by Sean Jobst
15 October 2025
(Continued from Part 1)
The Overton Window has shifted so much towards Israel and the Zionist stranglehold upon the USA that Mileikowsky, the genocidal psychopath otherwise known as Netanyahu, took a break from the seven-front terrorism campaign for a Greater Israel to deny responsibility for Charlie Kirk's assassination thrice. Who goes out of their way to deny responsibility for a crime, especially one whose suspect(s) and basic details aren't even known at the time? A medieval Latin law principle definitely applies here: “Excusatio non petita, accusation manifesta” (Unsolicited excuse, manifest accusation), i.e. “He who excuses himself accuses himself.” We can also paraphrase Hamlet (Act III, Scene II): “The psychopath doth protest too much, me thinks.” Every accusation Mileikowsky has projected upon others is an admission of his own actions and those of the Zionist warlord and billionaire class.
Perhaps leaning in
to the kabbalistic numerology of 24 and what he previously termed his messianic
“mission”(1), he evoked 9/11 on
its 24th year to justify bombing Qatar, not only to assassinate Hamas
negotiators but also to further reinforce the dialectic where American
opponents of Israel are called “Qatari agents” even while his own government
has special financial deals with Qatar - for that is
how a dialectic works. Then only minutes after Kirk was
assassinated, Netanyahu recycled his 24-year-old reaction to
9/11 - “It’s very good. It will generate immediate sympathy for Israel”(2) – by
seeing this latest opportunity to co-opt for Israel: “Charlie Kirk was
murdered for speaking truth and defending freedom. A lion-hearted friend of
Israel, he fought the lies and stood tall for Judeo-Christian
civilization.”
Professing his alleged closeness to Kirk in such over-the-top terms is itself suspicious (and will be a recurring theme by the various Zionists cited throughout this article), as its known within criminal justice that most murders are committed by an acquaintance, "friend," or business associate. Because a psychopath lacks even the capacity for insight (further reinforced through a sense of being part of a people “chosen” over all other nations), Netanyahu couldn't help but deflect attention lest Americans forget how he views this nation as an instrument to be “easily moved”. So even while scoffing at “conspiracy theorists” suspecting Israeli involvement, he made his own presumptions in a Fox News interview where he ascribed blame to “radical Islamists and their union with the ultra-progressives.”
Raising such a bogeyman is designed to serve a domestic agenda of ramping up even more crackdowns on Americans' free speech, while entangling the US into wars against Iran and other competitors to Greater Israel. A couple of hours earlier he spoke to Newsmax, whose CEO was honored by the Zionist Organization of America for his service to Israel. In that fawning interview (where the American interviewer wore a yellow ribbon pin aligned to this foreign nation), Netanyahu made the same denials with hyperbolic deflection, seemed to “know” the motive before any others, and even threw in “Nazi” references (foreshadowing his “Woke Reich” libel only two weeks later):
“That's insane. That's insane. Israel also changes the orbit of the moon. Israel pushes the sun. I mean, the whole thing is, it's not only insane. It's so absurd, so stupid, so ridiculous. When you hate Jews, when you hate the Jewish state, you're willing to say anything and promote all these absurd rumors. Over the centuries, especially in the Middle Ages, the horrific Middle Ages, the worst things were said about Jews, you couldn't possibly believe. We were poisoning the wells. We were drinking the blood of Christian children, you name it. I mean, these things that continued actually up to the Holocaust.
“The Nazis said
the same thing. You know, we're carrying vermin, we're spreading disease, and
people believed it. And every time they believed it, this was a prelude to a
greater and greater massacre, culminating with the worst massacre of them all,
the Holocaust. Well, since then, we've learned when people spread these lies
about us, prepare yourself for the assault. And, you know, they're trying to
delegitimize the state of Israel. I'll tell you one thing, we're fighting on
the battlefield against the terrorists and winning. And [Kirk] was fighting in
the battlefield of ideas, and I think he was winning. He was going to win.
That's why they shot him. I hope they don't silence him.”
Joining him in this chorus was former Mossad chief Yossi Cohen, who has been platformed by international media while his predecessors lurked in the shadows – a sign of Israel's growing desperation in its going-for-broke phase. When Australian Zionist propagandist Erin Molan asked him about the Kirk assassination on 18th Sept., Cohen responded: “No, we’re not involved in political assassinations, we never were.” Five days later he repeated that denial in an interview by Bari Weiss, AIPAC nepo baby whom the Ellisons astroturfed as their Z.E.I. hire overseeing CBS.(3) Responding to a question about Epstein, Cohen went out of his way to deny responsibility for the Kirk assassination: “People believe that Mossad created the tsunami. People believe, just right now, that we were behind Charlie Kirk’s assassination. False. We don’t do that, we never will, we never did.”
This denial of any assassination is more insane given that the State of Israel has committed hundreds of political assassinations going back to the earliest days of its foundations (such as Swedish UN peace negotiator Count Folke Bernadotte in 1948 and likely an Egyptian scientist in California in 1952) up to assassinating Hamas negotiators in Qatar on 9th Sept 2025. Announcing the latter, Israeli “Defense” Minister Israel Katz issued a threat to assassinate anyone, anywhere in the world, whom Israel determined was an enemy: “Israel’s security doctrine is clear - its long arm will act against its enemies everywhere. There’s nowhere they can hide.”
 |
| Coordinated response? |
What about the ‘letter’?
