Transcription
It's like a cancer. You have to remove it when you see the tumor. If you wait and you have 20 tumors, it's over. But then you have to name the problem.
From the unbelievable number of conversations I have had, I sense that people are not being honest about the nature of the problem. They're afraid to speak openly about it. They're afraid to be forthright about it. They're certainly afraid to be on camera about it. And I'm trying to understand why, given the gravity of the problem presented by radical Islam.
The only chance for the small guy is to use the strength of the big guy against himself. Okay? Same with radical Islam. They are the small guy. We are the big guys because we are at home, our history, our society. But they are using our values, our laws, and then our weaknesses against ourselves. And this is very dangerous. But it's as if someone had come into the brain of western societies and removed this ability to be aware and to be ready to fight. So we became weak. So we became a target for predators.
>> I think that should give us courage. Exposure to other people's perspective is moving us in a good direction. >>
Tibo, why did you arrive here with the police escort? Well, it's a long story, but, uh, to make this long story short, I've been a trial attorney, criminal attorney for more than 30 years. But since I work a lot with the the police, the military, uh, I understood about 15 years ago where my country was heading at and, uh, I mean, the big troubles with radical Islam. So when I was young, I was in the military and so and so. So, uh, I'm not going, uh, to avoid or to ignore this fact. So I asked my wife, uh, whether it was okay or not that, uh, I was go I would go and fight against the rising of radical Islam. I knew by asking the question that she would agree, of course, because otherwise she wouldn't be my wife. Uh, but I told her that it would be, um, it would kind of rock, you know. And indeed, it rocked. Uh, and so I was very early targeted by the Islamists because they understood that I did understand. And at that time, there were very few guys in France who would open it against radical Islam.
And then came the 2015 wave of terror attacks against Europe and especially against France. And then, uh, I started to represent a victim of these crimes. I wrote the first book against radical Islam, claiming that the country could collapse. Uh, then I created the think tank about security, but among other things, against the risk of radical Islam. So this made me very famous, uh, in the eyes of the enemy, at to start, much more famous in their eyes than in the French public's eyes. Uh, and so I was targeted very early and now I have, um, I have been seen by international terror groups who decided to go after me. There's a video. I don't want to talk too much about it, but it's worldwide and, um, we've had a lot of problems. A few years ago, I was in the three highest targets. So I had a whole crew, several cars, a lot of guys around me. So it was very heavy to to live with. So now it has been reduced a little, but, uh, still have to keep the head up.
>> Head on. Yes. >> Yeah. >> You said you said that, uh, they understood that you understood. Yeah. >> What do you understand? >> I understood two things. The first is there was, um, a change of population in Europe and especially in France. This change of population, uh, has it root its roots in the decisions that were made in the late 60s, early 70s, which is to open the boundaries, the the to open our countries to, uh, immigration because, uh, we were in in, um, in a wave of growth, economic growth, and we needed people to work. But there was a huge mistake that was made at at that time is that for a lot of reasons, politicians didn't either understand or dare say that if you have an incoming wave of people with a different culture, then it has consequences of the way to live, uh, in the country where it happens. So this was completely blindside. People didn't realize it. People didn't even re people didn't think about the consequences. There was no, uh, general survey, long perspective thinking, you know, things like that. So this is the first reason.
The second reason is that when you have, uh, a large number of people who come from abroad with a different culture, you have to be very careful of, uh, the the risk that can rise from this culture. And I got interested. I interested myself. I started to read, to ask questions, to meet people who knew, and then I realized that Islam is a religion, but it is the religion who can also be, uh, the the the the a rocket for an ideology which which has a political dimension. And this this is a dimension of conquest. So they are in a logic to conquer. And it's written, they wrote it. The Muslim Brotherhoods, the the the the Salafists, they, you have dozens of books, Alawi and others who who say that they will conquer the western world and they explain that they would use the immigration to do so. So the program was there. It was an open book. The only thing you had to do is to read it and then to speak about it. So this is what I understood very early. I started to work on the groups that were working, uh, at that aim, and I realized that in our society, in the French society, but same with a lot of other European countries, the way to achieve the goal was, uh, on two legs. The first leg is the leg of the ideology.
