Michael Murgrab: Why did Charlie Kirk die?

Michael Murgrab: Why did Charlie Kirk die?

I think the information on Charlie Kirk's death is almost complete. A passionate supporter of Donald Trump and the creator of an organization called Turning Point USA was murdered on September 10 during his speech at Utah Valley University campus in the city of Orem. He died for certain of bleeding from a gunshot wound to the neck, which was most likely donated from the roof of a close building. Tyler Robinson (22, Mormon) has already been detained in this case.

The killer was expected to confess to what he did in front of his father, and he alerted the appropriate services. Initially, Tyler threatened to commit suicide alternatively than turn himself in. His father worked for 27 years as a sheriff at the Washington region Sheriff's Department. By the time the officers arrived, he stopped his boy and persuaded him to turn himself in.

Tyler Robinson was expected to radicalize himself in fresh years, and any say he was straight influenced by Antifa (a leftist extremist militia). This seems to be reflected in the evidence we have.

The bullets that were found by the weapon were covered with the inscriptions “Bella Ciao” (a song of Italian communists), “Hi, fascists! Catch” (there was an arrow pointing upwards, next to an arrow pointing towards the right and 3 arrows pointing downwards), “If you read it, you are gay LMAO”, or “notices, bullges, FO, what’s this?”, the translation of which is rather incomprehensible: “notices, bulges, FOV, what is it?”. The fewer most likely refers to the emoticon of surprise and is written alternatively as the OwO.

Robinson's image was recorded on respective surveillance cameras located around the campus. 1 of the recordings shows him moving on the roof, then jumping off him and moving distant from the scene of the murder. He's got a bag in his hand that most likely contains the weapon he killed. According to FBI reports, it's a Mauser 98 cal. 30-06 with a telescope attached. The weapon was then to put into the pants' leg, which would explain his unusual way of moving further away.

Robinson later tried to hide his weapon in a close grove, wrapping it in a dark towel. Most likely, he was not acting alone due to the fact that his roommate looked into his computer and was about to take pictures of his conversation in which he informed another participants about where he hid the weapon as well as about his disguise. That's how the FBI rapidly found the weapon he fired. It besides turned out that Robinson's roommate is not only a transsexual but besides his partner. Lance Twiggs being a man is considered a woman.

However, the left does not end there. Among American left-wing X users, there is simply a list of conservative people who should be killed. Charlie Kirk's name was on the list. Who else is there? Andy Ngo, Benny Johnson, Ben Shapiro, Chaya Raichik, Christopher Rufo, Ian Miles Cheong, Jack Posobieć, Matt Walsh, Michael Knowles, Nick Fuentes (a staunch critic of Kirk) and Tim Pool.

There were besides voices calling for the removal of the remaining members of Kirk's family, including 2 of his children and a widow after him. Left is cancer, due to the fact that only in a sick head can specified an thought arise.

The FBI does not explicitly regulation out the engagement of abroad intelligence. This thread appears to confirm the individual of George Zinn (Jewish), who was detained immediately after the killing. Initially, it was suspected that he was the shooter. As a result, attention was focused solely on him erstwhile the real bomber managed to escape.

Strangely enough, the same man had previously witnessed the September 11, 2001 bombing of the planet Trade Center towers, and was besides arrested for admitting to plant a bomb on a marathon way in Salt Lake City and this was immediately after a real bombing that took place during a marathon in Boston.

But it was a false alarm. His confusion with 3 specified crucial events is simply a alternatively different coincidence, and the probability that he found himself on all of these events is close to zero. possibly Zinn is simply a sleeper Mossad agent who occasionally gets peculiar assignments. At least specified suggestions can be found among net users on American social media. Let's give them the right to vote, due to the fact that it's happening in their territory. Zinn's function alone, unfortunately, but we cannot explain clearly.

Although the bomber's name is already known, we know almost nothing about his motives. About who truly was behind the assassination. Did individual inspire him or get instructions? But where can we find the answer to this question? For the situation to become a small more understandable, Charlie Kirk himself should be addressed. At the end of 2023, it was possible to observe Kirk's expanding protest of certain issues concerning Israel's favorable narrative, served of course by judaic mass media in the US.

