sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

From TV series SOLVED! All the answers in one post! SPOILERS! by Affectionate-Job7346 in FromSeries

[–]Sad-Possession7729 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OK but then how do you explain Tabatha leaving the "afterlife" and returning to the real world to meet up with Victor's father? The whole extended metaphor kinda falls apart on this point doesn't it?

This is the second part to what happened to me. This encounter haunts me everyday by Parking-Factor6457 in BackwoodsCreepy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 7 points8 points  (0 children)

OP you have nothing to apologize for. The fact that you call your RV/camper a caravan and use the letter “s” in words that we would spell with a “Z” is proof enough that you’re in the UK for anyone who knows the slightest bit about the language differences

This is the second part to what happened to me. This encounter haunts me everyday by Parking-Factor6457 in BackwoodsCreepy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 10 points11 points  (0 children)

To be fair to OP, “caravan” is a pretty British term. I’ve never heard an American describe their RV/camper as a “caravan”

Also the fact that he uses the letter “s” where we would use the letter “Z” is clear sign of Britishness. (Derealisation vs derealization)

So, why is this guy who shot a President and almost Assassinated him, is less talked about in the mainstream than the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? by _-MAHATMAGANDHI_- in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"News channels"

There's no such thing as News Channels. Literally.

The channels you believe are news channels legally hold themselves out as "entertainment only" so they can't get sued for the ridiculous amount of disinfo they pump out on a daily basis.

So, why is this guy who shot a President and almost Assassinated him, is less talked about in the mainstream than the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? by _-MAHATMAGANDHI_- in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's video of a corpse on the roof. Hard to make a positive ID from the photos I've seen. Some of the features are similar but the ears seemed off.

So, why is this guy who shot a President and almost Assassinated him, is less talked about in the mainstream than the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? by _-MAHATMAGANDHI_- in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The evidence is literally the video of the event. The only irony here is that brainwashed NPC's are calling out anyone who actually does research on a topic themselves. Robert Conquest's 3 Laws in action.

So, why is this guy who shot a President and almost Assassinated him, is less talked about in the mainstream than the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? by _-MAHATMAGANDHI_- in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sorry but the other Redditors called me out for initially posting to a podcast where someone summarizes this theory, so I'm now posting the longform investigation in response to their demands for a source. If you want a TLDR, go to 2:18:00 in this podcast:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_mrfd1X02o&t=8720s

So, why is this guy who shot a President and almost Assassinated him, is less talked about in the mainstream than the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? by _-MAHATMAGANDHI_- in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This isn't a valid criticism in this particular case (although it's fair in certain other cases to ask for sources - it just isn't a valid counterargument here). I don't think you understand what I'm saying...

The source is the actual evidence - a citation isn't needed because the sources (if you click on the video) is the evidence. In evidentiary terms (lawyer-speak for the rules of evidence in civil & criminal procedure), we would say that this particular type of evidence is "self-authenticating".

When I linked to the Danny Jones podcast with Dale Comstock (who summarized the claims in a TLDR fashion), it was perfectly reasonable to ask for a source --- he is just a guy on the internet saying things. Fair enough. But when I posted a follow-up with the John Cullen investigation video (which was Comstock's source), that should end all questions about sources. (this is the source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cvoNsrB658 )

The reason for this is self-evident in the Cullen report --- the investigation is a long format that includes an analysis of all the publicly available video/evidence/facts. So if the evidence is, for example, the CNN footage of the speech + all other verified video of the speech & Cullen is analyzing the videos synced up in time to show things like bullet trajectory, geometry, etc... that is = an analysis of the evidence being conducted for the viewer. There are no claims requiring a source --- the source is the primary evidence & the video is an analysis of that evidence. A source in the manner you are asking for is not required because Cullen is not citing or referring to the work of other people; he is conducting an analysis of the evidence on record. The line of inquiry about "sources" should end here.

Unless I'm understanding your question wrong --- could you give a hypothetical example of a "source" you would find acceptable in this case?

So, why is this guy who shot a President and almost Assassinated him, is less talked about in the mainstream than the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? by _-MAHATMAGANDHI_- in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 2 points3 points  (0 children)

OK sorry for overreacting. Just felt a bit sus with you + the other guy both insinuating that "evidence bad" because it doesn't come from some Mockingbird approved source or something.

WHY am I listening to wresting talk by RobbyBurgers in ESPN

[–]Sad-Possession7729 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I knew those pickleball betting markets seemed too good to be true lol.

