"Sheep Led by Donkeys?" Sébastien Laye Discusses His Book Describing the Élites (as Well as the Peoples) of France and the Western Hemisphere

 

The central question is no longer whether artificial intelligence will reshape our economy, but who will benefit from that transformation. … The social stakes are immense.

Ten days after penning The Ascent of AI Deplomacy in his AI Revolution series for the Washington Examiner, Sébastien Laye returns with a sequel of sorts, The political economy of artificial intelligence. 

But what is really on his mind these days is next week's publication of his book, and in that perspective we bring two in-depth interviews, with Frontières (Macron has ruined France, 35 minutes) and with GPTV (FRENCH BANKRUPTCY: EVIDENCE OF PRE-PLANNED DESTRUCTION, 1 hr 25). 

The title of the book is Des moutons menés par des ânes ?, or Sheep Led by Donkeys? or Sheep Led by Asses? The title is based on the age-old idiom Lions led by donkeys, and readers will recognize that its title could apply to just about any country in the Western hemisphere.

 
In an interview about his new book that starts out with a quote from Bastiat, Sébastien Laye says that Macron has ruined France. 

Oct 9, 2025  Grands entretiens fauteuil rouge

L'économiste et entrepreneur Sébastien Laye est l'invité exceptionnel du grand entretien de Frontières. Dans cet entretien, Sébastien Laye présente son nouvel ouvrage dans lequel il démonte les fables du macronisme, décortique trois décennies d'erreurs économiques et met en lumière l'inculture et l'aveuglement de nos dirigeants. À travers une analyse claire et documentée, nourrie de comparaisons internationales, il dresse le constat d'un pays où le bon sens a cédé la place à l'idéologie et l'action à la communication. Retrouvez son livre : "Des moutons menés par des ânes ?" Disponible sur Amazon : https://amzn.to/48Fg0Sf 👉 Commandez notre nouveau magazine à l'adresse suivante : https://www.frontieresmedia.fr/produi...

 
Sébastien Laye spent almost an hour and a half with GPTV's Mike Borowski discussing la FAILLITE FRANÇAISE : LES PREUVES D’UNE DESTRUCTION PROGRAMMÉE. 

L'ENTRETIEN GPTV EN DIRECT 7J/7

La France vit une décomposition programmée. Sous couvert de modernité et d’Europe « unie », Emmanuel Macron a accéléré la mise sous tutelle du pays par les structures technocratiques de Bruxelles et l’appareil militaire de l’OTAN. Désindustrialisation, explosion de la dette, effondrement énergétique, contrôle numérique et fiscalité punitive : rien n’a été laissé au hasard. Ce système ne vise pas la prospérité, mais la dépendance. Les élites administratives et financières ont méthodiquement sacrifié la souveraineté nationale pour maintenir leurs privilèges, transformant le citoyen en consommateur docile d’un ordre globalisé. Cette soumission n’est pas un accident, mais une ingénierie politique. Le macronisme repose sur la peur et la fragmentation sociale : peur sanitaire, peur climatique, peur sécuritaire. Chaque crise devient un levier de contrôle renforcé. La bureaucratie étouffe la productivité, les médias verrouillent la parole, et la démocratie se réduit à un simulacre. Les Français ne choisissent plus, ils subissent les décisions d’un pouvoir qui gouverne contre eux, sous la tutelle des institutions financières et transatlantiques. Pourtant, une alternative existe. La reconquête de la souveraineté passe par la sortie de l’OTAN, la restauration de la primauté du droit français et le rétablissement d’un État stratège au service de la nation. Souveraineté énergétique avec le nucléaire et les ressources locales, réindustrialisation réelle, indépendance numérique, politique monétaire au service du travail et de l’investissement : autant de conditions pour que la France redevienne une puissance libre et respectée. Face à la désintégration planifiée, seule une rupture nette avec la logique mondialiste permettra de redonner au pays son prestige et son autorité. Sébastien Laye et Mike Borowski dévoilent ce qu’il en coûte vraiment d’obéir à Bruxelles, en direct sur Géopolitique Profonde. 

 

Macron Invites Europeans and Arabs to France's Own Middle Eastern Peace Summit—Guess Which Country Is Not Invited: "While Trump Is Peace-Building, Macron Is Cosplaying"

As Causeur's Ivan Rioufol asks Will Trump and Netanyahu make history? and as Dreuz's Guy Millière wonders whether France's largest media outlets will concede the grandeur of Donald Trump — calling the state leaders who recognized a Palestinian state "odious cretins" as well as "servile Dhimmis" — a trio of Paris-based members and/or allies of the GOP (French, American, French-American…) take on Emmanuel Macron's hardly believable reaction to the Trump peace deal. 

