1,022 words
By now we have all heard about the shocking and tragic assassination of conservative pundit Charlie Kirk. For me it was a devastating turn of events simply because Charlie Kirk was part of the American Right—if not a brother, then a close cousin. I really felt the loss. Yes, he was mainstream. Yes, he was pro-Israel. Yes, he had made many bad calls. I’m sure quite a few of us would make bad calls now and then if put under the spotlight as often as Charlie was. But the following is irrefutable: he was staunchly conservative, was becoming more and more vocally pro-white, and had dedicated his life to the optimistic goal of shifting the Overton Window rightward through honest debate.
This is why I was always glad he was around. This is also why I am devastated at his passing. And as I pointed out on X, this optimism will sadly die with him. Why should anyone on the Right be optimistic anymore? Why should anyone on the Right believe in debate anymore? Leftist elites ignore atrocious acts of black-on-white violence, including murder, they demonize anyone on the Right who speaks out against it as Nazis and fascists, and then sit back and blame us when one of ours—one of the nicest guys around—gets murdered in broad daylight.
It’s infuriating, and I do hope it sparks an outrage on the Right so white hot (pun intended) that it will make all white nationalist dreams come true. Separation, divorce, red-state secession, whatever you want to call it. No, I don’t want a civil war. No, don’t I want to deport tens of millions of non-whites who were born in America to legal citizens. No, I don’t want to return to segregation. No, I don’t want white supremacy. I simply want to peacefully carve out a portion of the United States to be dedicated to right-wing white people and a small number of their vetted allies. I want to do this peacefully and humanely. I want to follow the ISEE model of white survival. I want the slow cleanse.
In the meantime, however, people on the Right would be remiss not to take maximum rhetorical advantage of Charlie Kirk’s assassination. The first thing we must say is that the Right has finally found its Martin Luther King, Jr. Of course, as living men, Kirk and King could not be more different, and it would almost be an insult to Kirk to compare him to MLK. Thanks to Donald Trump releasing the FBI’s MLK documents in his first term, we all know that the Left’s favorite deceased icon was a plagiarist, a philanderer, a fraud, a hypocrite, a tax cheat, and a tool for the Communist party. Charlie Kirk wasn’t any of these things. He was a better and more honorable man the MLK by a mile. So the comparison is not perfect.
But calling for the Right to elevate Charlie Kirk’s status as political martyr until it equals or surpasses that of King is not only fair game, it’s smart. The Left has gotten a lot of mileage out of the bullets James Earl Ray pumped into King in 1968, and we have no excuse not to do the same now with Kirk’s assassin, whoever he is. In death, Martin Luther King, Jr. has become larger than life. I don’t need to expound on how often his name is still invoked when promoting leftist causes, whether they be Black Lives Matter, immigration, DEI, transgenderism, or whatever other kooky schemes leftists concoct in their Marxist laboratories. King has become the patron saint of liberalism, communism, globalism, and whatever “ism” is trendy on the Left these days. His famous “I have a dream” speech can be neatly applied to just about anyone—except, of course, conservative or race-realist whites. In death, King has become a better tool for the anti-white Left than he ever was in life. There is no reason why the Right should not honor (i.e., weaponize) Charlie Kirk’s memory in the exact same way. A tad cynical perhaps? Maybe. But it would be fair play, given how the Left has behaved for the past 60 years. After all, we would only be following their playbook.
And here is another convenient parallel: Martin Luther King, Jr. was considered a moderate—just like Charlie Kirk. This can be put to use as well. As I wrote after Trump released the MLK files back in 2017:
As an icon of the Left, Martin Luther King, Jr. is remembered today in two major ways: as a paragon of the egalitarian ethos championed by current Western elites, and as proof of the moral superiority of the Left over the Right. Using King, the Left can justify violence against its enemies simply by claiming that King’s nonviolent approach has been proven to fail. Any racial disparities in the years following the Civil Rights Movement can be seen as proof of this. The fact that King was assassinated offers proof as well. Because King failed to reach the Promised Land via nonviolence, the only tactic remaining for the Left is, of course, violence. This is essentially why Martin Luther King will never die in a multiracial society: as a weapon he’s too useful.
In being assassinated, Charlie Kirk has now proven the moral superiority of the Right. He was a moderate, he was conciliatory, he eschewed race realism and white identity, and he was philo-Semitic. He was about as mild as you could get on the Right and still be on the Right. By taking him out, the anti-white Left has shown that moderation and debate and conciliation do not work, if they ever did at all. The Left has shown its moral inferiority and its dedication to violence and terror to keep its control over the Western world. This is enough to disqualify it from power forever.
