The Charlie Kirk assassination and the impulse to declare things as forgeries

[Scott]

I don't understand the point that people are making that Tyler Robinson did not disassemble his rifle. No, he didn't take it apart after the shooting. He put it back together before the shooting ─ probably only took him a minute or two.

No, Tyler first scoped out the area in a red shirt and shorts early in the morning. Then, wearing pants and a dark shirt with a flag and an eagle on it before the Charlie Kirk event, he limped a ways down the neighborhood on people's doorbell cams with the rifle shoved down his Right (rear) pant leg (probably partially disassembled) and other parts either under the back of his shirt or in his backpack, when he went up to the roof. Student common areas were on the roof. Very easy.

Tyler quickly reassembled the rifle when he got to the roof but dropped or forgot his screwdriver. After he took the shot, he did not have time to disassemble the rifle again and ran away with it wrapped in a dark towel (a little less than ideal but at least he was not walking with a limp). He had to stash the rifle (assembled) in some trees off campus in order to get away, and he was not able to recovered it later that day despite it having possible fingerprints (and DNA) on it.

I'm seeing a lot of Epistemological Nihilism here. I coined that term years ago, btw.

LHO was a dyslexic misfit who had his Russian-born wife take "Resume" photos (plural) of himself with an Italian Carcaro WWII military rifle and a Smith & Wesson revolver and some Communist literature (for different hostile factions, LOL) at their Oak Cliff neighborhood apartment in Dallas on Neely Street ─ which still exists today, not far from his future boarding house on Beckley St. (two miles from Dealey Plaza and now a museum) and not far from the location where Officer Tippit was shot at 10th and Patton, or the Texas Theater on Jefferson Avenue (where Oswald was captured after sneaking in without paying after shooting Tippit).

Literally no radical groups were interested in hiring Oswald, and in his "resume" photos he comes off as a complete nutter.

The FBI and the Dallas PD did not know that Lee Harvey Oswald had taken a rifle shot at General Ted Walker at his upscale Dallas home, which is today next to an LDS church. Walker was only slightly injured but there were no leads in the case. Walker was a retired Army general and a John Bircher who was against Desegregation, and whom the Kennedies hated, and presumably so did Oswald. The bullet of the future "Patsy," as he called himself later, hit the window pane and deflected just enough to spare Gen. Walker's life. Marina Oswald knew about the Walker shooting, but since her estranged husband wanted to send her back to Russia, she was afraid to talk to the police and her English was rather marginal.

The FBI was not interested in Oswald at all except that as a former defector, they wanted his address on file and Agent James Hosty, who was more interested in investigating Klansmen than cringey Communists, did make one visit to Mrs. Ruth Paine's house in Irving, Texas (ten miles from Dealey Plaza) where Marina was living, to get a current address on Oswald, which prompted a histrionic complaint from Oswald to the FBI, a file which the bureau "lost" after the JFK shooting and Director Hoover started asking questions.

The Dallas PD and the FBI had no leads on the Walker shooting, and they were never interested in Oswald. Later they discovered that Oswald was planning on defecting to Cuba (where the real revolution supposedly was) and had applied for visas at the Soviet and Cuban embassies in Mexico City in late September, 1963. The CIA surveilled the embassies but otherwise they were not interested in Oswald either.

The shots that Oswald took are simply not that remarkable. Oswald was an ex-Marine and a decent shot. Any soldier who could not hit a target the size of a head at less than 100 meters (where you sight your rifle in at) in three tries, I frankly would not want to serve with.

The Charlie Kirk shot was pretty basic for a deer hunter too. The media reported 200 yards at UVU but it was actually 128 Meters or 420 feet (140 yards).

The farthest Kennedy shot was the last one at 81 meters (266 feet), and it was the easiest since it was a straight line with the car, so no right-angle deflection needed, and with the car almost stopped, plus less foliage in the way.

Here is a short video explaining Maximum Point Blank Range. That means meat-on-the-table at less than 300 Meters without a lot of fuss. You just have to sight your high-powered rifle in so that it hits maybe 3 inches high at 100 meters.

[Wetzelrad]

All of this has been debunked. All of it! The screwdriver, the disassembly, the alleged find in a “copse of trees”, the alleged chats and texts, his parents’ involvement in his alleged ‘confession’, all of it is bogus! All of it.

