This video asks the question was the Charlie Kirk assassination a profession hit? Near the end of the video he mentions the old man they first arrested claiming he was the shooter and the problematic nature of that announcement.
If the FBI announce they have the shooter then law enforcement isn't going to set up a perimeter and would there by let the real shooter get away. That in itself is suspicious. This next video asks is the FBI lying about the Charlie Kirk shooting?
The most obvious question is how did he get the rifle from the scene and stash it in the woods? One video suggests Tyler's job was to be seen on the roof. He was a patsy. Someone else took the rifle from the scene and someone else made the shot.
When the cops were scouring the area, looking for the shooter..
...they weren't carrying a long gun evidence box, with them.
They weren't walking around with it, so, someone had to go back, get the box, and walk back, with the box, to the scene, and box the weapon.
While we're here, let's compare the assassination of Charlie Kirk with the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin November 4th 1995. Was Yitzhak Rabin shot by a Palestinian? No he was not. He was shot by a right wing extremist who was Jewish.Benjamin Netanyahu benefited from his murder.
After that assassination ofYitzhak Rabin, Mossad created Hamas to push Fatah out of Gaza because the PLO signed a cease fire agreement. Mossad and Netanyahu didn't want anything to do with that agreement. He did not want to share the land with the Palestinians, he wanted to wipe them out so Israel could be from the river to the sea and then some.
Mossad rightly complains that Hamas' manefesto is unacceptable. The only problem is that Mossad are the ones that wrote it. Before the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin the PLO had been fighting with Israel for many years. Neither side recognized the other side's right to exist. No one wanted to share the land. They both wanted it all to themselves.
The Oslo accord changed all that. For the first time both sides recognized the other side's right to exist. The Jews and the Palestinians both have a hereditary right to that land but neither party has an exclusive right to the land. No one wants to share.
The Oslo accord recognized a Palestinian State and created the Palestinian Authority. Why is that important? Israel is a Jewish State. If you're not Jewish you can't become a citizen. Palestinians were residents without a country or a passport.
Netanyahu says there will be no two state solution. That would defeat the purpose of Yitzhak Rabin's murder. I support the Oslo Accord, I don't support Hamas. I agree with Charlie Kirk in that Netanyahu is determined to ethnically cleanse Gaza. That I cannot support.
“I gotta be careful the way I say this” - Charlie Kirk
An image of an Israeli soldier's uniform with a patch of the map of 'Greater Israel' has been circulating online. Far-right Israelis also openly express their territorial desires.
Here the long-term ambitions of the supporters of 'Greater Israel' are explained pic.twitter.com/sNNs4ypVh3
Netanyahu publicly denies they were involved with the assassination of Charlie Kirk just like he publicly denies they had anything to do with Jeffery Epstein despite the fact that Ghislaine Maxwell's father was Mossad.
I want to talk about the dangers of polarization. This is one of the reasons I think the CIA were involved with Charlie Kirk's assassination. We are so deeply polarized right now and the CIA keeps driving the two sides further apart.
We can now see the great divide between the left and the right and it has indeed become extreme. The American flag is referred to as the stars and stripes or the red, white and blue.
The flag represents red states and blue states living together in one union. The freedom of association and the freedom of expression are important elements of a free society.
There is a dark purpose behind polarization. It's not just to keep people divided, it's to push people to the extremes. Yet both extremes lead to the same place. That's why they push it.
In my line in the sand diagram I talked about the lines that people cross where Liberals become Communists and Conservatives become Fascists. There is a big line between Conservatives and Fascists because the two are actually opposites. One believes in a centralized government while the other believes in a decentralized government.
Right now we are deeply divided and the polarization we witness keeps becoming more and more extreme. Events like the Charlie Kirk assassination keep driving people further and further apart. Each side becomes hatefully of the other completely unwilling to see or recognize any common ground.