Did you know that last Thursday (five days after Thousands of Demonstrators Marched Through Paris Demanding the Liberation of the Final Hostages Held by Hamas), France organized its own peace summit?! Among the countries invited to The Day After summit were five European nations (the big five: besides France — Britain, Germany, Italy, and Spain) and five Middle Eastern countries (Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE), along with Turkey, Canada, and the EU. Guess which country, besides the United States, was not invited — i.e., to a peace summit involving "Palestine" and, uh… Israel? Oh, the answer would be, uh… Israel (!) — No antisemitism there (no anti-Americanism either), none at all! No Jews, no Yanks. 

And guess why? Because the countries involved want to organize a multinational UN force in the region. Very nice and friendly and neutral, n'est-ce pas? Hardly: the reason is purely anti-Israeli, to prevent more Jewish colonies in the West Bank and to ensure that the the countries' aforementioned recognition of a Palestinian state is not jettisoned, but goes forward. And here — in pure drama queen fashion ("existential threat"!!) — the French president reveals the profound dangers lurking for the region: "The acceleration of the construction of [Jewish] settlements in the West Bank constitutes an existential threat to the State of Palestine." The epitome of neutrality and objectivity, n'est-ce pas? (Merci pour l'Instalien, Sarah.)

To echo Dennis Prager, there are 22 Arab countries in the Middle East, and there between 50 and 60 Muslim countries in the world, but the planet's lone Jewish state — the size of New Jersey, smaller than Sicily or Jutland — must not be allowed to remain its (tiny) size but must be sub-divided.

Over at Valeurs Actuelles, Nicolas Conquer writes that While Trump Is Peace-Building, Macron Is Cosplaying. When Paris

brought together European and Arab ministers this Thursday to "rethink" the American peace plan—without even inviting Israel (!)—Donald Trump, for his part, brought the negotiations to a successful conclusion in Cairo. The result: France spoke, America acted. And this symbolic agitation came at a price: three wasted months, three months of tragedy, three more months of hostages and human lives lost. Our diplomacy claims to "re-enchant" the world, but it only prolongs its misfortunes.

 … [Trump's] detractors denounced an unpredictable president; they discovered a methodical strategist. Far from a list of caricatures, Trumpian diplomacy follows a clear line: using the balance of power not to dominate, but to create the conditions for peace. Where so many leaders procrastinate, Donald Trump is committing his own political capital, at the risk of unpopularity, including among his base. This consistency, even more than his style, is redefining the United States' place in the world today. He addresses the powers in the only language they respect: that of firmness. The trade war was not an end in itself, but a lever. While Biden apologizes [as does/did, (in)famously, Obama], Trump takes responsibility. While Macron moralizes, Trump concludes. 

 … Our president seeks the stage, Trump seeks the result. One of them multiplies the symbolic gestures, the other the signatures of peace. One of them is hoping for a virtue signalling prize, the other deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize.

Over at Causeur, Philippe Karsenty points out that Emmanuel Macron is doing everything in his power to prevent Trump from achieving a peace agreement between Israel and Hamas. Indeed, the spokesman for the Comité Trump France points out that the French president doesn't like any Jews, whether in France or in Israel — and, as it happens (although it may seem counterintuitive), he does not like any Arabs either, whether in France or in Gaza. Hence his title: Emmanuel Macron n’aime ni les juifs, ni les arabes, que ce soit en France, en Israël ou à Gaza 

What peace summit, given that Trump's is underway and on track to end the fighting? To waste time and to prolong the war and the ordeal of the Gaza hostages?

It should be noted in passing that those who have been vigorously calling for a ceasefire for two years—and who had it within reach a second time with Trump's September 29 plan—seem less eager to see it come to fruition… especially if it leads to the disappearance of Hamas and its jihadist allies.

Several questions then arise.

Faced with his repeated failures on all domestic fronts—from his failed dissolution to the successive prime ministers he has being consuming—have the Israelis and Gazans become the cannon fodder needed to sustain internationally a president who is completely discredited in France? Should his nihilistic handling of French domestic policy serve as a model for the Middle East? Or is Emmanuel Macron reviving good ol' medieval practices: is the Jew the scapegoat intended to divert attention from his many failures? 

What Karsenty says about the French politician's outlook on Jews and Arabs, I have often said the same about leftists, American as well as foreign: in the final analysis, they don't really care about Arabs, and blacks, and women, and gays, and transgenders, etc, etc, etc; the latter are simply victims — or weapons, if you will — to be used to shame regular citizens ("normies") in their incessant virtue signalling.
 
Indeed, in an interview about his new book (more about that in a few days) that starts out with a quote from Bastiat, Sébastien Laye says that all the "completely discredited" French president's hyper-activism with regards to international affairs is based upon the simple (and sordid) fact of his impopularity among the French people, given that Macron has ruined France. 

Sébastien Laye: The ascent of AI diplomacy

After paying visits during his travels to, among others, Texas and Miami — a place ROF's Sébastien Laye vaunts as "the new American economic model" — the economist and AI entrepreneur whose book is being published next week has penned an article called The ascent of AI diplomacy.