This is exactly what I am trying to caution against. To say that things are bogus based on little more than speculation is to walk out onto a shaky tree limb. Let me respond to some of these.

The screwdriver and the DNA match retrieved from it is information made public by FBI Director Kash Patel. There is no evidence that refutes what he said. The new theory is that since only Patel mentioned it, the screwdriver allegation is another fake, and Patel was just running his mouth. This is wild speculation. Utah's case against Robinson is built on numerous other physical evidence matched to Robinson's DNA, including the rifle, the towel, the fired casing, and the unfired casings, so this screwdriver is not needed to prove their case.

As for assembly or disassembly, it's largely immaterial because that narrative doesn't come from law enforcement. All of that is just social media chatter. And needless to say, a video about disassembling the rifle does not necessarily have any application to Scott's claim that the rifle was assembled on scene.

The rifle was found in what the charging document calls "a wooded area". I'm not sure what your issue with this is. Some people have characterized it as a "forest", which would be a poor description, but that's immaterial.

The chats and texts have been criticized for all kinds of reasons, but none of those reasons have much bite. One of the top reasons given for their being fake was that Robinson's word choices seemed unlikely for his background. The word "vehicle" in the messages struck some as unbelievable, but then Robinson was found to have used the same word "vehicle" in bodycam footage. It is also just a matter of time before these messages are fully authenticated in court, at which point the alleged conspiracy will have to widen to include the cell companies and app companies.

The charging document, based on interviews with Robinson's parents, has them first suspecting Robinson, then trying to convince Robinson to turn himself in, only succeeding after involving a family friend. I guess it's possible that this is a totally fictitious narrative, but so far I have seen nothing that indicates that, and none of the involved parties have come out to say they are being misrepresented, which they obviously would if they believe in Robinson's innocence.

One new line of evidence being pursued is this pre-shooting Google Trends data. I think this is probably completely phoney based on the fact that the supposed search data appears and disappears at random, as shown by the original person who popularized it. It is also shown to happen for other countries. Probably it is a programming bug or an artifact with how Google presents the data. Google Trends was not built to be used this way.

[Stubble]

Is there any picture of the ammunition in the rifle floating around?

I want to see the projectile.

The only projectile I can think of that would have created the 8-10" expansion cavity, caught a vertebra and shot down his spine (blowing 6 of them out) is the 165gr Sierra HPBT Game King.

Anything else would have blown straight through. Ballistic Tip, FMJ, you name it. At 140 yards it still had enough energy to lift a truck.

[Scott]

None of that has been released yet and probably won't be until the trial. Just because the police and DA have not dumped the evidence in our lap does not mean that there is a not a mountain of it.

The Robinson parents ─ who will likely be called to testify ─ have probably lawyered up and are not talking to the media.

Candace Owens is an incredible grifter who is spreading all sorts of disinformation at this point.

Here is an important video from an actual mortician, who explains how the death protocols work, death certificates, autopsies, etc.

VIDEO1

[Wahrheitssucher]

All of this has been debunked. All of it! The screwdriver, the disassembly, the alleged find in a “copse of trees”, the alleged chats and texts, his parents’ involvement in his alleged ‘confession’, all of it is bogus! All of it.

This is exactly what I am trying to caution against. To say that things are bogus based on little more than speculation is to walk out onto a shaky tree limb.

But it is definitely NOT being disbelieved based on mere “speculation”.
It appears you haven’t actually checked and looked into some of this in sufficient detail, Wetzelrad.
I.e. you appear to me to be behaving on this issue like the person with the user-name of ‘confusedjew’.

It also appears you just don’t like people questioning and debunking the official narrative.
An attitude and approach I find quite peculiar for someone who has seen through the mass of ‘official’ lies and misinformation regarding WW2 and the alleged mass-murder of 6 million jews.

THE OFFICIAL NARRATIVE:
Kirk was supposedly struck by a single .30-06 round from a bolt-action Mauser 98 rifle (gifted to Robinson by his grandfather) fired from the roof of the Losee Center building, about 142 yards away.