So meme-makers and myth-makers and film-makers get to work. Lawmakers, we need to convince President Trump to make October 14th, Charlie’s birthday, a federal holiday. With the assassination of Charlie Kirk, we now have our icon, our martyr, our Martin Luther King.
50 comments
Better yet, let’s just replace the King Holiday with the Kirk Holiday. The blacks have Jumeteemf. That should be enough until we wrap up multiculturalism and send them to Wakanda.
Greg, that’s a great idea. I was just at a credit union on Sept 11th, 2025. And the big media screen on the wall advertised Sept 11 is…..official make-your-bed day!
Just how many national holidays have been co-opted by Judeo-communists already? Columbus + indigenous people day, Washington + Lincoln’s b-day into catch-all “President’s Day” etc.
Note: In Alabama & Mississippi, MLK Day is *also* Robert E. Lee Day.
Jumeteemf.
I just spit out my hot cocoa laughing. Thank you, Greg. I needed some humor. This has been a very dark week.
Amen.
I am heartened by Counter-Currents honoring Chalie Kirk. NO EMEMIES ON THE RIGHT. If you are authentically right-wing then you are a “friend”. If you are on the left you are automatically an enemy.
Eddie Kyle: September 14, 2025 I am heartened by Counter-Currents honoring Chalie Kirk. NO EMEMIES ON THE RIGHT. If you are authentically right-wing then you are a “friend”. If you are on the left you are automatically an enemy.
—
I see. But, but, Eddie, what about us Whites who are neither on the “left” nor “authentically” right-wing, or even “right-wing” at all, but are serious, strict racial separatists/preservationists? What will you do with us?
We don’t dishonor the assassinated conservative Christian Zionist evangelical, but nor do we now view him as being some almost Great White Leader.
It’s unfortunate that Charlie was murdered for whatever reason. He was a nice young White family man who preached that everyone should accept Jesus — sent to Earth by his imaginary, otherworldly Jewish daddy up in the sky — to be our personal savior. No thanks.
Now Charlie’s pretty widow has vowed lead his movement. Will you follow her and open a TPUSA chapter?
Will you accept Charlie Kirk as Whites’ MLK, Jr? Really? That idea seems rather reactionary, definitely “rightist” to me — not revolutionary at all. Can’t we come up with a better martyr for our race?
I follow William Pierce. He said this, here: Dr. William Pierce – How Liberals Think – National Alliance Video
“[T]he government is locked into its present course of social and racial destruction. It does not have the will to change its fundamentally destructive policies. Nothing but a total revolution can bring about the changes necessary to minimize alienation, restore the faith of White citizens in the government, and eliminate terrorism. That’s why I’m a revolutionary instead of a conservative or a reformer.”
Chairman Will Williams – Most will have their own specific criteria for friend/enemy distinction. I have my own simple three-step winnowing process; each step requiring an affirmative answer: 1) Are you White? 2) Are you pro-White, not just “not” anti-White? (Making a reasonable allowance for “not Anti-Whites” who are on a genuine journey of discovering the truth and are willing to learn from those they might consider too radical) 3) Are you willing to think racially, and act accordingly, to the extent you have the power to do so in your daily life?
Anyone who is an honored veteran in the battle for White survival, such as yourself, and any organization like the National Alliance, that is working actively for not just the survival, but also the uplifting, of racially conscious White people is very clearly a friend.
I agree completely that the comparison to a Michael King (aka Saint MLK) figure for racially conscious White people is an absurdly reactionary take. MLK is a FRAUD and a disgusting wretch of a black man who has been used to beat down White people for decades. That we would seek “our” own is proof of exactly how beaten down our race has become. I get that it might appeal to Conservi-tards, but no MLK in my name — please!!
Hyacinth Bouquet: September 18, 2025 Chairman Will Williams – Most will have their own specific criteria for friend/enemy distinction. I have my own simple three-step winnowing process; each step requiring an affirmative answer: 1) Are you White? 2) Are you pro-White, not just “not” anti-White? (Making a reasonable allowance for “not Anti-Whites” who are on a genuine journey of discovering the truth and are willing to learn from those they might consider too radical) 3) Are you willing to think racially, and act accordingly, to the extent you have the power to do so in your daily life?
Your three-step method for discovering where one stands on race is effective for you, Hyacinth. I’ve developed an even simpler two-step method, after first asking myself, does this person pass my three-second face test? I can tell with reasonable certainty if a person is White by looking into his or her face. Then the simple first question:
Do you believe the White race is worth preserving, yes or no?
If the person answers “no,” there is no point in asking a second question. Thank the person and move on without arguing. However, if the answer is “yes,” the second question:
You do realize that to preserve our race requires fighting, don’t you?