As artificial intelligence becomes the nervous system of advanced economies, it is simultaneously becoming the grammar of power in international relations. We are entering the era of AI diplomacy — where national influence is measured not just in nuclear warheads or GDP, but in computer clusters, proprietary models, and access to strategic data. 

But AI, as a General Purpose Technology, has accelerated the fusion of technology and statecraft. Like the steam engine in the British Empire or petroleum in post-World War II U.S. hegemony, AI now underwrites national competitiveness. And like oil, its essential inputs — data, compute, and algorithms — are becoming commodities over which alliances are struck and conflicts sparked. It is thus crucial for leading powers to control it. 

 … The current U.S. administration has not merely acknowledged this shift; it has enshrined it as doctrine. … Thus, a new U.S. doctrine is emerging. It is unapologetically accelerationist, oriented around deregulation, innovation, and technological sovereignty. …

ROF's Sébastien Laye and Camilla Furman at Bourse Tocqueville
on May 26 with the Heritage Foundation's Kevin Roberts

Monday May 26

Last night in Paris, I was invited to a Bourse Tocqueville event hosted with the Heritage Foundation. We had the pleasure of welcoming in Europe @KevinRobertsTX , head of the renowned foundation, as well as many of his experts, such as @lora_ries and Mike Gonzalez. It was a great… pic.twitter.com/dUP9vKr4Ym

— sebastien laye (@SebastienLaye) May 27, 2025

Demanding the Liberation of the Final Hostages Held in Gaza by Hamas, Thousands of Demonstrators March Through Paris

To mark the second anniversary of the October 7 massacre and to demand the liberation of the Palestinians' remaining hostages, thousands of demonstrators marched through the boulevards of Paris last Sunday, singing "Shalom" and callback chanting such things as "Hamas / terroristes", "Hamas / assassins", and "Libérez! / les otages!"

There were pro-Israel demonstrations in Europe last Sunday, such as London and Paris — from la Place de la République to la Place Saint-Augustin — and elsewhere on the continent, such as Copenhagen, demonstrations are expected to be held next Saturday

According to TF1, there were 5,000 people in the streets, including Iranians waving the country's flag during the Shah era and gentiles like myself who chanced upon the demonstration by accident as they were marching behind l'Opéra Garnier. The march, brandishing  signs with the photos of the hostages, ended with the singing of the Israeli and the French national anthems (Hatikvah and La Marseillaise) — both of which are some of the most stirring anthems in the entire world. (Merci à Sarah pour l'Instalien.)

Three articles of note: 
• via Glenn Reynolds, CDR Salamander's Two Years Since the Oct. 7th Slaughter 
…what it tells us about non-Israelis…
• via Stephen Green, Naomi Nussbaum's Two Years After October 7, We Cannot Look Away.
• via myself, an article that took 12 days to write following the heinous attack: What Nobody Tells You About the Israeli Rave of October 7 — To Peacenik Protesters Everywhere (Pro-Palestinian or Other): The People that Hamas Slaughtered Mercilessly at Israel's Rave — They Are YOU!

 

A young girl sitting on her dad's shoulders
proudly waves le tricolore

A significant number of Iranian ex-pats joined
the march, waving Shah-era Iranian flags
or wearing clothes with the banner's colors

  

A couple of marchers recognized me (or, rather, my cat) from 
the Charlie Kirk homage and agreed to film me (us) in the march

 

Anti-Americanism in the 21st Century: Drama Queens on French TV Compare Attendees at the Charlie Kirk Memorial Service to "Fascists", "Religious Nuts", and Even "Taliban" Members, Reminding Them of "Nazi Rallies of the 1930s"

If you think — with good reason — that Some of the Liberal Media Reactions to the Charlie Kirk Memorial Service Were Insane (merci à Sarah Hoyt, aussi pour le hyperlien), and if you think — with good reason — that Iryna Zarutska and Charlie Kirk have exposed the media’s depravity (merci à Ed Driscoll), then you should see, and hear, the heights to which France's hysterical TV and radio channels climbed in their raving and ranting. 

After helping to organize an homage for Charlie Kirk in Paris two days before the TPUSA founder's memorial service, the ex-pat group Republicans Overseas France is back in the news, having decided to launch a major legal counter-attack. 

Indeed, during and in the wake of Sunday's memorial service, French TV channels were replete with a plethora of drama queens using the most foul language to describe the (entirely peaceful) crowds in Glendale, Arizona. You know the verbiage by now: fascists, Nazis, religious nuts, even members of the Taliban.

