33 Comments
User's avatar
EDWARD F FOGARTY, MD's avatar

RIP Charlie Kirk. God Bless his family and keep them safe. MAHA and MAGA unity ✝️🙏🏼

Expand full comment
Thomas A Braun RPh's avatar

Amen!

Expand full comment
VictorDianne Watson's avatar

Thank you, RFK, for the moving tribute to Charlie Kirk. May your words resonate with everyone. We’ve lost an amazing man. We must remember that, “We are all Charlie Kirk,” now.

Expand full comment
Kelli's avatar

rip Charlie Kirk

with so much love for all you are still doing/lundoing.

Expand full comment
Howie's avatar

We have an elite who are increasingly turning humans into debt, welfare and wage slaves via provably false narratives - while convincingly saying they, the elite, are not responsible for the slavery. How are we getting bamboozled and fooled? Through the 21st century elites' "town criers", the main$$tream media (m$$m) and google-type search engines that they censor and control the majority of the content of. And, they are not even hiding it, as even google will reveal that all major or growing companies on the stock market are owned/controlled by lackeys of the elite, Blackrock, Vanguard, States Street, BOA, Chase, etc.

RFKJr had it right on how the elite control the bulk of humanity by creating Hegelian dialectic opposites that they urge to fight each other, "black vs white", "left vs right", "republican vs democrat", Muslim vs Christian vs Jew vs Druze vs (etc), letting m$$m stir everyone up while stirring the caldrons of hate. Sadly, most people believe some m$$m or some of the hits of m$$m are true: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83UAwd56qk0

People blindly believe m$$m, not realizing that m$$m and google are multi-trillion dollar audio/visual/editorial machines --- whose sole purpose is to make "believable" stories. M$$m does mix "truth" in, but doesn't allow it to become dominant. It isn't a mistake that the elite's m$$m chooses actors and actresses as "conveyors" of their narratives. Again people don't put 2 and 2 together to realize that actors and actresses are trained to convincingly lie on stage. What stage? Never forget Shakespeare's "All the world's a stage...."

Expand full comment
Truth Seeker's avatar

you take a heartfelt eulogy and convert it into a opportunity to rant

Does not matter if your rant is accurate, it is grossly INAPPROPRIATE

Expand full comment
Howie's avatar

My previous comment was quite accurate. And appropriate - as, the main belief "steering wheel" of common citizens of most UN countries, especially the USA, is main$$tream media. Most main$$tream media are owned/controlled by a half dozen entities/people - and serve as propaganda machines. Only a few are independent of big biz, big pharma, bankers, politicians, rulers.

Anyone who has taken journalism courses or studied journalism knows that journalists are taught to write using rules that should not be, ever, violated:

1) Neutrally reports and tells testable, verifiable, truths.

2) Give more than one reference, if possible, that verify truths that were reported and how to test them.

3) If there are "sides", the journalist NEVER takes sides or endorses one side over another.

4) Never badmouths (ad hominem) or bestows praises on the issues or sides.

5) If the journalist feels compelled to give their "opinion", then they must clearly state, in boldface type or equivalent (more than once), that they are giving an opinion, again, with testable evidence to back the opinion up.

Again, this is quite appropriate, "truth seeker"; very convenient to hide anonymously.

Expand full comment
truth seeker's avatar

not a matter of accuracy, its a matter of appropriate grandstanding below an eulogy. Prattle on

Expand full comment
Howie's avatar

BS. You are grand-standing by irrelevantly criticizing the truth process.

Expand full comment
Yet Another Tommy's avatar

Now its an official problem=>reaction=>solution, hegelian dialectic operation.

Heeere we go:

Trump endorses “Charlie Kirk Act” to hold media accountable for misinformation

https://www.naturalnews.com/2025-09-15-trump-endorses-charlie-kirk-act-hold-media-accountable.html

^^this is further proof that both Trump and RFK jr work for the Rothschild syndicate and their Rockefeller front.

"Americans must reject complacency, demand transparency, and prepare for the possibility that this was not just a lone gunman—but a staged event in the globalists’ war on freedom."

Unraveling the web of deception: Charlie Kirk’s assassin and the FBI’s false flag

https://www.naturalnews.com/2025-09-15-charlie-kirk-assassin-and-fbi-false-flag.html

Expand full comment
currer's avatar

Kennedy is CO, the proof is in.

