After giving some thinking to Charlie Kirk's killing I have come to the conclusion that things do not add up.
The official story of a 22y old universitarian with no military background taking an accurate single shot from 200 yards that severes the jugular of his objective, in broad daylight, and then run home to confess to his father who inmediately turns him in to the FBI, is fishy, to say the less.
The planting of the rifle with transgender messages in the whereabouts is even fishier.
So, we'd better have a look to the bigger picture.
I guess that, although Kirk had received multiple death threats, he didn't have a potus-like secret service detail protecting him 24/7. Therefore, if the only goal was to silence him, it'd have been less risky to put him down discretely on the street, in his house or anywhere else where he was alone or more vulnerable. A car accident could have been faked, or he could have been poisoned.
But someone rather decided to execute a complicated long shot to a protected objective, in a venue full of cameras and through a crowded place full of people with mobile phones. Charlie was a big influencer, but I don't think that he was so important to justify this risky operation.
The only reason I find for taking that decision is that, as in every intelligence black operation, there were multiple direct and indirect goals to achieve:
- General rehearsal in a real scenario of a larger scale operation
- Trigger and check the response from the society to an assasination of a politic figure in full public display
- Sense the reaction of law enforcement personnel
- Intimidate the opponents
- Take down a political adversary
If this is true, a highly trained and efficient sniper with an already successfully rehearsed plan is at large, and we will see a similar murder attemp of a major figure in the coming months.
I hope I'm wrong.
#freedom #CharlieKirk