ROF collected a handful of the most depraved and insane comments in what can only be called a modern-day display of anti-Americanism (video at the hyperlinks):

• Appearing on France Info on September 21, former French Minister of Culture Aurélie Filippetti said of the Kirk Memorial event: “It inspires me with disgust and fear. All fascist movements have as a characteristic to victimize themselves and to instrumentalize their so-called heroes who died in battle” (The ministry of culture seemed determined to overlook the left's pantheon of larger-than-life heroes and martyrs during the past century, such as Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, not to mention Che Guevara.) 

• During the program C Politique broadcast on France Télévision’s France 5 on September 21, one Judith Perrignon declared, regarding the Charlie Kirk tribute: “American white supremacism is completely connected to Hitler’s racial ideology … The first time I watched the footage, I thought of the Nazi rallies that took place in the United States in the 1930s. There were large gatherings … The connection is still there.” Just as scandalous was the mere fact that the “C Politique” host, Thomas Snégarof, did not, in any way, attempt to contradict his guest, even partially.

• On September 22, during the program Les Partis Pris broadcast alive on TF1's LCI, Abnousse Shalmani said: "It was an evangelical mass of religious nuts — and I am carefully weighing my words — and all of this had nothing to envy of the Taliban before the launch of a crusade. Everything was soaked in an atmosphere of violence and a crusade barely contained…" (The word "crusade" comes from the word "cross" — thus, whether considered in a positive or in any other light, it only pertains to Christians; the word for Muslims and Islamists and other types of Taliban being "Jihad" — a word scrupulously avoided by the Frenchwoman born in Tehran.) In a registered letter on September 30, LCI responded to a ROF request for "un droit de réponse" (a right of reply) by turning it down. 

• Again on LCI, a former U.S. Ambassador to Finland, Charles Adams, compared Charlie Kirk’s death to the 1933 Reichstag Fire, which shortly preceded Adolf Hitler’s rise to power. A direct descendant of two of America's earliest presidents (John Adams and John Quincy Adams), the TDS-laden Democrat and vocal supporter of Barack Obama declared that “I would even say that for me this story of the murder, rightfully condemned, represents for Trump what the fire of the Reichstag represented for Adolf Hitler at the time. The parallel is absolute and obvious.”

Prior to that, the presenter of France Culture, Guillaume Erner, wrote an editorial called "Je suis Charlie." That lead to outrage in the journalists' union, la Société des journalistes de France Culture, and Guillaume Erner, a former writer at Charlie Hebdo no less (where the phrase originated in the wake of the 2015 shootings), felt he had no choice but to apologize when confronted by the union's denunciation: "By obscuring Kirk's extreme verbal violence, which contributes to endangering already vulnerable minorities, this post tends to elevate the influencer into a symbol of freedom of expression," said the SDJ, which fears that this stance will cast "discredit and suspicion on our entire network" in a context of "repeated attacks" against public broadcasting. As for the title, France Culture decided to change it.

Of course, this brings us all the way back to square one: the murder of someone like Charlie Kirk is What Is Bound to Happen When You Constantly Refer to Your Adversaries as "Fascists" and as "Threats to Democracy".

As PJMedia's Matt Margolis points out,  

The left’s habit of slapping labels like “fascist” or “Nazi” on its political opponents isn’t just name-calling; it’s a green light for violence. [Greg] Gutfeld spelled it out with brutal clarity: “You label someone a fascist or a racist or a Nazi, it makes you free to attack them, and that has been the ideology from the start.”

Glenn Reynolds adds that

“Nazi” just means “political opponents the left has marked for death.” We all know that now.  

As for Ed Driscoll, he quotes John Nolte: 

“Remember this: The corporate media, Democrats, and Hollywood don’t call us Nazis because we’re Nazis. They call us Nazis to justify their ongoing murder campaign against us.”

You assassinate us. Then you celebrate our assassination. Then you call us evil while we mourn.

There will be no unity. https://t.co/BkBpkEZ9X7

— John Ocasio-Rodham Nolte (@NolteNC) September 22, 2025

 
All of which led one ROF spokesman to appear on Morandini's CNews show Tuesday morning, in order to inform the French public that the group of ex-pats was filing complaints with ARCOM (l'Autorité de régulation de la communication audiovisuelle et numérique or the Regulatory Authority for Audiovisual and Digital Communication, France's administrative agency responsible for both audiovisual and digital communications).

Nicolas Conquer, spokesperson for Republicans Overseas France, was Jean-Marc Morandini's guest on "Morandini Live" on CNews. He notably discussed a segment broadcast Sunday evening on C Politique on France 5 …

While discussing the memorial service for Charlie Kirk, journalist and novelist Judith Perrignon said on the show: "The first time I saw the footage, I thought of the Nazi rallies that took place in the United States in the 1930s. There were large gatherings."

"I jumped out of my seat when I heard this comparison," declared Nicolas Conquer, "while we were attending this tribute, which was magnificent and poignant. We see this contrast, which is disconnected and truly an aberration […] The moderator, Thomas Snégaroff, doesn't correct his guest. He agrees with her. It demonstrates this ideological bias."

