r/ronpaul • u/RebellAlways • Jul 14 '26
End Democracy I created a pretty cool little cartoon mocking the fact that the Zionists and the leftists are two sides to the same coin! Scroll through my 5 panel cartoon titled “TWO PEAS IN A POD”!
•
u/rothbard_anarchist Jul 14 '26
Is there any actual evidence pointing to Israel killing Kirk? Is there any exculpatory evidence to put against the mountain of forensic evidence against Tyler? Any reason not to think the obvious answer is right? A deranged adherent to a philosophy of systematic violence lashed out against a figure who adroitly mocked his lover’s condition?
•
u/RebellAlways Jul 14 '26
In any homicide investigation, the FIRST thing a detective looks for is: Who had a motive to murder this person?
That’s number one.
•
u/rothbard_anarchist Jul 14 '26
That’s certainly a worthwhile criteria to consider. Robinson’s personal life, combined with the trans community’s hostility to Kirk, provide such a motive.
Of course, as a political public figure, Kirk’s list of opponents or enemies included half the electorate. So you have to narrow it down through other means.
•
u/RebellAlways Jul 14 '26
The people with the biggest motive to kill Charlie were the Israelis.
Charlie was on the cusp of turning against them in a hard way.
And usually the most dangerous opponents are those opponents who were former allies.
Charlie turning against the Israelis would have been catastrophic to their cause. Charlie would have been the most vehement critic of the Iran war. Charlie would have been the biggest critic of the “intelligence authorization act” where we are proposing to meld aspects of our military/intelligence apparatus with Israel.
The Israelis were already underwater with most demographic groups in favorability.
This is a gigantic motive.
•
u/rothbard_anarchist Jul 14 '26
That’s very speculative. In the months prior to his death, he had criticized Israel from a clear place of a friend urging a change in strategy. His letter to Netanyahu four months before his death is clearly not an indication that he’s about to abandon the Israeli cause. Even his event two months prior for conservatives was conciliatory, seeking to alleviate their concerns and keep them onboard. The first evidence we have of him possibly deciding on a major shift was just 48 hours before his death, in a private group text message.
To call that motive for Israel requires that they received leaked information about this private message, decided that assassination was the right response, planned and carried it out, complete with a patsy with DNA evidence, all within 48 hours. I’m not sure Tom Cruise’s Mission Impossible team could execute such a conspiracy. The Mossad certainly would have a difficult time managing it, on American soil.
So… speculatively, sure. You can imagine a scenario where Kirk turns on Israel and becomes a headache for them. But neither his actions nor the effects of those actions are easily predicted, and the evidence required to favor that theory of the crime should be significantly higher than the idea that an unhinged political junkie crashed out when he heard Charlie Kirk was going to show up so close by.
•
u/RebellAlways Jul 14 '26
Israeli knew Charlie was about to become more than a headache, he was about to become their worst nightmare. Charlie was head of the largest conservative organization in the United States. Charlie was respected and even lionized by the youth.
Charlie had a singular position of influence among the young conservatives, If Charlie became a bitter enemy of Israel, it would be catastrophic for the Zionist cause.
The boomer class is about to pass on to the next world. Israel knows its support among the left has cratered and will never likely recover. A divorce with Charlie likely meant a Divorce from the last constituency Israel could ever hope to court, and that would be a disaster for the future.
The damage Charlie was about to do to the American Zionist cause is incalculable. He was extremely anti-regime change. He was also truly an American patriot, who in the end, refused to compromise his values.
There was millions and millions of dollars offered to Charlie before his murder by Benjamin Netanyahu for Charlie to “stay the course”. I’ve heard upwards of a 100 million dollars was proffered. Charlie turned it down.
This was the meeting Days before his assassination. Charlie had a contentious meeting in the Hamptons with Jewish powerbrokers, hosted by Bill Ackman. They did not leave that meeting happy.
Charlie was in fear for his life. He had received numerous threats, some veiled and some not so veiled, from former supporters, nearly all of them Zionists.
Days after Charlie’s assassination Netanyahu put out that horrendous video, where he made himself look guilty as hell. Have you ever seen that video? It’s the most cringe video I’ve ever seen. People I personally know, who had never really thought about Charlie Kirk and were ambivalent about his death, instantly decided that Netanyahu was a guilty man who had a hand in Charlie’s death after watching that video.