DEBUNKED:
That ALONE defies basic physics.
Didn’t you watch the video I provided DEBUNKING that claim and PROVING it is BOGUS based on empirical evidence?
I can only assume you didn’t watch it as there is absolutely no way any sane person can argue against it.
As I regard you as a sane person, this means you either are:
a.) ignoring evidence that doesn’t fit what you want to believe
OR for some reason you also are
b.) deceiving in the attempt to keep people believing a bogus, debunked, ridiculous, ‘official’ narrative.
If a mauser 98 .30 06 had been fired from that distance and had hit Kirk in the neck it not only would definitely have left an exit wound, but it would have destroyed his neck.
That is a ballistic fact!
It is NOT “speculation”.
Suggesting it is speculation is either ignorance or deliberate deception! There’s no other option.

Let me respond to some of these.
The screwdriver and the DNA match retrieved from it is information made public by FBI Director Kash Patel. There is no evidence that refutes what he said. The new theory is that since only Patel mentioned it, the screwdriver allegation is another fake, and Patel was just running his mouth. This is wild speculation. Utah's case against Robinson is built on numerous other physical evidence matched to Robinson's DNA, including the rifle, the towel, the fired casing, and the unfired casings, so this screwdriver is not needed to prove their case.

As for assembly or disassembly, it's largely immaterial because that narrative doesn't come from law enforcement. All of that is just social media chatter. And needless to say, a video about disassembling the rifle does not necessarily have any application to Scott's claim that the rifle was assembled on scene.

EXPLANATION:
If the claimed rifle could not have caused the wound we all saw, then ALL of those are debunked. It makes it all planted ‘evidence’ to incriminate a ‘patsy’.
Do you agree?

The rifle was found in what the charging document calls "a wooded area".
I'm not sure what your issue with this is. Some people have characterized it as a "forest", which would be a poor description, but that's immaterial.

Eye-witness accounts of residents have refuted that ‘official’ statement. That’s what the issue is.
We have to either believe: i.) the ‘official’ narrative or ii.) reports from numerous residents and eye-witnesses.

The chats and texts have been criticized for all kinds of reasons, but none of those reasons have much bite.

That is an opinion.
One that taken together with your other arguments in defence of the official narrative I believe just shows naive gullibility or an intent to deceive. Again, sorry but as I see it, those are the only two options. In my opinion and many others they are very obviously fake for numerous logical reasons (i.e. not ‘speculation’).

The charging document, based on interviews with Robinson's parents, has them first suspecting Robinson, then trying to convince Robinson to turn himself in, only succeeding after involving a family friend. I guess it's possible that this is a totally fictitious narrative, but so far I have seen nothing that indicates that, and none of the involved parties have come out to say they are being misrepresented, which they obviously would if they believe in Robinson's innocence.

That also is apparently incorrect! They have said they are being misrepresented. They say they have been told not to say anything to media, presumably not before the trial . But apparently they have spoken to close friends and family who have said that they definitely DO deny the official story.
We, as distant viewers, have no way of knowing with certainty. We have to rely on 2nd hand accounts. But we don’t get the option to deny there are accounts refuting the official narrative. If we do, then that is dishonest denial.

Plus Tyler definitely has officially denied his guilt. He did it in court. Which refutes the official narrative. Corroborating the 2nd hand accounts that his parents also don’t believe he did it, which also refutes the ‘official’ narrative. And again, that is NOT based on ‘speculation’. Do you agree?

Taken together this shows you are just flat out denying any refutation, presumably because for some reason you don’t want to believe your governmental institutions lie to you (or, you yourself are deceiving).
Why any American would implicitly believe official narratives after their lies, concealment and tampering with evidence to conceal murder of American citizens at Ruby Ridge, Waco, Dealey Plaza, WTC7, the Pentagon, twin towers, etc., etc., beats me.

One new line of evidence being pursued is this pre-shooting Google Trends data. I think this is probably completely phoney based on the fact that the supposed search data appears and disappears at random, as shown by the original person who popularized it. It is also shown to happen for other countries. Probably it is a programming bug or an artifact with how Google presents the data. Google Trends was not built to be used this way.

Hmmm? Well, …You appear to me to be ironically doing what you started by accusing others of doing: viz. just disputing evidence either because you don’t understand it or don’t want to believe it, in order to maintain belief in something.
Ermmm… again just like ‘confusedjew’ used to do.

[HansHill]

To be fair to Wetzelrad, i did ask you:

What is the evidence that I may have possibly missed, that Israel is connected to the Kirk assassination?

And you replied

I can go into the details why I suspect this, but it isn’t conclusive evidence. It will just be a long list of clear inconsistencies

That is,

Evidence was requested, and not forthcoming.

