I Hate Being the One to Ask This, But… Where Are the Pictures of Gaza's dead Palestinians?

I'm probably going to get in trouble for this — another Google ban? — but… I'm sorry, the question needs to be asked, and somebody needs to ask it: Where are the photographs of Gaza's dead Palestinians?

Remember the Gaza kid who was allegedly malnourished and starving "because of" Israel's inhumane policies? Didn't Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq's photo and story immediately show up in the New York Times and everywhere else?

Above is the first photo of American dead to appear in America during World War II — a conflict in which the USA participated without much controversy, i.e., without protestors, hysterical radicals or other types, clamoring one way or another.

If, in Zoran Mamdani's words, it is true that 

Benjamin Netanyahu is a war criminal, the architect of a horrific genocide against the Palestinian people. He is responsible for the killing of more than 73,000 people, for the maiming of tens of thousands of children 

— then you don't have to be a hysterical propagandist in Palestine or even a dishonest one, to think as follows: "Why not set up, say, 20 of the myriad of corpses, or 50, or 100, either in a morgue or among the ruins of the city, and invite in the international press corps? Let the world see the war crimes of the Israelis!"

In fact, if in the New York mayor's words, "the UN confirmed that Palestinian children continue to be deliberately targeted and killed by Israeli armed forces", why not up the ante and have the 20/50/100 corpses be exclusively of… Palestinian kids?! (Certainly, in all cases — dead adults or dead children — the photos should be blurred — especially if the cadavers display horrific wounds — but the question remains.)

When Zoran Mamdani mentions "the devastation he [Netanyahu] has wrought", what we see are ruined buildings — indeed, smoldering cityscapes — which remind people, whatever their leanings, of World War II — here we go back to the 1940s again — when carpet bombings led to thousands of dead civilians.

But as far as Gaza is concerned, do we ever seem to see a single corpse? 

The prime minister's office in Jerusalem states that

Under Prime Minister Netanyahu's leadership, Israel has taken unprecedented wartime measures to minimize harm to civilians while confronting Hamas, a genocidal terrorist organization that uses Palestinians as human shields and deliberately targets innocent Israeli civilians  

Could it be that the IDF's boast to keep the casualties down as best as possible is not propaganda? 

Radio Courtoisie's 250th Anniversary Part 2: An American Retrospective — From George Washington to Teddy Roosevelt and Donald Trump

Today, I was a guest on Evelyne Joslain's Radio Courtoisie for the Second Part of America's 250th birthday celebration: An American Retrospective: from George Washington to Teddy Roosevelt and Donald Trump (audio at link).

The first part, on June 24, was a history stroll through the first half century of the American Republic, from about 1756 to 1815, from the French and Indian War and the Boston Tea Party through the revolutionary years and the writing of the Constitution until Jefferson's purchase of the Louisiana territory and the Lewis and Clark expedition. 

Today's second podcast — Une Rétrospective américaine : de George Washington à Teddy Roosevelt et à Trump, avec Erik Svane — treats the next couple of centuries of American history, focusing on the first hundred years, with the War of 1812 and the Texas Revolution through the conquest of the Wild West and the Civil War to the closing of the frontier and the Spanish-American War.

I am grateful that we have received lots of congratulations from people after the first podcast who added that they have learned a lot. 

 

Libre journal du nouveau monde du 22 juillet 2026 : « Une Rétrospective américaine : de George Washington à Teddy Roosevelt et à Trump, avec Erik Svane »

• Patron d'émission : Joslain Evelyne

Le 22 juillet 2026

Evelyne Joslain, assistée d’Eric, reçoit :

• Erik Svane, porte-parole des Republicans Overseas France

Une Rétrospective américaine : de George Washington à Teddy Roosevelt et à Trump.

What is the difference between a "Yank" and a "Frog"? At 50, an American buys a $300,000 house in Florida; At 50, a Frenchman takes to the streets to protest an extra €50 per month

In just a handful of sentences, plus one cartoon, Sebastien Laye takes down the French public deficit:

France’s 2025 public deficit: €152.5bn.

The government’s extra €3bn in annual savings equals just 2% of that gap. At that pace, reaching zero would take 51 years.

