Charlie Kirk and the Cult of Human Sacrifice

Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or the free speech platform SPdonate.

By Kevin Barrett

It was Wednesday, the eve of the 9/11 anniversary. I was brushing up on my Spanish by watching a few minutes of TV news in a hotel lobby in Malaga when the story broke: Charlie Kirk had been shot. Though I have never been especially interested in Charlie Kirk—he always struck me as one of countless TV talking heads who somehow draw big audiences for unknown and perhaps unknowable reasons—I immediately sensed that his death might be more important than his life.

The mass-mediated demise of Charlie Kirk had all the earmarks of spectacular, politicized ritual sacrifice. Experts in the construction and maintenance of public myths, which is how Jewish-Zionist 9/11 czar Philip Zelikow memorably described himself, know that literary anthropologist René Girard was onto something: Most human beings are motivated by myths (sacred stories) not by facts, and one of the most powerful catalysts for mythmaking and myth-maintaining is ritual sacrifice. That’s why Zelikow & Co. scripted 9/11 as a spectacular ritual sacrifice of thousands of Americans designed to consecrate, in blood, a sacred bond between Americans and Israelis, and trigger the murder of millions whom Zionist Jews view as their enemies.

Charlie Kirk grew up in the shadow of that myth, the myth of 9/11, and lent his telegenic looks, voluble tongue, and modest intelligence to the cause of maintaining it. He was shot and killed on the eve of the 24th anniversary of 9/11, symbolically mixing his blood with the blood of the thousands of victims of the Israeli attacks on New York and Washington.

It’s suggestively mythic, though perhaps coincidental, that Kirk was felled by a shot to the throat. JFK, too, was initially struck in the throat, shortly before his brains were blown out the back of his head. Ritual sacrifice victims are commonly killed by throat-cuts, which sometimes extend into complete beheadings. Symbolically, cutting the victim’s throat can send a message about silencing the victim—as, for example, when freemasons ritually slash the throat of a moser who has spilled unspeakable secrets:

The Freemasonry oath for an Entered Apprentice includes a symbolic penalty where the candidate promises "to have my throat cut across, my tongue torn out by the roots" if they reveal Masonic secrets. -Google

Might Charlie Kirk have spilled a secret or two? Ricky Hale points out: “While Kirk had supported Israel's genocide, he had started examining October 7 and called it an inside job.” Kirk was also starting to let his conservative Christian followers in on another big, nasty secret: Zionist Jews dominate the media and are by far the biggest force behind all forms of censorship in the West.

(Kirk) had complained about how Israel is the one country he is not allowed to criticize and Zionists were turning against him. He opposed Trump's crack down on anti-Israel protests at universities…

Kirk had also begun unveiling another awful secret: that Jewish money is behind “cultural Marxism.”

Charlie Kirk: Jewish communities have been pushing the exact kind of hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them. Now I don't like generalizations. Not every Jewish person believes that. But it is true. The Anti-Defamation League was part and parcel with Black Lives Matter.

It is true that some of the largest financiers of left wing anti-white causes have been Jewish Americans. They went all in on woke. And it wasn't just ADL, it was some of the top Jewish organizations in the country that have done that. In fact, we have seen this with the recent retreat of Jewish donations that are no longer going to be administered to colleges.

Mark Rowan, Leon Kopperman, can we get that full list? It's very powerful.

So that's totally true. And by the way, Tucker Carlson reinforces this.

So I'm going to kind of…It was quite a day on the Internet. Tucker Carlson was interviewing Candace Owens. We have Candace Owens coming up next hour. And Tucker Carlson mentions that Jewish Americans have primarily been financing cultural Marxist ideas.

We said this by the way, last week and people came after us. We actually said it in a different way. We said, I'm glad that Jewish Americans are reconsidering their financing of cultural Marxism. And people misunderstood it intentionally and slandered us as being anti-Semites. But listen to this.

Tucker Carlson is completely correct by saying that the philosophical foundation of anti-whiteness has been largely financed by Jewish donors in the country.

Worst of all, from the viewpoint of his likely killers, Kirk was turning against the pro-Israel narrative he was being paid to parrot. One month before Kirk’s assassination, he received what in retrospect could be read as a chilling warning from a pro-genocide Zionist fanatic named Daniella Bloom.* The topic: Kirk’s Turning Point conferenced featured plenty of people who, like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, recognize that Zionist Jews are not just genocide perpetrators, but the likely authors of such monumental crimes as the JFK assassination and 9/11.

Bloom evinces anguished betrayal as she laments that her once-reliable genocide-friendly shabbos goy Charlie has just presided over a Turning Point conference that Israel views as disastrous:

But after watching the recent focus group on Israel and AIPAC, I’m heartbroken—not just by what was said, but by what wasn’t…what are you doing? Watching that focus group unfold was gut-wrenching…

Bloom accused Kirk of spreading the message “that Israel is the problem.” Her long, vapid, repetitious, excruciating and obviously AI-assisted rant basically screams “get back on the Zionist reservation, Charlie!” People with similar views, who make their living killing journalists, were probably adding—privately—“or else.” Since then, Mossad’s spying on Kirk’s private as well as public communications may have alerted them to, as they say, “a situation.” If Kirk were indeed moving toward an anti-Israel position echoing Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Marjorie Taylor Green, Thomas Massie, and millions of their followers, the natural response of Mossad’s Journalist Assassination Bureau would have been: “Let’s hurry up and let our media make him a pro-Zionist martyr while such a thing is still possible.”