In the
Fox News interview, Mileikowsky waved around a letter Kirk purportedly wrote
him on 2nd May, quoting him: “One of my greatest joys as a Christian
is advocating for Israel and forming alliances to defend Judeo-Christian
civilization.” By not showing the contents and only cherry-picking one
alleged quote is a lie by omission. Only after more people
began suspecting Israel (despite all his denials and the old libel of “anti-Semite”
losing its bludgeon) did the zionist New York Post publish the alleged letter on 29th September. Yet it merely proves what we already know:
Charlie Kirk came from a Christian Zionist background where support for Israel
was taken for granted.
The letter's tone
demonstrated Kirk's growing fatigue with Israel - facing so many students'
questions about the Mideast in contrast to the domestic issues that were
clearly his increasing focus - and that he wanted Israel to lead its own
propaganda campaign instead of relying on him as their primary “surrogate”. Citing a letter from May ignores the
acceleration of events over the next three months that led Kirk to make
apparent shifts more aligned to the growing Israel skepticism of his grassroots
supporters, while resisting the ruthless pressure campaign by Zionist
billionaire donors like Bill Ackman and Robert Shillman – his public opposition to war against Iran in June, platforming Israel critics
like Tucker Carlson and Dave Smith at his July conference, the Hamptons
“intervention” by Ackman and his astroturfed shills in August, followed by Kirk’s visible
anger at being called an “anti-Semite” whose very “moral character” was called in
question by Zionist donors, up to his asking questions about Israel on his own
show to a shocked Ben Shapiro just the day before his assassination.
Netanyahu mentioned his invitation for Kirk to visit Israel but again lied by omitting how the American turned down this obvious re-education tour and $150 million funding offer. This was confirmed by Kirk’s spokesman and executive producer Andrew Kolvet – who certainly differs from what Owens and other Israel critics have said, but nonetheless corroborates Kirk’s turning down any “foreign funding” (which doesn’t account for domestic funding by pro-Israel billionaires) and his developing a “nuanced view” on Israel. What the story reveals is a push-and-pull struggle between the growing discontent of his own base, the focus upon Israel while he wanted to increasingly focus on domestic issues, and the pressure of Zionist billionaires as well as Rabbi Pesach Wolicki, who ingratiated himself as Kirk’s hasbara coach to ensure compliance with Israel.(4)
Another proof calling the “letter” into question is how another hasbara coach, Josh Hammer, said nothing about the letter until Sept. 29, even while claiming “I was given access to this letter a few months ago. I read it at that time.” Yet he never brought up this letter in his various media rounds where he was criticizing “Tucker, Candace, and other bad-faith actors” who questioned the Zionist narrative about Kirk. One would think he would cite such presumably strong evidence for his cause yet never brought it up. This leads to two possibilities: Either he lied about even knowing about the letter, or it was something manufactured by Zionist propagandists after the assassination. In any case, I’ll cite much more on Hammer in Part 3.
Focus group challenges Israel-First dogma ... (and Some of My Commentary on the Israel Dialectic in the West)
Growing Israel skepticism among the TPUSA grassroots was expressed in a focus group on 26th July. The video, entitled “AM I ANTISEMITIC?! — 25 Gen Z Students + Charlie Kirk Discuss Israel, Netanyahu, Gaza, AIPAC,” began with a montage of anti-Zionist voices (accurately) calling Kirk biased towards Israel, followed by some Zionists accusing him of being “anti-Semitic”. The increased frequency and aggressiveness of the latter was clearly affecting Kirk, so that based on his personality he became more opened to question Israel, albeit very cautiously and with many caveats due to his lifelong Christian Zionist leanings and funders. Nevertheless, the clip reveals internal shifts combined with the students expressing concerns that were clearly shared by him. Throughout the focus group, he alluded to the pressures from his Zionist donors and their aggressive tactics in squashing even the slightest disagreements.
Kirk opened the discussion criticizing how Ted Cruz and others use Biblical verses to justify their own support for Israel, with the ice broken by one young Jewish convert to Catholicism who said he had concerns about AIPAC. Kirk then said, “I’m told by some people that if I criticize AIPAC, I’m ‘anti-Semitic.’” Other students agreed there is a “higher prioritization” of Israel over American interests. Another shared his view that “prophecy as policy is problematic.” Kolvet asked the focus group what they associated with the word “Gaza”, and they replied about the obvious loss of human life, to which Kirk asked if there was also a focus on “the hostages.” Of course, nothing was said about the thousands of civilian Palestinian hostages (reframed as “prisoners” by the media); how 7th October 2023 was not some “Year Zero” arising from nowhere; that Netanyahu rejected every previous deal to release hostages; or the Hannibal Directive which saw the Israeli military killing many of its own civilians as matter of policy.
Next, we get to the crux of Kirk’s increasing pivot towards domestic issues: “How many of you get the impression that Israel matters more than having young people being able to own homes?” They unanimously agreed how Israel-First was harming these domestic concerns, a fact that often gets lost within the debate. Its certainly annoying to me when many pro-Palestinian Western leftists only approach Zionism as part of their own internal struggles about “colonialism” and “white supremacy”, obscuring the reality of Zionism as a system of Judeo-supremacism and organized pressure(5) that is likewise harmful to American and European interests. Such people say little about Zionism’s role in mass migration (the side of the dialectic they support, while pro-Zionist Western rightists oppose migration but support war policies that cause that migration while blaming the migrants themselves).
