unknown
Member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2011
- Messages
- 13,675
RIP: Charlie Kirk Assassinated at Event in Utah
- Thread starter CaptUSA
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 64,262
Interesting...
It does seem clear that Charlie Kirk was treading on dangerous ground, and making enemies (like Netanyahu who brags about assassination), but motive is not proof. Evidence is necessary in a court of law, not just who benefits from or celebrates the crime. A vast portion of the left celebrated, including Trantifa, who had a motive (and the suspect in the killing).
It does seem clear that Charlie Kirk was treading on dangerous ground, and making enemies (like Netanyahu who brags about assassination), but motive is not proof. Evidence is necessary in a court of law, not just who benefits from or celebrates the crime. A vast portion of the left celebrated, including Trantifa, who had a motive (and the suspect in the killing).
acptulsa
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 77,174
acptulsa
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 77,174
Fortunately, voters don't need beyond a reasonable doubt. They just need to decide not to reelect anyone who ever displayed a Star of David by their office door.
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 118,678
LOL - I remember this guy.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 40,895
Not only is motive not proof, motive is not even an element of proof. When the cookie jar is empty and the toddler has cookie crumbs all over his fingers and lips, you don't need to suss out a motive for the caper to secure a conviction. Lots of people end up being convicted "beyond a reasonable doubt" without there ever being any certainty (or even just a good guess) as to what their motives were.
The problem when it comes to things like the case of the assassination of Charlie Kirk is that, depending on one's preferred narrative (which is ineluctable, because "the facts" do not ever "speak for themselves"), some will suspect or insist things are "cookie crumbs" that others will suspect or insist are not (and vice versa) - let alone whose fingers and lips they are on (or not).
At some point, when a sufficient "critical mass" of "the facts" (as interpreted and analyzed from this or that perspective), speculation, suspicion, innuendo, etc. has been achieved, things reach what I call the Conspiracy Theory Event Horizon - beyond which "the truth" (as distinct from "the facts"), even if it ever really came out, and whatever it might be, would just end up being regarded as merely another narrative among the rest, with no essential quality sufficient to particularly distinguish it from those others.
The JFK and 9/11 cases are exemplars of the CTEH having been crossed.
The Charlie Kirk assassination seems already to be well on its way there.
As unlikely as the former seems, the latter seems even more so.
ClaytonB
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2011
- Messages
- 10,796
jmdrake
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 52,917
There are elements of 9//11 that go far beyond motive. We know about Pakistan wiring $100K to lead hijacker Mohammed Atta.
Michael Meacher: The Pakistan connection
Michael Meacher: There is evidence of foreign intelligence backing for the 9/11 hijackers. Why is the US government so keen to cover it up?
We know about the CIA running interference to make sure the hijackers got visas.
Now we've got more whistleblowers coming out about the CIA / Saudi / hijacker connection.
All we have so far on Charlie Kirk is that (maybe) he refused money from Israel and (maybe) the official story of a bullet being shot from a rooftop into his neck is BS.
We don't have anything tying CK's shooter to anybody except (maybe) his trans roomate/lover.
Anti Globalist
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2017
- Messages
- 52,175
If Israel doesn't want people thinking they had something to do with Charlie's assassination, then they should provide solid evidence instead of telling us to take their word for it.
acptulsa
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 77,174
Just because mafias don't want to go to court over their murders does not mean they don't want people afraid of them.
Snowball
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2011
- Messages
- 5,448
It's more comparable to Sandy Hook because there are questions about it being a hoax and staged.
acptulsa
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 77,174
That's not exactly a necessary step in the CTEH being crossed, nor is it evidence that it hasn't been. So... So?
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 40,895
I wasn't comparing the Kirk assassination to JFK or 9/11. Those were merely cited as examples of things that have already passed beyond the CTEH - meaning that even if the really "truly true truth" actually came out about either of those things, it would almost certainly end up being regarded as "just another theory" - and quite possibly (probably ?) a "wrong" one, in some way - by many (most ?) people.
IOW: There is some point at which speculations and theories (such as those involving "questions about [something] being a hoax or staged") regarding some event (such as JFK, 9/11, Sandy Hook, etc.) will have accumulated into a "critical mass" of speculative conspiracism such that even "the truth" can no longer escape its gravitational attraction, so to speak.
Last edited:
Similar threads
