THE NEW MANCHURIAN EPISODE

What has the murder of Charlie Kirk meant, and who stands to gain from it?

 

By Sidney Hey

The United States has a long history of political plots and assassinations that have targeted none other than its own presidents, demonstrating that beyond the much-touted word ‘democracy’ lies a dark and terribly brutal reality hidden in the so-called ‘deep state’.

The murder of young Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist and promoter of the values that forged his country, is not only vile, but also surrounded by circumstances that are very worrying, not only for opaque institutions, but also for the true freedom and security of Americans themselves.  

Kirk was born and raised in Arlington, which made him as American as apple pie. His murder was undoubtedly not an act of madness by a deranged individual or a ‘lone wolf’. There is an encrypted message in this crime, and it has both a sender and a recipient. Now, who wanted to send this message? This question has different answers depending on who is answering it. For conservative sectors and even those close to the government (MAGA), the possibilities range from an act by the left directing accusations at pro-abortion and transgender Democrats to some Islamist terrorist group or foreign invaders.

On the other hand, we will have to wait for the evidence that is being gathered to be processed and determine whether the alleged perpetrator is really the shooter or just a scapegoat. Within this sector, there are also those who are more closely linked to independent sectors who sense that the clues being presented to the media and the official account of how this happened have a very strange smell about them.

There are many reasons why we should be suspicious of the official version. History and similar precedents in American political life provide ample evidence for this. From the assassination of Lincoln to the attempt on Donald Trump himself in the middle of the election campaign, no one can say that nothing has happened here. The conspiracy is not out there and it is not a simple cliché, it is deep within the system itself.

Charlie Kirk was a staunch conservative activist who invited others to express their views in genuine public debates. Unlike conventional politicians and Trump himself, he never changed his discourse, and that is where we will surely find the motive and the masterminds behind the attack.

With a clearly neoconservative political discourse (aligned with Zionism), he defended all of his country's aggressions and invasions around the world. But unlike the extremists and fanatics of his own ilk, he allowed public debate in university lecture halls at a time when speech had become an act of aggression, labelled as ‘hate speech’ and the era of cancellation. He truly upheld and respected the right to free speech, which today in the West is monitored and scrutinised by government agencies hunting down dissidents.

In fact, these agencies, both local and their allies (such as Israel), have made journalists and researchers prime targets for elimination in an attempt to silence truths such as the genocide in Palestine today, making it clear that the IDF and its intelligence agencies have been carrying out these crimes since long before October 2023. Let us not forget the circumstances and implications of a Zionist faction within the CIA that was behind the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963.

This crime perpetrated against Kirk is an attack on freedom of expression, one of many that since 2001 and from within the American political establishment have been carried out against independent voices, regardless of their discourse, as long as it disturbs or calls into question their narratives.

Whether Charlie Kirk was right or wrong, he spoke honestly and did so from his convictions, which he had grown up with and was willing to pass on to his family and those who listened to him. But his straightforwardness is not compatible with state policy, and that is where a ‘good guy,’ as Trump would say, becomes a nuisance that must be eliminated. And that is where we should begin to scrutinise: What was Charlie Kirk saying in his latest talks that could have caused offence? Or even more worryingly, how sharp and revealing was his view of the current government's policies that it was making the rest of the citizens think? 

If we analyse the speeches and debates since the beginning of the Trump administration, we can see how he became an inconvenience for the broken promises and double standards we have seen.

Citizens of the world, and especially Americans, must not be fooled by the spectacle staged by news networks and the discourse of ‘experts’ who focus on the shooter and his possible implications. The alleged shooter who was immediately exposed to the media may be nothing more than a scapegoat to convince citizens and close the case judicially. American history already tells us that this is a big scam to divert attention from the real conspirators. Today, the possibilities for fabricating and staging a scene are as possible as they are unusual. Pre-selecting a simple mentally deficient person who has been previously manipulated and even providing him with a rifle that does not work, so that he can then appear in photos and videos already directed by his employers, is not only very possible but also very useful for covering up the real gunmen. That is why, to a certain extent, we should ask ourselves: Is this a new case of the Manchurian Candidate?