TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

One speaker recounts that he did not like Bibi Netanyahu, describing Netanyahu as a destructive force and saying he was appalled by what was happening in Gaza, and that Netanyahu was using the United States to prosecute wars for the benefit of his country, which he called shameful and embarrassing and bad for the United States, a view he resented. He also notes that he didn’t hate Netanyahu. After that speech, there was a sharp backlash against Charlie Kirk and, to a lesser extent, the speaker, with Kirk having about $100 million in donors and being heavily dependent on them because his project was nonprofit. They went after him and tormented him, while a small, very intense group offended by the speech tormented Charlie Kirk until the day he died.

Speaker 0 recalls watching Charlie Kirk’s memorial in Malaysia and an “extremely coordinated onslaught” by high-level actors who claimed the passage was “not just offensive, but was one of the worst blood libels ever uttered in a public setting since World War two” and that it “intended to imply that Israel was behind the killing of Charlie Kirk.” Speaker 1 frames the passage as the Christian gospel: “Ultimately, he was a Christian evangelist” who “tells the truth about the people in power” and that “they hate it and they become obsessed with making him stop”—“they end up torturing him to death to kill him, and then... it becomes the world's biggest religion.” He says he did not intend to attack Jews, criticizes antisemitism and Zionism for seeing everything as about Jews, calling that attitude “sick” and “bad for this country,” and urges treating Israel as a country with overlapping interests. He cites ADL pressure and stresses repentance in the Christian message.

Netanyahu immediately weighed in with prayers about Charlie Kirk just minutes after he was killed. It was eerie. His body was still warm, and Netanyahu was beginning to claim Charlie Kirk's legacy. "Israel requires American Christian, mostly conservative men to fight the war of Armageddon that Netanyahu wants against Iran." Kirk, a conservative asset, was moving away from Netanyahu and privately despised him under Zionist donor pressure. The Grey Zone exposed a secret Hamptons influencer summit. Candace Owens later revealed more. Netanyahu released a video: "I did not kill Charlie Kirk. I never accused him of killing Charlie Kirk." The talk covers DEI funding via the Tikva Fund and a push to buy TikTok to suppress Palestine content, led by Larry Ellison’s network. Antifa designated as a terrorist organization; media consolidation and regional tensions involving Turkey, Syria, Qatar; Egypt’s red line on Gaza, Rafah.

- "So something I would like to raise, which was actually my first published paper, was how you and the Likud party are cut from the same ideological cloth as Trump and the GOP in America." - "And so specifically with Charlie Kirk's assassination, who was a big mentor of mine, he's my first mentor in the space." - "Evangelicals, from all my research, evangelicals are the reason that Israel has been supported in public sphere outside of just Jews." - "So with Charlie's assassination and with the kind of trajectory that we see with, like, Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson." - "I guess I'm curious about what's another game plan if we lose evangelical support for the state of Israel." - "What's our backup plan to be strong, like, outside of the diaspora? Thank you."

Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister, said that the bigger the lie, the faster it will spread. Well, somebody has fabricated a monstrous big lie that Israel had something to do with Charlie Kirk's horrific murder. This is insane. It is false. It is outrageous. Charlie Kirk was a giant, a once in a century talent who defended freedom, America, and our Judeo Christian civilization. Charlie loved Israel and the Jewish people. He told me so in a letter he sent me a few months ago. One of my joys as a Christian, he wrote, is advocating for Israel and forming alliances with Jews to protect Judeo Christian civilization. He encouraged me to explain to Americans how vital Israel is to U. S. National security. He told me, The Holy Land is so important to my life, it pains me to see support for Israel slip away. A few weeks before his death, I spoke to Charlie and invited him to visit Israel again, sadly, that won't happen. Now some are peddling these rumors, perhaps out of obsession, perhaps with Qatari funding. Charlie Kirk was a great man, and a great man deserves honor, not lies. Rest in peace, Charlie Kirk. May your memory be a blessing.

