USA news & politics

[Welsh Exile]

Jees thats harsh, discounting him for using a popular phrase, no way in hell youd catch me doing that hahahaha

If you're making a serious piece I find it deeply unserious to say, right off the bat, that the guy who has apparently confessed (amongst other evidence) could "no way in hell" have fired that shot.

If he's Dave down the pub saying it it's one thing but if it's some supposedly serious person making a serious piece that I'm meant to listen to then I expect those people to be more careful with their phrasing.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Did you watch further to him qualifying that remark?

If not then your opinion is worthless.

If you did and still disagree then fair enough.

To me, I found that he put forward enough doubt to seriously question the "alleged" shooter.

He also did state quite clearly that he would explain how he got to that conclusion, which he then did, all within the first 25 seconds. But hey dismiss it on the first 5 seconds.

His biggest argument was that the bullet from a 30-06 at that range and angles could not have been responsible the way it has been said. The bullet would have passed through Kirk's neck and wouldn't have been deflected downwards the way it was,but would have had too much power.

As to a confession, didn't someone else claim he did it immediately after the event?

Did I watch him qualify that remark? No because he can’t. It’s ridiculous and enough for me to initially rule him out as a chancer.

You say he’s made an argument for reasonable doubt so why say straight away there’s no chance in hell? He’s just contradicting himself.

 

[ncurd]

Magic bullet conspiracy theories FTW!

 

[dirty harry]

If you're making a serious piece I find it deeply unserious to say, right off the bat, that the guy who has apparently confessed (amongst other evidence) could "no way in hell" have fired that shot.

If he's Dave down the pub saying it it's one thing but if it's some supposedly serious person making a serious piece that I'm meant to listen to then I expect those people to be more careful with their phrasing.

Wow thats a harsh standard...

Im guessing you dont agree with everything Alex Jones is always right about either?

 

[AlRums]

If you're making a serious piece I find it deeply unserious to say, right off the bat, that the guy who has apparently confessed (amongst other evidence) could "no way in hell" have fired that shot.

If he's Dave down the pub saying it it's one thing but if it's some supposedly serious person making a serious piece that I'm meant to listen to then I expect those people to be more careful with their phrasing.

Firstly, he never said that at all in the first minute of the video.

So if you are going to make claims at least be accurate.

He a really said "there's not a chance in the world that TR could have taken the kill shot "

Close, but no cigar (I used initials for brevity)

Secondly, go through the video and prove him wrong.

It's extremely difficult to debate you on an opinion that you refuse to review it. Either watch the video and debate points or shut up. So far all you've said is one incorrect statement purportedly at the beginning of the video.

If you don't want to watch the video then you can't dismiss it as uninformed/conspiracy without being able to quote/disprove talking points.

Which points do you disagree with and why?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Yes, but with reasoned arguments.

Don't forget he's got a PhD in Pathology.

I'm not remotely claiming he's right, just that he's so far created reasonable doubt.

Why have the authorities been so silent and secretive?

Isn't pathology unrelated to this? Surely that's related to illnesses and diseases.

 

[Saintjay]

Yes, but with reasoned arguments.

Don't forget he's got a PhD in Pathology.

I'm not remotely claiming he's right, just that he's so far created reasonable doubt.

Why have the authorities been so silent and secretive?

I don't know the US legal system but I'd assume they have some form of rules on disclosure and not releasing stuff that could influence a jury.

They might be able to put everything in the public domain before a trial but the UK doesn't normally.

 

[AlRums]

Magic bullet conspiracy theories FTW!

It is, a less powerful bullet managed to kill JFK through and through and then wounded Connolly 3 times to then fall out of his body to be found on a gurney.

Yet Kirk was shot in the neck at an angle and there was no exit wound.

 

[AlRums]

Isn't pathology unrelated to this? Surely that's related to illnesses and diseases.

Autopsies are conducted by pathologists aren't they?

Become a forensic pathologist

Forensic pathology is perhaps one of the most well-known pathology specialties – it’s also one of the smallest. Forensic pathologists provide vital expertise in cases where a person has died in suspicious circumstances.

www.rcpath.org

 

[AlRums]

I don't know the US legal system but I'd assume they have some form of rules on disclosure and not releasing stuff that could influence a jury.