Moreover, Charlie Kirk and Donald Trump's roads were about to disperse around April that year. What was the reason? They had a different approach to pursuing anti-Semitism. Charlie Kirk feared that the extremist repression of the Trump administration against universities and students who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations, of course, in the name of combating anti-Semitism, violates the American "traditional of freedom of speech".

Kirk was not isolated in this, as tensions in the Republican organization accompanied many of its members due to the different ways of defining anti-Semitism, the way to fight it, and how specifically support for Israel should be demonstrated. Against this background, there were truly strong frictions in the party. The attack on colleges and students for alleged support for Hamas and anti-Semitism would yet lead to censorship and punishment of everything possible on the basis of accusations of racism or anti-Semitism.

Kirk feared that the full substance would go besides far, and in the future, if a politician were to be president, their methods could then be utilized to persecute Republicans. For the Polish reader, in 2 words, it is worth to outline what the repression of students and universities looked like. About 1,400 people from abroad were removed from the list of students. They were closed both by taking these people out of their homes and off the street.

During the trials, it was not entirely clear what they were tried for, and frequently even deported. In turn, Harvard, who refused to intensify its efforts to prosecute students and university staff for anti-Semitism, was stripped of millions of national subsidies.

We don't know precisely erstwhile and who or what caused Kirk to change his position. He may have talked to someone, read something, or just thought a lot about it and connected the dots. A clear change could be observed erstwhile Kirk publically (on his X profile) criticized David Friedman (the Ambassador of the United States in Israel, a Jew) for abandoning Trump's administration that having much greater opportunities to prosecute anti-Semitism in the United States they do not exploit their full potential.

Bomber

By the way, it's amazing politics that the ambassador sets up the president, not the another way around. I wonder what that means? I'll leave the question open. Friedman talks about things we in Poland do not know, and which may amaze us, unless individual is acquainted with the US's interior policy.

Friedman comments on Trump’s administration’s actions: “Well, you know, governments can't change the way people think. It's true. ... In my opinion, most people who are anti-Semites, most of those people who hang around... We won't get their hearts and minds due to the fact that they don't have hearts and minds. So there's no reason to think we'll always convince them, but we can deport them, we can put them in jail. We can make their lives miserable. We can cut off their funding, and that is what the Trump administration does for the first time."

Kirk disagreed with specified statements and actions. In consequence to the ambassador, he stressed that “the American tradition of freedom of speech is our heritage. We should never get free of her. ... The First Amendment and our absolute freedom of speech are 1 of the most crucial rights of Americans to separate us from all another countries in the world. 1 of Trump's main promises in 2024 was to reconstruct and defend American freedom of speech”.

In a akin tone, Harvard manager Alan Garber responded to Trump's administration.

In addition to conflicting with the fences of prosecution for anti-Semitism, Charlie Kirk, in the months preceding his death, besides appealed publically to the Department of Justice to uncover “all papers concerning Epstein”. In addition, he made it clear that Epstein was connected to Mossad by a individual named Ghislaine Maxwell (his partner and partner). On his show, Charlie Kirk Show besides talked about the fact that her father – Robert Maxwell, was a spy for the Israeli intelligence agency.

According to Kirk, Epstein's function "was blackmailing as many influential people as possible". He emphasized that "This is not just speculation"and Epstein himself "played a key function in a decade-long operation to blackmail the most powerful people in the world". He besides assumed that the case had been silenced due to ties to Israel’s intelligence. Another time he recalled the words of erstwhile national prosecutor Alexander Acosta, who revealed publically that he had been instructed to handle Epstein carefully.

As long as Kirk uncritically supported Israel in the war against Hamas and questioned the facts regarding the famine of people in the Gaza Strip, he was considered a good and useful [goat]. At 1 of his traveling debates, a certain individual from the crowd who entered the polemic with him quoted many quotes from the Talmud, in which Christians, Jesus and the parent of God were insulted, asking him if it was true. Kirk confirmed their authenticity, but at the same time added that there is inactive a passage in the Scriptures in which St. Paul orders the blessing of the Jews.

Here we see a completely unconditional devotion to Israel. However, erstwhile he began to question the sense of involving the United States on the side of Israel against Iran, they began to look at him little and little kindly. Charlie Kirk rhetorically asked if Iran posed a serious threat to the US?

That's enough. He besides began pointing fingers at the guilty, saying, "The same people are engineers behind both the Iraq War, the Taliban fight, and now Iran. ... All my life, I've heard Iran's about to own an atomic bomb. I don't like Iran, but it looks like these people are trying to get us into a war with Iran.