I was shocked and sickened by the ghoulish and really repulsive reaction of the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, to Charlie's death, basically made it all about him and his country, redirecting the grief toward support for his projects. Charlie Kirk did not hate Jews. "Charlie didn't hate Jews. He loved Jews." He did not like Bibi Netanyahu, and he felt that B. Netanyahu was a very destructive force; "he was above all resentful that he believed Netanyahu was using The United States to prosecute his wars for the benefit of his country, and that it was shameful and embarrassing and bad for The United States, and he resented it." After that speech, there was an intense attack on Charlie; "He had $100,000,000 worth of donors." Two days before he died, he lost a $2,000,000 donation because he had publicly pledged to bring me to the next Turning Point conference in December. The American Jewish Committee called Charlie Kirk an anti Semite and "dangerous." He was not an anti Semite. He was the opposite, and he was a great lover of people and a purveyor of peace. Seth Dillon of the Babylon Bee was out there demanding that Charlie Kirk take me off the roster, pull me off stage, because I had said things that BB didn't like or that he didn't like or whatever. This is a trend.

- "Charlie Kirk is the pro Zionist guy." - "What if they were listening in to him and he was in communications with people saying, hey. I think I'm gonna go this direction and they knew his intentions or saw this pattern." - "Here's this pro Zionist guy with this incredibly powerful platform that they built, by the way, that Charlie has, thanks to them." - "So if he's gonna take what they gave him and turn it against them, that could literally destroy Israel because the youth is people they're most concerned about." - "We can't let him turn." - "Israel was never my top suspect until, you know, I've spent twenty four hours thinking about it, I'm like, it's not unreasonable. It's not even out of the question in terms of would Israel do this." - "it's in their wheelhouse."

Did Israel kill Charlie Kirk? The alleged shooter is now in custody, turned in by his own father. This speculation about Israel being behind Charlie Kirk's assassination came across as absurd to many people. Max Blumenthal and Anya Parampil revealed Kirk was beginning to break ranks with the Zionists; he was questioning Israel. Was Charlie Kirk's assassination just a lone gunman? Or was it a violent coup by Israel to gain control over TPUSA? Turning Point USA received tons of financial support from Zionist donors including the David Horowitz Foundation. He repaid his backers over the years by unleashing a relentless fire hose of anti Palestinian and Islamophobic diatribes. Kirk rejected Netanyahu's offer to infuse Zionist money into TPUSA. Kirk had come to loathe the Israeli leader regarding him as a bully. Netanyahu tweeted prayers for Kirk minutes after news of the shooting broke.

From Israel's perspective, "Charlie Kirk is the pro Zionist guy. He is the pro Israel guy." The speaker notes that without context it wouldn’t make sense to claim Israel would kill him, but asks what if they were listening and he was in communications with people saying, "hey. I think I'm gonna go this direction and they knew his intentions or saw this pattern." They describe "this pro Zionist guy with this incredibly powerful platform that they built, by the way, that Charlie has, thanks to them," and warn that if "he's gonna take what they gave him and turn it against them" it "could literally destroy Israel because the youth is people they're most concerned about." Charlie "is the dude when it comes to Israel." "We can't let him turn" and if he starts to turn and "we take him out before he ever really genuinely turns, and then he's the Zionist martyr"—blame on the Palestinian—could "unify the right" and silence critics. The speaker concedes: "I Israel was never my top suspect" but now thinks "it's not unreasonable" and that "it's in their wheelhouse." It shows how much they needed Charlie Kirk—"nobody's gonna be defending them anymore" and "their reputation is in the toilet."

“‘When they say they have a right to exist, they're saying we have a right to control American society to secure our existence.’ If the youth are being lost, this poses an existential problem to Israel. If the youth in the right wing of America becomes indifferent to Israel, they are truly alone. They have lost China, Russia, the whole Muslim world, Europe, Africa, Latin America—who do they got? It's just us. America’s support is conditioned upon the Republican constituency in America. If it were up to Democrats or Zoomers, they wouldn't support Israel; it's Republican boomers that are keeping it together. Do you think that's why Netanyahu offered Charlie Kirk a $150,000,000 to support Israel? The money ‘would probably come from America’ and be dispensed by Jewish American billionaires; ‘He would double their money.’ Charlie Kirk, the bag man for the GOP, who has a personal relationship with Trump, would overnight become a very rich man… a kingmaker. He declined; ‘Now he's dead.’”