They might be able to put everything in the public domain before a trial but the UK doesn't normally.

Never stopped them in the past, look at the Idaho murders.

 

[ncurd]

I don't know the US legal system but I'd assume they have some form of rules on disclosure and not releasing stuff that could influence a jury.

They might be able to put everything in the public domain before a trial but the UK doesn't normally.

Grand Jury's are convened to decide if there is enough evidence to proceed to trial. These are held "in secret" as I understand it for this very reason. Thigh various details might be disclosed beforehand.

 

[AlRums]

Petition launches for Rutgers to disband school's TPUSA chapter

A Change.org petition targeted the Rutgers University Turning Point USA chapter for disbandment, accusing it of hate speech and creating a "toxic" environment.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Welsh Exile]

Wow thats a harsh standard...

Im guessing you dont agree with everything Alex Jones is always right about either?

Alex Jones isn’t a serious person.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Firstly, he never said that at all in the first minute of the video.

So if you are going to make claims at least be accurate.

He a really said "there's not a chance in the world that TR could have taken the kill shot "

Close, but no cigar (I used initials for brevity)

Secondly, go through the video and prove him wrong.

It's extremely difficult to debate you on an opinion that you refuse to review it. Either watch the video and debate points or shut up. So far all you've said is one incorrect statement purportedly at the beginning of the video.

If you don't want to watch the video then you can't dismiss it as uninformed/conspiracy without being able to quote/disprove talking points.

Which points do you disagree with and why?

Ok, I think it’s stupid he said

“there's not a chance in the world that TR could have taken the kill shot”

And that’s when I stopped listening. I have a sneaking suspicion my gut wil be right on this (it’s pretty good at recognising BS like this pretty quickly) but hey, if he’s right I’ll hold my hands up. But yeah, I’ll shut up on it now as it doesn’t really interest me anyway.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Autopsies are conducted by pathologists aren't they?

Become a forensic pathologist

Forensic pathology is perhaps one of the most well-known pathology specialties – it’s also one of the smallest. Forensic pathologists provide vital expertise in cases where a person has died in suspicious circumstances.

www.rcpath.org

Forensic pathologists. If he is one of those then it's his area of expertise but I think if he's just a pathologist, he may not actually have expertise on this. Not saying he doesn't but I believe there is a subtle but important difference.

 

[AlRums]

Ok, I think it's stupid he said

"there's not a chance in the world that TR could have taken the kill shot"

And that's when I stopped listening. I have a sneaking suspicion my gut wil be right on this (it's pretty good at recognising BS like this pretty quickly) but hey, if he's right I'll hold my hands up. But yeah, I'll shut up on it now as it doesn't really interest me anyway.

So you won't watch it to prove/disprove your opinion?

If that's the case, then you forfeit the right to pass comment or opinion.

You have no idea if he is/could be correct on what he's said and laid out for inspection because you don't like him opening statement.

That is the opposite of an open mind and I feel sorry for you

Dirty Harry has been threading this path for a while, in fairness on this item he has so far been open minded. You are taking it to new levels. Is there something in the water in Wales?

 

[Welsh Exile]

So you won't watch it to prove/disprove your opinion?

If that's the case, then you forfeit the right to pass comment or opinion.

You have no idea if he is/could be correct on what he's said and laid out for inspection because you don't like him opening statement.

That is the opposite of an open mind and I feel sorry for you

Dirty Harry has been threading this path for a while, in fairness on this item he has so far been open minded. You are taking it to new levels. Is there something in the water in Wales?

Just came off as conspiracy theory type rubbish that’s all. If he’s right then great. At least it’s not Netenyahooooooo killed Kirk I suppose so there’s that.

 

[AlRums]

At least it's not Netenyahooooooo killed Kirk I suppose so there's that.

Do we? Prove it

 

[Which Tyler]

Plenary authority huh?

 

[Kiwiwomble]

....he just stopped talking......