If the answer is “yes” again, I can introduce the person to the National Alliance, handing him an NA business card that has our Websites so he can inform himself, or continue the conversation, learning about his situation and looking for common ground on important issues. Most folks I deal with these days are online and race-thinkers, like you — already somewhat familiar with Dr. Pierce and NA, so those two questions are unnecessary.
—
Anyone who is an honored veteran in the battle for White survival, such as yourself, and any organization like the National Alliance, that is working actively for not just the survival, but also the uplifting, of racially conscious White people is very clearly a friend…
—-
Thanks, friend. We are few and far between presently, but that will change if our people are to survive long-term. We must physically separate from not only Jews and other non-Whites and their influences, but from fellow Whites who would answer “no” to, “Is our race worth preserving?”
The number of black celebrations and street festivals—all occasions for twerking, hootin’ and hollerin’, criminality, and general mayhem—here on the South Side of Chicago every summer boggles the mind. And yet they still believe, in many cases earnestly, that they are oppressed and therefore need mo’ free sheet. What do you call being a thousand miles beyond disgusted? That’s me.
Brilliant. Utterly brilliant take!
Charlie Kirk was definitely moving in our direction
This is his interview with Tucker Carlson from July 2025 =
https://www.charliekirk.com/podcasts/my-annotated-conversation-with-tucker-carlson
The first part of the talk focuses on usury and predatory debt
Starting at 53:00, immigration and intentional destruction of young white men and masculine productive work are discussed at length
No, I want to deport tens of millions of non-whites who were born in America to legal citizens. No, I don’t want to return to segregation. No, I don’t want white supremacy
i don’t get this; this is how our people lived for centuries , all of a sudden it’s extreme? So, call me an extremist: they all have to go.
No, I want to deport tens of millions of non-whites who were born in America to legal citizens. No, I don’t want to return to segregation. No, I don’t want white supremacy. Yes to all. And make it so terrifying for them, the nogs, zogs, and slobs wouldn’t dare even think a negative thought of our folk ever again. They are lowlife mattoidal garbage and should be treated cruelly as so. Then we wouldn’t be burying those we care about.
I meant to say “No, I don’t want to deport tens of millions of non-whites who were born in America to legal citizens.” (Thats what you get for writing in the heat of the moment.) I would like to achieve a white ethnostate peacefully, and ethnically cleansing so many people would be an act of war that would be catastrophic for everyone. Rather, part of the US declares itself a state for whites, and manages its demographics over time to exclude nonwhite immigrants and reduce the political (not human) rights of nonwhites unt they die off naturally or self deport. That is my take on the slow cleanse.
And for the people who don’t want to give up an inch of American soil, remember that it’s important to have a secure base of operations. After the inevitable decline and fragmentation of non-white America, we could probably take most of it back…
Agreed. The slow cleanse is really only possible once a dominant political stranglehold has been achieved. We aren’t there yet.
What CAN be achieved, immediately and by any rightist with a transferable skillet, is migration out of blue states and leftist strongholds (where their political will is ignored) and into red states (long term) or, perhaps more effectual in the short term, into purple states and swing states.
This insourcing will have 2 immediate effects. Firstly, a few tens of thousands of right leaning voters moving into hotly contested presidential battleground states could be enough to secure victories for whomever succeeds Trump.
Secondly, the blue states losing population will also be losing seats in congress to the states gaining that population.
As far as planting the seeds for an ethnostate, has anyone at CC yet opined on actionable specifics? Namely, which specific states should we consider insourcing into?
I consider Montana, Wyoming and the Dakotas as solid candidates. Small population, all 85+% white, large landmass. Lots of energy production. On the flipping, the weather sucks and the economy of each is small.
Very good article. My only fear would be that the small hats, as is their wont, would use Trump and their control of standard media to use his death for their own ends–by tying his martyrdom to his earlier, better known support for Israel. Although the sequence of events provides circumstantial evidence that the Izzies might have had a hand in death–a while before he hosted a debate in which the anti-Zionist Dave Smith obviously won; Bibi asks for a personal visit from him but he demurs; he’s shot dead by a highly skilled assassin who escapes from a security camera-rich campus–that’s never stopped them from getting away with it before:
Their fingerprints were all over the RFK assassintation . . .
. . . but they still managed to make it look to the public like he Bobby was offed for his support for Israel. The normies are much more familiar with his long-time support for Israel than with his late seeming turn. I just fear that making that kind of martyr out of him could give some new life to normiecon support for the genocidal maniacs. Just my two cents.
No, Bobby was killed by a 24 year-old unemployed stable boy and Christian nutjob with Jordanian citizenship, who was angered by American support for Israel and what RFK had been chattering about on TV.