"you and the Likud party are cut from the same ideological cloth as Trump and the GOP in America," noting "Charlie Kirk's assassination" and that "Evangelicals, from all my research, evangelicals are the reason that Israel has been supported in public sphere outside of just Jews." He asks for a backup plan if evangelical support for Israel fades, to be strong "outside of the diaspora." "Christian influencers" and labels the "woke Reich" a challenge to be fought by securing support in the U.S., pointing to "money of NGOs" and "money of governments." He argues we must use "the weapons that apply to the battlefields"—"the most important ones are in social media"—with "the most important purchase that is going on right now is class Followers." He cites TikTok and X, says "talk to Elon. He's not an enemy. He's a friend." "Are we gonna succeed with everyone? No. Will there be a strong counterpoint? Yes."

Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister, said that the bigger the lie, the faster it will spread. Well, somebody has fabricated a monstrous big lie that Israel had something to do with Charlie Kirk's horrific murder. This is insane. It is false. It is outrageous. Charlie Kirk was a giant, a once in a century talent who defended freedom, defended America, defended our common Judeo Christian civilization. Charlie loved Israel. He loved the Jewish people. He told me so in a letter that he sent me just a few months ago. One of my greatest joys as a Christian, he said, is advocating for Israel and forming alliances with Jews to protect Judeo Christian civilization. He encouraged me to make the case directly to the American people about how vital Israel is to US national security. He told me, The Holy Land is so important to my life, it pains me to see support for Israel slip away. Now some are peddling these disgusting rumors, perhaps out of obsession, Perhaps with Qatari funding? What I do know is this: Charlie Kirk was a great man, and a great man deserves honor, not lies. Rest in peace, Charlie Kirk. May your memory be a blessing.

Speaker argues Charlie Kirk’s “financial stake in the future of the company” and leadership of the faith division would matter, noting that if Charlie “decided one day to become Catholic” it would have financial implications. He says, “I never had a conversation that that Charlie was in the process of converting,” but claims “Rob in particular knew for an absolute fact that Charlie was done with Israel bullying him.” He presents alleged proof via a group chat two days before Kirk’s assassination, with nine people including Charlie and Rob McCoy; seven names withheld. In the chat, Charlie writes: “just lost another huge Jewish donor. 2,000,000 a year because we won't cancel Tucker.” “I cannot and will not be bullied like this.” “Leaving me no choice but to leave the pro Israel cause.” A donor writes: “please do not invite Candace.” Forty eight hours before Charles was assassinated. He says Charlie “did not back down” in the Hamptons meeting or the text thread, and suggests donors may be driving the hosts, asking why Carlson and Kelly haven’t condemned them, calling it suspicious and alleging donors might be running them to “eulogize Charlie” who “never once flinched” from the Israeli cause.

Speaker 0 stated that 'you and the Likud party are cut from the same ideological cloth as Trump and the GOP in America,' citing Charlie Kirk as a mentor and 'Evangelicals' as the reason Israel has public support; he asked for a backup plan 'if we lose evangelical support for the state of Israel' to stay strong 'outside of the diaspora.' Speaker 1 replied: 'Christian influencers' are key and described the 'woke Reich' as opposing the base in the US, noting money from NGOs and governments funds the challenge; we must fight back with 'our influencers' and 'the weapons that apply to the battlefields'—especially social media. The most important purchase is 'class Followers' with 'Five followers. TikTok. No. Barts? TikTok.' 'Oh. TikTok. Number one.' and 'X' is also crucial. 'We have to talk to Elon. He's not an enemy. He's a friend.' If we get those two things, 'we get a lot,' though there will be counterpoint: 'Are we gonna succeed with everyone? No.'

Speaker argues that 'you and the Likud party are cut from the same ideological cloth as Trump and the GOP in America.' They reference 'Charlie Kirk's assassination, who was a big mentor of mine' and say 'Evangelicals, from all my research, evangelicals are the reason that Israel has been supported in public sphere outside of just Jews.' They note 'So with Charlie's assassination and with the kind of trajectory that we see with, like, Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson.' They ask 'what's another game plan if we lose evangelical support for the state of Israel.' 'What's our backup plan to be strong, like outside of the diaspora?'