[Stubble]

None of that has been released yet and probably won't be until the trial. Just because the police and DA have not dumped the evidence in our lap does not mean that there is a not a mountain of it.

The Robinson parents ─ who will likely be called to testify ─ have probably lawyered up and are not talking to the media.

Candace Owens is an incredible grifter who is spreading all sorts of disinformation at this point.

Here is an important video from an actual mortician, who explains how the death protocols work, death certificates, autopsies, etc.

VIDEO1

The picture of the rifle is floating around. There could have been a release of a picture of the engraved bullets I missed.

They released an image of the 'anti ice' sharpied bullet from the dallas shooting.

/shrug

My description of the post-mortem comes from tpusa (and the video, that expansion cavity was huge), so, can be taken with a grain of salt.

[Wetzelrad]

Didn’t you watch the video I provided DEBUNKING that claim and PROVING it is BOGUS based on empirical evidence?

No, I didn't watch the video. I've chosen not to say anything about the shooting itself for a number of reasons, especially my own ignorance about such things, but since you deem it of great importance I will respond now.

THE OFFICIAL NARRATIVE:
Kirk was supposedly struck by a single .30-06 round from a bolt-action Mauser 98 rifle (gifted to Robinson by his grandfather) fired from the roof of the Losee Center building, about 142 yards away.

Well, that's not quite it. We know he was shot by a .30-06 rifle, but the type of ammunition has not been given. I have been entertaining the idea that a special or incorrect type of round was used in the rifle, a claim suggested by others and so far unrebutted. (Admittedly this possibility seems less likely over time since law enforcement hasn't offered it.)

DEBUNKED:
That ALONE defies basic physics.

It doesn't. For me it was enough just to hear different hunters chime in with their experiences of bullets not always exiting their targets, not always behaving predictably, to feel comfortable that what is alleged is physically possible.

I have also seen numerous videos of bullets hitting targets sideways, meaning they are tumbling in flight, which in the case of the Kirk shooting would lower the bullet's velocity. This seems like another plausible explanation for the wound.

But even if we put aside some of the unconventional theories, I just don't believe we have sufficient information to make a conclusive technical proof like you are claiming. Having now watched the video, I'm unimpressed. Like every other video of this type, it was made with the intent to prove how powerful .30-06 is, not to test if the shooting was possible. They did not even try to replicate the shooting in its details, nor did they experiment with anything that could falsify their theory, like alternate ammo. I'm fed up with these repetitive explanations. I would still consider reading or watching a debate if some well-informed people on both sides wanted to take it seriously.

EXPLANATION:
If the claimed rifle could not have caused the wound we all saw, then ALL of those are debunked. It makes it all planted ‘evidence’ to incriminate a ‘patsy’.
Do you agree?

I didn't know that this was the angle you were taking. I do agree at least partially with the logic. If the shooting was technically impossible then it would cast doubt on a lot of other evidence. However, this builds a sort of house of cards in which the derivative claims depend on the core claim. I again say you are venturing out on shaky ground.

Eye-witness accounts of residents have refuted that ‘official’ statement. That’s what the issue is.
We have to either believe: i.) the ‘official’ narrative or ii.) reports from numerous residents and eye-witnesses.

I'm unfamiliar with these accounts. Robinson leaving the rifle there seems to be consistent with the fact that he brought it with him off the roof but did not keep it in his possession, hence the attempt to return and collect it later. Also corroborated in the text messages. Are the eyewitnesses better evidence?

That also is apparently incorrect! They have said they are being misrepresented. They say they have been told not to say anything to media, presumably not before the trial . But apparently they have spoken to close friends and family who have said that they definitely DO deny the official story.
We, as distant viewers, have no way of knowing with certainty. We have to rely on 2nd hand accounts. But we don’t get the option to deny there are accounts refuting the official narrative. If we do, then that is dishonest denial.

Big if true. Doubtful because it should be huge news and the number one topic on social media.

If they believe in Robinson's innocence, they would all be very foolish to keep their mouths shut now. It is not against the law to defend him in the public sphere, and he stands a much better chance of winning his case if he gets the public on his side. He could get millions in crowdfunding overnight.

Plus Tyler definitely has officially denied his guilt. He did it in court. Which refutes the official narrative. Corroborating the 2nd hand accounts that his parents also don’t believe he did it, which also refutes the ‘official’ narrative. And again, that is NOT based on ‘speculation’. Do you agree?