RFK was anti-Vietnam War, but outside of college campuses, this was an awkward stance because while LBJ was not running for reelection, he would still be the President for some time, and he did not tolerate Democrats countersignalling the Democratic Party’s greatest crusade of all time in Indochina.
Contrary to popular belief, there is no guarantee that RFK was going to win the Democratic nomination, especially on an antiwar platform. So unlike risky hammering on Vietnam, RFK singing hosannas for Israel was probably terra firma for him.
And it came to pass that on the eve of first anniversary of the Six-Day War, a disaffected Palestinian immigrant plopped his eight-shot Iver Johnson .22 caliber revolver into his suit coat before going to the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, where Kennedy would speak to supporters after winning the California Primary.
After the Tet Offensive soured the public on the idea that the Indochina war would soon be won, polls had incorrectly placed antiwar candidate Sen. Eugene McCarthy (D-MN) far ahead of the pack, and Pres. Johnson decided not to run for reelection in 1968.
Just before Midnight on June 4, 1968 Bobby was exhausted after his victory speech in the main ballroom but was still obligated to greet more supporters in a couple smaller ballrooms, so his schedule was in chaos and would probably be cut short because reporters wanted a press conference.
It just happened that Kennedy was being hustled through a narrow hallway near the kitchen to bypass the crowds when he bumped into Sirhan, who started firing wildly but was tackled by RFK’s bodyguards, including Football Negro Rosey Grier. Presidential Primary candidates did not warrant Secret Service protection at the time.
Bullets flew everywhere and RFK was hit four times : one bullet lodging in his neck, one passing through his chest at the armpit, one (ultimately fatally) in the head at close range, and one passing through his jacket without harming him. Five other people were wounded but none too seriously. Kennedy died in the wee hours of the morning at the hospital a day later on June 6th.
I have watched all of the old TV feeds, or as much as I could find. Contrary to popular belief, there is no video of the RFK shooting until after he was taken away from the kitchen area. When Kennedy concluded his victory speech, the news networks had already shut down the live coverage and were winding up the cables. The ABC associate news producer was wounded in the shooting and spoke from a stretcher. ABC had some Black & White B-roll of the kitchen area, and CBS restarted its coverage 21 minutes after the shooting. Some six-million people on the West Coast saw some live RFK assassination coverage and it was big news by breakfast time.
In my opinion, hardly anyone noticed the earlier Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. assassination ─ but the second dead Kennedy drew an almost hysterical public reaction. I was mad because the limited television programing of the time was all preempted for about a week by the endless Kennedy eulogies.
Liberals just could not understand how scruffy losers could buy a 21 dollar mail order surplus rifle and shoot the President, or another inexpensive gun to go and kill the former Attorney General.
A hagiographic Congress passed the Gun Control Act of 1968, and then in 1972, Sirhan Sirhan’s appointment with the California Gas Chamber was stoppled for a Life sentence.
🙂
Good article! I am still chewing on that rough paragraph. Charlie Kirk will be forgotten within a year, so evoking his name will produce diminishing returns once his assassin is captured, which according to the radio has already happened. 🙃
Sorry. Accidentally hit enter before I added the link:
https://www.unz.com/runz/how-israel-killed-the-kennedys/
Any hooo! Make hay while the sun shines, because there is heavy cloud cover on the way. 🙃
Along with the dozens of murals(hopefully) going up in cities around America of Iryna Zarutska, we need massive statues of Charlie in capitols. And not ones that look like cunnilingus.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=hNL4IwTS&id=2D73B3B6CD497349D285F475F1827EE89300123A&thid=OIP.hNL4IwTSfbOegp-0k8KQRAHaE7&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.artnews.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2023%2F01%2FGettyImages-1246205448-e1674231176554.jpg%3Fw%3D2000&cdnurl=https%3A%2F%2Fth.bing.com%2Fth%2Fid%2FR.84d2f82304d27db39e829fb493c29044%3Frik%3DOhIAk%252bh%252bgvF19A%26pid%3DImgRaw%26r%3D0&exph=1333&expw=2000&q=mlk+statue+arms&form=IRPRST&ck=C668A4CA70DDE8AB19988DDF41DBAB24&selectedindex=4&itb=0&vt=4&sim=11
Hmm. ? Evidently that is a sculpture of four arms. ? It was created by Brooklyn-born Hank Thomas, the son of a Black Panther. Per wiki, without attribution, Thomas tried to sell/sold the photography of Graeme Williams, a White South African man, as his own.
(On a side note, I’m glad we’re not married to each other, Fire.)
I would make a great husband, just ask the Mrs.
But seriously, is there something I am missing here? Is it my name? I think Kim Walk With Lee has a nice ring to it.
Okay, yes, taking you at your word–
I said it jokingly because you inferred that a sculpture of 4 disembodied arms, brought to your mind, a sex act.
