Trump assassination attempt TAKE TWO discussion

[Paul Rigby]

6 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

     What's puzzling, though, is that Kinaski, Rigby, and Cotter have never been able to explain why the Deep State hired a dietary aid from a nursing home to assassinate Trump in Butler.  Was Crooks a decoy, and the expert assassin missed, or what, exactly?   

Er, yes, very obviously so. 

[Paul Rigby]

On the subject of polling, pay close attention to this extract. Looks like the US inter-agency has farmed out the fake polling duties to a curious firm in...the UK:

 

 

 

[Karl Kinaski]

@Gallaway: Routh is a lone nut!  Yeah, it just so happens that he loved to visit Fort Bragg in recent years.LOL For some "brain-massage" I guess. There you have your lone nut. BTW Can anyone explain to me in one sentence why Tulsi Gabbard ist on a  terrorist watch list and Routh was not? 

[W. Niederhut]

5 hours ago, Paul Rigby said:

Er, yes, very obviously so. 

So, tell us in plain English, please.

In your "theory," was Crooks a decoy/patsy, and the expert assassin missed?

[Kirk Gallaway]

5 hours ago, Karl Kinaski said:

@Gallaway: Routh is a lone nut!  Yeah, it just so happens that he loved to visit Fort Bragg in recent years.LOL For some "brain-massage" I guess. There you have your lone nut. BTW Can anyone explain to me in one sentence why Tulsi Gabbard ist on a  terrorist watch list and Routh was not? 

You have to learn about spycraft, Karl.

The problem is I, we know all this! You haven't stumbled upon clandestine sources. This is public information.! Remember I used the analogy of LHO and the Soviet Union.?  Think you better brush up on JFKA 101!  

That's like Israel publishing the receipts for buying those pagers and walkie talkies!   heh heh

Karl, you know so little about Russia. You actually thought Dmitry Medvedev was just another jerk off twitter search!

 

 

[Paul Rigby]

What have we witnessed so far? An extract from the memoir of a former British SAS member helps clarify. It appeared in the December 1996 edition (32) of Robin Ramsay’s Lobster, within a book review by John Newsinger, “SAS: the Stiff Memoir,” pp.10-12.

Peter Stiff’s See You In November (Alberton, SA: Galago, 1983), charted a career of service first with the British SAS – Borneo, Aden, Thailand/Laos – then with one of its numerous unofficial offshoots, David Stirling’s Watchguard International, and, finally, the premier Rhodesian intelligence service, the Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO). Newsinger noted how routine assassination and terrorism were to such as Stiff, and went on to quote at length the following extract from his book. It was new to me, and continues to impress, for it was/is that rare thing, a pithy, lucid, and logical typology of assassination:

“The art of assassination, like anything else, can be taught from a text book as it is in the SAS and other special force units. There are even various set terms used for the exercise, which are built around four words: positive, non-positive, direct and indirect.

The most certain way of killing someone is by a direct positive method. An example would be to walk up to a person, press a gun against his body and pull the trigger.

Direct non-positive is the next most likely method to be successful. This would include hiding on a roof with a rifle and shooting the target as he entered the house opposite. This would be direct because the assassin was actively involved and present when it happened and non-positive because the target was moving and the range didn’t exclude the possibility of a miss.

Next in order comes indirect positive. This method is where the would-be killer waits until his victim is asleep in his bed and then climbs the garden wall and plants a bomb under his car. It is indirect because the man who plants the bomb leaves once he has done so, but it is positive because when the victim detonates the charge with his car, it is a strictly no nonsense goodbye. There remains a possible element of failure though…”

Finally, indirect non-positive: A letter bomb, for example.

Both recent shooting attempts on Trump have been, as we can see from the above, direct and non-positive in nature. Why not use the first and best way, direct positive (ie a shot from close range)? Because the US inter-agency has pursued two objectives simultaneously, with one, the post-assassination gun grab, compromising the success of the other, the elimination of the target. Shooting from distance is inherently less reliable than from point blank, however much such factors as elevation and shortened distance have been used to minimize the chance of failure. The temptation of the twofer plainly proved too strong, though, in the Crooks' case, very nearly succeeded.

[Karl Kinaski]

They are playing dumb again.

 

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

4 hours ago, Paul Rigby said:

What have we witnessed so far? An extract from the memoir of a former British SAS member helps clarify. It appeared in the December 1996 edition (32) of Robin Ramsay’s Lobster, within a book review by John Newsinger, “SAS: the Stiff Memoir,” pp.10-12.

Peter Stiff’s See You In November (Alberton, SA: Galago, 1983), charted a career of service first with the British SAS – Borneo, Aden, Thailand/Laos – then with one of its numerous unofficial offshoots, David Stirling’s Watchguard International, and, finally, the premier Rhodesian intelligence service, the Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO). Newsinger noted how routine assassination and terrorism were to such as Stiff, and went on to quote at length the following extract from his book. It was new to me, and continues to impress, for it was/is that rare thing, a pithy, lucid, and logical typology of assassination:

“The art of assassination, like anything else, can be taught from a text book as it is in the SAS and other special force units. There are even various set terms used for the exercise, which are built around four words: positive, non-positive, direct and indirect.

The most certain way of killing someone is by a direct positive method. An example would be to walk up to a person, press a gun against his body and pull the trigger.