So it is that some on the American right have awakened to how support for Israel uproots even the semblance of American sovereignty, that Israel’s warfare/welfare State is propped up by American taxpayers. We can also speak about Israel’s consolidation over the US media; how tech companies filled with Israeli military intelligence Unit 8200 agents have infiltrated throughout US infrastructure and cybersecurity (as I’ve detailed with examples in many articles); the hi-tech transfer to Israel; and Israel’s intelligence, security, and geopolitical connections to China and Russia (contrary to certain anti-Zionists neutered into the “BRICS” dialectic). All of these forces of Empire are ultimately linked by the same Globalist system and its interlocking network of billionaires and bankers.
Opposing Zionism
on such grounds of subsidiarity and sovereignty are commendable, as with
humanitarian concerns over how the Palestinians are dehumanized to justify
genocide by this one nation made “exalted” over all other nations (and exempted
de facto from the same standards as other nations). I point out this
dialectic because such a balanced, holistic perspective becomes lost within
these culture war distractions, where both sides miss a piece of the puzzle by
staying confined within their own paradigm. We are all subjected to the same
self-proclaimed elites, who shuffle the people back into these culture war
distractions whenever there is the slightest organic left/right consensus about
the banksters, War Machine, Israel, or releasing the Epstein files.(6)
At this point Kirk was still grappling with his life-long pro-Israel education: “Do you see Jew-hatred increase across your generation?” The students unanimously responded it was being conflated with criticism of Israel, to which he saw his opening: “There is a rise of Jew-hate but its not the majority mover. I think the majority mover of Gen-Z and Gen-Z conservatives is exhaustion. Can we just make it where I can buy a home or deport people?” This admission itself pierced through the vicegrip of Zionist programming which conflated the two. Kirk agreed with them that the more such libels of “anti-Semitism” were leveled, the more it became a self-fulfilling prophecy. He expressed frustrations with backlash over his platforming Carlson and Smith a week before, such that even a Judeophile like himself was being accused of “anti-Semitism”. Yet this is indeed what happened with the vitriolic reactions of such Israel-First windbags as Laura Loomer:
“I don’t ever want to hear @charliekirk11 claim he is pro-Trump ever again. After this weekend, I’d say he has revealed himself as political opportunist and I have had a front row seat to witness the mental gymnastics these last 10 years. Lately, Charlie has decided to behave like a charlatan, claiming to be pro-Trump one day while he stabs Trump in the back the next. TPUSA was only able to thrive thanks to the generosity of President Trump. On the one year anniversary of the assassination attempt on Trump’s life, Charlie hosted @ComicDaveSmith at @TPUSA’s SAS conference where Dave Smith was able to speak to a bunch of conservative youth at an organization that claims to be Pro-Trump. 3 weeks ago, Dave Smith called for President Trump to be IMPEACHED and REMOVED from office over his decision to blow up Iran’s nuclear facilities.
“Charlie played both sides of the Iran issue
on his show as we all saw, because he wants to play to both sides of the aisle.
The honorable thing to do is to have a position and actually defend it to
the death instead of flip flopping. Smith said all of MAGA ‘should turn
on Trump’ and abandon him. He said this 3 weeks ago. See the clip below. TPUSA
is definitely not pro-Trump. If they were, they certainly aren’t anymore. Out
of all of the incredible pro-Trump voices out there who support the President,
Charlie decided to host Dave Smith? It really is shameful. And I am honestly
just disgusted by the nonstop flip flopping on the right.” – Laura Loomer Tweet, 6:30 PM · Jul 13, 2025
With the focus group Kirk rejected “the binary that’s presented, that if you don’t passionately talk about it you are a hater. That’s probably destructive for everybody involved.” He then described how he was “trying to find this new path” where he could still support Israel as the place where his Christian faith arose, while also “I’m an American and I represent a generation that can’t afford anything.” “I think we need to have the prudence to reject the Jew-hate, we’re not going to put up with that, that’s dumb. But also if you call everyone an anti-Semite, if they don’t take a puritanical view of the Netanyahu government, then I think that’s bad for everybody.” He thus measured his criticism by distinguishing between Netanyahu and Israel, a similar mental gymnastics as Labor Zionists such as Bernie Sanders but is meaningless when a poll found 82% of Israelis support Netanyahu's policies in Gaza. Kirk's next comments are worth quoting as a strong glimpse into his personal growth:
“A cope that is often found in broken institutions and I found this now over 13 years, its a great truism, you guys learn it for the rest of your life. Anybody that tells you we have a messaging problem, you should go a step deeper and ask another question. Are you actually doing something wrong or are you bad at messaging it? Because people who are doing bad stuff will be like we're just not presenting it correctly. Sometimes that's true or sometimes there's might be something beneath the surface that you're not doing.” “The reason we're doing this focus group is that I've been trying to tell them [the donors?] that there's an earthquake coming on this issue and in the country. And they don't believe, so I'm like why don't you just hear it from people yourselves?”
So he was aligning more and more with the grassroots sentiments of his student groups, whose criticisms he also saw as validating his own internal doubts. Remember the controlled environment around which Kirk founded TPUSA in 2012, when he was an impressionable teenager and with 90% funding from David Horowitz.(7) The tight control of the donors remained thereafter and intensified within the past two years. Seeing the applause that Israel critics received at TPUSA events, showed his sensitivity to the cultural pulse. Yet he failed to realize that Zionists tolerate no “middle path”, accepting nothing but subservience especially after taking their funding for so long. To even challenge the smear campaign behind “anti-Semitism” and raising questions about the prioritization of Israel over domestic concerns was enough to earn their ire which reared its ugly head up to the day he was assassinated (and afterwards with how his Zionist pressurers have exploited his death).