Speaker 0: 'you and the Likud party are cut from the same ideological cloth as Trump and the GOP in America.' 'Evangelicals, from all my research, evangelicals are the reason that Israel has been supported in public sphere outside of just Jews.' 'what's another game plan if we lose evangelical support for the state of Israel.' 'What's our backup plan to be strong, like, outside of the diaspora?' Speaker 1: 'Christian influencers.' 'The woke reich.' 'We have to fight back.' 'the weapons change over time. You can't fight today with the swords.' 'the most important ones are the social media.' 'the most important purchase that is going on right now is class Followers.' 'Five followers.' 'Followers. TikTok. Number one.' 'X. X. That's Successful. Good.' 'We have to talk to Elon. He's not an enemy. He's a friend.' 'Are we gonna succeed with everyone? No. Will there be a strong counterpoint? Yes.'

The speaker says there is a financial stake in the company tied to Charlie Kirk’s leadership of the faith division and notes concern if Charlie ever became Catholic, though conversion was not discussed. Rob McCoy allegedly knew Charlie was done with Israel bullying. He cites a group chat two days before Kirk’s assassination, with Charlie and Rob McCoy; he says he might release a name every day this week. In the chat, Charlie writes, "just lost another huge Jewish donor. 2,000,000 a year because we won't cancel Tucker. I'm thinking of inviting Candace." A second comment adds, "Jewish donors play into all of the stereotypes. I cannot and will not be bullied like this. Leaving me no choice but to leave the pro Israel cause." The speaker notes it was "forty eight hours before Charles was assassinated" and that Charlie was "very clear and he did not back down" in Hamptons meeting or thread. He questions why others haven’t vindicated these claims and suggests donor pressure may be shaping coverage toward eulogizing Charlie as never flinching in support of the Israeli cause.

Over the past year and a half I became closer to Charlie Kirk, joining a group chat he called his 'brain trust.' We discussed Israel, Jewish–Christian relations, antisemitism. He was an adamant opponent of antisemitism. Campus talks exposed him to questions, including about the Talmud, and he provided 'very good answers'—'better answers than probably 98% of Jews probably could offer there.' We strategized to turn back the tide against rising antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment. Charlie said roughly half, 50% of the questions that he got asked were all on Israel, Jews. He organized a Zoom call the night before Utah Valley University event, the first stop of a tour, with me, Pesach Willicki, producers, and one Christian pastor. The fact that he was seeking our counsel... calls into question this narrative that he was getting ready to renounce his lifelong support for the Jewish people, for the state of Israel.

I attended a TPUSA faith event expecting politics to be shaped by biblical principles, but the experience did not meet that expectation. The event opened with a speaker who immediately criticized Candace Owens, calling her evil and antisemitic, and stating that what she’s doing is evil. I wanted to leave, but security was intense—armed men were stationed all around the venue, and there was even an armed man on stage with a hand on his gun. The security presence made me uncomfortable. Inside, the speaker talked extensively about Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, portraying them as evil and antisemitic. He argued that Christians should support Israel because Jesus was a Jew and Judaism underpins Christianity, while claiming that what Israel is doing is evil and corrupt. He suggested that refusing to support Israel would be anti-Semitic. I disagree with this framing, and it struck me as not aligning with what I expect from biblical politics. I also noted that the speaker referenced Charlie Kirk (though I recall it as Charlie Cook) and suggested that Kirk would not endorse the positions being discussed, referencing Kirk’s and Owens’ friendship and his past critiques of Israel. Throughout, the speaker’s preaching style resembled name-calling rather than traditional preaching. He labeled the political left as “idiots,” “freaks,” and “losers,” and spent much of the time denigrating liberals rather than offering constructive biblical guidance. This approach felt discordant with Christian teachings I associate with Jesus, who, as the speaker himself stated he loves, “ate with sinners,” including prostitutes. I felt the message was spreading hate rather than embodying the inclusive example I expect from Christian doctrine. A major concern was the impact on young attendees. Teenagers and young Christians appeared to be absorbing the message, treating this figure as a leader and a future guide for their faith, which raised alarms about further division within the Christian community. In summary, the event did not teach the biblical political perspectives I anticipated. The emphasis was on discrediting the left and on framing Israel in terms of Jewish loyalty, rather than engaging with broader Christian concerns. The speaker’s approach—name-calling of political opponents, calls for aggressive stances, and a heavy focus on left-wing critique—left me feeling that the session did not align with constructive faith-based political discussion. The speaker also touched on issues like men in women’s sports, but stated this was not the most important topic for Christians to discuss amid broader national concerns.

