edit: after watching some other videos im actually convinced now he was shot from the back and what we see is the exit wound. the main thing that convinced me is his body reacts to the shot before we see the hole. it has to be from behind then
i don’t understand the claim that an entry wound wouldn’t leak like that. especially considering where the wound was. this dude obviously knows way more about this stuff than i do but i think that may be a case of him knowing too much and over complicating his analysis. bodies do crazy shit. i dont think its that crazy tho to be leaking blood from a hole in your neck right next to or on a main artery. i get the logic behind “if it was an entry wound it wouldnt do that”, kind of like, to tell if a window was broken from the inside or outside, look where the glass is. but even with that example if someone uses a bullet powerful enough to straight up explode the glass then some will still end up on the outside
I think there are 2 general principles coming into play (1) the exit wound is typically larger than the entry wound, and is thus more prominent, (2) blood initially is forced out the exit wound at high pressure due to the pressure wave caused by the bullet. I think when he says that ‘entry wounds don’t do that’ he’s remarking on the immediacy of the appearance of blood spatter outside the visible wound. It appears only a few frames after he was shot, not enough time for the pressure to reverse at the site of an entry wound…
I was surprised that the sniper was allegedly in front of him. My first thought watching the video was that he was shot from the side and the blood was the exit wound. My assumption was why when I saw it and was like, he’s dead. Like he says in the video, he didn’t bleed out he was dead instantly. But I don’t know anything. And in the long run who cares. The conspiracy is happening before our eyes. They have their excuse whether or not jet fuel melts steel.
with these perspectives, for me its hard to say whether or not the shot was an inside job. i can 100% see the argument that it was and i can see how a lot of the evidence points in that direction too. but i also feel like the less complicated story, that some dude just hated kirk so he shot his dumb ass, is also believable.
honestly though considering how our government loves orchestrating “tragedies” to consolidate power that bit of information may even make it being an inside job more likely than some kid just hating kirk
do you think he shot him with a 30-06 round?
im no authority on the matter so i have no way of saying. i will say the story about him disassembling that rifle then reassembling it makes no sense and that as far as ive seen no matter what “man of steel” jawbone kirk has there’s little chance the wound from a 30-06 would just be a little bullet hole like that.
What is this.
Israeli sniper confirmation #23