.jpg)
.jpg) |
| Ackman paling around with Chabad. His billions as one of their oligarchs combined with their "spiritual" guidance founded upon a supremacist, messianic agenda. |
Ackman and His Lapdog
Grifters Threatened Kirk at Hamptons “Intervention”
At the beginning
of August, Zionist billionaire Bill Ackman, whose various financial frauds
(going back to the financial crisis of 2008 up to the Rona in 2020) I exposed
in Part 1, convened an influencers' summit in the Hamptons. The summit was
ostensibly to discuss the “threat” posed by Zohran Mamdani if elected New York
Mayor, but as reported by Max Blumenthal on the authority of “five sources with intimate knowledge of
Kirk's meeting with Ackman,” the gathering “turned into an 'intervention' where
he was 'hammered' for his increasingly skeptical views on the US special
relationship with Israel, and for platforming prominent conservative critics of
Israel at his TPUSA events.” Blumenthal continues his account:
“The meeting went
off the rails when Ackman personally confronted Kirk about his views on Israel.
The public face of UK Lawyers for Israel, Natasha Hausdorff, joined in the
argument, and began ‘screaming’ at Kirk, according to the attendee. When his
hosts presented him with a detailed list of every offense he supposedly
committed against Israel, Kirk was ‘horrified,’ said one person. Ackman also
allegedly demanded Kirk rescind his invitation for Tucker Carlson to speak at
his upcoming America Fest 2025 in December. ‘The whole thing was a disaster,’
said an attendee.
The attendees
list, also corroborated by their public social media accounts, read like a who’s
who of attention-craving Zionist “influencers”, clearly astroturfed together by
Ackman to pressure Kirk. They include Natasha Hausdorff, legal director of UK
Lawyers for Israel, whom the Adelson-owned Israel Hayom praised as “the British attorney who fights Israel’s wars”; Xaviaer DuRousseau, Instagram “influencer”
working for PragerU, the propaganda outlet led by an officer of Unit 8200’s cyber-spying division; his best buddy (and fellow
PragerU lemming) Emily Wilson, who calls herself “Emily Saves America” despite
engaging in constant activism for Israel. Two weeks after the intervention,
DuRousseau and Wilson enjoyed an all-expenses-paid trip by the Israeli State to propagandize about Gaza. Their
videos openly mocking the starved Palestinians have gone viral and speak
much about the lengths to which psychopaths lacking true personality would do
anything for money paid them by psychopaths with authority.
Interestingly,
even as recent as February Wilson herself was lamenting “the SECOND I even make a comment on Israel’s government I’m called antisemitic
and people literally lose their minds.” Yet she has been a reliable Zionist prostitute
ever since, engaged in hasbara while working overtime to deflect attention into
the same culture war distractions lest there be left/right coalitions awakening
to her paymasters. When he wasn’t selling his soul in Israel, he was too busy
partying and “wine drunk” to be bothered about any investigation into Kirk’s assassination. Two weeks
later, he was honored by the city commission of Hallandale Beach, Florida,
which declared Sept. 29th “Xavaier Day” in a ceremony where they flashed their Duper’s delight before an Israeli flag covered over
a US flag. These are the sort of activities engaged in by these “influencers” now
that Kirk is “out of the way” so American conservatism can now openly
assume its Israel-First transmogrification.
Other attendees
included Seth Dillon, CEO of Babylon Bee, the conservative outlet which dropped
its "satire" mask into full-blown Zionist propaganda.(8) Dillon is
an evangelical Christian who speaks of his faith while boasting about his “Ashkenazi blood” giving him special spiritual privileges (contradicted
by his own faith: Romans 10:12, Galatians 3:28, 1 Timothy 1:4, Titus 3:9);
Arynne Wexler, former Goldman Sachs trader who openly argued “we need to bring bullying back” to enforce support for Israel and crack down
on what she calls “anti-Semitism”; and Ory Rinat, former Special Media Advisor to Jared Kushner who now serves as CEO of Urban Legend, leading “an army of 700 social media influencers who command varying degrees of
allegiance from audiences that collectively number in the tens of millions.” This
army of Israeli-funded influencers was activated by a gleeful Netanyahu himself only weeks after the assassination, as part of the Esther Project – a similar name to the Heritage Foundation’s plan to subvert free speech against Israel, and evokes a story filled with notions
of a crypto-identity and “ancestral” enemies similar to ‘Amalek’ (a common
Zionist trope).
 |
| DuRousseau and the City Commission of Hallandale Beach, Florida, covering the Israeli flag OVER the US flag, in a ceremony declaring Sept. 29th "Xaviaer Day" (Source) |
 |
| Psychotherapist Daniella Bloom, who steers out of her lane into "JEXIT" grifter and whining Zionist propagandist, speaking at the Adelson-funded Jewish News Syndicate |
Unhinged Bloom
Demands TPUSA “Must Continue” to Serve Israel
Psychotherapist Daniella Bloom, who signs off all her writings with “National Ambassador of JEXIT (Jews Exiting the Democrat party)” and “Unapologetically Pro America and Pro Israel Advocate” (the former clearly subjugate to the latter in her formulation), wrote an op-ed for the Times of Israel on 5th August. Entitled “Turning Point must continue to be a safe haven for aligned Pro-America, Pro-Israel Jews on campus and for future generations”, Bloom wrote: “Dear Charlie Kirk, the Noise Got to You, Too.” The ‘noise’ is her Orwellian term for Kirk even associating with individuals critical of Israel, influencing him to ask too many questions. Her article is worth quoting in detail as an example of the typical Zionist talking points - and some ways I respond to their propaganda narratives.