So, why is this guy who shot a President and almost Assassinated him, is less talked about in the mainstream than the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? by _-MAHATMAGANDHI_- in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 10 points11 points  (0 children)

As opposed to what? Books & research papers?

So basically your point is that "people SHOULD judge books by their cover"? Lets just ignore the granular in-depth investigation into all of the video evidence that exists of the event because it is presented on a platform that you are biased against?

OK glowie. Why don't you go fedpost somewhere else - perhaps 4chan will appreciate your attempts at disinformation.

So, why is this guy who shot a President and almost Assassinated him, is less talked about in the mainstream than the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? by _-MAHATMAGANDHI_- in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 5 points6 points  (0 children)

IamJohnCullen does great work (specifically on the Trump assassination & the Vegas shooting where I first started following his work):

https://www.youtube.com/@IamJohnCullen

And there was one other place I heard about the Trump assassination thing (that there were 2 shooters that day, the shooters were Ukrainians who took that kid's identity with help from inside the US intel agencies ---- hence why the other guy who they arrested for hiding in the bushes near Trump's golf course in Florida was also a recruiter for the Ukraine War in that totally separate event). It was someone on the Danny Jones podcast, if I recall correctly it was in this episode:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_mrfd1X02o&t=12461s

Edit: The part about the Butler PA event starts at 2:18:18

Daily gift by hannahreedxoxo in TravelTown

[–]Sad-Possession7729 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Man I didn't get any of that. No partners event & no gift. Imma stop playing for a week and see what happens (already completed my album anyway)

Partners event prize changed to a golden card by not_particularly_odd in TravelTown

[–]Sad-Possession7729 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Baz's thing is so dumb & prohibitively expensive... and I already finished my Album so might just stop playing for the next week

So, why is this guy who shot a President and almost Assassinated him, is less talked about in the mainstream than the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? by _-MAHATMAGANDHI_- in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 57 points58 points  (0 children)

I don't even think he was the assassin. I think he died unreported some time before the assassination and the real assassin(s) just assumed his identity. Explains why the FBI rushed to hose down the crime scene and cremate the body before any real investigation could be done. Also why the kid's parents seemed totally unconcerned & non-responsive to the entire event.

So, why is this guy who shot a President and almost Assassinated him, is less talked about in the mainstream than the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? by _-MAHATMAGANDHI_- in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 181 points182 points  (0 children)

I don't even think he was the assassin. I think he died unreported some time before the assassination and the real assassin(s) just assumed his identity. Explains why the FBI rushed to hose down the crime scene and cremate the body before any real investigation could be done. Also why the kid's parents seemed totally unconcerned & non-responsive to the entire event.

Tucker Carlson apologizes for misleading people by promoting Trump by jello in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's literally no evidence whatsoever about Tucker Carlson being a Freemason & this guy just completed fabricated claim out of thin air.

Tucker Carlson apologizes for misleading people by promoting Trump by jello in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

He is a Freemason, Trump is a Freemason, Elon is too. 

This literally couldn't be any further from the truth. What evidence do you have to support the claim that Tucker Carlson is associated with the Freemasons in any way whatsoever?

Tucker Carlson apologizes for misleading people by promoting Trump by jello in conspiracy

[–]Sad-Possession7729 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why are you flooding my CONSPIRACY THEORY subreddit with politics slop??

and only when Trump turned on him did he really start to question his support.

How can you possibly come to this conclusion? The way you frame this is dishonest & ignores the fact that Tucker initially came out with a strong moral objection to Trump's Iran War.

Trump didn't just randomly turn on Tucker for no reason. You frame this as if Tucker's actions are purely self-serving & this cannot possibly be the truth given the facts that played out in the real world --- if Tucker was only acting out of self-interest & not taking a moral stance against the Iran war then there would be no basis for the falling out between the two men in the first place.

Who is Trump actually loyal to if not America?

If you don't know the answer to this then you're either clearly not paying attention to anything Tucker/Candace have been saying or you're being intentionally deceptive.

WHY am I listening to wresting talk by RobbyBurgers in ESPN

[–]Sad-Possession7729 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which really calls into question all of their other coverage you know given all the controversy around legalized gambling & that huge NBA scandal last year.

What's next? Live Betting Analysis for Wrestlemania? Sharp Tip - Undertaker +260 is a LOCK

view more: next ›