What would Charlie have said (WWCHS)

The thing that made the late Charlie Kirk so unique was his ability to properly respond to any question asked of him by college students at their campuses, covering a wide variety of subjects. His vast wealth of information on everything from abortion to politics to issues of faith and morality gave him an edge over so many others who may have expertise on one subject but certainly not ten. 

Once he left us, it seemed that he could only be replaced by at least 5-6 people, each having their own expertise on topics frequently asked. At the moment, Turning Point USA has not chosen to go in that direction.

Instead, they recently invited Vice President Vance to address students at the University of Mississippi campus, where he took on the many challenging questions posed to him.

As usual, students stood in line, waiting to approach the microphone. But one, in particular, caught my attention. Identifying himself as a young Christian man, he said, “I’m confused why there’s this notion that we might owe Israel something or that they’re our greatest ally or that we have to support this multi hundred-billion-dollar foreign aid package to Israel to cover this, to quote Charlie Kirk, ethnic cleansing in Gaza.  I’m just confused why this idea has come around considering the fact that not only does their religion not agree with ours but also openly supports the prosecution of ours.”  

Within this question, could be heard anti-Israel and anti-Semitic rhetoric, as well as a non-substantiated quote that Charlie Kirk supposedly held the opinion that the IDF was guilty of ethnic cleansing in Gaza.

All of those matters begged to be addressed on a very thorough level, because they went beyond the political and into areas which had spiritual implications as well. Unfortunately, Vance failed to do so and simply spoke to the fact that the U.S. and Israel do have some common interests which justifies why there is involvement between the two countries.

In the end, the ethnic cleansing claim was not tackled nor the badly-framed comment about Judaism differing from Christianity, in a way that actually is hostile –  two pressing statements which, left unanswered, have the potential to develop into grave concerns for listeners who should have heard clear and moral responses.

Now we ask the question, “What would Charlie have said?” How would he have responded?

Having listened to many hours of Charlie taking questions on campuses, it seems to me that Charlie would have begun by asking this young man how he defines his Christian faith. Does he adhere to the words of the scriptures?  Does he know that Israel is a constant running theme throughout them, the first of which commands us to bless her so that we can be blessed in return?

Because none of his comments gave the slightest hint that this man felt any affection or good will towards the Jewish state. On the contrary, by stating that Judaism is antithetical to Christianity, and also asserting that Charlie Kirk had, himself, accused Israel of engaging in ethnic cleansing, already revealed a disdain for Israel, exposing a serious bias which, unfortunately, went unchallenged.

Charlie would have never allowed such blatant inflammatory statements to stand, without forcing the speaker to back his words. In this case, Vance should have, at the very least, asked the man to provide a sourced reference as to when Charlie spoke about Israel as having committed ethnic cleansing.  

Of course, such a scathing charge, from Charlie, a devout Christian, would have been top headlines in every newspaper. But I don’t remember ever seeing anything that resembled those sentiments. Nonetheless, the doubt now lingers as to whether or not he ever made such an accusation.

This is the frequently used predictable tactic of those who employ smears as a way to convince others that their point of view is correct. Rather than specifically state the date, time, event, along with other factual information to substantiate what amounts to a libelous accusation, the reference is made, causing everyone to wonder.

Without a doubt, Charlie would have nailed him on that, because he would have known that to allow that kind of allegation to go undisputed, could easily condemn the entire Israeli military, who has taken great pains to minimize civilian casualties, even at their own peril.

But this questioner had no problem with making a false moral equivalence.

It must be firmly said that defending one’s citizens, by removing the bloodthirsty terrorists whose goal is to completely annihilate the Jewish state, is not equal to ethnic cleansing, defined as systematic forced removal of an ethnic, racial or religious group from a given territory. 

Charlie received so many of these types of questions following the massacre of October 7th. Regrettably, many young people, rather than searching out accurate information or speaking to eyewitnesses, chose to go with the voices of biased, anti-Israel peers, making it easy to believe the worst about the Jewish state.

In one particular exchange, a young man, after just having used Jewish writings to disparage Jews, asked Charlie, point blank, if he supported Israel. Charlie’s answer was, “Yes, of course I do.” Charlie went on to test him on his knowledge of Judaism, which proved to be next to nothing. It was easy to counter the man’s nasty remarks, because Charlie had studied Jewish texts extensively.  

Then there were others, who, under the “America First” agenda, argued that supporting Israel was not in the best interest of their country. Totally misunderstanding the crucial role played by Israel in fighting terrorism and the tyranny of radical Islam, they have never considered themselves to be an eventual target of Hamas.  

All they knew was that supporting a Jewish state seemed contrary to the promises made by President Trump who vowed to put the interests of American citizens before all others. The huge miscalculation comes in their ignorance of the stated goals of Islam – first Israel, then America. Europe is practically there already!

It's all too easy for ignorant individuals to throw out bogus claims against Israel to speakers who lack the necessary knowledge or information to counter them. That’s why Turning Point USA should always have someone personally knowledgeable, on hand, in future public debates, who would be able to immediately refute the anti-Israel accusations which will come their way, because they surely will!

It was what Charlie did best!