He added: "I'm obviously contacting ARCOM. We're also going to file a complaint for incitement to hatred against a group — Christian conservatives, MAGA supporters. By normalizing this comparison with Hitler and Nazism, they're targeting activists. This is extremely serious!"

"We are calling on Arcom to take responsibility rather than tracking down the statements of [exclusively right-wing] activists. It should monitor what is said about the public service," he concluded.

As Randy Yaloz and Paul Reen prepare the official statements of Republicans Overseas France, allow us to inject a bit of humor, with the Babylon Bee and Cynical Publius providing a touch of tongue-in-cheek sarcasm 
— CNN: Charlie Kirk Memorial 'Mostly Hateful' and 
Nazi Rally Inspires Millions To Forgive And Love Their Enemies; plus:

That's true. I totally remember that rally where Hitler publicly forgave the plotters who tried to assassinate him and then he called upon them to give their hearts to Jesus.

In fact, that was pretty standard at most Nazi medals.

History remembers.

— Cynical Publius (@CynicalPublius) September 21, 2025

25 Years Ago — Fate of 12-Year-Old Palestinian Led to 911 Attack and the Invention of the Word Pallywood: "If we ignore how images propagate and mutate, we hand the moral high ground to those who traffic in outrage"

Today’s rising tide of Jew-hatred from all directions – Right, Left, Muslim, Christian, secular, knowing and unknowing – started on September 30, 2000 
— Richard Landes

UPDATED: Tuesday marks the quarter-century anniversary of the beginning of one of the biggest scandals of the past 50 years, the Mohammed al-Dura affair, which saw French television video and photos of a 12-year-old Palestenian and his father being supposedly felled by Israeli bullets in Gaza, and which led to the creation of a new word — Pallywood.

Chief among those instrumental in debunking the hoax was a young free-thinker by the name of Philippe Karsenty, and so it was natural that, 25 years later, Alexandre Gilbert of the Times of Israel would wish to interview him.

In the interview, the man who has since become the spokesman for le Comité Trump France gave to the Isreali newspaper, he spoke about the media wars — regarding Daniel Pearl, etc, but most notably the al Durrah affair which had its start on September 30, 2000; which Karsenty himself was instrumental in helping to debunk; and whose lawsuits No Pasarán covered over the years. (Shookhran for the instalink, Sarah.)

Less than a year after the IDF's dastardly Jews' alleged murder of the 12-year-old Arab — not, as it turns out, at all incidentally — the world witnessed the 911 attacks on New York and Washington.

Before we take a look at the Philippe Karsenty interview, a must-read is the piece that Richard Landes penned in The Jerusalem Post five years ago — as the Abrahamic accords were being signed — about the twentieth (20th) anniversary of "one of the most disastrous events in the year 2000". It's a hard, indeed a mind-boggling, read — check out RL's blog, The Augean Stables — especially coming three years before the October 7th massacre.

The image of Muhammad al-Dura via the narrative that the IDF had targeted him became the global symbol of Palestinian suffering at the hand of Israeli cruelty. It rapidly became an “icon of hatred” that had a greater immediate and long-term effect on the new century than any other such vehicle of incitement.

A cry arose, for some of pain, for some of rage, but for all a clear sign that the Infidel, led by the twin Satans Israel and USA, were making war on Muslims. Indeed, no single event so far has done more to arouse the spirit of jihad against the West than this footage, which, as Bin Laden quickly pointed out in his recruiting video for global jihad, demanded vengeance against al Yahud and their allies.

 … the Muhammad al-Dura icon fed an apocalyptic jihadi narrative: to #GenerationCaliphate Israel was the Dajjal (Antichrist).

The West followed suit. Lethal journalists like Robert Fisk quickly affirmed the charge of deliberate murder. Where before such comparisons were considered ugly if not worse, now comparing Israel to the Nazis became common. A prominent French news anchor, speaking for many, declared that al-Dura “erased, replaced the image of the boy in the Warsaw Ghetto.” It was a new, post-modern “replacement narrative.”

Instead of Christians or Muslims replacing Israel as the true Chosen People, it was the former chosen people replacing the Nazis, and the poor Palestinian victim suffering the fate of the Jews. The progressive refrain, “Israel has lost the moral high ground.” … 

 

 … Al-Dura justified terrorist attacks on Israel in the minds of both Muslims and non-Jews, especially Europeans. “What choice do they have?” progressives responded when Palestinians targeted Israel civilians. They were merely resisting …

 

 … At the height of the suicide terror campaign, siding with the Palestinians was a “litmus test of liberal credentials.” Suggesting this heinous violence was genocidal aspiration, not state-deprived desperation, was a ticket to cancellation.

 

 … ANGRY PROTESTS in the West accused Israel of genocide, and a large plurality of Europeans believed it.  … the Western legacy media constituted one of the most potent weapons in the cognitive war “Caliphaters” waged against the West. 