>> Hey, did you know only half of you watching are subscribed? If you're enjoying the content, hit the subscribe button to keep the videos coming. Thanks. >>
But the this is a leg who we our our societies have a lot of difficulty to to see because it's not violent. Uh, it's people who who say, "Okay, we we live like you. Don't worry about us. We are not a threat." But the more they are, the more they ask for derrogations about the common way of life. Not only the law, but the common way of life. So they have, they ask for derrogations. The first derrogation they're asking for is the fact that they would very much like that in the law, uh, we bring back the blasphemia. Blasphemia, blasphemy, blasphemia. Okay. So because, of course, uh, according to to to the to Islam, if you blasphe the the prophet, then you can get killed. And in France, it's been more than a century that the blasphemy has been, uh, removed from the law. So, uh, you can, uh, say whatever you want about Jesus Christ, about Moses, about Allah. You have absolute freedom of speech. And the Muslims, the radical Islam, they hate that. So this is their first request. There are a lot of others, but that's the first leg, ideology. The second leg is violence. It's jihad. It's, uh, uh, using violence to try to, uh, change the society by try to starting a war of people against each other to get the system to collapse and then to prevail. Because if you know history, you know that to have a political prevail on violence, you need to be a a few deter, a few guys with a lot of determination can break a whole system. So I understood both and I started to say, and still today, of course, that violence is not the worst because violence is waking you up. Everybody wakes up when there is when it comes to violence. The worst is the use of, uh, uh, it's what I call the the judo, judo, you know, judo, the martial art, the judo of values. They use when you have a big guy fighting a small guy, the only chance for the small guy >> is to use the strength of the big guy against himself. Okay. Same with radical Islam. They are the small guy. We are the big guys because we are at home, with our history, our society. But they are using our values, our laws, and then our weaknesses against ourselves. And this is very dangerous. But if you say that loud loud, then you get targeted because people would call Muslims, radical Muslims would call you Islamophobe. And the others wouldn't dare defend you because, uh, if they defend you, then they get called Islamophobe themselves and they get into the line of fire. And no one likes to be in the line of fire. So this is a, this is basically how, uh, I got what I understood and what I'm fighting against, and why I sometimes have all these security problems.
>> So you're not alone in voicing these concerns, and you are correct that many radical Islamist groups have very clearly stated their intention. But yet, this is less in the United States and more in Western Europe. Western, not Eastern Europe. When you state those facts, people accuse other people of being far right. I don't, I don't understand. Like they're saying that this is the plan. They're doing the plan. You're saying this is what they're saying. This is what they're doing. And then people are accusing you of being far right. >> Yeah. >> So I'm hoping you can help me to understand that because I cannot understand that. >> This is, um, what is called, I will try to put it in English. >> Okay. >> Uh, you correct me if it's not understandable. >> Okay. >> The inversion of accusation. Okay. It's, uh, like George Orwell, 1984. The truth is wrong. Black is white, things like that. Okay. So where they are very good is that, uh, they understood that the more powerful they are in a society, the more they have a weight in a democracy, meaning that they represent votes. So in the last 20 years, 30 years, the, uh, radical Islam managed to get along with the far-left and even more than that, with the left altogether. Why is so? The far left left is working to break the system, >> right? >> So they find that I understand. Yes. >> So they find with radical Islam allies. They just forget one thing, and the Iranian history shows it to us, right? >> Is that if they take, if one day, God forbids, they take power in France or everywhere else, these islands would be killed the the very first day after they get into power. And the Islamists would slaughter the extreme leftist wouldn't be a consolation because we would be slaughtered before. But but left, but but you have, but but you, but you have to, no history, you know, interesting. So, this is about the far left, but what is more a concern >> is the center, the the the the the weak belly, the fat, the the the and these guys, >> they just can't figure that people would like to destroy our system. And this for at least