Have you ever seen the video of Charlie’s death? I mean slowed down, frame by frame? He wasn’t shot by a 30.6 bullet in his neck. His microphone lapel likely exploded, possibly the piece inside his shirt, the magnet part, which sent a piece of shrapnel rocketing through his neck.
The video is not easy to discern. The one thing I can discern is the fact that he wasn’t shot in the neck by a 30.6 round.
There was an explosion off of his chest. His shirt popped up as if a man inside Charlie had poked his finger outwards. That energy had nothing to do with a bullet hitting the bare skin of his neck. The energy wouldn’t have traveled to that particular spot.
Charlie wasn’t thrown back, there wasn’t any recoil backwards. Charlie didn’t even flinch backwards. Instead, the force of the blast sent Charlie upwards on the stool he was sitting on.
So, if Charlie wasn’t shot in the neck by a German Mauser rifle, what happened, and who was responsible? Certainly not Tyler Robinson. He didn’t plant the explosive device onto Charlie’s chest. He very might well be part of the plot, he might be the patsy, he wasn’t the one solely responsible for Charlie’s death.
So who was? Who had a motive? Why is the government lying? What are they trying to cover up? Using deductive reasoning, common sense, and my knowledge of the circumstances, I’ve come to a conclusion.
In my mind, in my heart, considering everything taken together, I think Israel is responsible.
I could be wrong, I don’t know exactly what happened 100%, but in my mind, I believe it was Israel.
•
u/rothbard_anarchist Jul 15 '26
Again, you're insisting the loss of Kirk's support would've been the death knell for US support for Israel in the US. Maybe. But even granting that, the Israel lobby was trying to woo him just 2 days before his death. It was a call with an AIPAC donor that had angered him. So clearly, 48 hours prior to his death, they were still thinking of using soft tactics like withholding donations. To go from that to a fully planned secret assassination in such a short time defies belief.
But let's talk about the evidence around the shooting itself. The lack of a big exit wound is unusual, I will grant. But it's neither impossible nor unheard of. If the bullet hits one of his vertebrae at the right angle, it can get redirected. They found a bullet fragment inside, but it was too damaged to match to anything. Not unusual.
But there's no evidence whatsoever for this exploding microphone theory. Let's agree that there was not a man inside Charlie, poking his finger outwards to pop up his shirt. This small detail is being used as evidence that he had an exploding microphone. But the entire sequence is on video, and there's no exploding microphone. Was it so fast that it occurred between frames? Why did it leave no residue? Why did it not burn his shirt? How in the heck could a microphone, anchored by a tiny clip to a flimsy scrap of cotton, provide enough force to punch a fatal hole into his jugular through his neck? In reality, that movement of his shirt was almost certainly the shockwave of the supersonic 30-06 round inches away from his neck.
This same question also answers why Charlie wasn't "blown back" by the bullet. Conservation of momentum - the momentum imparted to Charlie would've been something less than the momentum imparted by the kick of the rifle. Wind drag would take some energy away, but you wouldn't expect him to be knocked off his chair.
There is simply no evidence for an exploding microphone. Nothing beyond a curious movement of Charlie's shirt, which is far more likely to be from the bullet. Mind you, considering the coroner found a bullet fragment inside Kirk... how could it have gotten there if he was killed by a microphone?
I get that Israel is practically a rogue state that runs US foreign policy to an embarrassing degree. I get that Netanyahu is probably a war criminal who belongs on trial at the Hague. But that does not mean that every bad thing that happens in the world is by their hand. They're just not that hyper-competent, even if they are willing do to such a thing. It's worth noting that the 10/7 attacks, much like our own 9/11, had warnings and signs of danger, but institutional incompetence kept such warnings from being heeded properly, and allowed both tragedies to occur.
I would particularly caution against Candace Owens. She has essentially no interest in the truth, and will say anything to get views. Check everything she claims - her spreadsheets of flights are disproven by Flight Aware, as are most of her other claims. She has essentially one good source - whoever passed her Kirk's texts - and she's decided to use it to enrich herself immensely.
•
u/Mitchard_Nixon Jul 14 '26
Seems pretty reductive, like maybe you don't talk to many people with differing opinions from the ones you hold IRL. Most leftists I know don't trust intelligence agencies and see that they are tied to the Epstien class and therefore are interwoven with the zionist forces. The few Maga types I interact with also think the feds are the ones climbing out of the uhaul trucks in blue and khaki.