Ricky Hale thinks the Trump Administration should be put alongside Israel on the suspects list:

Why the Trump administration? Well, Kirk had been a Trump supporter, but then he started talking about Epstein and appeared to be joining the dots. The last thing Trump needed was a highly influential conservative turning against him and demanding transparency on Epstein. If Trump loses his fan base, it's over for him.

Kirk’s refusal to obey Trump’s orders to “forget Jeffrey Epstein” may indeed have helped seal his fate. A tweet with almost 5 million views shows Kirk, just days before his death, essentially telling Trump to go to hell, by insisting on a complete release of all information being held on Epstein.

But for all of its thuggery, the Trump Administration is unlikely to be running a unit charged with assassinating annoying or dangerous journalists. They leave that stuff to Mossad and its friends in the Jewish-dominated organized crime community. So Hale’s “blame Trump” scenario is really just another way of pointing the finger at Israel, Trump’s owner and handler.

Ron Unz’s “American Pravda: Mossad Assassinations” makes a convincing case that Israel should always be the top suspect in any political assassination that it might benefit from:

Their use of political assassination as a central tool of their statecraft even recalls the notorious activities of the Old Man of the Mountains of the 13th century Middle East, whose deadly techniques gave us the very word “assassin.”

And the shooting did indeed show signs of being a professional hit. While Israeli snipers pride themselves on being able to put a single bullet into a child’s genitals or kneecap or eye or jugular or what-have-you from over a hundred meters, few angry collegiate leftists share that skill. Only one bullet was fired at Kirk, hitting him in the neck. According to ChatGPT, “Trauma studies suggest mortality rates for penetrating neck injuries are around 10–15% overall.” So the gunman was either very lucky or, more likely, very skillful. (If he had depended on luck he would have fired many more shots; and if he was an amateur rather than a pro who know he’d hit a fatal spot, he likewise would have kept firing. So the shooter must have been a pro.)

The Charlie Kirk “lucky neck shot” recalls the Donald Trump “lucky ear shot” of July 13, 2024, which annointed the forthcoming selection of Trump as Israel’s genocide-puppet-in-chief. Admittedly, the odds that a lucky amateur could squeeze off a single kill shot to the neck are quite a bit higher than the odds that Trump would be nicked in the ear, producing exactly the right amount of blood for him to smear on his face as war paint to jazz up the obviously pre-scripted photo op in front of the flag. But that isn’t saying much.

Israel, Judaism, and Sacrifice: “The Jew Cries Out as He Strikes You”

René Girard tells us that human sacrifice is typically used to unite a community by turning it against a despised outsider. Human sacrifices are basically lynching parties, and everyone lies about what’s really going on.

Girard gives Judaism some of the credit for humanity’s progress towards neutralizing and abandoning this barbaric custom. According to Girard, when God told Abraham not to sacrifice his son, and when Jews created a pro-underdog, pro-victim mythology, humanity set off on its long road toward transcending sacrifice.

But that is at best a half-truth. From another perspective, Jews are actually the premiere practitioners of human sacrifice. They have been conjuring up false or exaggerated images of outsiders (goyim) supposedly plotting to kill Jews, as an excuse for Jews to rise and kill the goyim first, for millennia. As I tire of repeating: The old joke that every Jewish holiday is the same—“they tried to kill us, we killed them first, let’s eat”—suggests that the “they tried to kill us” part is highly dubious. Pharaoh’s plot to kill every Jewish firstborn, Haman’s plot to kill all the Jews of Persia, Amalek’s nebulous designs on killing Jews, Hitler’s plot to throw all the Jews in gas chambers, the Kazakhstanis’ plot to throw the Jew down the well (recounted in The Book of Borat) and of course the Palestinians’ alleged effort to throw the Jews in the sea all fail to pass the smell test.

Similarly, the alleged radical Muslim attack on Jew-heavy Lower Manhattan 24 years ago turned out to be a fraud whose real purpose was to trick the Americans into killing—you guessed it—“the enemies of the Jews.” And it worked. The Americans killed millions and laid waste to the Middle East (and, more subtly, to themselves).

If Israel did indeed kill Charlie Kirk on the eve of the 9/11 anniversary, in a sacrificial false flag designed to unite conservative supporters of Israel behind the ever-accelerating genocide—and to shore up support for Israel’s beleaguered genocide puppet, Donald Trump—we may expect more such attempts to scapegoat real and ostensible enemies of Israel, and to legitimize ever-greater violence against them.

---

*It’s “chilling,” of course, because the media always uses that trite expression and I’m making fun of them…and because the high-level Israelis who spend their days thinking about which journalists to murder next were no doubt thinking exactly the same thing as Bloom.