EDITOR’S NOTE (Nick Stamatakis). In an interview between Charlie Kirk and Ben Shapiro, which occurred ONE DAY before Charlie Kirk’s death, the two discussed the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its implications for global politics. The conversation centered around Israel’s actions in Gaza and the role of countries like Qatar in mediating between Hamas and Israel.
Kirk and Shapiro disagreed on Israel’s military strategies. Shapiro expressed strong support for Israel’s efforts, emphasizing their right to defend themselves and win the war quickly. He critiqued the slow pace of Israel’s military response, arguing that a faster approach would have minimized prolonged conflict and better served Israel’s interests. Kirk, however, took a more critical stance, particularly regarding Israel’s handling of the war, expressing doubts about the efficacy of Israel’s military strategy. He also raised concerns about the influence of global actors and argued for a more critical approach to Israeli policies.
Kirk’s opposition to Israel was particularly evident when he shared his discomfort with the extensive support Israel receives from pro-Israel donors. He described a tense atmosphere within conservative circles, where his views against Israeli policies had led to private pushback from influential figures, including those tied to Netanyahu’s government. His stance made him wary of the influence of wealthy, pro-Israel figures, framing the issue as one of broader influence over U.S. politics.
This disagreement over Israel’s actions and the surrounding global dynamics, especially regarding foreign policy and donor influence, highlighted the divide between the two commentators. And may lead to hints about his assassination…
========================
Kirk, as most rightists, had a strong anti-Semitic streak. That’s a bit unusual, especially with the Evangelicals. They are enamoured with Israel and are waiting for the “rapture” which will come from Israel. Shapiro, being a Jew, supports Israel, but is also an extreme rightist himself. They would not have agreed.
Nick’s suspicion that the assassination attempt might have originated from Israel, while nnot far fetched, seems as not really necessaryy at this ttime. Trump is a strong Israel supporter. That’s what matters right now. Kirk didn’tt really have the power to change America’s long sttanding policy of support for Israel.
Bob – here are the correct statements: Kirk was a very pro-Israel activist until a few months ago. His TPUSA was funded by Zionists to the tune on millions. But he could not handle anymore the earthquake in the grass roots against the Gaza genocide. Candace Owens describes the switch quite well. The Zionists committed political suicide; they fell victims to hubris/arrogance and they only have to blame themselves. They have lost the game for good. The sooner they accept their defeat the better for themselves and for humanity.
Bob, that is an untruth: most rightists in the US have been vehemently pro-Israel and philosemitic. In the 1930s, the Zionists got along famously with the Italian fascists, very much admiring their masculine, patriotic values. As for the Nazis, the Zionists worked in tandem for three years. They even struck a medal in which both the Star of David and the Swastika were emblazoned.
There is far more anti-Israeli in the Democratic left today.
Ben Shapiro is delusional if he thinks he’s ever taken serious as Charly Kirk