This Is IMPOSSIBLE To Believe About Charlie Kirk — How Is This Even Real? (Future proves past?)
(wltreport.com)
🧐 Research Wanted 🤔
Comments (10)
sorted by:
Well that's a horse of a different...color?.. no not really. Think JFK/ Abe Lincoln
In Brian De Palma's 1998 film Snake Eyes, the boxer featured in the high-profile event is Lincoln Tyler, portrayed by Stan Shaw. He is the heavyweight champion in the boxing match where a political assassination occurs.
Also, the headline of the movie is" believe in everything, except your eyes"
In the movie there's a tropical storm going on called "Jezebel". Megyn Kelly has just been talking about how feminist website Jezebel paid witches on Etsy to curse Charlie Kirk. Holy cow that's freaky
https://youtu.be/UbxJFmKm4mw?si=J3k0ewH4LDgZvsId
hmmmm
Everyone keeps thinking this has to do with being able to "predict the future". Fucking idiots. Obviously Charlie Kirk is a fake name. Charlie was an agent like any other. Maybe he was a good one or bad one or a double agent. Obviously an agent's mission has a start and a finish, it has goals to accomplish and it can span over many years.
Everything you watched was planned out. No need for "prediction". If you examine frame by frame the bullet wound and blood, it's cgi. The blood doesn't stain the shirt and the wound doesn't track perfectly with the movement of his neck.
Regardless of whether that's his real name or not, the fact you have Q posts like 51 of them to be exact with the words: "Future proves past."
There's a reason why this is a research board and things like this are discussed, the Deep State uses movies for their supposed plots and plans to be told without exposing it all directly.
For those who don't know any better, usually when they come across things such as this. They'll assume that the future was accurately predicted by these people or other in words ahead of the curb.
But fail to realize they just planned it all ahead of time, it's nothing new under the sun.
Absolutely. I just don't think we need to go down the path of predicting the future as some on this board have a knee jerk disposition to do, when the obvious answer is that these are planned events and movies are part of that.
Future proves past says nothing about prediction.
Yes I added more to my comment, but the reason I put research wanted is for people to investigate themselves. The larger and more vague the rabbit hole is, imagine what can be found. Bread crumbs or not, one thing leads to another.
But I think now Q team is using that predictive programming movie for good by making it way too blatant hmm.. I think Charlie is alive
Before I knew about the hidden cuts in that opening sequence, I used to think that was the coolest thing that it went for 13 minutes and one take. There is a movie I’ve seen called Victoria, which is a European film and from what I can tell it legitimately is one take and it’s even advertised as such. It’s a pretty good movie and really interesting from that perspective