If the U.S. could get involved, it would be the biggest failure in abroad policy in years. We must watch out for China, we are besides active in Ukraine. Is it a good thought to enter another endless conflict?”.

It was besides about Kirk being the only individual who tried to halt him from attacking Iran. In this context, there was even a sharp exchange between them. Kirk was expected to come to the White home to get Trump's attention to refrain from attacking Iran, and this 1 was expected to yell at him for it.

Charlie Kirk was equally critical of climate policy, speaking briefly and bluntly of it, that it was "complete gibberish, nonsense and nonsense." In addition, he was an opponent of forced vaccination on Covid-19. He besides criticized lockdown. He besides felt that the U.S. should not support Ukraine, and Zelenski specifically prolonged the war. Islam, in his opinion, was the sword “which the left uses to slit America's throat.” This is only part of his views that may not have pleased both the left and the influential Jews.

By the end of his life, Charlie began to break off a leash that he had never been bothered by before. Netanyahu offered Charlie a large shot of Zionist money for Turning Point USA. However, Kirk refused to accept them and was not corrupted. They couldn't buy it, so there's only 1 thing left. 2 weeks before the bombing, he was invited by Netanyahu to fly to Israel.

However, he did not usage the invitation. During 1 of the interviews, which I failed to establish, he asked the leader whether criticizing Netanyahu's bad decisions as Prime Minister would make him a bad Christian? His disquiet most likely came from the fact that the Evangelicans gave the Jews a large estim. This seems to be confirmed, as he said after a while, due to the fact that he stressed that with large respect for the nation of Israel he has the right to criticize his government, as he criticises the incorrect decisions of the American government.

On the day of his assassination, Netanyahu hypocritically wrote that he was praying for him. Can a hebrew pray for a Christian erstwhile he does not accept Jesus as God? What would be the point of that?

Immediately after the assassination, he expressed his condolences on the following: "Charlie Kirk was murdered for telling the fact and defending freedom. This devoted friend of Israel fought lies and powerfully defended Christian Judaism. I only spoke to him 2 weeks ago and invited him to Israel. Unfortunately, this visit will not take place. We lost an amazing man. His boundless pride in America and his unwavering belief in freedom of speech will leave a lasting trail. remainder in peace, Charlie Kirk.”

Netanyahu purchased time shortly after this at highest ratings of 1 of the national tv broadcasts to comment on a letter received from Kirk, in which he allegedly wrote about how much he loved Israel. Many people question the letter’s content, which seems justified in fresh events. At the same time, Netanyahu besides wrote something real in his condolences.

Charlie Kirk was actually murdered for telling the truth. Of course, not everything he said was real. However, he was heading in the right direction, and his transformation was truly amazing and sparked legitimate hopes. It won't be a lie if we say that he was sincerely looking for the truth.

A period before Kirk was killed on the Megyn Kelly’s Show, with which they frequently shared conversations, Megyn (an American journalist) lamented that his judaic donors had filled him with messages and phones full of outrage and criticism of his attitude. The news included Tucker Carlson (American journalist). Many well-known people including Laura Loomer (Jewish) and Daniella Bloom (Jewish) joined the attack on Kirk.

On the news, they accused him of being antisemite, justifying that, among others, he suggested links between Epstein and Mossad. The bitterness was besides intended to convey the fact that he invited Dave Smith (a comic known for criticizing Israel's actions) to his event directed to students – SAS TPUSA. Smith was to debate with the pro-Jewish publicist and lawyer Joshua Hammer (Jewish). Charlie Kirk moderated the debate, giving both sides the same time to speak.

The Jews supporting the organization of the TPUSA made it clear that he was not allowed to do specified things, and they besides identified him as an immoral person. Kirk, in an interview with Kelly, stressed that he was first a citizen of America and that it was her business that was most crucial to him. He besides pointed out that he did not refuse to aid and support Israel, but that the way he was treated was repugnant.

On September 9, the day before the assassination, Ben Shapiro appeared on Kirk's channel. Charlie was “smirking” after his introduction: “We have resisted the media on the subject of covid, lockdown, Ukraine and the wall on the border”, asking the following question: “Should we not ask ourselves whether the media are telling the full fact erstwhile it comes to Israel?”. He added that it was just a question. Then he finished thinking, "Maybe we shouldn't believe everything the media says." Shapiro couldn't hide his surprise due to what he heard on the air[1].

