>>12462668 (pb)
It's just one thing no one has ever gotten down to be able to explain it. I want to figure this one out concretely.
We always have two injuries, bruising on the outer socket and extreme redness/abrasion on the eye. Actual injury could be ruled in as a result of any of the others listed.
Bruising from Botox is not very prevalent. It happens, but it's slight. You can see that on the Kim Kardashian image there, and that's a more severe case. If it was drug related, there would only be incentive to inject once through the socket, thus not causing the same amount of damage we see.
The eye bruising takes place on both eyes. On some, it's extremely heavy and the bruising varied. If it was a ritual, you'd probably see a similarity in the bruising. You can see on Bush Junior there that there looks to be a needle point on the injury, but it's nowhere near Phillip's.
Cloning gets into soul physics and electrostatic transfer of memories or personae onto the genetics of that husk. Half of that is drowned in endless speculation. There is an underlying theme though of possession via the right eye, going to the symbolism of actors showcasing their right (pyramid, flower) eye as a show that they're controlled, an asset.
I would say that the injuries are tech being inserted via needle into the socket (initial bruising), and then whatever process comes after that is the extreme abrasion across the eye (redness). But even if you go down that route, that still leaves the idea of what exactly would warrant being placed into someone's eye. Then you'd argue that it's most likely a killswitch with the abrasions letting whoever sees know that they're a controlled asset through the eye injuries.
More than happy for other Anons to add to it.