two reasons. The first one, >> You mean they don't believe it? >> No, they don't believe it because the because for two reasons. The first one, and this is a very important thing if you want to understand what happens to Western Europe, is that we've been at peace for 80 years. So this is great. I'm a children of peace. I'm 57. So I've only I've only known peace. Okay. But I have my particular history. I was in the military. I'm concerned about all this. So I know. But most of the people, 95% of the people in France, they have never been confronted to physical violence, to the reflection about the need to protect what you have, not abroad. Sending troops, troops abroad is fine, but I mean, to fight for what you have here, because what you have, what we had here was never contested in 80 years. So we lost generation after generation. Fascinating. >> Understanding that everyone has to be ready to fight for what he has and what he loves. And so we lost. It's like if you took that DNA, which is a a deep human DNA to be ready to fight for what you have and what you love, but is as if someone had come into the brain of western societies and removed this ability to be aware and to be ready to fight. So we became weak. So we became, uh, uh, we became a target for predators without even realizing it. So this is a ve, a very important thing to understand because this explains a lot of the reactions of the politicians, of the medias, of the economic leaders, of, uh, the big schools, the big colleges that are processing our future leaders and so on. So this is very, very important. And the second reason is that where the the the the Islamists have been very, very, uh, clever is that they, they have with the help of, you know, you have an idiot, it's a idiot, foods, useful idiots. >> Useful idiots. Thank you. Useful idiots. You also have traitors. That's another question. But you, useful, useful idiots. They think that, uh, you have to be nice. Uh, but this is the consequence of the first statement. The, but and, and so if you tell them, "Okay, look at this book, look the what these guys say, look what they have done in other countries, look how their number is increasing. Uh, there has never been a society remaining in peace with more than 15% of Muslims. Never, never, not one ever." So, uh, you explain that, but they say, "But no, because here it's different. Look at these guys, they are very nice and so and so." So, they just don't understand the fact that, uh, radical Islam is climbing, uh, behind masks. It's called the takia. It's quite a famous expression now. They're hiding themselves. They said, "Oh, but we are, we are very nice. Don't worry. We're not a threat." And then they're trying to increase their number among the base of >> Oh, not just trying though. >> Yeah. No, but yeah, they are, they are succeeding. But they, before succeeding, you need to try. >> Right. >> It's a successful try, right? Right. But but yeah, but but what I mean is that they're they are working hard on it. So this is something that you can see that you can point out. But still, the more, you know, we have a famous French writer called Shal Piggy, who was killed in the First World War. And he, he wrote, he wrote a lot of great things about the French, uh, nation. And what one of his sentences that I like the most is, uh, you have to tell what you see, but first you have to see it. You have to see what you see. But if people don't agree that this is a glass of water, what can they say? >> I think that they think that saying it's not a glass of water makes them better people. >> Yes. >> So they won't, they'll, they'll never say it's a glass of water because they think all the people who say it's a glass of water, call reality for what it is, >> are somehow bad people and existential threats. >> That's my understanding of the problem. >> But you know, Machiavelli? >> Yes. Machiavelli. Very, all, all the people who work on strategy, they all read Machiavelli, right? >> Machiavelli said something. He said, "It's very difficult for the human brain to think about bad weather when the sun is shining." >> This is also some, it's very simple, and you can, everyone who's looking at us right now can take a moment and picture it for his own life, because it is a human tendency, even for me, for you, for everyone. But you have to work against that. If you are claiming that you want to think about, uh, collective issues, political issues, political in the way of the life of the city, >> you have to be able to to go beyond those those, uh, those restrictions of your mind. You have to open your mind. If if you stay, I in a closed mind, and, uh, of course, it's easier to to avoid facing the problems, but eventually the problems got to you. So all this explains, uh, a lot what, uh, what is happening to to France and to to Europe now.