France needs structural reform—not budgetary symbolism.

On the other hand, Sebastien is more loquacious when discussing America's 27th state, in which the founder of Eudokia Wealth is spending more and more of his time:

Wow, Florida has truly impressed me with its extraordinary economic momentum. I am struck by how the Sunshine State has surpassed Australia and Mexico to rank as one of the world’s top economies if it were a sovereign nation (14th rank). With a $1.8 trillion economy in 2025 and on track to reach $2 trillion this year, Florida stands nearly the size of Brazil at $2.1T, Spain at $2.1T, and Canada at $2.4T — effectively doubling its GDP in just eight years. This achievement underscores the power of principled leadership and a dynamic business environment. 

You don't know me? I am Sebastien Laye, an American citizen born in France. After spending a decade in Europe, I have returned to the United States. I am an entrepreneur specializing in artificial intelligence and data centers, as well as an economist and author. My international experience provides me with a distinctive transatlantic perspective, combining European insight with a deep understanding of the U.S. market. 

This leads the entrepreneur to point out that

The biggest economic story of the last two decades isn’t China.

It’s the widening gap between the U.S. and Europe.

Americans can afford homes, investments, and global travel increasingly out of reach for Europe’s middle class.

You don’t notice decline when it happens slowly.

In that perspective, what is the difference between an American and a Frenchman? 

At 50 years old, an American buys a $300,000 house in Florida.
At 50 years old, a Frenchman takes to the streets to protest an extra €50 per month.
Same generation. Two very different outcomes.
I am an American citizen but was born French and just spent 10 years in Europe.
I see this difference everywhere.
It does not come from salary levels.
It comes from a fundamental mindset.
Americans invest. The Europeans save and fear the future.
In the U.S., your retirement savings are automatically invested in stock funds by default.
You do not have to do anything. Your employer often matches contributions.
In France, your money sits in a Livret A savings account earning 3%.
Your bank takes its commission along the way and tells you that the stock market is “too risky for you.”
Over 25 years, with the same monthly effort:
→ $500 per month invested at 7% ≈ +$400,000
→ $500 per month in “safe” savings at 2% ≈ +$190,000
Same effort. Double the capital.
At retirement, this changes everything.
I am not saying everything is better here. It is just different.

 

The 4 questions that the "Real communism has never been tried" folks never seem to ask

 

The main problem with the claim that "Real communism (or real socialism) has never been tried" isn't how much truth there might be in that sentence or not.  

It's as follows: 

• Given the alleged claim that communism has never been done right, and that during myriad attempts in over a century, with one — horrific — failure after another, what makes you think that this time will lead to success? How many chances are there, really, of that (finally) happening? How willing are you to risk a(nother) failure — with all that that entails?

Remember the millions of deaths under Lenin and Stalin? Remember the millions of deaths under Mao? Remember the millions of deaths under Pol Pot? Do go to Instapundit to check out Solzhenitsyn's assessment and verdict.

• Given the extent of the nightmares under socialism (the real kind or any other type), how much better is socialism, really, than the free market in the first place? (As a kid during the Cold War, I remember capitalism being skewered for being responsible for… the horrendous unemployment rate! By the way, if the would-be communist countries are not to be defined by real communism, why must the West be defined by "real" capitalism?)

• Speaking of which: given that we are country bumpkins who are not supposed to understand the underlying beauty of the dream, why would this type of claim not be applicable to fascism? And, for that matter, Nazism?! Why couldn't a group of neo-fascists likewise come and claim — either while lauding or while disparaging such people as Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini ("der Führer and il Duce managed to screw up society's beautiful dream!") — that "Real fascism (or real Nazism) has never been tried"; while we are supposed to remain silent and give the rosy description of their ideology the benefit of the doubt? [Update: No, in no way am I advocating fascism or neo-fascists to start advancing this type of "arguments"; I am as much against fascists as against communists; all that I am doing is pointing out the double standards of people who are not against one type of authoritarian dictatorship while they are against the other.]

• Finally: How many citizens, exactly, are supposed to suffer and die during the next attempt to impose socialism (successfully or otherwise)? Given that the previous shots at introducing socialism have led to so many tragedies, how willing are you to have your family, your loved ones, and your neighbors join in the numbers of innocents arrested/deported/executed/worked to death in the next attempt? Are you yourself willing to volunteer to be among the victims?