Trump 2.0 has been completely different than Trump 1.0. Everything Trump promised to do he didn't. Instead of draining the swamp he became the swamp and used the promise of draining the swamp to simply eliminate political rivals.
The first problem came from the centralization of power. I did a podcast about how they accused Trump 1.0 of being Fascist when he wasn't but Trump 2.0 has indeed led us down the road of Fascism through the centralization of Government.
Right now racism is off the charts. I commented on how people like Marc Emery scour the Internet for examples of extremism to justify their own extremism. Marc Emery is complaining about the number of Asians and East Indians in Metro Vancouver. I was like AYFKM? Are you even from here? Asians and East Indians have always been a vibrant part of our community.
Yet Marc Emery isn't the only one openly promoting racism now. Recently there was a press conference about the Rabih Alkhalil arrest in Qatar which is another anomaly all on it's own. After the press conference the comments on social media were amazingly racist and no one bat an eye about it.
After the press conference people were like learn English. They were like these temporary work visas must be very hard. She had to stay up all night working at Tim Horton's before doing a RCMP press conference. It was absurd and when people reported the comments Facebook said, that's fine. They fit within our guidelines. Before Trump 2.0 people would call things that weren't racist racist and now things that are racist they claim aren't racist. What on earth happened? We've gone from one extreme to the other and it keeps getting worse.
I submit that one of the goals of polarization is to push the extremes and great a great divide. Previously I asked how does a Conservative become a Fascist because Conservatives and Fascists are opposites. Hate. People become consumed with hate and forsake all the Conservative values they once had in an end justifies the means quest.
The purpose of the Charlie Kirk assassination was to increase polarization and make people hateful thus blinding them to the big picture. Once they become hateful of the other side they put blinders on. They cover their eyes and their ears refusing to listen to anything the other side has to say.
They scour the Internet for examples of extremism to justify their own extremism. In so doing they become inherently partisan. That means when their side becomes too extreme they refuse to recognize it and rationalize it by using examples of extremism they have found on the other side.
For example, when Donald Trump says or does something too extreme, no one questions it because the other side wants to transition kids in school and put men in women's sports.
It's a dangerous road that leads to Fascism because it stops questioning the centralization of power or the brutalization of the police state. One could argue that the CIA is pushing Fascism to the extreme until it fails so they can say, Fascism didn't work so let's try Communism. Let's not do neither.
Let's shun the extremes and find a healthy balance between them. For example, Candace Owens supported Donald Trump but objects to the genocide in Gaza. That doesn't mean she supports transitioning kids in school.
Likewise Rand Paul says tariffs are taxes. That doesn't mean he supports men in woman's sports. That simply means he supports lower taxes like every Conservative should. As a result, Rand Paul has teamed up with the Democrats in supporting a bill that limits Trump's power to arbitrarily impose tariffs. That doesn't mean he supports gun control or Q plus.
The purpose of polarization is to create a gulf or great divide so that people from both sides won't work together to stop the WEF's agenda. The CIA and the WEF want people fighting with each other so they don't see where they are taking us and so they don't join forces to stop them.
WION is reporting that "Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old alleged assassinator of Charlie Kirk, was allegedly living with a transgender partner, the New York Post reported. His 'partner' was in the process of transitioning from a male to a female, a law enforcement source confirmed, to the NYP."
A law enforcement source confirmed, to the NYP. The NYP is law enforcement. So a different law enforcement agency told them. FBI or CIA. Let's assume it's FBI since they're leading the investigation while Kash Patel is in the hot seat. The claim was first reported by Fox News who cited the FBI as their source.
We're hearing conflicting reports. Seemingly he was raised in an LDS home with conservative parents. No one knows if he was romantically involved with his room mate but saying he lived with a Gay man isn't as catchy of a headline. After all, right now it's all about trans hate so we really need to throw that in there just to further polarize people on the issues.