>> Okay. So there's so much to talk about here. You, you, you, you're representing Samuel Pati's sister. >> Yes. >> And that was a, we've, we've been going into the, I don't, I've been told to not say slums or ghetto, but we've been going into the slums. I don't know what word I should use. And we've been talking to students. We've been interviewing teachers. We've been seeing if there are any lessons for American administrators and and teachers, etc. And in all the classrooms, there is Samuel's photo with another young man. And he was beheaded. And the where we were, and I was wondering if you could speak, speak to that. >> Yeah. So we are currently, this this month is the appeal trial of the people who are have been convicted by the first court about having, uh, led to the beheading of Samuel Pati. The guy who beheaded him was shot by the police minutes after. So he's dead. But the question here is very important. It's the responsibility or not of the guys of the the Islamists who who took, uh, the history of, uh, pointing out the way he was teaching freedom of speech in a French class, using caricatures of, uh, Muhammad, which is a criminal offense under radical Islam. And they pointed out that this teacher should be punished, and they made videos, and eventually they pointed him as a target. And a guy from Chechnya, who was in France, and who was wanted to to kill people who were against Islam, uh, he came at the in his, uh, high school, and, uh, he beaded him at the at the end of class, re strictly, really is there, so he cut his head. So this was a huge shock. This happened in 2020, and it was, of course, a huge, uh, shock. And now, uh, the the very interest, interesting stake about this trial is the responsibility of these leaders of radical Islam who use the social networks, uh, to point out people who they claim are Islamophobes. Okay. And doing so, they know that there are, uh, like for, I'm this would be a military image, but, uh, if you know, you have bombs that are guided by laser, so you have the guys who p the laser, and then you have the planes who shoot the bomb. Okay. So these are the lasers. So they show the target. They don't pull the trigger, but they show the, they, they, they show the target, and they know that there are planes turning, and one of the planes will hit the target that they have shown with the laser. This is exactly what happens with people on the social networks, uh, in the medias, on the also now sometimes in the politics, who claim that people like me or others are, uh, Islamophobes. And this is why I have police details, by the way. So the, the, this is why this hearing, this court hearing, this trial is very important. It's very followed because this beheading was a huge shock in France. But it's also very followed because this the issue is, is it a crime to make a video about someone and claiming that he should be punished because he did something that was an offense to Allah? And, and, and the answer was yes by the first court. And it would be a dramatic issue that it would not be yes before the second court. So I'm fighting with all my heart, uh, to leave for, yeah, eventually for my country. But to have this court of appeal, uh, confirming that the answer to the question is yes. But what is very interesting is that the main convicted guy, who is a Islamic preacher, he's a, he's been in France for 30 years. He, he's been fighting against Western Europe for these 30 years. He comes from Morocco, by the way, but he was welcomed in France, and he's the typical example of these guys we should never have let, at least if not let in, at least kicked out very often, very quickly. He was a clear danger. He became a troublemaker like the first year of his presence in France. He went to college, all that paid by the French society, and starting in college, he tried to make troubles against radical Islam and so and so. So he was spotted immediately, but he could remain here, and this is the result. Uh, it it was claimed in these trials that Samuel, the young teacher Pati, was Islamophobic, and that was somehow some excuse, maybe. >> Yes. >> Or, uh, please. >> This is very interesting. Under the on the first trial, the guy had lawyers who made a technical legal defense, which was of a of a good level, claiming that there was not direct link between his videos and the criminal who beheaded Samuel Pati. So this is a legal point that can be discussed. But in appeal, he changed lawyers, well, some of them, and he took a new one, and he asked this lawyer, who is just being the voice, he's not the brain, he's the voice, but he asked this lawyer to claim that more than the technical legal point, the real issue was that Samuel Pati had been offending the Muslims, which is legally a bit of a suicide, because of course. >> That's so crazy. >> It's it's as if in a rape case, >> the rapist would say, "Oh, but the girl had the small skirt." >> Yeah, that's exactly what. >> How do do you, how do you think that you can be of good faith before of the jury when you explain that? So, this is the very interesting and the and the very worrying part of this case right now. It's if you make a step back, then you realize that this guy who was convicted 15 years by the first court and faces even more because it could go up to 30. He make he made the choice to make a provocation which has very few chances to convince the jury. Meaning that he's not