"Frequent apologias for feminism": Calling Nolan's film "an epic mistake", The Economist dismisses the movie as "a very silly adaptation" of “The Odyssey”

You have read Ed Driscoll's collection of movie reviews of “The Odyssey”— good as well as bad — on Instapundit (if you haven't, do check 'em out). Now The Economist joins the fray.

Calling Christopher Nolan's film "an epic mistake", the London weekly turns to the favorite adjective of the Monty Python troupe to dismiss the movie about "Odysseus, the sacker of cities" as A very silly adaptation of “The Odyssey”. (Thanks for the Instalinks to Ed and to Sarah who comments: WHEN EVEN THE ECONOMIST THINKS YOU’RE TOO WOKE.)

Warning: the film review, which happens to be this week's story most read by subscribers of The Economist, contains a spoiler (!) at the end of the very first paragraph quoted below: 

The film itself is unlikely to allay any anxieties about anachronisms. In everything from its scenery to its psychology it says far more about the modern West than about ancient Greece. Startling liberties are taken with the plot to turn Odysseus, the archetypally flawed ancient hero, into a simple modern goody by flattening his flaws. Any bad behaviour is explained away either by drug use or hinted to be due to proto-PTSD (the overdiagnosis epidemic having apparently reached the ancient shores of Ithaca). The ending, which has him pierced by arrows and turned into a St Sebastian-style pincushion, is sillier still.

 … Sir Christopher’s retelling … is manifestly a product of the present day. Female characters offer frequent apologias for feminism (not a noted strong suit of the ancients). The casus belli of the Trojan war is given as a desire to improve trade routes, as if Agamemnon were merely a blameless advocate for free trade rather than one of antiquity’s greatest thugs. 

… The simplistic, visual modern world has taken Homer and turned him into social-media spats and an absurd Cyclops—and thus into a tragedy that is all its own. ■ 

Meanwhile, three critics at The New Yorker are enchanted by the film, with Naomi Fry, Vinson Cunningham, and Alexandra Schwartz giving it 4, 4.5, and 4.5 stars out of 5, respectively.

When asked, by Newsletter editor Caroline Mimbs Nyce, "how might this version reflect our current cultural moment?", Alexandra Schwartz confirms the Economist's review, answering that 

The thing that feels the most contemporary to me is the film’s treatment of women, who are universally depicted as prisoners of a patriarchal world. Helen’s famous face has been disfigured, presumably by her angry husband, Menelaus; the sorceress Circe uses her witchcraft in self-defense, seemingly as a result of traumatic encounters with men. Nolan has been criticized for his thin treatment of women in the past, and I sense he’s making up for it here—but I fear this approach is differently reductive. 

The Economist Weekly Reveals Its Frustration: Why Won't Donald Trump Let the SAVE Act Go?

It is surreal to see The Economist suggest that it is somehow problematic to make a law saying that if you wish to go into a voting booth, you must show an ID (The bill that won't die, July 11th) — something that has been considered the epitome of common sense as far as anyone can remember. (Cheers to Sarah for the Instalink.)

After speaking, derogatorily, about "Donald Trump’s fixation on a bill with little chance of becoming law," the London weekly goes on to ape one leftist talking point after another.

Mr Trump says he will not sign any legislation until the SAVE Act is approved. Prediction markets put its odds at less than one in ten. 

 … Supporters describe the measure as an election-integrity reform that would increase public confidence and ensure that only citizens vote. Yet evidence of voter fraud by non-citizens—or anyone else—is vanishingly rare.

The SAVE Act would, however, make it harder for citizens to register and vote. 

 … In private, Republican aides concede that Mr Trump will probably use the bill’s failure as a pretext to blame lawmakers if the party loses seats in the midterms. Critics see a broader purpose. They argue that the SAVE Act is part of an effort to undermine trust in elections. “The strategy was never about necessarily passing this bill,” argues Alexandra Chandler of Protect Democracy, a non-profit. “It’s about setting the pretext to claim that if Democrats win, then the election can’t be trusted.” 