The New York Post stated "Kirk, 31, was struck in the neck by a single bullet shortly after being posed a question on his American Comeback college speaking tour about transgender mass shooters. 'Do you know how many transgender Americans have been mass shooters over the last 10 years?' asked attendee Hunter Kozak 'Too many,' Kirk responded."
I agree. If there was one mass shooting by a transgender individual that would be too many. Just like if there was one mass shooting by a heterosexual individual that would be too many. There's no difference. Any mass shootings are too many.
The first thing I want to say is that whether or not Tyler was Gay or trans, that is simply not relevant. Far more mass shootings have been committed by heterosexual individuals than by Gay or Trans individuals.
Yet the emphasis on his trans room mate and the number of mass shootings committed by trans individuals reaffirms my belief this shooting was also staged like many of the others. The CIA's new false flag mass shootings are utilizing trans individuals to push their current agenda of deep polarization.
Look at where Trump 2.0 is taking us. He's taking the T out of LGBT. Banning men from competing in women's sports is common sense. Banning trans is not. Banning trans meds for children is common sense but hating on adult trans is not.
That's a separate issue. What I'm getting at is the polarization agenda and the deep divide. In response to Charlie Kirk's murder Trump said "The radicals on the right are radical because they don’t want to see crime,' Trump said. 'The radicals on the left are the problem – and they are vicious and horrible and politically savvy. They want men in women’s sports, they want transgender people, they want open borders. The worst thing that happened to this country.”
So Trump doesn't just want to prevent under age kids from taking hormone meds or getting gender changing surgery and he doesn't just want to ban men from competing in women's sports, he hates adult trans too. That's why he took the T out of LGBT. I'm not here to promote the Q plus crusade of insanity. I just draw the line at LGBT without the Q plus.
I don't think underage kids should get meds or surgery to change their gender before they're old enough to to vote and I don't think men should compete in women's sports. Yet what consenting adults do behind closed doors is their business. The key words are consenting adults. Yet that would be a compromise balancing the extremes. The CIA doesn't want that. The CIA wants to push the extremes to increase polarization.
Trump claims "the radicals on the right are radical because they don’t want to see crime." That is not true. Fascism and the centralization of power is a lot more than crime reduction. I think everyone on the left and the right want to see a reduction in crime. The far left promote crime so the far right can come in and fix it by taking all our rights away. Both extremes are part of the same agenda. It's the problem, reaction, solution paradigm.
Another reason why this shooting is so suspicious is because it fits in perfectly with Trump's trans hate. The fact that Charlie Kirk was shot while answering a question about how many Transgender individuals are involved in mass shootings makes the whole thing look staged. BTW USA Today reported that "Tyler wore a Trump-related Halloween costume in 2017, according to Amber’s Robinson’s Facebook page."
It is 100% true that Charlie opposed war with Iran and was fighting with his donors over Israel— as Tucker Carlson just shared on Megyn Kelly’s show.
This is why I am discomforted by the intentional lie by omission that Bibi told on Fox News about the letter Charlie wrote him.
Global News is reporting that "U.S. authorities confirmed Friday morning the arrest of 22-year-old Utah man Tyler Robinson, the suspect in the killing of Charlie Kirk. Kirk, 31, died after he was shot in the neck while speaking at an event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday."
So they have a suspect. A 22 year old kid. Did he make that shot? I don't know. Do I still think the CIA are behind this? Yes I do. I don't believe that kid they claim shot Trump made that shot from that distance. John Cullen is a ballistic expert. He explained why there were multiple shooters in the Donald Trump assassination attempt. He's illustrated many conflicts with several recent mass shootings including the one in Las Vegas.
After the recent shooting at a school mass Candace Owens said the government is behind this. Each shooting is more traumatizing than the next. It's designed to scare us into compliance. The Charley Kirk shooting is designed to promote further polarization and create a great divide.
Before we even look at ballistics, I'm going to address the first concern that comes to mind. How did he make that shot? Was he a trained hunter? Kids who are taught to hunt and fish don't mug little old ladies. Hunting and fishing brings with it a sense of groundedness. Kids who hunt are taught the proper use of firearms along with gun safety.