After a large amount of material I had read, I had the impression that Charlie Kirk was an honest man who wanted to tell the truth, although he had not always full known her. He seemed naive and simple. At times, he unnecessarily exposed himself to those whom he criticized and who simply pretended to be his friends.

Why ask specified a question to Ben Shapiro, who boldly flaunts himself in public space with his being judaic and openly agitates in everything possible for Israel? There's no another explanation. seemingly he had a good heart and a long tongue.

A fewer days before Kirk's assassination, Ben Shapiro appeared on Mark Levin's show (editor Fox News, besides a Jew). During the conversation, they both demanded that the America First movement be cleared of people they thought they were conservatives, but they are not truly conservatives due to the fact that (!) they dared to attribute to any secret groups perpetration in the context of actual United States rule.

Shapiro then explicitly said that you can't be a leader on the right if you think that “the president is covering Mossad’s network” or even say that “the president attacked Iran doing so for Israel” alternatively than alone or in the US’s interest. I could get the impression they're talking about Kirk in a camouflaged way. At least that's the impression I just got.

Immediately after the assassination, bold statements were made about taking over what Charlie Kirk had built, unfortunately mostly with the money of his judaic sponsors. They didn't wait long due to the fact that the body was barely laid in the grave. The first vulture to start circling Kirk's organization was Ben Shapiro. On his channel, he said straight that "Charlie's voice did not go silent. We're gonna choice up that bloody microphone from where Charlie left it. ... We will never let Charlie's voice die.”

It's true, they yet pumped quite a few money into this task and now they want to regain control of it. At least this is what Harrison H. Smith (journalist) says, who posted his post on X on 13 August that year, writing plainly that "Charlie Kirk fears to be killed if he turns against Israel." His close friends besides reported that he was afraid of the influential judaic leaders as well as the environments behind them.

Sam in 1 of his talks with Megyn Kelly said he was afraid of the consequence from judaic donors who supported his organization. The failure of control over Kirk could mean only 1 thing to the Jews – immense losses in the form of a decrease in their influence in American Conservative environments. The Zionists feared losing support from young Republicans who saw authority in Charlie Kirk. Why did they care so much about Kirk's organization?

The Reich of her sympathizers are Republican organization voters. Trump himself after winning the election emphasized the key function of the U.S. Turning Point, simply saying that it was not his victory, but Charlie Kirk. It was specified a powerful tool, and that's the key to reading the assassination. In addition, Kirk on his YouTube channel has over 4.5 million viewers. On the X, almost 6 million followers. These are powerful ranges that they surely did not underestimate. Whatever conviction he put on, he had large possible for destruction. possibly individual was just afraid?

There's another vulture who saw an opportunity. Known in Poland, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach (the same 1 who advertised sex-gadgets from his daughter's store) decided to make money on Kirk's death and immediately after the assassination he launched... a fundraiser to defend himself. He implied that since they killed Kirk, he doesn't feel safe. However, barely anyone paid for the fundraiser. Fortunately.

At the same time, a run was launched to erase all unfavorable statements that fell from Kirk's mouth toward Israel. 3 cases can service as the best example. The first is to talk of him by leading Jews as “friend” or even “brother.” They emphasize that Kirk was a large defender of Israel. Until any time, it did. That's all they want those who are curious in him to remember. However, they will not be afraid with a word of the questions he raised erstwhile he talked about the conduct of the Jews recently.

It's in their communicative that they're vain to seek. They effort to hide from people the change that occurred in his attitude and at the same time perpetuate his earlier image, the 1 before that period. The second example concerns the U.S. President, who is besides referred to as Kirk's friend. Well, with the aid of AI, a poster was created on which Trump hugs Kirk, and in the background, American and judaic flags are flying. This is simply a cynical usage of the image of individual who can no longer defend himself or question specified an idea.

Trump appears here as a simple cynical player who not only utilized Kirk erstwhile they were together along the way, but besides after his death. erstwhile asked by 1 of the American journalists immediately after Kirk's death about how he felt about Charlie's death, he replied that he was very good, and then rapidly changed the subject to 1 that afraid the renovation of 1 of the rooms in the white house. It's like he's not curious in talking about Charlie. Sam seems either intimidated or blackmailed.