 

 … The icon of al-Dura was the first successful blood libel in the West since the Nazis rode their ecumenical Jew-hatred to mega-death for all in 1930s and ‘40s. Unlike earlier versions, this was spread by a Jew and carried by the professional news media, and its primary impact was on progressive, leftist circles, giving birth to a “new antisemitism” in its 21st-century avatar, eliminationist “anti-Zionism.” Today’s rising tide of Jew-hatred from all directions – Right, Left, Muslim, Christian, secular, knowing and unknowing – started on September 30, 2000. 

 

 … Whether we know it or not, those of us entering this very grim-looking third decade of the 21st century are the inheritors of this al-Durah-triggered new wave of Jew-hatred and its accompaniments: fake news, conspiracy theories and violence.

 

 … As some honest Arab journalists point out, #FakeNews is something of an Arab specialty, and for far too long public opinion has been manipulated by dishonest and malevolent actors masquerading as journalists. 

And this brings us, full circle, to Alexandre Gilbert's Times of Israel interview with Philippe Karsenty.

Alexandre Gilbert: Osama bin Laden explicitly cited the Al-Dura case as justification both for the assassination of Daniel Pearl, a journalist from the Washington Post, who was about to find him, in Abbottabad in 2002, and for the 9/11 2001 aircraft hijack and attacks on the United States. How do you interpret that?

Philippe Karsenty: Bin Laden invoked Al‑Dura very directly. He pointed to the footage as proof that Jews and the West were child‑killers. He then used that grievance as a pretext to justify Daniel Pearl’s murder — presenting it as vengeance for Al‑Dura. And he cited the same image again as moral cover for 9/11, claiming that the attacks on New York and Washington on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, were retaliation for the supposed killing of a Palestinian child. In his rhetoric, one short televised clip became the excuse both for executing a single journalist and for massacring thousands of civilians. 

That’s how far the reach of this image went: from Gaza, to Karachi, to the Twin Towers. Modern media ecosystems — from satellite networks to the social platforms that would come later — are accelerants. An emotionally charged image, broadcast without context, can spiral into a global narrative within days. Bin Laden’s invocation was not the origin of that mechanism, but it displayed how effectively extremists could harness it. That is why accountability, forensic analysis, and the willingness to pursue uncomfortable inquiries are vital. If we ignore how images propagate and mutate, we hand the moral high ground to those who traffic in outrage.

It’s crucial to understand that we moved from the notion of “deicide” to “genocide.” In Christian tradition, Jews were stigmatized as “Christ-killers.” With the Al-Dura case, the Jews were recast as child-killers, genocidal by nature. This image of Mohammed Al-Dura, supposedly shot by Israeli soldiers in 2000, became the ultimate weapon of demonization against the Jewish people. And honestly, if you search through every existing representation, you won’t find anything more powerful or more destructive than that image. Everyone knows it, even people completely detached from politics or the conflict.

 … You stress that you weren’t the first to discover the Al-Dura fabrication. Who was?

Philippe Karsenty: It was Nahum Shahaf, an Israeli researcher. He was the one who opened my eyes. When I saw his analysis, it struck me as obvious. So I approached France 2, expecting them to correct their mistake. Instead, they dismissed me. I went to the CRIF, to the Israeli ambassador—everyone brushed me off. Ambassador Daniel Shek even refused to shake my hand, calling me a “conspiracy theorist.” That was the environment I was up against.

Let’s talk about the legal battle. How did it begin?

Philippe Karsenty: Since I had no legal standing to sue, I published a deliberately provocative article, hoping France 2 would sue me for defamation. They did. In 2006, at my first trial, the prosecutor said I had presented convincing evidence of a staged event and should be acquitted. Yet I was convicted. On appeal, the court demanded France 2 release its raw footage. I had obtained 18 minutes of it. The footage exposed blatant inconsistencies. I was acquitted, and the case made global headlines—even appearing in US diplomatic cables later revealed by WikiLeaks.

But the story didn’t end there, did it?

Philippe Karsenty: No. France 2 appealed to the Court of Cassation. Despite the Attorney General’s conclusions in my favor, I lost—on a procedural point. The court ruled that I didn’t yet have the footage when I published my article, and therefore my claim was defamatory at the time, even if later proven correct. In 2013, at the retrial, I brought experts from around the world—architects, analysts. France 2 was demolished in court. But once again, the verdict went against me. I was ordered to pay €11,000. At that point, I decided to stop. The system was hopelessly politicized.

So where does that leave you today?

Philippe Karsenty: Today, I continue to say openly that the Al-Dura video was staged. France 2 can no longer sue me. Their only argument—that I lacked proof at the time of publication—has expired. I have the evidence, and I speak freely. The irony is that the more they tried to silence me, the more the affair spread—the Streisand effect in action.