So first of all, I have to ask you, how did we reach a situation that prime minister Netanyahu needs to clarify today that Israel was not involved in the assassination of Charlie Kirk? Because there are some people in The United States that have lost their minds. This is a blood libel. It's absolutely disgusting and, vicious. The level of untruth is such that it's hard even to think that you have to defend it, that you have to repudiate it. But there are people who will believe the most outrageous lies, and I guess we should learn from history that this is not something new. Where does this stop? And it's really, really disgusting, but I'm very glad the prime minister addressed it. Charlie Kirk was a true friend of Israel. True friend of mine. I've known Charlie since he was 19. A brilliant, brilliant young man.

Charlie Kirk's perspective on Israel was not starting to shift. It had shifted entirely. Israel knew that. Turning Point USA knew that because Charlie was explicit. He wrote of his deep love for Israel. About forty eight hours before Charlie Kirk died, Charlie informed people at Turning Point, as well as Jewish donors and a rabbi that he had no choice but to abandon the pro Israel cause outright. Charlie was done. He said it explicitly that he refused to be bullied anymore by the Jewish donors. Did he express that? Did he also express that he wanted to bring me, Candace Owens, back because he was standing up for himself? And then did he, just forty eight hours later, conveniently catch a bullet to the throat before our on stage reunion could happen?

I’m going to state this, and I’m going to challenge Turning Point USA executives to issue a very clean statement saying that I am lying if this is not true. About forty eight hours before Charlie Kirk died, Charlie informed people at Turning Point, as well as Jewish donors and a rabbi, that he had no choice but to abandon the pro Israel cause outright. Charlie was done. He said it explicitly that he refused to be bullied anymore by the Jewish donors. Did he express that? Did he also express that he wanted to bring me, Candace Owens, back because he was standing up for himself? Just forty eight hours later, a bullet to the throat. Charlie did not die pro Israel. He did not die for Israel. He did not martyr himself as a friend of Israel. The truth is going to win.

The speaker condemns Ian Carroll for making videos that claim Israel is behind conspiracies about Red Lobster, Applebee's, and Burger King, and for a live stream asking, “Where are you Nick? … Why are you with them?” He asks where the evidence is and notes the tendency to attribute almost every event to Israel, stating, “the heuristic seems to be Israel is behind literally everything,” past and future, which he calls ridiculous. He points to a September 7 tweet where Carroll said Charlie Kirk is “working for the Jews that killed Jesus,” and contrasts it with Carroll’s certainty on September 11 that Israel killed him to silence him, questioning what changed in those four days and suggesting Carroll may have ESP or telepathy. He accuses Carroll of grifting, intellectual laziness, and dishonesty, and refuses to be pulled into blaming Israel for killing the number one Israel defender in America. The speaker asserts personal history and credibility, saying, “I’ve been over here. I was at Charlottesville” in 2017, and that in 2019 he led the Gruyper war against Charlie Kirk, labeling Kirk as an “Israel shill.” He claims that from Turning Point’s founding in 2012 to today, the organization has been “owned by Israel and served Israel.” He recounts a June text in which Charlie Kirk told Dinesh D’Souza, “Nick Fuentes is vermin,” and notes the ongoing fight against him for six years, including Kirk’s August statement calling him “anti Semitic garbage” and his refusal to debate. The speaker describes Charlie Kirk’s inner circle and media connections: Kirk’s right-hand man Andrew Colvin comes from Salem Media, a Christian Zionist outlet aligned with Israel, with Melissa Strait having connections to Salem and Prager University and IDF unit 12082. He notes Colvin led a “struggle session about Israel” after a Turning Point SAS conference in July. He claims that when Israel bombed Qatar in contravention of Trump’s foreign policy, Kirk invited Ben Shapiro to present Israel’s position, while Kirk acted as moderator, and on the day Kirk “was shot,” he prepared to defend Israel with his rabbi at Provo as he drafted a book on the Jewish Sabbath. The speaker emphasizes that the person accused of fighting Israel was “the guy that was murdered,” and expresses pity for those who would believe that. He asserts, “I’m right here where I’ve always been, following the facts, following the money, looking at the information,” claiming to be light years ahead of Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson, and rejecting the idea that their ideology is about Netanyahu or Israel’s foreign policy, concluding, “No, sorry. Absolutely not. That’s totally ridiculous.”