I calls it like I sees it.
There’s two different kind of women, those that……nevermind. I’ll keep that to myself.
And now they’ve caught the assassin and he looks and talks like he could have been a member of Identity Evropa or Patriot Front. Wow, I didn’t see that coming.
(By saying he “talks” that way, I’m by no means suggesting that he believed in their ideologies or publicly expressed support for them. I was just watching some clips off special media posts his family made that gave him the appearance of being a clean cut, upper middle class, intelligent kid whose father is in law enforcement and taught him to shoot a gun. Not your prototypical deranged leftist with purple hair and ear gauges.)
There is also a photo of him at some rally or protest with a trans flag and a rainbow flag on his chest. So he might not have been a freak, but he was apparently a freak ally…
Not to lean too much into stereotypes, but the shooter had skills – which made me think it was probably not a leftist. That’s not their style.
So all the talk of the Left declaring war on us is premature for now.
Are you thinking along the lines of “patsy?” 🙃
No, I always try to avoid the conspiratard scenarios.
No conspiratorial takes here, but if it were merely a deranged trantifa mattoid, wouldn’t they have kept firing into the crowd against the other”racist nazis”? Such behavior is right out of their playbook. Also, the boomer jew zimm?, the mystery of the plane departure, and the weird hand signals by those two men behind Kirk before the shot. Guess it’ll just be memory holed.
Spencer is correct, we must politicize Charlie Kirk’s death. And if anyone is uncomfortable with using someone else’s death as a tool for political gain, I think in this case that it is obvious that Kirk would WANT right-wingers to use his death in order to fight the Left.
I find the history of the Irish struggle for independence against the English to be incredibly interesting and have listened to hundreds of Irish Rebel songs. It seems that almost every time a Rebel leader was killed or imprisoned, another Irishman sat down and wrote a song about him. They did not forget their fallen martyrs, nor must we.
There ought to be poems, songs, and films created by us to honor our heroes.
Let’s write acoustic funeral dirges to circulate.
I don’t mind occasionally being a single voice of reason here. See “MLK: Communist, Sickening Degenerate, Fetchit for Jews” at nationalvanguard.org. Rated X, not for children’s eyes.
—
Dave Chambers: September 12, 2025 Spencer is correct… I think in this case that it is obvious that Kirk would WANT right-wingers to use his death in order to fight the Left.
—
Being neither a right-winger nor of the Left, nor a conservative, but a racial preservationist, I find Spencer’s suggestion that Charlie Kirk become some sort of martyr for Whites that MLK is to Blacks, as absurd.
As racially responsible Whites let’s get serious and recognize and honor a true leader of our people, arguably the best of the second half of the 20th century, as did his biographer, Dr. Robert Griffin, did in “William Pierce: A Reminiscence” at nationalvanguard.org
Of course there was his intelligence. Simply, he was the brightest person I’ve ever been around… And there was his character. I found him to be a man of great integrity; there was the tightest fit imaginable between what he most deeply believed and the way he conducted his life. He had enormous commitment and dedication and perseverance. Day after day, year after year, decade after decade, he marched on. And he had courage. He put himself on the line. He went public; he used his own name. And he was incredibly hard working… I won’t be silent or controlled by fear, not now, not after knowing him. I seek to live with the courage he demonstrated. I want, in my own unique way, to live as he lived, as an honorable White man. Dr. Pierce was an honorable White man.
Will, you are thinking honestly, while I’m thinking tactically. The Left has gained a lot of influence and power eulogizing their sainted martyr MLK. Of course, leftist elites know that the narrative they feed the people glosses over, distorts, or ignores much of the real MLK. And they don’t care because that’s beside the point as long as the myth of MLK pushes the leftist agenda, which it does.
There is no reason why whites can’t do this with Charlie Kirk as well. He already has tens of thousands of supporters, maybe hundreds now. Let’s use the momentum. Are Kirk’s cuckish behavior in the past (which he was growing out of) and he iffy pro white pedigree (which was improving when he died) really good reasons not to take advantage of this opportunity? Who cares if the myth we wish to forge is not 100% accurate? What in the real world of politics ever is? It certainly wasn’t accurate with MLK, and that myth brainwashed whole generations.
We would be stupid not to do the same.
Spencer Quinn: September 13, 2025 Will, you are thinking honestly, while I’m thinking tactically…
—
Thank you, Spencer. I was raised by my parents to tell the truth and always have heard that honesty is the best policy.
Wherever you use the word “Left” I substitute the word Jewry. To have a strategy is important, but whose strategy?