How do you respond to being associated with conspiracy figures like Alex Jones, Steve Bannon, or Alain Soral?

Philippe Karsenty: I reject that completely. I have no connection to those people. In fact, they despise my work. Why? Because it disrupts their antisemitic narratives. I expose Palestinian propaganda as fraudulent, which doesn’t serve their agenda. Unlike others who were co-opted by conspiracy networks, I remained isolated—especially in the pre-social media era. That isolation made the fight very lonely. But it also kept me clean. 

 … The distorted vision of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is mostly in France a quarrel between Alsatian Ashkenazi and Algerian Berbers, isn’t it ? 

Philippe Karsenty: Yes. And a conflict suggests two equal sides fighting each other. That’s not the case. Israel never wakes up in the morning deciding to kill its neighbors. What exists is a war: the Arab attempt to destroy Israel, ongoing for 75 years. They tried conventional wars, terrorism, rockets—all failed. Where they succeeded was in waging media warfare. And in that realm, Israel doesn’t fight. The Al-Dura case was their greatest victory. That’s why I insist: this is not a conflict, it’s a war fought on a different battlefield—the media.

Karsenty Debates Charlie Kirk Tragedy and Trump's UN Speech

Hommage national pour Charlie Kirk: pour Philippe Karsenty, porte-parole du comité "Trump France", Charlie Kirk "était un homme de dialogue" pic.twitter.com/W9iD0uxB9h

— BFMTV (@BFMTV) September 20, 2025

Philippe Karsenty was in the media several times this week, mostly about the Charlie Kirk tragedy and Donald Trump's UN speech. But perhaps his most interesting appearance had nothing to do with current events, but with a hoax a quarter of a century ago that he helped debunk, when a new word — Pallywood — had, of necessity, to be dreamed up. 

Earlier: "It Should Not Be Considered Free Speech" Says Karsenty on French TV of the Left's Anti-Kirk Rants; "It Is the Glorification of Terrorism"

The night before the tribute for the founder of TPUSA, the spokesman for le Comité Trump France was on BFMTV not once but twice. Here he pointed out that Charlie Kirk had been "a man of dialogue."

Hommage national pour Charlie Kirk: pour Philippe Karsenty, porte-parole du comité "Trump France", Charlie Kirk "était un homme de dialogue" pic.twitter.com/W9iD0uxB9h

— BFMTV (@BFMTV) September 20, 2025

Five days later, Karsenty participated in a debate on Sud Radio about Donald Trump's United Nations speech — notably immigration, Russia, Palestine, and the climate — comparing it to Emmanuel Macron's UN speech. The spokesman for le Comité Trump France, incidentally, doesn't believe that there is any way the Nobel committee will ever give Trump the Nobel Prize.
 

Immigration, Russie, Palestine, climat : Trump est-il efficace ?

Sud Radio

1,701 views Sep 25, 2025 La vérité en face

Avec Philippe Karsenty (porte-parole du comité Trump France) et Arthur Kenigsberg (spécialiste de l'Europe centrale et fondateur d'Euro Creative, auteur de 'L'Europe de l'Est n'existe pas : Ces pays oubliés où se joue notre avenir" aux Editions Eyrolles)

What is it with the Euro itch for war? And not just any war, but war with Russia bristling with nuclear weapons?

UPDATED Over in the Richmond area of Virginia, Damian Bennett has his doubts regarding the countries of the Old Continent. (Spasibo za giperssylku, tovarich Sarah.)

There is a kulture shift happening, a great turning. Sadly we may not live to see it.

• French Hospitals Told To Prepare For A “Major Military Engagement” Within Six Months September 6, 2025
• Former Polish President Andrzej Duda Belatedly Confirmed That Zelensky Tried To Manipulate Poland Into War With Russia September 11, 2025
• Did The Polish Deep State Try To Manipulate The President [Duda] Into War With Russia? September 17, 2025
• Finland’s President Says Security Guarantees For Ukraine Must Include Willingness To Fight Russia September 21, 2025
• UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper: British Warplanes Will ‘Confront’ Russian Jets That Enter NATO Airspace Without Permission September 22, 2025
• ‘This Will Be Huge’ European Hospitals Preparing For War: British Intel September 22, 2025

I could go on.

What is it with the Euro itch for war? And not just any war, but war with Russia bristling with nuclear weapons? No Euro-NATO-Russian war will be neatly confined to a few drone strikes, a few lobs of ordnance, a few nukes. A Euro-Russian war immediately will default to global war, which will immediately default to nuclear war. Who wants this other than the globalists, the militarists, the profiteers? 

Russia is no altar boy, but NATO was squarely behind the Russo-Ukrainian war of attrition -- a war NATO KNEW/KNOWS Ukraine can not hope to win without NATO escalation, and NATO is just an army on paper without America. So the endgame is WWIII. 

The world is off its nut.

