At the United Nations General Assembly, Donald Trump delivered a speech that transformed a forum for international cooperation into a stage for his self-proclamation. Before world leaders, he established himself as the sole architect of peace and prosperity, ignoring the collective role in any real progress. This obsession with the self not only distorts reality, but undermines the essence of multilateralism, leaving the world facing crises that demand shared humility, not self-centered monologues.

Trump began his speech by mentioning glitches in the teleprompter, which led him to improvise on personal anecdotes, such as a faulty staircase in the UN building. These trivial details, elevated to central grievances, reveal an inability to prioritize the substantive in a time of wars and climate disasters. Instead of addressing global solutions, his speech is reduced to personal irritations, turning diplomacy into an exercise in superficial victimhood.

His narcissism manifests itself in claims of having resolved seven armed conflicts during his term, without any independent evidence to support them. Such unproven statements not only exaggerate his influence but also insult the victims of ongoing wars, such as those in Ukraine and Gaza, where his arms support has been instrumental. This pathological self-deception erodes trust in the American narrative, prioritizing personal myth over verifiable facts.

Trump lashed out at the UN for not “helping” him resolve these supposed wars, questioning its purpose with accusations of ineffectiveness. He forgets that his administration has cut funding and withdrawn from key mechanisms, weakening the very body he now criticizes. This hypocrisy reveals a one-sided vision: the UN should serve his agendas, not foster consensus that limits his absolute power, thus perpetuating the chaos he pretends to combat.

In his crackdown on migration, Trump accused the UN of funding an “assault” on Western borders, citing budgets of $372 million to assist 624,000 migrants in 2024. This distortion ignores that such flows respond to wars and inequalities driven by past interventions, including those of his own country. Blaming the institution for failing to seal borders amounts to rejecting shared responsibility, fueling xenophobia instead of humanitarian solutions.

His disdain for renewable energy was explicit: he called UN climate efforts a globalist “scam,” urging nations to buy American oil and gas instead of going green. This denial of the scientific consensus, which documents warming above one degree Celsius, prioritizes fossil fuel profits over planetary survival. Trump doesn’t debate facts; he dismisses them to enrich his corporate allies, condemning the world to a future of avoidable catastrophes.

He warned Europe that its countries were “going to hell” for depending on Russian energy and rejecting its fossil fuel model, ignoring European efforts to diversify sources in the face of sanctions he himself imposed. This admonition fragments transatlantic alliances, promoting asymmetric trade that benefits only domestic energy sectors. At a time of tensions with global rivals, his approach divides rather than unites, accelerating the instability he criticizes in others.

He resentfully recalled his rejected bid in the 2000s to renovate the UN complex for $500 million, presenting it as evidence of institutional ingratitude. This commercial digression transforms a diplomatic debate into a contractual grievance, measuring global value by failed transactions. The UN resists such privatization attempts to preserve its independence, but Trump sees it as a personal affront, exposing his worldview as an extension of his business dealings.

On issues such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Trump rejected recognition of a Palestinian state as a “reward to Hamas,” opposing Assembly resolutions seeking phases of peace. This unilateral stance ignores human suffering and demands for justice, aligning itself with interests that perpetuate the occupation. His opposition fails to resolve issues; it deepens divisions, prioritizing political loyalties over international equity.

This speech offers no leadership, but rather a toxic retreat into unilateralism that weakens the institutions forged to counter chaos. By flooding the podium with lies about achievements and selective criticism, Trump evades collective action on wars, migration, and climate change, dragging the world into his narcissistic abyss. Leaders applauded out of politeness, but the truth rings out: an unchecked ego builds not bridges, but ruins.

In Mexico, major media outlets such as El Universal, Televisa, El Heraldo de México, Milenio, and Radio Fórmula have failed to cover the Palestinian genocide and have erected a suffocating media siege in complicity with Israel. They hide the Holocaust, which UN rapporteur Francesca Albanese estimates at 680,000 dead. Of these, 75% are women and children.

Mexican media conglomerates, owners of 40-74% of the national audience, opt for “neutrality” to safeguard ratings and contracts. Their silence condemns 130 million Mexicans to ignorance, replicating a global pattern.

Televisa, under the Azcárraga family, merged with Univision in 2021, injecting billions from Haim Saban, a pro-Israel mogul who calls himself a “one-issue guy” for his Zionism. Saban used Univision for propaganda, silencing Palestinian voices among Latino audiences, an echo that resonates in lukewarm reports about “Hamas attacks” with no mention of 1.5 million displaced people or 1,581 aid workers killed. Globally, 70-80% of news comes from Israeli briefings, as the UN denounces, perpetuating the dehumanization of Palestinians as “terrorists.”

The scandalous Mexico-Israel relationship accelerates this silence. The 2000 Free Trade Agreement boosted bilateral trade to more than US$1 billion annually by 2025, with Israel as a key partner in technology and agriculture. But the dark core is the weapons: from 2006 to 2018, Israel exported 24,000 pistols and rifles to Mexico for the police, fueling drug violence. In 2024, Mexico imported US$20.3 million in Israeli military equipment, including drones and ammunition used in Gaza.