Expand full comment
Truth Seeker's avatar

oink just oink

Expand full comment
Yet Another Tommy's avatar

Charlie Kirk: Turning Point or TV Plot?

https://miri.substack.com/p/charlie-kirk-turning-point-or-tv

There's Even More To The Charlie Kirk Story

Things to make you go 'WTF?'

https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/theres-even-more-to-the-charlie-kirk

Outrage erupts after Amazon sells book about Charlie Kirk's assassination HOURS after the shooting

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-15093069/Amazon-sells-book-Charlie-Kirks-assassination.html

Real or fake? Charlie Kirk shot in the neck.

What an emotional rollercoaster. Is it by design?

https://mellowkat.substack.com/p/real-or-fake-charlie-kirk-shot-in

The Charlie Kirk Shooting, Brought to You By the Number 33

Wake up, people.

https://anthonycolpo.substack.com/p/the-charlie-kirk-shooting-brought

Fake, fake, fake, OK? Charlie Kirk & Iryna Zarutska

https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/fake-fake-fake-ok-charlie-kirk-and

Expand full comment
Truth Seeker's avatar

posting links is actually stupid

Expand full comment
currer's avatar

The book, written about the "assassination" before it "happened" is by someone called Anastasia J Casey.

Anastasia means RESURRECTION.

Does that help anyone?

Expand full comment
Howie's avatar

Mike Adams is totally incorrect on the issues of whether Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. In the minimum, I have met at least a dozen IDF troops and pilots. All of them say that the "news" m$$m reports from Israel is totally false - they are trained, and believe, that they should "take a bullet" rather than allowing an innocent person to be harmed. They know that the genocide is being committed by Hamas against the Palestinians by using them for human shields, dressing them in Hamas clothes, and making their 300 kilometers of tunnels in Gaza accessible only through hospitals, residential neighborhoods, etc.

All that needed to be done to stop the war, even 2 years ago, was to turn over the hostages. That, even now, they don't --- shows that the Gaza events are being controlled by a powerful 3rd party that isn't beholden to either side who profits from the war continuing.

There is no logic on Earth that makes sense --- to say that a country with 2 million Jews, mixed in with almost a million happy Muslims - would or could control governments like the US. 2 million against 8 billion? Come on! Mike Adams (Natural News) is wrong. What's he been smoking?

I do agree with Mike that it's unlikely that their Charlie Kirk assassination suspect is the real culprit. Charlie, like JFK Junior in 1999, was vocal enough that he was considered "presidential material" --- and the deep state may have wanted him "out of the way" at age 31, rather than becoming a more formidable voice a few years later, even in 2028!

Expand full comment
Marc's avatar

I'd piss on his grave gladly. I am not happy that it took a violent incident to put him in his grave. He was a mean and nasty person but he did not deserve that. But whatever way he got to a grave , I would spit and piss on his grave with a big smile on my face.

What kind of idiotic statement is your third sentence! There is a difference between this scriptural position and his ? Where is your proof ? I gave you proof that Leviticus 20:13 is truly what he did beleive. You just do not want to beleive that because the truth would shatter your false credulous image of him.

The only people he "brought together" were people who thought like him. He only convinced people who were already predisposed to think his way , quite obviously. So he reached out to the opposition . Big deal. Converts from the Left were few and far between again quite obviously . He did like the diabolical Trump did: he put out a unique savage message that "patriotic" idiots with some violent propensities were ready to hear. Certainly his boring opponents in the 2016 primaries could not do that because they were shallow middle class people appealing to surface ideas. Trump and Kirk got into their deep dirty souls impervious to true reason , just like they got into your filthy uneducated soul.

Expand full comment
Marc's avatar

Marc

Here below is Kirk referring to Leviticus 20:13 in his precious Bible ( see below CHARLIE KIRK QUOTE ) : It is clear that his ultimate goal was the death penalty for gays. And most gays are not lost. Have you ever talked to any to ask them if they feel lost because of their orientation ? No you haven't.

CHARLIE KIRK QUOTE:

" Let me reiterate the foulest of Kirk's positions : ( from an article in USA Today )

"In 2024, Kirk criticized children's YouTuber Ms. Rachel for arguing that the bible verse "love thy neighbor" in the Leviticus 18 scripture should apply to gay people. On the podcast, Kirk said: "by the way, Ms. Rachel, you might want to crack open that Bible of yours. In a lesser reference, part of the same part of scripture, is in Leviticus 18, is that ‘thou shall lay with another man shall be stoned to death.' Just saying."

This is a direct quote from his podcast about his clear HATE for gays. What is out of context here ? What is partially true and mostly false here , Susan ? Did Kirk disagree with that Bible quote after mentionning it clearly ? NO! (The quote is Leviticus 20:13 ) . So we must assume he agreed. " END OF QUOTE

Kirk made the technical mistake of referring to Leviticus 18 for his vile and violent position.