Bibi ‘the butcher” Netanyahoo liked Charlie Kirk becaus Kirk was a Christian Zionist who put Israel first, ahead of his own race. Bibi had recently invited Kirk to Israel and is disappointed that he was assassinated before he could have visited his Middle Eastern “Holy Land” to talk strategy. Kirk would have been comfortable in a meeting, described here in which the <ahem!> “Left’s” strategy was “Always do what is good for Jews” See: “25 Senators in Secret Meeting With Jewish Leaders to Plot Strategy Against Growing Anger Over Influence of Jewish Elites” at nationalvanguard.com
ON JUNE 5, 16 heads of Jewish organizations joined 25 Democratic senators in a private meeting, which, according to the Times of Israel, is an annual event. All of the Jewish organizations but one were openly declared advocates for Israel and are supportive of its policies. Key groups present included the Council of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Anti-Defamation League, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. A number of the groups have lobbied Congress and the White House in support of the use of force against Iran, a position that is basically identical to the demands being made by the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The senatorial delegation was headed by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), currently Senate minority leader who has described himself as the “shomer” or guardian of Israel in the Senate. The 25 senators in attendance constitute one-quarter of the entire deliberative body and more than half of all Democrats serving in it. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who has emphatically linked her campaign to become the Democratic presidential nominee in 2020 to Jewish and Israeli interests, chaired the gathering.
After the meeting, Jewish Insider provided a complete list of the participants and also a diagram of how they were positioned in the Capitol Hill conference room. The senators were placed on one side of a rectangle with the Jewish leaders in front of them filling the seats on the other three sides. Who exactly provided the agenda that Klobuchar was presumably following is not known, but one suspects that it may have been a joint effort by Schumer and several of the more prominent Jewish organization participants.
The meeting was by design not a public event, and, to a certain extent, it was a secret. Its time, place, and participants were not announced, and it was only reported at all in the Israeli and Jewish media. According to after-the-fact coverage of the event by Alison Weir of the “If Americans Knew” website, even staffers in the congressional offices were not aware that the meeting was taking place.
No statement was issued afterwards, but it is believed that the principal topic under discussion was how to contain and reverse pro- Palestinian sentiment among progressive Democratic voters, who, to the horror of the participants, actually have been embracing the possibility that Palestinians are human beings with plausibly the same rights as Israelis. A particular focus would have been the nonviolent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which has become a growing force on college campuses and in progressive circles.
Other issues raised were mentioned in passing afterwards on the email service “The Tell” by Ron Kampeas of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) news service. They included supporting Israel and also more federal-level legislation to combat “anti-Semitism.” And, of course, there was the issue of money. Several groups want funding from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) increased to pay for more security at Jewish facilities. Current legislation is considering allocating $70 million per year and there were demands that it be increased to $90 million. A 2014 article in the Jewish Forward reported that Jewish institutions received 94% of DHS discretionary funding.
One might reasonably argue that the private meeting with the Democratic senators reflects a singular urgency in that the party base is becoming notably less pro-Israel, suggesting that something had to be done to stop the rot. That may be true enough, but the reality is that the federal government’s pandering to Israel is both bi-partisan and global in its reach. The United States uniquely has a special envoy to combat anti-Semitism, and his writ extends to proposing sanctions against countries that are critics of Israel.
And even as the Democrats were meeting with Jewish leaders, the Republicans were doing much the same thing. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met with probably some of those very same leaders as the Democrats and expressed concern about the possibility that British Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn might become prime minister. Corbyn has been targeted by British Jews because he is the first UK senior politician to speak sympathetically about the plight of the Palestinians.
Pompeo was asked, if Corbyn “is elected, would you be willing to work with us to take action if life becomes very difficult for Jews in the UK?” He replied: “It could be that Mr. Corbyn manages to run the gauntlet and get elected. It’s possible. You should know, we won’t wait for him to do those things to begin to push back. We will do our level best. It’s too risky and too important and too hard once it’s already happened.”
So American Jews want to join with their British counterparts to either bring down or contain a top-level elected politician just because he recognizes the suffering of the Palestinians. The American secretary of state meets with those same activists and agrees with them that something must be done, to include quite possibly taking steps to ensure that he does not become prime minister in the first place.
Recall for the moment that Britain is America’s closest ally and is what passes for a democracy these days. Jews obviously occupy a rather special space, politically speaking, in the United States. One might reasonably ask, where are the private meetings with representatives of Italian, German, Irish, or Polish organizations, each of which represents a far greater portion of America’s ethnic mix than do Jews? The obvious answer is that those groups do not operate in a cohesive, tribal fashion and they do not possess the financial resources that the 600 or so Jewish groups that advocate for Israel have. In America, unfortunately, money buys access to power and, if there is enough money on the table, it can also buy politicians.
Nor are America’s White ethnic groups as grievance-driven.
