further, the second shot probably came from the triggering/and shooting from a real gun? Could it be that this is what people saw, heard and experienced there but explain both things with a sound of one or two guns? And/or could it be that the sound of the real gun that didn’t cause the injury actually came from fairly close to Kirk?
I would imagine that the acoustics in and around Kirk were probably quite hard to pin down (other than justifiably saying that it was close by), because of the arena setup around Kirk while he was at the lowest point? A small explosion down there was probably echoing a lot, making it hard to say from where it came and everyone sort of heard it coming from a different (but close) direction “as a shot“?
And what are we to make of the supposed fact that a bullet was recovered and/or seen in Kirks body? Was it placed there after the fact, maybe by someone handling him right after he was killed? And/or was the explosion devise equipped with (an already shot and damaged) round as a decoy to get propelled during the explosion into his body? One thing seems to be sure though, the official explanation of the type of caliber and gun used from that distance, leaving the bullet stuck where it supposedly stuck in his neck, seems very unlikely. Candace also seems to believe now that such a caliber/gun couldn’t have caused it and that probably a smaller caliber/gun was used.
Candace also speculates with good grounds I would guess, that there seem to have been quite a number of agents and law enforcement on the ground right after the kill that programmed everyone there “with what they have just heard and seen“, by saying things like “there was one shot“ and so on. I think that it is likely that something like that can make many people question and/or forget what they actually heard and saw and go with that adopted memory of the agents.
So it seems to me that Candace is following her nose quite well, in the absence of the explosion theory being considered more carefully.
It is interesting to me that she is honing into the idea that “a, or the, shot“ probably rang out quite close to Kirk and that people on the ground supposedly heard 2 shots as well. Further, she is saying now that it is a fact that “the bullet“ didn’t shoot through Kirk and that “a bullet“ was recovered and/or seen still in his flesh at a specific point at the back of his neck.
If there was some kind of explosion “from a microphone“ that caused his neck injury, you would expect to hear “a shot“ pretty (if not very) close to Kirk, right? Is that what people heard and Candace is now honing into (without realizing it)? Further, the second shot probably came from the triggering/and shooting from a real gun? Could it be that this is what people saw, heard and experienced there but explain both things with a sound of one or two guns? And/or could it be that the sound of the real gun that didn’t cause the injury actually came from fairly close to Kirk?
I would imagine that the acoustics in and around Kirk were probably quite hard to pin down (other than justifiably saying that it was close by), because of the arena setup around Kirk while he was at the lowest point? A small explosion down there was probably echoing a lot, making it hard to say from where it came and everyone sort of heard it coming from a different (but close) direction “as a shot“?
And what are we to make of the supposed fact that a bullet was recovered and/or seen in Kirks body? Was it placed there after the fact, maybe by someone handling him right after he was killed? And/or was the explosion devise equipped with (an already shot and damaged) round as a decoy to get propelled during the explosion into his body? One thing seems to be sure though, the official explanation of the type of caliber and gun used from that distance, leaving the bullet stuck where it supposedly stuck in his neck, seems very unlikely. Candace also seems to believe now that such a caliber/gun couldn’t have caused it and that probably a smaller caliber/gun was used.
Candace also speculates with good grounds I would guess, that there seem to have been quite a number of agents and law enforcement on the ground right after the kill that programmed everyone there “with what they have just heard and seen“, by saying things like “there was one shot“ and so on. I think that it is likely that something like that can make many people question and/or forget what they actually heard and saw and go with that adopted memory of the agents.
So it seems to me that Candace is following her nose quite well, in the absence of the explosion theory being considered more carefully.
Last edited:
By the way, the idea of a small explosion causing Kirks injuries sounds pretty consistent to me with the fact that they immediately started to extensively “clean up“ the area after the fact: They very quickly started to remove the gras and even covered the area with new “plaster“ and stuff. My strong guess is that even small explosions of that kind probably cover the surrounding area and especially the ground with particles that could easily show up in laboratory tests as residues of explosives. I would guess that the quick removal of the gras around the area and covering it up with new plaster was probably because they wanted to get rid of explosive residues.
Last edited:
Sort of. But at least for me, the exploding microphone was the obvious best option before we had any special insight. It's literally right there in front of people's faces.
To remember and keep close to our hearts that Charlie is someone’s son, borne from their bodies, loved and cared for as a child and an adult.
They look absolutely broken. I can only slightly begin to imagine their grief. I pray they didn’t see the footage of their beautiful boy’s gruesome murder.
Prayers for Mr and Mrs Kirk that they find some peace in their immense sorrow.
They look absolutely broken. I can only slightly begin to imagine their grief. I pray they didn’t see the footage of their beautiful boy’s gruesome murder.
Prayers for Mr and Mrs Kirk that they find some peace in their immense sorrow.
I guess what he meant by two wounds was that the main charge penetrated Charlie’s chest, and then the magnetic clip hit his neck, causing another wound. However, it appears that the two wounds were caused by the shaped charge going through the chest and exiting (or parts of it) through the neck.
Yeah. I felt that especially the video included in Bray’s X post was rather graphic, going back and forth with the neck bleeding (without any ”blurring” of it as many of the other analysts have done), and with the poor choice of background music, I thought that it was in a way ”disrespectful", for lack of a better word.
When I included Bray’s full X write-up in my post, I hadn’t watched the video in its entirety, and when I did so while paying attention (after posting), I thought that it would be better just to put his written text only in it, and leave a link to the clip for those who wanted to see it. So, I removed the video before the end of the 10-minute editing time.
(A side note: I was wondering why the original version of my post (with the video) could be seen in your quotation of it, but then realized that you must have done the quoting before I finished the editing.)
Anyways, perhaps I overreacted with this, but felt that it was in some way unnecessary ”exploitation”. (Personally, although the article about Charlie (and Iryna) was written in a thoughtful and reverent way, it was enough to see a short clip of the uncensored incident on John Carter’s substack article.)
Last edited:
Trending content
-
-
-
-
Thread 'Coronavirus Pandemic: Apocalypse Now! Or exaggerated scare story?'
- wanderingthomas
Replies: 30K
