On paper, out of those 3 incidents, which would cause the most damage.
Discussion
Interesting, thank you.
Take a listen to this, it gets you thinking!
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/ole-dammagard/id1449753062?i=1000665978996
It is apples and oranges.
I am very familiar with firearms though and a graze from a bullet, just breaking skin, is likely the least damaging but highest risk potential for catastrophic outcome if the bullet were to shift/hit anything of structure. I recommend watching the Garand Thumb video below.
I know what a MT bike crash does though, and we see the results of a viscous ear bite. MT crash ear photos posted in reverse graphic order. Weeks apart. The bloody photo was also cleaned up. There was a lot a lot of blood prior.
The last bloody photo didn’t upload. Don’t really want to post it as a standalone. I’ll share if you want
OOOf, nasty, glad you are ok and it wasn't worse!
Take a listen to he below pod, would be keen to hear your thoughts.
It is what started me thinking deeper about what we were told about the events that day.
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/ole-dammagard/id1449753062?i=1000665978996
Interviewee starts with how the event has been memory holed in a conspiratorial way.
From my opinions it makes more sense that it was memory holed because MSM/Google has never liked Trump, and the fact that someone nearly killed him is a boon to his campaign.
I think it is intriguing that the Bush 911 and Trump bullet photo were taken by the same photographer.
Shoe tangent, interesting (because I have noticed it myself from a psychological standpoint from other casualty events), but not sure how it ties into conclusive conspiracy.
Stopped taken notes at this point because he just makes so many points that I find a logical non-conspiratorial explanation for or am not compelled enough at this point to try to verify his point of view one way or the other.
All in all, I feel like I sort of got lost in the episode and he was jumping all over the place from different conspiracies to different conspiracies. BTW, I probably agree with him on many things that were false flags, JFK and Pearl Harbor at a minimum. The onus should be on him to lay his base case up front, and tie it in with facts throughout the interview to support this. Basic writing/narration. This never happened and could have been the fault of the podcast host.
All that said, I’m still not sold and honestly not even sure what he was arguing besides that just about everything is a grand conspiracy.
Show me the incentives and I will show you the outcome. That is my base case for life and what I look for when there is ‘conspiracy.’ He did not do this. I see incentives for the Iraq war with 911 and incentives for Israel/Gaza war with October 7th. Whether these events were orchestrated or occurred due to incompetence is up for discussion.
Nice run-down, thank you.
I found it all very interesting and a lot of his points married up with John Cullen's theories.
nostr:npub1guh5grefa7vkay4ps6udxg8lrqxg2kgr3qh9n4gduxut64nfxq0q9y6hjy interviewed him recently about this and the Vegas Shooting in 2017.
I’ve seen that one. That one was wild. Vegas shooting was very sus.