Mr Trump has repeatedly made such claims. Earlier this month his administration ordered the FBI to beef up an investigation related to the 2020 election in Georgia, reviving his baseless allegations of widespread fraud in the contest he lost. [Sic: Check out my post Let's Stop Using the Words "Trump Tried to Overturn the 2020 Election"; It's Unprofessional Journalism.]

Whatever the fate of the SAVE Act, Americans’ trust in the electoral process has already been deeply eroded, not least by Mr Trump’s repeated attacks on election integrity.

Moreover, that such a reasonable bill as the SAVE America Act should be necessary shows how far left America's Democrat party has gone. And yet The Economist puts all the onus on Donald Trump, calling the president's concerns for elections past and present "baseless" as well as a "fixation" while implying that he is the one trying to cheat.

But where else on the planet have leftists accumulated such a stronghold of dubious voting rules  — or, rather, the lack thereof (unconstitutional changes to state election laws, voting by mail, vote harvesting, unsupervised ballot drop boxes, counting votes for days or weeks after election "day", not demanding an ID because doing so is racist, etc)? Is it really Donald Trump, then, who is undermining trust in elections?!

There is not a single country in Europe — supposedly the model for the Democrat party on numerous issues — not to mention such nations as Japan and Nigeria, where such rules (or the lack thereof) are present; so the only conclusion must be that all of them are de facto racist. 

Regular voting is called election "day" across the West for a reason — by the end of the day (or within 24 hours), the population is supposed to know the results. Not having election integrity might suggest, as Donald Trump has pointed out, that your nation is akin to a third world country.

• See also: Joe Biden, Why Are You Calling Denmark a White Supremacist Country? And You, Barack Obama: Why Are You Calling Africa a Racist Continent?

• Let's Stop Using the Words "Trump Tried to Overturn the 2020 Election"; It's Unprofessional Journalism

* Also called Why Donald Trump won’t let a doomed bill die, July 11th 

Comparing 1776 with 1789 — America and France: A Tale of Two Revolutions

 
Over at PragerU, Andrew Roberts compares 1776 with 1789 — America and France: A Tale of Two Revolutions.

Two revolutions reshaped the world in the late 18th century. The American Revolution gave birth to the most successful republic in history. The French Revolution gave birth to the guillotine. So what went right in America, and what went wrong in France? Renowned author and historian Andrew Roberts explains. 

Related: Bastille Day Scandal — Any Person, French or Foreign, Wishing to View the Champs-Élysées Parade Must Wear a QR Code; Deafening Silence from France's Media Outlets

Over at Youtube, this is one of the comments:

@JkGreyWolf-21

Thomas Sowell’s great work, A Conflict of Visions , goes in depth on these philosophical differences, which he categorizes as Constrained (flawed human nature) vs. Unconstrained (perfectable human nature). We see these differences echo down today into many examples of left vs. right. These are the First Principles behind each side that are almost hidden from most of the public today. Well worth exploring. Imagine if universities covered this broadly- but then one side clearly outperforms the other.

Bastille Day Scandal: Any Person, French or Foreign, Wishing to View the Champs-Élysées Parade Must Wear a QR Code; Deafening Silence from France's Media Outlets

Which French scandal is worst? The fact that the French authorities have decided to impose QR codes on all people, French as well as foreign tourists, who wish to attend Tuesday's Bastille Day parade on the Champs-Élysées? Or the fact that hardly any news outlet has seen fit to even mention the decision?  

That is the question asked by the Moranidini website as well as by CNews, the right-leaning TV news program regularly described as fascist and whose license is under constant threat by the authorities. 

For the first time ever, you cannot just wander over to the most famous street in Paris and simply join the crowd (the same, incidentally, is increasingly true of museums; a stroller cannot be spontaneous and just walk in; he has to sign in beforehand on the internet), something that is dubious foreign tourists have heard about. Or, for that matter (what with the medias' deafening silence), French people themselves.

 … for the first time, anyone wishing to attend the July 14th military parade on the Champs-Élysées will be required to register in advance. Access for the general public—excluding official guests—will be reserved exclusively for spectators holding a personalized QR code. Registration must be completed via an online platform managed by the Office of the President of the Republic.

