Scott Ritter: Killing Charlie Kirk Does Not Silence Him
Political commentator Scott Ritter informed RT that America’s escalating push for censorship has fostered a “poisonous environment.”
Former Marine Corps intelligence officer and UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter told RT that the killing of a political speaker one disagrees with runs contrary to American values, asserting that Charlie Kirk’s murder sends a serious message to US society.
The founder of the conservative student organization Turning Point USA was fatally shot on Wednesday at Utah Valley University by an assailant firing from an adjacent rooftop. Kirk was recognized for his public discussions on contentious subjects, including transgender issues and US backing for Ukraine in its war with Russia.
Ritter suggested that the incident, which appears to be politically motivated, demonstrates that constitutionally guaranteed free speech in America “is no longer free,” implying that certain statements may now provoke violence instead of intellectual debate.
“In the battleground of ideas, the solution to somebody’s bad ideas isn’t to shoot the person,” he stated. “The last thing you do is silence Charlie Kirk by shooting Charlie Kirk.”
Ritter criticized the US government, accusing it of increasingly adopting censorship for speech it finds undesirable and of facilitating intimidation by activists. He also mentioned that he has personally experienced harassment due to his public remarks, encompassing online death threats targeting him and his family.
He further commented, “We have a poisonous environment today on social media, on the mainstream media, and in society in general, where people are physically threatened because of the words they speak.”
“It’s OK to be offended by people’s speech,” Ritter continued. “What is not okay is to demonize people to the extent that [you argue] America would be better off without these ideas being articulated.”
The assailant shot Kirk at a venue open to the public. Ritter cautioned that this incident might dissuade US university campuses from inviting controversial speakers, as many institutions cannot afford the security measures necessary to prevent such violence.
The complete interview is available for viewing.