There is a specific narrative being crammed down our throat and I don't buy it. Just like with the recent shooting at the school mass the shooter wrote strange messages on bullets or magazines. As far as I'm concerned that's over the top. That's where they crossed the line and made the story less believable.
In the Global News article they reported that the family noticed he was becoming political. They had a conversation at the dinner table about Charlie Kirk coming to town and he said he did not like him and thought he was a fascist.
That on it's own is a valid opinion. Like my father used to say feelings are neither right or wrong they just are. Everyone has a right to their feelings. How we express our feelings can be appropriate or inappropriate but everyone has a right to their feelings. Shooting someone in the head for their political opinion would obviously be an inappropriate way to express those feelings. Yet the narrative concerns me.
Now all of a sudden if you disagree with Charlie Kirk and think he is a Fascist you are a mass shooter. Obviously not but the narrative is grooming us to never doubt extremism on the right and that is not healthy. This leads to my next post on the dangers of polarization. People become so divided and so hateful of the other side that they are no longer allowed to doubt, question or disagree with any opinion on their side no matter how far extreme it is. That is not healthy.
So if he was a Liberal, he wouldn't have been taught to hunt and shoot. He was raised in a Conservative home. That doesn't mean he held those beliefs but the whole thing is very suspicious. Some people are speculating that he was too far right for Charlie Kirk which is a bit ridiculous. He wouldn't have called him a Fascist then. What's right of a Fascist? Nothing. That's as far right as you can go. People are just grasping at straws and making sh*t up because it just doesn't make sense.
Damion has been through five different lawyers and for a time represented himself. He had a duty counsel assisting him on Wednesday. WTF? He asked for another adjournment but the judge refused saying it looked like Ryan was trying to game the system. You can get off for excessive trial delays but you can't get off if you are the cause of the delays.
The evidence against Ryan includes testimony from Agent 66, a drug dealer turned informant. Kind of like how Agent 22 busted the Zig Zag Crew in Winnipeg. When Agent 22 was in Vancouver Eric Sandberg told him he could get the agent any gun he wanted and that "they" were ready to wipe out all the competition in Surrey. That was back in 2009.
As I previously said Damion Ryan ran the DTES for the Wolf Pack and the CFSEU in BC wouldn't touch him. The Wolf Pack roll on the people they hired to do hits so IHIT gets a bust and they get to keep selling drugs.
Damion hired Lil Man aka Certi2x or Naseem Ali Mohammed to kill Anees Mohamad who used to sell for Damion Ryan in the DTES but Damion had his own guy killed. The media tried to make it look like a rival killed Anees in retaliation for Gary Kang but that was not true. Damion Ryan ordered that hit then had one of his peeps rat Lil Man out. That is the Wolf Pack's MO.
The fact that he's representing himself is somewhat bizarre. He's high ranking Wolf Pack and they have a lot of money. Makes ya wonder what is going on. So Damion has a new nickname now. Larry Amero is Gumby while Damion Ryan is Napoleon Dynamite - He's an Idiot.
After the Five Eyes generated that subsequent bogus bust Damion Ryan ratted out Zone 43 in the DTES who he brought in from Montreal. Looks like the Manitoba RCMP isn't cutting him the same breaks the CFSEU in BC did. It's about time.
This is another example of extremism. Assassinating someone for their political opinion. That's about as extreme as it gets. Meanwhile AOC is exploiting the tragedy to call for more gun control. STFU will you? That would not honour his memory.
Such a dramatic tragedy forces us to ask has there ever been a political assassination where the CIA wasn't involved? Not that I know of. We all know the CIA killed JFK. RFK knows it.
Never mind the JFK files and the Epstein list. We know the CIA was behind both. Ghislaine Maxwell's father was Mossad. The CIA has a long history of foreign assassinations. Wikipedia has a list but Wikipedia is edited by Mossad.