… Detractors denounce a departure from the popular, free, and traditionally open nature of the Bastille Day parade. The authorities respond that a gathering bringing together tens of thousands of people and several heads of state now requires exceptional precautions.

Well, there you have it: Perhaps le président de la République simply wants to be spared from being booed, as happened during last year's 14 juillet, on what will be this Tuesday Emmanuel Macron's final Bastille Day parade. (Merci à Sarah pour l'Instalien.)

Related: Comparing 1776 with 1789 — America and France: A Tale of Two Revolutions

For half a decade, libertarians have been wondering what, following in the wake of the Covid lockdown, would be the next attempt on people's liberties — predicting it would be some sort of new disease (real or imagined); who could have foreseen that it would instead center on a military parade on the Champs-Élysées in Paris?

14 juillet : Le scandale des "QR code" obligatoires imposés par l'Elysée, pour la première fois, pour assister dans la foule au défilé militaire à Paris - Le silence assourdissant des médias - Vidéo

UPDATE:  On Monday, one day before the Bastille Day parade, according to France Soir, a judge shut down the QR system, telling police officers to cease and desist asking for QR codes and ID papers. But the following day, the police and gendarmes had not been informed thereof, not all of them anyway, as they were still seen to be verifying QR codes and IDs of people approaching the Champs-Élysées.

 

« On est en train de privatiser la Fête nationale ! On est en train d'enlever au peuple français ce qui lui appartient, c'est-à-dire la Fête nationale, par manque de courage face à l'insécurité. » 
— Kévin Bossuet, CNews, 11 juillet 2026.

Today Is George Bush's Birthday (George Turns 23)

Today George Bush will be celebrating his birthday. Some will protest and say, that's not true, the former president's birthday was July 6. But we're not talking about the same person, apparently. Nor about his father. Because this George Bush turns only 23 today.

The George Bush I have in mind is not the one whose full name is George Walker Bush, nor the one whose full name is George Herbert Walker Bush, but the one whose full name is George Bush Abdul Kader Faris Abed El-Hussein (no relation to Saddam). And this George Bush was born in Baghdad on July 11, 2003. (Update: Shookhran to Instapundit's Ed Driscoll.)

From a post of exactly two decades ago:

As far as can be ascertained, George Bush’s parents named him in honor of some Western leader one of whose recent feats they found to be not only impressive and admirable, obviously, but worthy enough to name their new-born son after. They must have been plenty impressed, in view of the fact that they gave their child the name of someone not of their faith, with linguistic roots not of their culture. (Sort of like a Westerner — say, someone from the Bush clan — giving a newborn son a name such as Mohammed Ahmed Yusuf Bush.)

Now, here is what I suggest. I suggest that the West should send a number of representatives to Baghdad. The type of people that David Brooks calls “the members of the sneering brigade”, “the think-tank johnnies and the rest of the commentariate” in “their usual sky-is-falling mode” — people like José Bové, François Hollande, Jacques Chirac, Gerhard Schröder, José Luis Zapatero, Jean-Marie Colombani, Plantu, Willem (to name only the Europeans), etc… They should choose a couple of high-visibility VIPs, “arm” them with all the usual arguments, and send them to Baghdad.

And there, they should seek out the parents of George Bush. Once the couple has been found, they should patiently explain the “truth” to them and seek thereby to install some common sense in them. That would include telling them…

• that the war was unnecessary and a sham, conducted for bogus reasons;
• that Iraq, and the world, were far better off before the conflict;
• that the presence of foreign soldiers is “humiliating” for George Bush and his fellow countrymen;
• that they must resent America (or at least, the Bush administration) for the current situation in which thousands have been killed over a period of more than three years and hark back to the previous situation in which the secret police killed several thousands per month with total impunity;
• that, in contrast to the administration of George Bush’s namesake, they, the holier-than-thou members of the peace camp, had (and have) nothing but the best interests of his parents in mind;
• oh, and, of course, that George Bush’s namesake is nothing but a nincompoop and a despicable liar.

Once the parents of George Bush have been converted to the sky-is-falling truth, the “the members of the sneering brigade” could go to work convincing more of Iraq’s population.

