Let's face it, we all wanted Zio-cons to start waking up and call out Israel. Charlie Kirk did. He may not have been the most vocal and didn't (yet) turn fully against them, but he touched the third rail more than once and most likely paid the ultimately price for it. What more can you ask for?
He called out Oct 7th as a stand down by Israel, and even mentioned that Bibi was having political trouble before that event / needed a distraction. Do you think Bibi has forgotten that?
He also called out Epstein as Mossad linked and brought people to TPUSA events saying the same. That is a real big no-no in Zio-world.
Frankly, what he did publicly is more than most of us have done or will do. So, show respect when it is due. I salute Charlie Kirk for his service to America and to humanity. He refused to be a slave to the Synagogue of Satan.
Yes, I am inclined to believe the shooting was a real assassination by the Hidden hand. Not so much because they were threatened by Kirk, but because they want to stir shit up and get the rightwingers riled up for a civil war.
Their end goal is always a bloody revolution or a war and they always finance both sides. All they truly care about is spilling as much blood as possible because they are Satan's spawn. They hate people more than anything because we bear the image of God and He chose us for salvation and eternal life in Him.
https://patriots.win/c/TheDonald/p/1AR0LV791v/
So what, they didn't have the budget to have proper AI? Make it make sense.
Come on, man! (In Biden's voice)
Sure. The argument you made just now is logical fallacy. You just appealed to the authority.
You avoided the content of the video, ignored the 3 glaring AI facts, cognitive dissonance is when you don't accept information right in front of you face.
As for why they didn't do a better job at AI, I can only speculate. Perhaps they don't mind being a bit obvious, CK was throwing symbols and the media is doing it's "33" thing again. I don't know about you, but I'm totally over being a sheep. I will no longer just shrug shoulders and assume they are being honest.
The ring moved fingers, the clumps of blood are evaporating as they fall, and the shirt shirt is not getting much blood on it. The letters, look a little messed up when you watch it frame by frame.
Maybe, and this is spectacular speculation, they didn't expect the enough people would watch frame by frame, and that's why they didn't care that AI wasn't perfect.
Also, not sure if you realize what controlling the media actually means, but since the literally control the media, they don't have to worry about the media reporting these AI errors to the masses.
Why are you cog dis? Why are mentally lazy?
That's not appeal to authority. Appeal to authority would be saying Charlie Kirk got killed for real because the news/government agencies said so.
That was an appeal to common sense - if they want to fake something, they can do it at such a level that you'd never notice anything sus with it. I mean, they do it for movies, of course they can pull it off irl too.
It's also Occam's razor - it'd be easier to pull off a good ol' assassination from hundreds of yards away than to make an AI hologram (or practical effects and AI for the video footage) of the guy getting killed in front of hundreds of witnesses. If you can do something for real you don't fake it and we all know they can easily assassinate people and that's their specialty, long before AI, computers or even guns existed. In the end the effect is the same and if the method is cleaner and safer, it makes sense they'd go with it.
That's a non sequitur and a strawman. Of course they're not honest and it's all planned from above. Of course they embed their symbolism in their psy ops. Symbolism is only obvious if you can interpret it correctly which normies can't obviously. But what does any of that have to do with it being AI circus and not a real assassination JFK/MLK/Lincoln style?
On the contrary - mental laziness would be going with a sweeping statements like "everything is fake and staged" instead of using discernment and reason. Why not go even further and say Charlie Kirk never existed and he was played by actors using a mask or maybe an AI hologram? Where is the threshold of what is reasonable?
Idk why but such pragmatic reasoning is kryptonite for conspiracy theorists.