talking to the jury anymore. He's talking to the public opinion. >> Interesting. >> So the very bad news is that this guy thinks he feels strong enough. His ideology feels strong enough that among the French population, you have, of course, small, but not that small number of people who can be seduced by that speech, which is crazy and which is very dangerous. So this choice of defense is in itself a very good and sad example of the increasing of, uh, the radical Islam in the the the French population and in the the the French, uh, public debate. But that excuse wouldn't work on literally anything else. I mean, it wouldn't work with a woman dress. It wouldn't work. So why is this, there's a fallacy called special pleading, like why is it working here and not like, why, why is this a unique? >> But he, he, I, I to tell you what I truly believe. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> I think his aim is not to win in court. His aim is to be a martyr. His aim is to be convicted again and to be able to say afterwards, "Look at these, uh, French Islamophobes. Their justice is a part of an Islamophobe system. They split on the Muslims. The beheading of that guy is the consequence of what he did in his classroom," which is a sentence that one of the lawyers literally said two days ago. If he, the guy said in court, if he was interrogating a witness and he said, quote, "If Samuel Pati, the teacher, had not shown one of the caricatures of the Muslim, we would not be here today." This is absolutely crazy. So >> I know, I know it's totally insane. >> But, but, but, but as I said, the, the, we have, you have to, to remain with a cool head and to understand what is going on. Course. Of course. >> And what is going on is that this guy probably prefers to be re-sentenced, maybe 15, 20 years, and being and be a martyr, uh, and become very famous because of being a martyr than claiming that that's not what he wanted, sorry, and blah, blah, and get away with it. So, >> I mean, the enormity of the problems you're facing, and you know, we've talked to a lot of people on this show. I don't even know how many people we've talked to since we've been here, and I'm just be You're a very forthright guy. We're very forthright people. So, I'll be very forthright with you. Many of the people will tell me one thing on camera and they'll say off camera, "Well, I wanted to say this, but I'm afraid." Or we'll talk to people from think tanks, and we'll get an email when we send the specific, like, you need this mic and this video camera, and let's say, "Well, I'll I'll do it on a podcast, but I don't want my image there." And basically, they say they're afraid of being murdered. Now, these are people who work in the field and live in France. And then, you know, I've been disinvited for a talk. They wanted the abstract, and I think the abstract was something like, "First principles, why you need to be honest about the nature of the problem." I can't remember exactly, but something like, you know, radical Islam, the economy, etc. And I've noticed when we've gone out, we've spoken to a lot of people. I'm going somewhere with this. Please correct me if you think that my perceptions, because I don't speak French, and I'm positive that that's extremely limiting from my understanding. From the unbelievable number of conversations I have had, I sense that people are not being honest about the nature of the problem. They're afraid to speak openly about it. They're afraid to be forthright about it. They're certainly afraid to be on camera about it. And I'm trying to understand why, given the gravity of the problem presented by radical Islam. Does that make sense? >> It, it, it does. >> Okay. >> Am I incorrect? >> No, no, no, no. You're fully correct. I'm, I'm trying to, to, um, do you know this is, I, I'm about to use a French expression, so I don't, but, um, there's, um, in 1917, uh, there were after three years in World War I, uh, some, uh, regiments of the French army, the French army was slaughtered, the German army was slaughtered. It was like a big slow, which is, by the way, one of the reasons of the we of the weakening of Europe after that, because, uh, Europe lost several million men. So then lack of million babies for the century coming, anyway. So some guys started to refuse to go to war. M. >> So this is what the French army did at that time, and it's not new, because the Romans did the same 20 centuries ago when people would not go to war, to refuse to fight, >> they would take one guy on 10 and shoot him. >> Yeah, that's what to decimate means. >> Decimate. Exactly. I was not sure. So if I, if I had been sure, I would have started by that. I was not sure it was a in English, okay. Decimate. Decimate. Okay. So what the Islamists, it's not decimate, is they kill one, and you have 10,000 who shut their mouth because they don't want to be the next. What happened in France in 2015, 7th of January, the whole reduction of a French newspaper called Charlie, which is a satiric newspaper, uh, who makes, uh, uh, caricatures and drawings against everything. They're anti-system, anti-politics, anti-religions. Sometimes it's very funny, sometimes it's awful. But so this is the freedom of of speech and writing. It would be protected. It is actually protected in France, like in the First Amendment in America. So >> 100%. >> But they made caricatures of the prophet, and, uh, so they had a fatwa