And there is one other significant difference: While other ethnic groups in the United States are protective of their respective cultures and languages, there is no sense that any of them actually seek to advocate policies damaging to the United States to benefit the foreign nations that they identify with. The Jewish advocacy for Israel is something quite different, costing the American taxpayer billions of dollars every year and involving Washington in a sequence of wars of choice driven by Israel itself aided by its powerful domestic lobby.
Israel also comes with a price tag in terms of the constitutional rights enjoyed by Americans. Before too long, legislation currently working its way through Congress will criminalize any criticism of Israel. No other national or ethnic group in the United States seeks to dismantle the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in quite that fashion.
Israel is no friend and never has been. Recent media reports detail how Jewish-American oligarch Paul Singer has been working with the Israeli government to transfer thousands of high-paying American IT jobs to Israel. Is he guilty of dual loyalty? No, he is only really loyal to Israel, as are many of the Jewish leaders who met with Pompeo and the senators. It is a disgrace.
And it is also a disgrace that Pompeo and 25 Democratic Party senators should be meeting privately with Jewish organizations to do things for Israel and the Jewish community that do not serve the interests of all Americans, up to and including meddling in the politics of a genuine close ally to respond to the paranoia of British Jews.
Yes, there is a Jewish international conspiracy in place directed by some Jews like those who met with the senators and Pompeo, and it has no off switch. Never before in history has a great power been so dominated by a puny client state and its domestic fifth.
column, and it is time that the private meetings whereby a government “of the people, by the people and for the people” panders to one group alone should end forever.
Tell us, Spencer, is your strategy for White preservation anything like Jewry’s strategy to maintain Jewish control of the American government?
Left right distinctions make no sense regarding Senate Shomer Chuck Schumer. Was Tyler Robinson also identifiable as a Zionist during his youth? He was brought up Mormon.
Minor mistake, James Earl Ray did NOT kill MLK, and Mark Lane proved it in detail. FBI clearly were worried about King when he suddenly went antiwar and anti israel
I haven’t studied the King assassination, but attorney/journalist Mark Lane was a dodgy Libertarian Jew. This is exactly the last guy to trust for real history.
🙂
When I went out today to make my rounds, I observed no anguished, or angry faces, I observed no beating of chests, heard no keening wails. I observed no demonstrations in the streets, no one carrying signs protesting Kirk’s death. When it was announced that Kirk’s assassin had been apprehended, people forgot about Charlie Kirk. The “walking dead” out there just want to get back to “business as usual.” The opportunity to capitalize on Charlie Kirk’s death has probably passed us by. When Charlie Kirk is buried, he will be forgotten, except for the occasional reference to the trial of his assassin. 🙃
That’s because when WE march in the streets, the Feds charge us with RICO, or our protest is declared an illegal assembly, or a Jewish lawyer starts suing everyone within 3 city blocks of the protest.
I agree, protests need to happen, but it’s not 1960, and 60s tactics don’t really work anymore.
The only people I see incoming MLK are conservatives, so called. Kirk was not mild. He matured a lot in only the last five years or so. Very conscious of the white struggle, noticing a lot of stuff about the greatest ally, he came a long way and MUCH younger than many of us, and with a huge megaphone. A truly great man.
Invoking MLK, not incoming. Sorry for the error.
CC Reader: September 13, 2025 The only people I see incoming MLK are conservatives, so called…
—
When will C-C readers finally ditch conservatism from the likes of Charlie Kirk? See Greg Johnson’s “Why Conservatives STILL Can’t Win” at counter-currents.com.
The core of [William] Pierce’s argument is that conservatives can’t win because they aren’t really trying. The left play for keeps. They have an overriding goal. They have a world to win… Conservatives may fight ferociously from time to time, but they are always playing defense… Other things being equal, the side that fights to win will defeat the side that fights for a draw. Fortune favors the bold, those who launch offenses, not those who merely play defense… Conservatives also make a virtual cult out of being good sports, graceful losers, and ready compromisers.
Good sports like Kirk, but losers!
—
He matured a lot in only the last five years or so… noticing a lot of stuff about the greatest ally, he came a long way and MUCH younger than many of us, and with a huge megaphone. A truly great man.
—
Mr. Kirk got a lot of face time in Jew-controlled mass media, yes, especially so-called conservative FOX News, with his giant pro-Israel megaphone, but he compromised with our enemy, Jewry, and worshipped our enemy’s imaginary god, promoting their deity’s mythical son Jesus like a side-show barker.
Many conservatives do that. None of them are truly great men for our race. They compromise with our greatest enemy.
Having been a “truth activist” for more than a dozen years Kirk should have noticed and confirmed a “lot more stuff” about the shitty little ally in the last five years or so than he let on to his followers.