Direct non-positive is the next most likely method to be successful. This would include hiding on a roof with a rifle and shooting the target as he entered the house opposite. This would be direct because the assassin was actively involved and present when it happened and non-positive because the target was moving and the range didn’t exclude the possibility of a miss.

Next in order comes indirect positive. This method is where the would-be killer waits until his victim is asleep in his bed and then climbs the garden wall and plants a bomb under his car. It is indirect because the man who plants the bomb leaves once he has done so, but it is positive because when the victim detonates the charge with his car, it is a strictly no nonsense goodbye. There remains a possible element of failure though…”

Finally, indirect non-positive: A letter bomb, for example.

Both recent shooting attempts on Trump have been, as we can see from the above, direct and non-positive in nature. Why not use the first and best way, direct positive (ie a shot from close range)? Because the US inter-agency has pursued two objectives simultaneously, with one, the post-assassination gun grab, compromising the success of the other, the elimination of the target. Shooting from distance is inherently less reliable than from point blank, however much such factors as elevation and shortened distance have been used to minimize the chance of failure. The temptation of the twofer plainly proved too strong, though, in the Crooks' case, very nearly succeeded.

Wow Paul,  was that supposed to be an answer to W's question?

On 9/18/2024 at 5:51 AM, W. Niederhut said:

So, tell us in plain English, please.

In your "theory," was Crooks a decoy/patsy, and the expert assassin missed?

Well I guess that was in plain English. Thank you for that sniper jargon. It reminds me of Rumsfeld's "know known" and "known unknown!". 

Very Cool!

I thought you guys might really like this! This commemorative photo of the "Big event" for only $99!

John, I think they  might even offer financing!

Matt turned me on to it. You can thank him!

P.S.  I'm sorry, John, I spoke too soon  The Trump organization is not offering financing.

 

Karl, It's hard to believe there would be no investigation into Routh's background. I think there is, and there certainly should be.

But just to clue you in on the rosters here. Matt Gaetz himself is under investigation for child sex trafficking and led a Republican coup to overthrow Speaker Kevin Mc Carthy when Gaetz asked Mc Carthy to stop the investigation , and Mc Carthy refused.

Pretty cool huh?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 19 by Kirk Gallaway

[Karl Kinaski]

21 hours ago, Paul Rigby said:

Why not use the first and best way, direct positive (ie a shot from close range)? Because the US inter-agency has pursued two objectives simultaneously, with one, the post-assassination gun grab, compromising the success of the other, the elimination of the target.

The will probably give up the lesser important objective when they try it again. And if Trump is elected, the deep state is not automatically out of function. They will try it a fourth and fifth time when he is president. They are obsessed now.

UPDATE 2024 Sep 20th  11h CET: 

Quote

 

Rep. Matt Gaetz on X. 

12h

A senior Homeland Security official told me there are at least FIVE known assassination teams in our country targeting President Trump! Requests for President Trump to have additional security went UNANSWERED and some people were even taken off of his Secret Service detail! It may be time to consider private augmentation of President Trump’s security team so we can keep him safe.

 

 

Edited September 20 by Karl Kinaski

[Karl Kinaski]

20 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

I thought you guys might really like this! This commemorative photo of the "Big event" for only $99!

Naaaa ... BTW. TIME has already published the Cover of the second volume of SAVE AMERICA. It is online since September 11th 2024 ... 

 

Edited September 19 by Karl Kinaski

[Paul Rigby]

Mike Benz on Ryan Routh's role as the passport man for Ukie-bound Middle Eastern terrorists:

 

[W. Niederhut]

This MAGA/Putinist spam thread doesn't belong on the Political Discussions board.

If anything, it's mainly serving to derail any informed discussions about critically important political issues in the U.S. during this election season.

Not to mention the fact that Paul Rigby refuses to engage in an intellectually honest discussion by answering straightforward questions about his implied Trump assassination "theories."

As for Routh, it sounds like he was regarded as a mentally unstable flake by people supporting Ukrainian defense against Putin's illegal invasion.

Do Rigby and Kinaski think that Routh was a decoy/patsy for a professional assassin on Trump's golf course?

Also, do Rigby and Kinaski know what "exception to the rule" means in English?

The JFK assassination was the "exception to the rule" in American history, along with the Lincoln assassination conspiracy.

Most of these assassination attempts, as Allen Dulles told the Warren Commission, were, in fact, perpetrated by lone nuts.

Stephen Sondheim even wrote a musical about American Presidential assassins.

Stephen Sondheim’s ‘Assassins’ lays bare the bizarre role of guns in American culture (theconversation.com)

 

Edited September 19 by W. Niederhut

[Karl Kinaski]

 

Good reenactment of Routh's actions (starts around 1 minute into the video). Routh was hanging around his sniper's nest for 12 hours -- undetected. I had to grin when Watters mentioned Routh's 'sick smirk' ... where have I heard that expression before? Right: Lone Nutters loved attributing it to Oswald. 

 

[Karl Kinaski]

8 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Most of these assassination attempts, as Allen Dulles told the Warren Commission, were, in fact, perpetrated by lone nuts.

Niederhut quoting Allan Dulles as his trusted source when it comes to assassinations and political murder.  

[Karl Kinaski]

Surprise, surprise! 

Quote, FOX NEWS.

Quote

Gov. Ron DeSantis just told Fox News that the Feds are BLOCKING his investigators’ access at Trump’s golf course where the 2nd attempt on Trump’s life occurred.