She described her first meeting with Kirk, how they “spoke about the crisis of Israel’s PR and the alarming rise of progressive influence on campus – funded not just by Qatari money, but also by powerful socialist Jews.” … Given that the Zionist cause in the US is backed up by billionaire oligarchs who openly express their allegiance to Israel, such as Larry Ellison, Robert Shillman, and Bill Ackman; with Ellison’s consolidation of CBS/Paramount and TikTok on the personal urging of Netanyahu (who called it one of Israel’s “weapons”); with a powerful AIPAC lobby which makes or breaks politicians; all-expenses-paid propaganda trips to Israel, and paying “influencers” to promote hasbara; QR codes for donors to scan favored puppets at AIPAC conferences, etc..
The likes of Bloom can only deflect to some fictitious “Qatari” bogeyman while billions of blood-soaked dollars are funneled and laundered to manufacture consent for Israel. Even more perverse is her mentioning “powerful socialist Jews” which she was ‘allowed’ to do as a Jewess, whereas the Gentile Kirk was accused of “anti-Semitism” for expressing something similar in late Oct. 2023(9), in a fake “controversy” designed to corral the parameters of debate safely within a Zionist dialectic as I described in Part 1. Yet her evoking “powerful socialist Jews” is also a convenient valve to solely blame the actions of Zionists upon this other group who happen to form a large section of leftist pro-Palestine movements, in contrast to the blameless Zionists. Bloom clearly wants to direct gullible Gentiles towards her own perceived inter-Judaic civil war as the self-styled founder of JEXIT.
“After watching
the recent focus group on Israel and AIPAC, I’m heartbroken – not just by what
was said, but by what wasn’t,” Bloom continues, using her psychological training
to play up this archetype of a manipulative woman who projects grievances to
garner sympathy for her cause. … “Watching that focus group unfold was
gut-wrenching. The segment didn’t resemble a balanced discussion—it resembled a
set-up. A slow-burning dog whistle of insinuation, imbalance, and omission.”
This is even while what really comes out throughout her article is less sadness
and more anger, indeed validated when she next accuses Kirk and the students of
“coded antisemitism,” again deflecting to other lobbies and “radical Islam –
the actual global threat that unites anti-Israel actors.”
Such Zionist
propagandists gloss over the Israeli intelligence services’ own links to radical
Islamist groups, whether that be funding the rise of Hamas (as a counterbalance
to the secular PLO), or aligning with the Islamist fanatics who overthrew
Qadhafi in Libya and Assad in Syria. Nor has radical Islam been any impediment
to close ties behind the scenes between Israel and the Wahhabi petro-sheikhdoms,
as the “Abraham Accords” continues to expand against their common bogeyman of
Iran. Those were wars championed by the likes of Netanyahu (who spoke of “positive reverberations” in a 2002 US congressional hearing) and the Israel-Firsters. The latter such as
Bloom are only “pro-American” insofar as the State continues to fund Israel and
fight wars for their interests. Nor will the likes of Bloom
mention how Israeli media and fanatical rabbis with close ties to the Likud establishment have evoked a “war”
between Christians and Muslims as fulfilling their “prophecies” out of which Israel is envisioned as ultimate victor.
 |
| Whether Bloom or the other Zionist propagandists mentioned in this article believe such "prophecies" is unknown, but certainly the existence of such a current exposes the fraud behind their dialectic of a "Judeo-Christian" West vs. Islam, all for the benefit of Greater Israel and the War/Debt Machine. |
Bloom laments “how the seeds of Jew-scapegoating get watered – not by swastikas, but by ‘just asking questions’” about Israel. “You’ve built your platform on Judeo-Christian values. Don’t trade those in for applause from the Dave Smith, Joe Rogan, Tucker-adjacent crowd who mistake edgy cynicism for wisdom.” …. As with other woke liberals who made this pivot to conservatism after 7th Oct. 2023 (their Year Zero), Bloom wants to cancel all criticism of Israel behind such hyperbolic “Jew-scapegoating” hysteria. She welcomed Kirk's free debate about social issues, but she cried foul the moment he allowed criticism of Israel at his events. Only lock and step compliance is acceptable to her ilk who bestow upon themselves the "moral clarity" (their roots are in woke, after all) to police any wrongthink. Her psychological manipulation sought to cajole him with such emotional blackmail even while publicly evoking her self-serving “friendship” (just as Josh Hammer keeps plugging his book in all his interviews and statements about Kirk’s assassination etc.).