Bibi Netanyahohoo has already stated after the assassination, “Charlie Kirk [was] a lion-hearted friend of Israel, he fought the lies and stood tall for Judeo-Christian civilization.”
What lies did he fight?
Captain John Charity Spring MA: September 13, 2025 Left right distinctions make no sense regarding Senate Shomer Chuck Schumer. Was Tyler Robinson also identifiable as a Zionist during his youth? He was brought up Mormon.
Tyler couldn’t help how he was raised until he was older.
Morons, er uh, Mormons, are a little different than most Christian denominations, but their church’s name still says it all: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Tyler Robinson’s dad was stupid to share his son’s confession with a preacher; he should have called the FBI himself and claimed the $100,000 reward. If his son is to fight the lynch mob in court to avoid the death penalty, $100,000 might at least initially retain top defense specialists. Other donations will pour in later like they have for Luigi Mangione.
You’re right, Captain. Chuckie Shomer doesn’t care at all about Left vs. Right designations, only about what’s good for Jewry and Israel. Nor should serious White separatists/preservationists care about Left vs Right distractions — only about preservation of our unique race and the destruction of shomers who threaten our welfare and survival.
THINK RACIALLY – ACT LOCALLY
Mormons don’t have “preachers” or “pastors.” I don’t know all the details, but some other denomination must have been involved with sharing the shooter’s story.
If the news media here actually means an LDS Bishop with the term “preacher,” they would not be allowed to keep the reward money. Bishops are volunteers from their community “Wards” and do not receive pay of any kind.
Also, in my view Mormons are not Zionists. But the Utah Gov. Spencer Cox is LDS and a former Mitt Romney-style “Never Trumper.” He supported Rubio, and then Cruz, until finally reluctantly getting on the Trump Train when the electoral winds blew favorably.
I listened to Gov. Cox’s dial-it-down speech several times and I can’t find fault with it but I am highly suspicious (LINK). I agree that those who felt outrage over the Charlie Kirk assassination by an AntiFa faggot will have forgotten about it in a week hence.
I think we need to 1) hold them at their word that the Kirk shooter will be put to death as promised, and 2) that troops will continue to be sent to put down crime in Blue cities, which makes Duskie-hued Democrats look very bad when they oppose it. And 3) we also have to make sure that Trump maintains the heat on border security and the pace of deportations.
At the Charlie Kirk TPUSA headquarters in Phoenix, there have been lots of Christian-themed weeping. I respect Christians but they are frankly part of the problem. It is time to double-down rather than turn the other cheek. The other problem for me is that Charlie Kirk was often a shill for Israel. Yes, the guy did not come without blemishes ─ but who does?
The important thing is that TPUSA was called “White Nationalist” by the enemy, and that is exactly what they should be getting in spades. While the idea that TPUSA was WN is absurd, we need to pretend otherwise and make Horst Wessel into a saint and martyr even if that requires a little wishful seasoning.
The enemy are worried. I hope so! Their minions are stupid and frequently go off the Reservation. Their spontaneous roar of hate on social media when they first heard that CK was dead was extremely embarassing for their cause ─ and their head honyocks are all furiously backpedalling. Even (((Bernie Sanders))) of all people issued a plea for peace with MAGA.
The most successful gambit is for the media to reframe the narrative that Charlie Kirk was indeed killed by Hate, but that it is not the Left doing all the hating but the usual crop of Rednecks instead. They hate us because we exist ─ not because of what we do.
White Nationalists ─ not milquetoast Christian Conservatives ─ need to get right back out onto the college campuses! Otherwise, what’s the point?
🙂
The English haven’t forgotten Charlie yet: Mega demo in London yesterday. MSM are saying 150,000, so possibly it was closer to a million. Only a handful of arrests. It’s true that he was very pro-Israel for years. It’s equally true that he has been publicly changing his mind. He was fingered as an anti-Semite by Media Matters in 2023. He reckoned the Hamas attack was an inside job. A summary of all his recent anti-Israel statements would pack a powerful punch.
“He was fingered as an anti-Semite by Media Matters in 2023. He reckoned the Hamas attack was an inside job. A summary of all his recent anti-Israel statements would pack a powerful punch.”
Yes, agreed, that would be very useful to pin down his evolving thinking on his journey rightward. I’d also like to see an essay on the shooter, hopefully separating fact from fiction. I very much see the Kirk legend continuing apace.
How about this for an amuse-bouche?
The conclusions of this (gentile-authored) article regarding zio-culpability and ‘donor backlash’ may yet age like milk but it is worth considering.
Its contents: an examination of “the background events swirling around TPUSA and Kirk prior to the shooting“
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.