He predictably made a plea of not guilty. He has not said that he has been framed or anything else that would be obvious to him now if it were true.

Hmmm? Well, …You appear to me to be ironically doing what you started by accusing others of doing: viz. just disputing evidence either because you don’t understand it or don’t want to believe it, in order to maintain belief in something.

No, actually it's proven that the people who are using this information do not understand it. When someone asked Sam Parker why the Google Trends were different for him, he was told to try again on another device. This is nonsense. Either the data exists or it doesn't. When it's pointed out that the same trick can be played with countries other than Israel and events other than the assassination, Parker has not responded. Baron Coleman at least admits the trick can be played with other topics, because he uses it with a bunch of unrelated conspiracies.

This entire line of analysis also ignores the most obvious innocent explanations, like that we live in a world of AI where millions of useless and meaningless search queries are made every day. If any of the Trends data is real, it would have to be shown that it is incompatible with normal searches made by humans and AI.

With this, I will probably stop engaging because I don't think anything productive will come from this now. I'm more interested in forgery accusations and where they end up.

[Wahrheitssucher]

Didn’t you watch the video I provided DEBUNKING that claim and PROVING it is BOGUS based on empirical evidence?

No, I didn't watch the video.

Thanks for the honest answer. But… Then how can you fairly say: “ I'm more interested in forgery accusations and where they end up.” You’ve just proven that you aren’t actually interested in refuting evidence when it is offered to you. You only watched it after being forced to, to restore some credibility for the position you have chosen.

THE OFFICIAL NARRATIVE:
Kirk was supposedly struck by a single .30-06 round from a bolt-action Mauser 98 rifle (gifted to Robinson by his grandfather) fired from the roof of the Losee Center building, about 142 yards away.

Well, that's not quite it. We know he was shot by a .30-06 rifle, but the type of ammunition has not been given. I have been entertaining the idea that a special or incorrect type of round was used in the rifle, a claim suggested by others and so far unrebutted. (Admittedly this possibility seems less likely over time since law enforcement hasn't offered it.)

DEBUNKED:
That ALONE defies basic physics.

It doesn't. For me it was enough just to hear different hunters chime in with their experiences of bullets not always exiting their targets, not always behaving predictably, to feel comfortable that what is alleged is physically possible.

Well, if expert opinion is “not enough” for you, don’t you see you can not fairly claim: “I'm more interested in forgery accusations and where they end up”?
Because aren’t you then doing exactly what you are highlighting and warning against, viz. disbelieving evidence because it does not fit i.) your current understanding + ii.) what you want to believe? I.e. a subconscious confirmation bias?

THE BASIC FACTS
The irrefutable evidence that we currently have is the neck wound captured on camera from numerous angles.
The official narrative has a claimed murder weapon plus an accused person acting from a claimed position.

The question any honest, unbiased investigation has to ask is: “Can a bullet of any kind shot from a Mauser 98 .30 06 from the alleged position cause such an entry wound”?
The expert opinion is in the negative! If you have credible expert opinion refuting that, you haven’t yet shown it.

I have also seen numerous videos of bullets hitting targets sideways, meaning they are tumbling in flight, which in the case of the Kirk shooting would lower the bullet's velocity. This seems like another plausible explanation for the wound.

Please share it.

But even if we put aside some of the unconventional theories, I just don't believe we have sufficient information to make a conclusive technical proof like you are claiming. Having now watched the video, I'm unimpressed. Like every other video of this type, it was made with the intent to prove how powerful .30-06 is, not to test if the shooting was possible.
They did not even try to replicate the shooting in its details…

What details do you think they did they not replicate? Please explain.

…nor did they experiment with anything that could falsify their theory, like alternate ammo.

As you have conceded (and respect to you for that) the presented evidence from those supplying the ‘official’ narrative, suggests the bullets found and used were normal.
So IF it is a normal round for a Mauser 98 .30 06, then the video I linked to DEFINITELY DOES “test if the shooting was possible”.
So… Again I respectfully suggest that what you are doing is precisely what you warned against: viz. dismissing actual evidence as false merely because you don’t like the obvious conclusion.
I.e. it is you who are dismissing the actual evidence and inventing other less likely and less credible scenarios in order to rescue the discredited ‘official’ narrative.