The members of “the commentariate” could start with Mohammed, Ali, and Omar, the brothers from Iraq the Model and expand outwards, to include the Iraqis who lost hands and tongues to Saddam’s thugs, had their faced scarred by acid, had their sisters, mothers, and daughters raped, and had their parents, brothers, and children shot down and their bodies thrown into unnamed graves. With luck, “the think-tank johnnies” would eventually reach that vast majority of people who in polls believe life has never been better since the war toppled Saddam and who say they feel more optimistic than they ever had in the past.

Let us join together and wish them “good luck and godspeed with your sacred mission”.

Oh, and by the way, Georgie: Happy birthday!

Related: There's a new George Bush in Baghdad,
six weeks old and screaming in a crib
• Nadia Jergis Mohammed, 34, … told Associated Press Television News:

"I tell you all Iraqis hated Saddam's regime. It was only George Bush who liberated us, without him it wouldn't have happened. If he hadn't done it the sons of Saddam would have ruled us for years. He saved us from Saddam and that's why we named our son after him"

Related: George Bush of Iraq, Meet Little Trump of Syria…

Blast from the past:
• 2018 — Today is George Bush's Birthday (George Turns 15) 
• 2016 — Today is George Bush's Birthday (George Turns 13) 
• 2006 — Today is George Bush's Birthday (George Turns 3) 
• 2004 — George Bush's Birthday is July 11 (He Will Be 1 Year Old)

Why Greenland? "China's Desire to Dominate Global Waterways Is a Threat to Sovereign Nations"

Over at Fox News, Eric Mack has an interview with US Ambassador to the UK Warren Stephens [stating that] China's desire to dominate global waterways is a threat to sovereign nations. (Nie Hau to Sarah for the Instalink.)

China is using control over global seas as a tool of "political coercion," the U.S. ambassador to the United Kingdom warned, and President Donald Trump is restating his interest in Greenland for that very same reason.

China is seeking to turn ports, ships and supply chains into instruments of geopolitical leverage, U.S. Ambassador to the U.K. Warren Stephens warned in a statement to the International Maritime Organization Council (IMO).

"I spoke about a challenge that we cannot afford to ignore: China's systematic effort to use maritime power as an instrument of political coercion," Stephens wrote in a Truth Social post after the speech. 

"Beijing has pursued an aggressive strategy of acquiring port concessions and infrastructure around the world — not simply for commercial gain, but to extend its strategic reach and weaponize that access against sovereign nations."

The U.S. is "not a passive observer of maritime affairs," Stephens told the IMO, calling America a "cornerstone of the global maritime economy." 

  … The warning comes as Trump continued peacemaking efforts in the Strait of Hormuz and pressing Demark [sic] and NATO for U.S. control over Greenland due to Chinese and Russian threats to free navigation in the Arctic.

"Denmark doesn't spend money to really help Greenland, but it's an important part for the United States. And it's surrounded by China ships and Russian ships," Trump said at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey.

For global security, Greenland "should be controlled by the United States, not by Denmark," Trump added.

 … Greenland’s position between the Arctic and North Atlantic has made it a key piece of U.S. security planning.

Did you know? Back in February, I wrote a major article in Danish simply presenting the point of view of Donald Trump regarding the reasons for trying to overtake Greenland, and it was rejected by all parties in Denmark, even the pro-rightist websites and even the (rare) pro-Trump websites, the equivalents of, say, Fox News and Instapundit.

FYI, the major reasons for President Trump's designs on Greenland are discussed in these articles:

• Bombshell Revelation! Lexington Institute Explains the Exact Event Which Caused Trump 45 to Want to Acquire Greenland; ADDENDUM: Here Is What Is Wrong with Greenland's Status Quo

• NOT SO DELUSIONAL — The Donroe Doctrine and Beijing's "Polar Silk Road": Last Month, a Report by None Other than Danish Intelligence Itself Warned About the Russian and Chinese Threat to Greenland and the Arctic

Back to Fox News' Eric Mack:

 … Stephens said China’s response to the Panama ruling was "swift and punishing," accusing Beijing of taking action against Panama-flagged vessels in a move the U.S. characterized as an attempt to undermine Panama’s sovereignty and disrupt global supply chains.

