• agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    The case, in my mind, for the false flag hypothesis is simple: he’s a blithering coward. If a serious attempt was made on his life, nothing about his prior behavior suggests he would be fist-pumping. His confidence betrays comfort. Further, he idolizes those who have used similar false flags. Maintaining composure in such an event is so remote a possibility, that the probability of an orchestrated scenario with foreknowledge, a common blood capsule, and collateral damage seems comparatively likely.

    Not certain, of course, but probable enough for consideration. Certainly it’s far too early to draw concrete conclusions one way or another. However, if it were a false flag, how would it look differently?

    • evranch@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Indeed he is a known coward, which is why getting someone to shoot at him and miss is absolutely off brand for him. The risk is way too high.

      I hunt and shoot long range and I would trust myself to hit the head at that range, but not a chance on the ear. Even wind is too great a factor and the potential for an accidental fatality is just way too high.

      I don’t consider myself a coward and there’s no way I’d set up this shot. It’s Russian roulette.

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        This assumes he was shot at directly. A stage blood pack in the midst of anticipated gunfire sounds more likely to me than a triumphant, exposed rise after actually being hit.

        Still, far from a certainty. But the rhetorical power of such an event, the uncharacteristically brave behavior, and the similarity to known false flags in ahem historical regimes prevent me from discarding the hypothesis.