By no means is he a single person. Although it is alternatively improbable that Trump would want Kirk dead, he was actually rather a burden to him recently. As 1 of Trump’s most celebrated people, he put him in an increasingly hard situation in the context of his relation with Israel. Perhaps, then, not only did Netanyahu feel relieved after Kirk died. The last example is the most up-to-date and has not yet dried well.

In Israel, Ashdod, a mural was created to commemorate Charlie Kirk. He was portrayed as a saint with angel wings. After all, he is simply a devoted friend, almost a martyr for the judaic cause. No, it's not. The fact is different.

On the PBD Podcast program, which aired a year ago, Charlie Kirk posed a question about the Hamas rally inside Israel, which took place on 7 October 2023 and lasted for over 6 hours, and which we associate with those murdered during the music festival.

During the program he suggested that possibly ‘withdraw order ... The journey from Israel to Gaza takes 45 minutes ... the full country belongs practically to the IDF After a while he hesitated, and I don't think he wanted to say what he thought, but then he broke down and said the shocking words "I should be careful how I say this. ... Now they will effort to conduct cultural cleansing in Gaza (...) ni usage this word easily ... have a mandate to search justice and revenge”.

Charlie was clearly afraid to say what he thought, but yet he did it[2]. In 1 of his programs, he explained why. He said on the air that sometimes there is not adequate courage to "openly criticize the Israeli government and talk little than he truly thinks".

Mural for Charlie Kirk, painted in Israel

In his own show The Charlie Kirk Show on his YouTube channel, he criticized Jews at least respective times with the following words: “The judaic community pushes precisely the same kind of hatred against whites that people claim to usage against them.

I don't like generalizing. Not all hebrew does that. However, it is actual that the League Against defamation [ADL] was an integral part of the BLM. It is actual that any American Jews are the biggest sponsors of the left. ... Woke, and ADL is the largest judaic organization in the U.S. that does that. (...) tthe most actual truth.”

He besides recalled Tucker Carlson's message that American Jews are besides the main sponsor of cultural Marxism. Kirk, who called for the Jews to rethink their commitment to this lewd cause, was immediately named anti-Semite by them. Another time in the same programme, he said that “Jewish donors are the main liable entity behind the mechanics of extremist border opening, or liberal-marksist politics of cultural institutions and NGOs.

It's a beast created by secularized Jews, and now it's coming after them, and they're surprised. It's not just about environmentalists, it's besides about NGOs, movies, Hollywood, all this." So who's the 1 who could care most about shushing Charlie Kirk? possibly the left, but as you can see, not only is the lead leading us to a completely different place.

Finally, it is worth recalling his merits in the fight against abortion. He was a courageous opponent of killing unborn children. He criticized sex ideology as well as LGBT. Recently, he besides defended the worship of Our Lady. Being a guest on Michael Knowles' channel, they agreed that Mary is the 1 who can heal women under the influence of feminist ideology. Kirk thought it would be "an excellent counterweight to feminism toxicity".

Kirk felt that the Protestants did not worship her enough. He even referred to St. Ireneus' teaching on Our Lady. It was clear that we should return to what the early Christians said about her, even as St. Ireneus said. The large merits of the Catholic Church were highlighted as the 1 who kept the oldest truths of religion in unpolluted form.

Numerous converts of evangelicals to Catholicism were besides mentioned. Interestingly, in the commentary under the film, there are many testimonies of Protestants who say that they came to the Catholic Church just due to Mary and the rosary prayer. This is rather shocking information, due to the fact that Kirk was a declared Evangelican, as we discussed earlier. possibly if he had not been murdered, he would have gone along the same way as many another Protestant converts to Catholicism. Unfortunately, he was deprived of that opportunity.

Finally, it is worth noting that Donald Trump has declared an outlaw of Kirk's murderer. That means anyone can kill him without being punished. Is this about concealing evidence in the form of the bomber's testimony? Why, now that he's already in custody, is his trial to be as simplistic as possible, so that he can see the death punishment immediately?

[1] Shapiro call, from 9:55. Source: https://www.youtube.com/embed/Gt4rRPkyjVY

[2] PBD Podcast, from 28:27. Source: https://www.youtube.com/embed/fQ9VolaBBeo

We besides recommend: The Jews lost to Father Guz in court. It was a ritual.