Why is this “Judeo-Christian”
slogan repeated ad nauseum by Zionist propagandists? Jews and Christians who
know the differences between their respective religions tend not to use it
given foundational disagreements over the Trinity and Jesus, never mind subsidiary issues distinguishing their respective “covenants”. Rather, this
term is a political tool to qualify the latter with the former adjective. As a Pagan, I have no urge to qualify another religion
with the standards of my own spiritual worldview, especially given our core
differences. Yet Zionists use “Judeo-Christian” for their own propaganda
purposes to ensure Christians are joined at the hip with the modern
political entity of Israel. This is why Bloom repeatedly deflects to “radical
Islam” while ignoring how Christians are treated within her precious Israel, or
how Iran and its allies (Bashar al-Assad, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Shi’ite groups
in Iraq) are known as regional protectors of Christian minorities while Israel
aligned with their Wahhabist persecutors. We can also cite Iran’s historic
ties to Armenia in stark contrast to Israel’s supporting and arming Azerbaijan against
that Christian nation.
She raised the
strawman that “Israel is not the reason” for Americans unable to buy homes, open
borders, inflation, and other failed policies. She completely glosses over the obvious
fact that when countless billions are annually poured into Israel, rather than
being invested domestically, and not to mention invisible costs, lost
opportunities, and the energy extracted to instead be poured into this foreign
cause, that it clearly does have a direct effect on economics and
domestic policies. She tries to assume the “logical” psychologist, but her
emotion comes out when she next outbursts in this public article against
Kirk: “Stop pretending that if AIPAC disappeared, America’s problems would vanish
too. That’s not patriotism. That’s propaganda.” One couldn’t invent a better
case of projection from a Zionist propagandist whose entire modus operandi is
to gatekeep American patriotism into Israel-First servility.
“Stand now with
Israel,” Bloom pleaded, oblivious to see by her own admission this wasn’t standing
with America. “Now more than ever, we—as Jews and Christians who proudly love
America and stand with Israel—must stand strong together in our alignment.” She
continued to gatekeep and make demands: “Turning Point must continue to be a
safe haven for aligned Pro-America, Pro-Israel Jews on campus and for future
generations.” Why a professed Christian organization such as Turning Point “must”
serve her own ethno-identity politics is lost in her explanation, but more significant
is her open admission of dual loyalties to this one foreign state.
She decried a “coordinated
campaign” between “anti-Israel Democrats” and “MAGA Woke Right”, “to divide
Christians from Jews, and sell fear and scapegoating as political strategy,”
even while her entire screed fear-mongers about radical Islamic “threats” (to
manufacture more wars for Israel), scapegoating “Woke Right” and other domestic
critics of Israel, etc.. Her litanies of “benefits” of supporting Israel include
“cutting-edge security intelligence” (nothing about espionage and selling those
secrets to China), the “Iron Dome” (even more ironic given its failures against
Iranian missiles, so much so that the pro-Israel Trump regime bailed them out
by depleting the domestic arsenal), and “reinvesting” into US defense
contractors, claiming this “creates jobs” and “bolsters our own military readiness”
when its actually about profits for the Military-Industrial-Complex and
inflating a “defense” budget of trillions while all other sectors of American
society and economy are neglected.
“Israel’s
innovation in cybersecurity, water conservation, agriculture, and medicine
blesses the entire globe.” ‘Innovations’ made possible by the countless
billions poured into Israel from American taxpayers, but two points here:
Cybersecurity, as in a weapon of subversion and espionage by Unit 8200; and ‘Medicine,’
which would include the jabs, lockdown policies, and tracking apps enabled through the Rona. The American blood and treasure expended to prop up Israel and fight wars
against its enemies mean little to the supremacist Bloom, who then cites “cherry
tomatoes in your salads and delicious sliced seedless watermelons” as part of
this alleged “Israeli revolutionized innovation.” “Supporting Israel is not an
act of disloyalty to America—it’s the opposite,” implying that “disloyalty” to
Israel would similarly be disloyalty to the US. She closed her screed with “We’re
counting on you Charlie,” not clarifying who “we” are.
.jpg)
We see before us a
timeline of Zionist pressure, public denunciations and manipulative “emotional”
appeals, background interventions and financial threats from donors brought to
bear upon Kirk, within three months before his assassination. The more he
merely asked questions about Israel and refused to cut off anti-Zionist
conservatives, the more the billionaires ensured that Rabbi Pesach Wolicki and
Josh Hammer were increasingly placed within his orbit to be in his ears at all
times, desperately seeking to mitigate any possible appeals he was hearing from
Israel-critical voices. Perhaps given his personality, the more they pressured
him the more he opened his mind and began piercing over two decades of Zionist
programming. This came to a head with revelations of a private text thread just
two days before his death, where Kirk explicitly said he was given “no choice
but to leave the pro-Israel cause.” Two public appearances before his
assassination confirm his shift.
Following the Hamptons
“intervention”, a visibly angered Kirk appeared on conservative commentator
Megyn Kelly’s show on 9th August. They prefaced the interview with the caveat “We’re both
supporters of Israel,” and throughout it repeated many of the same hasbara talking
points we have grown accustomed to after Oct. 2023. It certainly demonstrates
they were not anti-Zionist and still preferred Israel over the Palestinians but
made some shifts on Israel as it relates to domestic considerations – piercing
through the dogma of complete US support for everything Israel does. And
as I’ve already expressed, Zionists accept only complete compliance and
tolerate not even the slightest criticism from public US voices and anyone with
a platform.
They talked about
backlash from even talking about Epstein’s Mossad links, and agreed Israel was losing
the “moral high-ground” (sic) and “propaganda war.” Kirk said: “The thing that
I think is being lost is that on some part of the population, you can scold
them into silence. But if I have any deviation of a purity test, such as
hosting a focus group with a bunch of our students that went viral; having Dave
Smith or Tucker Carlson at our event. All of a sudden 'Charlie is no longer
with us anymore,' wait a second what does 'with us' mean? I'm an American. I
represent this country and I don't even understand that paradigm. And Megyn, I
think you would agree with this, I want to make sure we really zero in on this.