"What happened to Panama is a warning to every nation in this room," Stephens said.

"When a country allows a foreign power or its proxies to control its ports, it does not simply accept a commercial arrangement," he added. "It accepts a vulnerability."

Stephens urged IMO member states to closely scrutinize deals allowing foreign entities, especially state-linked enterprises, to operate critical port infrastructure.

"Transparency, the rule of law and genuine sovereignty are not obstacles to commerce," Stephens said. "They are its foundation."

 … "The pattern is consistent: China uses its maritime and economic power to coerce, to intimidate and to punish those who assert their sovereign rights," Stephens said. 

Trump envoy warns China's power move at sea is threat 'we cannot afford to ignore' 

 

Iran: "What Saves Us and the Free World Is the Ego of Donald Trump"

"The United States and the free world have all befitted from the continuation of the Iran war," says Philippe Karsenty to a crowd of leftist guests and hosts on BFMTV (video). "The objective remains régime change. The world will not be free until the Tehran régime has been obliterated." 

As the ceasefire is over, he adds that that "What is saving us and the Free World is the ego of Donald Trump." (Merci à Sarah pour l'Instalien.)

Moreover, the spokesman for le Comité Trump France (who appears at 2:55, 9:47-12:12, 14:36-15:56, and 17:00-17:51) warned against believing the mid-terms will be won by the Democrats as he mentions the New York town hall as an example showing how radical the Democrat Party has become. While he thinks that, consequently, Trump will win the mid-terms in November, he believes that, conversely, Benjamin Netanyahu will lose in Israel that same month.

BFM TV 8 juillet 2026 - Trump frappe l'Iran, le cessez le feu est terminé

 

 

Ray-Ban Semiology: France's "Top-Gunned" President and the Mystique Granted by His Dark Aviator Shades

It turns out that France's president has taken to wear aviator glasses. As the Élysée Palace explains that one of Emmanuel Macron's eyes is suffering from an unspecified illness or trauma, Élodie Mielczareck thinks that there is more to the story, however.

Indeed, his shades have become a political sign, the semiology expert explains to Madame Figaro's Axelle Dusart in Pourquoi Emmanuel Macron porte-t-il des lunettes aviateur ?

Their shape is far from insignificant: their large, wraparound lenses cover the entire field of vision, including peripheral vision. Originally, they were a piece of technical equipment designed to protect US military pilots from UV rays at high altitudes—hence the name Ray-Ban, literally meaning "banish sun rays."

I cannot deny how stupid I felt since I have considered ray-bans to be such a hallowed name in luxury items that it never dawned on me that the name simply refers to their original practical intent. (Could it be that I am maybe not alone and that many readers, such as Sébastien Laye, feel the same way?)

But very quickly, function gives way to symbolism. Aviator sunglasses no longer merely protect against the sun; they become a status symbol. They inherit the entire mystique of the fighter pilot: courage, composure, technical mastery, and authority. 

 … The object invokes a heroic masculinity—one now made accessible to everyone, without effort or risk. For the price of a pair of glasses, one buys a touch of the fighter pilot’s aura: the cool composure, the technical mastery, and the gaze that scans the horizon while remaining unreadable in return.

Moreover, says Elodie Mielczareck — who has written before about another president, the American one (A Frenchwoman's Detective Work on Donald Trump and His Choice of Language, Donald Trump the Punchline President) as well as about Elon Musk (Throughout History, Elon Musk's Alleged Nazi-Fascist Salute Has Meant Many Different Things) and the yellow jacket movement (Sémiologie du gilet jaune : Entre mots, symboles et imaginaires) — has this to add about France's "Top Gunned president" and his glasses' "physiological barrier": 

Regarding these particular glasses, there is a crucial aspect to mention: the mirrored lens creates an asymmetry in the gaze. The wearer of Aviator-style glasses sees without being seen—they look out, yet their eyes remain hidden from the other person. It is an object that generates power by concealing part of the face: one gains access not to the individual, but only to their role—to the function signified by the object itself. The "Top Gun" glasses do more than shield the eyes from the sun; they conceal the subject behind a persona—specifically, that of the aerial hero—which bears no relation to the original optical instrument.