Today, September 22, 2025, a historic turning point: at her morning press conference, Claudia Sheinbaum called the massacre in Gaza “genocide” for the first time, urging an end to the aggression before the UN and recognizing Palestine. “Let’s stop this genocide,” she cried, aligning herself with Chile and 12 nations in Bogotá against arms to Israel. But the corporate media dilutes it.

Contrast this with independent media like La Jornada, which headlines “Stop the Genocide” and details 680,000 victims with testimonies from humanitarian flotillas.

Mexican society, 72% of whom consume news daily, remains blind to this holocaust. Radio Fórmula, with 32 million listeners, dedicates seconds to Gaza versus hours to local gossip. El Universal, receiving 240 million pesos in government advertising, remains silent so as not to bite the hand that finances—and buys—Israeli weapons. Owners like Ealy Ortiz and González of Milenio protect family interests, not the truth. Globally, the Israeli blockade of reporters since 2023 generates misinformation: 70% of coverage uses “Israeli defense” without counterbalance, as Albanese warns.

This global media siege, financed by lobbies and weapons, obscures the 428 deaths from hunger at aid stations in Gaza. In Mexico, the Azcárraga families prioritize alliances with Sabrán, and as a result, Mexicans are misinformed and become unwitting accomplices in a crime that Albanese calls “colonial erasure.”

Kirk, with his history of Islamophobic rhetoric, was complicit in the pro-Israel narrative for years, but his critical shift put him in the crosshairs of a relentless ally. His assassination, far from being an accident, appears to be a surgical move to protect Tel Aviv’s interests.

Here are 5 reasons why Israel benefits from Kirk’s assassination:

1. Silencing a Critical Shift That Threatened Netanyahu

Charlie Kirk, once praised by Netanyahu as “Israel’s lion,” began to question the US’s unconditional support for the Jewish state in 2025, especially following the escalation in Gaza, where more than 65,000 Palestinians have died according to NGOs. On his podcast, with an audience of millions of young conservatives, Kirk hosted anti-interventionist figures like David Smith, challenging the GOP’s pro-Israel narrative. His criticism of billions in military subsidies and his defense of free speech for anti-Israel protests made him an existential threat to the Zionist lobby. His assassination removes an influential voice that could redirect the MAGA movement toward isolationism, ensuring Tel Aviv maintains its control over American conservative discourse.

2. Turning Kirk into a Martyr to Mobilize the Right

Kirk’s death, presented as an “anti-Semitic attack” by pro-Israel media, transforms him into a “Judeo-Christian” symbol for evangelicals and the MAGA wing of the GOP. This martyrdom unifies a conservative base fractured by war fatigue in the Middle East, channeling their anger toward Israel’s enemies like Iran and Hamas. The narrative reinforces loyalty to Tel Aviv, guaranteeing the continued flow of $3.8 billion in annual US military aid. Furthermore, it diverts attention from international criticism of the bombings in seven Arab countries by portraying Israel as a victim. Kirk’s death, in this sense, is a masterstroke to consolidate political support at a critical moment for Netanyahu.

3. Protecting Sensitive Secrets about Epstein and Espionage

In August 2025, Kirk intensified his campaign to declassify the Jeffrey Epstein files, which, according to conspiracy theories, contain links to Israeli intelligence operations, including Mossad’s use of blackmail in elite circles. His public comments about “Jewish control” in Hollywood and universities, although labeled as antisemitic, resonated among conservative sectors skeptical of globalist power. These statements, coupled with his massive reach among young people, made him a risk to Israel. His deletion ensures that potentially explosive information does not come to light, protecting Tel Aviv from a scandal that could erode its influence in Washington and destabilize the perception of its alliance with the US.

4. Shifting the Focus from War Crimes in Gaza and Qatar

Kirk’s assassination comes at an opportune moment for Israel, under fire for the genocide in Gaza and an illegal bombing in Qatar that killed civilians in 2025. The global shock over his death crowds out headlines, replacing debates about human rights violations with a narrative of “an attack on a pro-Israel hero.” This allows Netanyahu to blame “anti-Semitic forces” or the “radical left,” reinforcing Israel’s image as a victim while the US approves new weapons packages. Kirk’s tragedy acts as a smokescreen, silencing criticism from organizations like the UN and diverting international pressure at a time of diplomatic isolation for Tel Aviv.

5. Avoiding a Fracture in the MAGA Movement

The MAGA movement, led by Trump, faces internal tensions between ardent Zionists and isolationists who prioritize “America First.” Kirk, by hosting critics of Israel and questioning the usefulness of the US-Israel alliance, threatened to deepen this divide. His death eliminates the risk of a schism that could weaken GOP support for Israel’s interests, ensuring that pro-Zionist figures like Laura Loomer maintain narrative control. By portraying him as a martyr, Israel reinforces the loyalty of the conservative base, ensuring that subsidies and political support flow uninterrupted, especially in a crucial election year for both countries.

The Times of Israel’s premature announcement on September 10, 2025, 20 minutes before Trump’s 6:45 p.m. ET tweet or any FBI statement, raises suspicions of a calculated operation. Netanyahu, at 6:25 p.m. ET, called Kirk “Israel’s lion friend,” a gesture many see as an attempt to control the narrative. The Israeli media’s swiftness, without explanation from its source, suggests insider knowledge, fueling theories of a Mossad coup.

Kirk’s death strategically strengthens Israel. His blood unites conservatives. The truth, like the Epstein files, remains buried.