Personality types like you, myself, and Tucker, the more that you guys
privately and publicly call our character into question, which is not isolated.
It would be one thing if it was one text, or two texts, it is dozens of texts.
Then we start to say hold on, hold the boat here. And to be fair, some of my
really good Jewish friends say that's not all of us. But these are leaders too,
these are stakeholders.”
Kelly contended how “some in the pro-Israel camp are so knee-jerk about calling you anti-Semitic or getting deeply offended if you say anything that doesn’t align with their narrative, that it undermines their cause.” Still, she insanely claimed “its propaganda coming at us from Hamas” – such is the stranglehold Zionism has within US media and those who due to either their own programming or careerism, do not allow themselves to stray from this mental kibbutz. Kirk reiterated his support for Israel based on his interpretation of Christianity, including “scriptural land-rights” and simply as the place where Christianity arose. “However, Megyn, you're hitting on something very potent and important,” Kirk opened up.
“I will say this, the behavior by a lot, both privately and publicly, are pushing people like you and me away. Not like we're going to be pro-Hamas. 'Charlie, what are you doing?' What am I doing?! I'm sorry, like let's just take a step back here. Like, I'm an American citizen. Yes, I want Israel to win. Yes, I'm a Christian, but like some of the messages, and you've seen how I've been treated Megan by some, not all, by some.” Kelly spoke about how “Dave Smith is allowed to criticize Israel. You had both sides [in the July debate],” to which he replied: “No, you’re not allowed to. It’s even worse than that.” “Well, you and I believe that we're Americans and Americans first. Period. End of story. We are citizens of this nation. But it goes to the point where if, for example, if I have less ability sometimes online to criticize the Israeli government about backlash than actual Israelis do. And that's really really weird, isn't it, Megan?”
On 6th Sept, Zionist propagandist Ben Shapiro appeared on “Life, Liberty & Levin,” a Fox News program hosted by Mark Levin, who had earlier publicly criticized Charlie Kirk for opposing the war against Iran and allowing Israel-critical voices at TPUSA (perhaps also envious due to his own irrelevance). Their dialogue is worth quoting to establish what amounts to a threat only four days before Kirk was assassinated. They were placing such ideas within the ether, on the cultural level, essentially accusing Kirk - although not mentioning him by name, it was clear within the context - of “treason” to their cause. Amidst his own bankrupt and declining platform, Shapiro stood to benefit from establishing himself as the gatekeeper of American conservatism while excommunicating those who dare to question the Israel-First narrative....
Levin: “Do you think there's enough of an effort to push back? I find that conservative groups and conservative organizations that have these weekend events and these seminars, whether they're for young people or think tanks or that sort of thing. They sort of sprinkle these events with these America haters who claim to be American-Firsters and are fake MAGA and even stab the president in the back.”
Shapiro: “Yeah, I
mean I think it's definitely an attempt by some of these organizations to quote
unquote 'maintain the big tent.' But the reality is that as many have said, the
problem with a ‘big tent’ is that you may end up with many many clowns inside,
and the most fundamental thing is that just because you’re saying somebody
votes Republican—that doesn’t mean that they ought to be the preacher at the
front of the church, they’re not the person that ought to be leading the
movement, if they are spending all day criticizing the President of the
United States as ‘covering up a Mossad rape ring’ or ‘being a tool of the
Israelis for hitting an Iranian nuclear facility.’”
The day before his
assassination, Kirk interviewed Shapiro on his show: “We’ve pushed back against the media on Covid, on
lockdowns, on Ukraine, on the border. So maybe we should also ask the question:
Is the media totally presenting the truth when it comes to Israel? Just a
question that maybe we shouldn’t believe everything the media says, because I
know I’ve been conditioned to ask a lot more critical questions over the last
couple of years. So Ben, some people would accuse Israel of wanting to
ethnically cleanse, some people in the Israeli government are saying….” The
clip shows Shapiro with raised eyebrows, shocked that Kirk would even
question the narrative about Israel. Kirk was obviously aware of Shapiro's public threats three days prior.
In a video posted to his social media less than 24 hours after Kirk’s assassination, Shapiro announced: “We’re going to pick up that blood stained microphone where Charlie left it.” Then in what appeared to be a humiliation ritual, Shapiro appeared on The Charlie Kirk Show, lecturing a silent Kolvet, Matt Walsh, and Michael Knowles on “unity” around “Biblical conservative values”, before handing over a $1 million donation to TPUSA – from whom did the money come from? What was behind this public spectacle? I contend these were obvious moves by Zionist billionaire donors to ensure Turning Point would no longer turn away from the Israel-First kibbutz. And each of these voices since then have not questioned the “official” narrative and seem to want to move on quickly from any investigations; and so too have they doubled down on culture war distractions or publicly criticized those asking the questions.
[To be continued
in Part 3 with Kirk’s texts announcing his final break from “the pro-Israel
cause,” Josh Hammer’s cryptic calls for “public execution,” TPUSA leaders doubling down on Christian Zionism, Geofencing and the
Israeli/Technocratic element, and other cultural and suspicious events since
the assassination….]