The above quote comes from a post I wrote reacting to another article here

Expand full comment
Marc's avatar

Charlie Kirk does not deserve to be eulogised by anyone. The authors of this article comparing Kirk with Kennedy's father's decency is inaccurate and disgusting. There is no common denominator whatsoever. Kirk was a disgusting homophobe , and his political positions on so many other issues were vile.

You can read my more extensive critique about Kirk in the comments section of a recent article here : "Charlie Kirk and the crisis of free Speech in America". Especially vile was Kirk approvingly quoting a biblical verse , Leviticus 20:13, calling for the stoning to death of homosexuals. Proof of this twisted position of Kirk's can be found in my aformentionned critique .

Leviticus 20:13 — New International Version (2011) (NIV)

13 “ ‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

Way to go there Charlie baby. What you deserve is not Heaven but Hell.

Expand full comment
Truth Seeker's avatar

_u_k you moron lefty

Expand full comment
Marc's avatar

You might want to reply as to why you consider me a moron. To repeat, Kirk, was a notorious homophobe amongst other sinful orientations . A CINO, a Christian in Name Only. A filthy hypocrite.

Expand full comment
truth seeker's avatar

why not just out thyself???

Expand full comment
truth seeker's avatar

the reason is self evident, however lieing moron might be a better desciptor

CK did not take on the perjorative simpleton word you use. He did respectfully confront the lost.

Expand full comment
Marc's avatar

CK "respectfully" confronted the "lost" ? What a laugh. He would confront lost gays by telling them at best, they are "sinful", at worst that they should be killed if they did not repent. CK was a mean nasty CINO (Christian in Name Only ). A worthless force for evil.

What do you mean I should out myself? There is nothing to out.

Expand full comment
truth seeker's avatar

As pointed out you say stupid slanderous things. He did not confront gays

(who are lost) and never ever suggested he wished any violence on them.

Mark, out thyself... You say stupid things, and thus it is fair game to suggest the obvious.

Expand full comment
Marc's avatar

Marc

just now

Marc

Here below is Kirk referring to Leviticus 20:13 in his precious Bible ( see below CHARLIE KIRK QUOTE ) : It is clear that his ultimate goal was the death penalty for gays. And most gays are not lost. Have you ever talked to any to ask them if they feel lost because of their orientation ? No you haven't.

CHARLIE KIRK QUOTE:

" Let me reiterate the foulest of Kirk's positions : ( from an article in USA Today )

"In 2024, Kirk criticized children's YouTuber Ms. Rachel for arguing that the bible verse "love thy neighbor" in the Leviticus 18 scripture should apply to gay people. On the podcast, Kirk said: "by the way, Ms. Rachel, you might want to crack open that Bible of yours. In a lesser reference, part of the same part of scripture, is in Leviticus 18, is that ‘thou shall lay with another man shall be stoned to death.' Just saying."

This is a direct quote from his podcast about his clear HATE for gays. What is out of context here ? What is partially true and mostly false here , Susan ? Did Kirk disagree with that Bible quote after mentionning it clearly ? NO! (The quote is Leviticus 20:13 ) . So we must assume he agreed. " END OF QUOTE

Kirk made the technical mistake of referring to Leviticus 18 for his vile and violent position.

The above quote comes from a post I wrote reacting to another article here

Like

Reply

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 16
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
truth seeker's avatar

The issue Kim is the eulogy. What in particular about CK do you find admirable?

People have waxed poetic about RFK, this moment is not for him.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 18
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
truth seeker's avatar

Good question Kim it you can fathom the answer. Most interested in how people think. Am not "angry" not responding to the eulogy of which there are hundreds.

What I said about CK was clearly lost on you and your resonance. I am not paying attention to the "likes" am (for the second time) explaining why the post was so placed. Reread a few times. Period.

Expand full comment
Truth Seeker's avatar

CK was the most influential 31 yr old on the planet. The tribute by RFK echos this however it is not "because" of loyalty to RFK. Wheter his assassin was Israel contrived which is likely, or Soros, or whatever the Dems have become will not bring him back.

Grief is part and parcel of this tenure on earth.

CK did more in 31 years than anyone could mention... He like RFK back DJT 100%.

Any fool not seeing this has blinded themself.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 18Edited
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
truth seeker's avatar

Kim you clearly do not understand Subs. Was not commenting on your comment, specifically!! Was placing it there as you have 12 likes so that it has prominence.

Resonate onwards. And do REREAD what was mentioned about CK.

Expand full comment