The point is we all know the CIA has been involved with many extrajudicial foreign assassinations. All these drone strikes in Afghanistan is another example. Oh we killed him because he's a terrorist. Says who? Says the people that blew up the three Towers in New York. This is why due process is so important. The CIA can make up anything about anyone to justify killing them. The CIA lie. Lying is their MO. We cannot in good conscience believe anything they say.
This is why accepting foreign extrajudicial assassinations is such a slippery slope. If you accept foreign assassinations for any reason that opens you up to accept domestic assassinations for the greater good.
The CIA were behind the assassination attempt on Donald Trump. Ballistics experts have produced many videos explaining why there were multiple shooters. That kid did not make that shot. Do I really believe the CIA was behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk? Of course I do. If they will kill innocent people in 9/11 they will do anything. What could possibly be their motive? Polarization and gun control. The CIA want to divide us.
The purpose of this kind of deranged tragedy is to trigger an emotional response and it was very successful at that. The heartfelt tributes are filled with emotions. He was 31 years old and had a wife and children. It's impossible for that not to created an incredibly emotional response.
Don't I think it's heartless to talk about conspiracy theories in the heat of the moment when emotions are so raw? Of course not. I think it's heartless not to because these kind of orchestrated events have an agenda behind them and polarization right now is off the charts. The purpose of this assassination is to further the divide and fill us with hate so we can't see what they are doing behind the scenes. So we won't unite on common ground.
It's like asking if there was ever a terrorist organization the CIA didn't train? The CIA trained the Taliban to fight the Russians. The CIA created ISIS and ISIS K. A CSIS operative was a member of ISIS in Syria. The Mossad created Hamas after the PLO agreed to disarm in the Oslo accord. Operation Fast and Furious armed the Mexican cartel. Declaring the cartel terrorists without declaring the CIA terrorists will solve nothing.
It's like asking if there ever was a drug dealer the CIA didn't profit from. Freeway Ricky unknowingly worked for the CIA. As Gary Webb pointed out, the CIA was behind the US Crack epidemic in the /80's. The CIA created the Golden Triangle. All the Opium in Afghanistan, that was the CIA until the Taliban brought it to an end. Now fentanyl is everywhere are they expect us to believe the CIA isn't behind it. Not likely.
Asking these questions is not insensitive. Refusing to do so is.
The Surrey Leader Now is reporting that "Surrey city councillor Linda Annis aims to have a Surrey First mayor – herself – installed at City Hall to re-ignite a political dynasty that ended with Linda Hepner in 2018. Councillor Annis declared her intention to run for mayor Wednesday at the Civic Hotel in Whalley. The next civic election is set for Saturday, Oct. 17, 2026 – more than a year away."
ROFL - I just heard a commercial on the radio about this. A paid commercial. The next election is more than a year away. I'm pretty sure there are campaign financing rules about that but hey, Dianne Watts' personal party never did care about the rules. They always made them us as they went along. Surrey First was Surrey's Worst for fiscal responsibility.
All Dianne Watts and Linda Hepner did was spend money and raise taxes. Dianne Watts wanted to toll every bridge under the sun to pay for her junkets. Bridges that were already paid for she wanted to put new tolls on them so she could spend more money. Dianne Watts was never a Conservative. She was a tax and spend glutton. That's why the globalists kept throwing her money. Linda Annis was the only Surrey First candidate elected last election.That's because she was new. All the incumbents were wiped off the face of the earth. For a reason.
Surrey First was defiant about turning 104th Avenue into a single lane each way and running LRT down the middle of the street. That would have been an infrastructure nightmare. Grass roots activists chose Skytrain over LRT and gave Surrey First's defiant arrogance the boot once and for all.
That was her MO and that's who is behind Surrey First and is using Linda Annis to bring back bullies and the LRT. Not on my watch. We used to call Dianne Watts Godzilla. Go Go Godzilla.
.jpeg)