.jpg)
NOTES:
(1) The number 24 is symbolic within Kabbalah for “judgement and severity,” and the number of sacrificed offerings before the Temple altar. (See Rabbi Dr. Hillel ben David, “The Significance of The Number Twenty-four”. Netanyahu sees himself as fulfilling such a “divine mission” as he was told in a 1990 meeting with Chabad leader Schneerson. Or as he told i24 TV interviewer Sharon Gal, who presented him an amulet of a Greater Israel map, in August: “So if you’re asking if I have a sense of mission, historically and spiritually, the answer is yes.” At his UN appearances, Netanyahu gaslights maps of “Blessing” and “Cursed” nations. The Temple tie-in is there too with the Temple Institute and their ilk around Ben-Gvir and Smotrich among his coalition partners. Given all of this, the Iranians weren’t so far-fetched when they spoke about dark occult forces also at play in Israel’s war.
(2) “Asked tonight
what the attack meant for relations between the United States and Israel,
Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, replied, ‘It’s very good.’ Then
he edited himself: ‘Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate
sympathy.’ He predicted that the attack would ‘strengthen the bond between our
two peoples, because we’ve experienced terror over so many decades, but the
United States has now experienced a massive hemorrhaging of terror.’” (James
Bennet, "A DAY OF TERROR: THE ISRAELIS; Spilled Blood Is Seen as Bond That
Draws 2 Nations Closer," New York Times, Sept. 12, 2001, Section A, p.
22).
He reiterated this
during a conference at Bar-Ilan University: “We are benefiting from one thing,
and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, and the American
struggle in Iraq.” These events “swung American public opinion in our favor.” (Maariv,
16 April 2008. Cited in Haaretz the same day.) On the first anniversary of those attacks, Netanyahu was in
Congress lobbying for the U.S. to invade Iraq, peddling the WMD lie and the “positive reverberations”
in the region. Of course, the war’s Neocon architects were openly
following the Clean Break plan they
wrote up for him in 1996. This itself was an update of the Oded Yinon Plan for a “Greater Israel” laid out from the 1980s onward.
(3) It was Bari
Weiss who, along with her fellow Zionist Eric Weinstein, coined the phrase “intellectual
dark web” which set the stage for the rise of Woke Zionism and Tech Bros
through which Larry Ellison, Bill Ackman, Shaun Maguire, Joe Lonsdale, Alex
Karp, and other Techno-Zionist oligarchs give a pseudo-“intellectual”
justification for their levels of control. The term specifically describes a
cabal of mediocre thinkers or sociopathic miscreants like Curtis Yarvin, Dave
Rubin, and James Lindsay, whose platforms are astroturfed by oligarch funding to
manufacture cultural consent. They were propelled out of obscurity as part of
the corporate/technocratic pivot into this new iteration of Woke masquerading
as its “antithesis”.
(6) Yoseph
Janowski, a Zionist whose writings have also appeared on Exodus Magazine
and Chabad.org, wrote an article “Trump, Israel, and the Epstein Files” published by the Times of Israel on 21st July 2025. He openly admitted
how Epstein was an Israeli blackmail operation and threatened Trump with it
over even the slightest criticism of Netanyahu (never mind that he was still
funding and running cover for Israel at every turn). “Trump and his
administration criticized Netanyahu and Israel. And now the Epstein files are
haunting him. For a long time the files had subsided in the background. They
weren’t considered to be much of a threat to Trump. But all of a sudden, right
after he started up with Israel, the files surfaced, and they seem to be
overwhelming him.”
Their being
“subsided in the background” meaning as a blackmail threat looming over any who
showed even the slightest difference to Israel. Janowski cited Trump’s
“berating” Netanyahu about Israel bombed the church in Gaza, a “madman” after
bombing Syria, and his hesitancy in committing the US to complete war against
Iran aside from a one-off strike: “And now, some old files are threatening him.
Perhaps Trump will realize, that it really doesn’t pay to start up with Israel.
Perhaps those implicated in the files, will express contrition and regret.” The
Epstein blackmail would continue until “Everyone sees, that the world is not a
jungle, and that G-d Almighty runs the world with compassion, giving humanity
the ability to fix what’s wrong, so that we can have peace with true ethics —
as G-d told Moses at Mount Sinai, to tell all nations to adhere to the seven
Noahide laws.”
(7) David
Horowitz’s son, Ben Horowitz, co-founded the venture capital firm Andreessen
Horowitz with Marc Andreessen. The two personally visited Israel to recruit from “elite IDF tech talent,” likely alluding to Unit 8200. So we see yet another
correlation between the fake ‘conservatism’ of David Horowitz which justified
corporatism and predatory finance, with Zionism, and together converging with
Technocracy.
(8) After Israeli
tanks fired upon the Holy Family Catholic Church in Gaza, Babylon Bee managing
editor Joel Berry wrote on 19 July: “This won’t be easy for
people to hear, but there are only about 200 professed Catholics still living
in Gaza and they all support Hamas.” He followed up: “Anyone who supports
Hamas and the extermination of the Jewish people is not a Christian, no matter
what they profess, or where they go to church.” He doubled-down the next day: “I
apologize for nothing. Go pound sand.” This is just one expression of the
cultural divide between Catholics and evangelical Christian Zionists, also
revealing why the latter could care less even about Palestinian Christians, who
are mostly Orthodox or Catholic “heretics” according to evangelicals – lower in
their view than the Israelis they worship.
No comments:
Post a Comment