From Greenwich (CT), Duncan Hill joins the conversation:

Sort of feels like between WW I and WW II.

I agree whole heartedly that Biden and NATO suckered Putin into invading Ukraine. Just imagine what we could have achieved if Harris had won.

You probably have seen the news that today Trump admonished the UN delegates for their imbecilic policies. Ukraine should have all their territory returned to them. And Trump said that NATO countries should shoot down Russian aircraft violating of their air-space. Clearly, Trump has coordinated with NATO in turning up the heat on Russia. This should give Putin pause...a big pause.

So, I wonder if Macron is adding credibility to Trump's escalation? No doubt Trump's shift was discussed with NATO before he made the statements.

Whatever the reality, at least we don't have Neville Chamberlain to worry about.

UPDATE: Duncan Hill returns a couple of days later with this Anton Troianovski news item: Longtime Putin Aide Who Opposed Ukraine War Is Granted Rare Resignation 

I wonder if this had anything to do with Trump's change in position on the Ukraine war. Putin double crosses Trump and, in addition, fires..."voluntarily" resigns...the guy who perhaps was for negotiations. 

 Is this another giant step toward WWIII? I don't know...that's the peacenik [with the purple tie]. They all look like cuddly folks. Kind of reminds me of the guys at the corner table at Dominic's on Arthur Ave.

This allows for Damian Bennett to shoot back:

The Russo-Ukraine tea leaves are hard to read. Kozak's resignation is a departure from the usual accidental self-defenestration job vacancy. I can think of dozens of unobvious reasons why Kozak has been, for the time being, spared -- some dark, some 3D chess jooks.

Suffice to say, Trump's unexpected positional shift is strategic, not tactical. I think Putin knows he misplayed his patty-cake approach to DJT. 

The Kremlin's Tepid Response To Trump's 'Paper Tiger' Comment Indicates They Know They've Gone Too Far September 24, 2025

DJT wants a result (think Fordow, Isfahan, Natanz), not a long endless string of phone calls, stalls, and peace conferences with open bar and hot canapés. Neither Putin nor NATO nor anybody else is used to this -- an approach that doesn't feed the grift of diplomacy. Unlike Putin, unlike NATO, unlike EU and its sputtering hawks with butter-but-no-guns economies, America has the muscle and, in Trump, the political will to produce a desired result -- peace. 

When Trump leaves office Departments of State worldwide had better've rewritten their American playbook, because JDV48 is DJT 3.0.

Google Caves: "The silenced are a rapidly growing movement with loud voices"

In the wake of No Pasarán's's restoration to the internet, astounding news from Ashley Oliver of Fox News: Google to reinstate banned YouTube accounts censored for political speech.

Google vowed on Tuesday to offer YouTube accounts that were permanently banned for political speech the ability to be reinstated, and the big tech giant admitted that it once faced pressure from the Biden administration to remove content about COVID-19. 

 … "Reflecting the Company’s commitment to free expression, YouTube will provide an opportunity for all creators to rejoin the platform if the company terminated their channels for repeated violations of COVID-19 and elections integrity policies that are no longer in effect," the lawyer representing Google wrote.

 … The document from Google also noted that YouTube "values conservative voices on its platform" and acknowledged that the creators "have extensive reach and play an important role in civic discourse."

 … Google's revelations came in response to a yearslong Republican-led investigation by the committee into big tech companies, including Google, that censored and suppressed content on their platforms related to COVID-19, the 2020 election and Hunter Biden.  

Our ol'-time friend Damian Bennett — who helped me write some of the registered letters to Google (in fact, one of them was just about entirely his doing) — had the same reaction as I did.

Put down your coffee to avoid hot lap spills and a nose snort fountain...

• Alphabet Admits It: Biden Pressured Google And Youtube To Silence Conservatives September 23, 2025
• Google Admits Political Censorship on YouTube, Promises to Embrace Free Speech September 23, 2025

I like to think ¡No Pasarán! shin-kicking Google was some small part of this. 

To quote Abraham Lincoln: Agreed for once, a thousand times agreed.

 

Mutual pal Duncan adds:

Oh, damn! Coffee all over my lap!

These admissions by Alphabet are huge. Castrates these faux-offended Lefties over canceling Colbert and Kimmel. My one big question is when will the continuous collapsing of the narratives cause the Dem voters to start questioning their "leaders?"

And I have no doubt ¡No Pasarán! and Erik's supporters...mainly you [Damian Bennett]...made Google realize that the silenced are a rapidly growing movement with loud voices.

 

Instapundit has more, holding the left to the flames:

Joe Scarborough: "OMG watch out conservatives, what would happen if a Democrat admin went after your speech??"

Three hours later: https://t.co/Lfk3cvs9fB pic.twitter.com/BsmrgPZrXp

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) September 23, 2025

Stephen Green ends with these words: 

The Left projects. Always.