I'm fed up with these repetitive explanations. I would still consider reading or watching a debate if some well-informed people on both sides wanted to take it seriously.

EXPLANATION:
If the claimed rifle could not have caused the wound we all saw, then ALL of those are debunked. It makes it all planted ‘evidence’ to incriminate a ‘patsy’.
Do you agree?

I didn't know that this was the angle you were taking. I do agree at least partially with the logic. If the shooting was technically impossible then it would cast doubt on a lot of other evidence.

Hunh!? It would ‘only ‘cast doubt’ in your mind?

However, this builds a sort of house of cards in which the derivative claims depend on the core claim. I again say you are venturing out on shaky ground.

The known wound on Kirk’s neck and the known ballistics of the known rifle claimed are NOT ‘shaky ground, Wetzelrad. They are the most solid evidence in the actual murder investigation.

Eye-witness accounts of residents have refuted that ‘official’ statement. That’s what the issue is.
We have to either believe: i.) the ‘official’ narrative or ii.) reports from numerous residents and eye-witnesses.

I'm unfamiliar with these accounts. Robinson leaving the rifle there seems to be consistent with the fact that he brought it with him off the roof but did not keep it in his possession, hence the attempt to return and collect it later. Also corroborated in the text messages. Are the eyewitnesses better evidence?

That also is apparently incorrect! They have said they are being misrepresented. They say they have been told not to say anything to media, presumably not before the trial . But apparently they have spoken to close friends and family who have said that they definitely DO deny the official story.
We, as distant viewers, have no way of knowing with certainty. We have to rely on 2nd hand accounts. But we don’t get the option to deny there are accounts refuting the official narrative. If we do, then that is dishonest denial.

Big if true. Doubtful because it should be huge news and the number one topic on social media.

Your argument then is because you haven’t seen/read this therefore it’s not credible? Isn’t that also precisely the reaction to refuting evidence that you are warning against?

If they believe in Robinson's innocence, they would all be very foolish to keep their mouths shut now. It is not against the law to defend him in the public sphere, and he stands a much better chance of winning his case if he gets the public on his side. He could get millions in crowdfunding overnight.

Plus Tyler definitely has officially denied his guilt. He did it in court. Which refutes the official narrative. Corroborating the 2nd hand accounts that his parents also don’t believe he did it, which also refutes the ‘official’ narrative. And again, that is NOT based on ‘speculation’. Do you agree?

He predictably made a plea of not guilty. He has not said that he has been framed or anything else that would be obvious to him now if it were true.

He hasn’t had a chance to say anything at all publicly. You are again doing exactly what you warned against. You are dismissing evidence if it doesn’t fit your preconceived position.

Hmmm? Well, …You appear to me to be ironically doing what you started by accusing others of doing: viz. just disputing evidence either because you don’t understand it or don’t want to believe it, in order to maintain belief in something.

No, actually it's proven that the people who are using this information do not understand it. When someone asked Sam Parker why the Google Trends were different for him, he was told to try again on another device. This is nonsense. Either the data exists or it doesn't. When it's pointed out that the same trick can be played with countries other than Israel and events other than the assassination, Parker has not responded. Baron Coleman at least admits the trick can be played with other topics, because he uses it with a bunch of unrelated conspiracies.

This entire line of analysis also ignores the most obvious innocent explanations, like that we live in a world of AI where millions of useless and meaningless search queries are made every day. If any of the Trends data is real, it would have to be shown that it is incompatible with normal searches made by humans and AI.

With this, I will probably stop engaging because I don't think anything productive will come from this now. I'm more interested in forgery accusations and where they end up.

I respectfully suggest that is the opposite of what you are doing. For some reason you have accepted the official narrative and you reject all evidence that refutes it sometimes without even seeing it, and then with illogical reasons once you have.

[Wahrheitssucher]

To be fair to Wetzelrad, i did ask you:

What is the evidence that I may have possibly missed, that Israel is connected to the Kirk assassination?

And you replied

I can go into the details why I suspect this, but it isn’t conclusive evidence. It will just be a long list of clear inconsistencies

That is, Evidence was requested, and not forthcoming.

Yes, you asked for any conclusive evidence that Kirk’s public murder was orchestrated by the zionist ethno-state illegally occupying and mass-murdering and maiming hundreds of thousands of captive civilians in Gaza with American weaponry and permission.

I stand by my former answer. My reply to that question remains unchanged.