since 2006, and in 2015, nine years after, two guys came inside the building at the time of the weekly reaction conference. So the whole reaction was there. They came with Kalashnikovs and they slaughtered them. They killed 10 and, uh, got a few others very badly wounded. And when they got out, uh, they were filmed by several guys, and they say, "We did it for the prophet. This is a revenge because you offended the prophet," and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Okay. So this was a huge shock in France. But so a lot of people said, "Okay, never again. We have to fight." The the the next Sunday was a a big march with, it's the biggest march in the French history, like almost five million people, so it's like 8% of the whole French population, huge in Paris. So, "Never again, never again." But, okay, "Never again." So what do you do? Just to have "never again"? You fight. You fight. But, okay, I said I was one among the guys who said, "We have to be very tough on that. We have to fight back, like to hit, but with a huge strength to show how, uh, committed we are to protect who you who we are." Okay. Oh, yes, but you have to be careful because, okay, when you start like that, it's over. And behind the "never again," everybody shut their mouth. And when I was at that time, I started to be invited on the TV shows and things, and I say, "Okay, we have to be logical. >> We have been hit very hard. >> So now we know that we are targeted. >> So we have to fight back. And it's not only a fight back. We understand that we have bad seed seeds in our garden. We have to remove them very, very fast because if we don't, then the whole garden will be, uh, abs will be will turned into a bad, bad, we, bad, bad grass and whatever. So you have to be very quick. You have to, it's like a cancer. You have to remove it when you see the tumor. If you wait and you have 20 tumors, it's over. But then you have to name the problem. You have to understand. You have to say, "How, oh, people started to say, 'Oh, how could this have happened?'" >> Okay, just look at what this, what they write for 20 years. >> Okay. So this is what I don't understand. I think a couple of times in our conversation, >> you said people were shocked. >> Yeah. >> But I'm actually shocked that they're shocked. No, but you have to understand. I, I understand your, I understand your the fact that you don't understand. But when the, I have a lot of people, I, I friends or not friends, who say to me, even today, now, of course, a lot more people say what I do, but 20, 10 years ago, as I said earlier, we were very few of us. But now, okay, it's been a politic issue, a lot of politicians go go that that road and everything. But still, I still have people, and it was even much more 10, nine, eight years ago, who said to me, "You know, between two doors, 'Oh man, you're so brave. I admire you. You have such a courage.'" But then I said, "Okay, but come along. If you have 10 guys who fight, they're easy to kill. >> And, uh, they, they are easy. The people are afraid. But if suddenly you have 10,000 guys, you can, nothing can happen. So the more we are, Yeah. >> The less we are in danger. >> Right? >> And, but still today, I, of course, we are much more than we used to be, but still people in court and there lawyers, they say to me, uh, uh, "Oh, this is a, this is a, oh, you're a courageous man." But, uh, I said, "Okay, but let's go. Let's go. Let's make a picture. Let's make a public statement together. Come with me on the." Oh, no, because, you know, I don't have time. Right. >> Right. Um, is, so I'm a little over. I'm, I'm feeling a little overwhelmed. I'm feeling very bad. >> Well, I don't know. I just, I like the French. They've been traditional allies of the US. I see the trajectory. I see people not being honest about the problem. What is the state doing about this? >> This is a very good question. Uh, some people, uh, in the, many people in the security, in the state security, they understood that 100%. Okay. So they try to organize to fight, they propose changes of laws and things like that. And yet, I have to, to be honest, a lot has been made in 10 years. So we're not at the same level of, uh, blindness that we were 10 years ago, but not enough. Uh, on the viol, you remember my two legs? So on the violence question, terrorism, things like that, we improved a lot. Both our intelligence organization and abilities, and our, uh, legal response, laws have been enhanced, and, uh, it mo, it works. Let's, to summarize, it works more or less, but it, it does work. I mean, it's, uh, above average. But the catastrophe is, uh, the blindness that is, uh, still in process regarding the ideology. And this is, this is what worries me a lot. And I'm, maybe I'm going to surprise you. >> Okay. >> But I think that one of the things that we should do collectively, politically, and especially the right on the polit, political, uh, chess, uh, is to talk to the Muslims who are not radicalized and who just want to live here, you know, in peace. In peace. >> Like everybody else. >> And of course, and, and thanks God, a majority still does. But since the number of Muslims increases and increases, and they are targeted by the radicals, it's mathematical, it's enhancing. So we have to, to talk and to drag with us those who want to live in peace. So we have to, to, and it's not a, there's no contradiction in the speech. So I'm a tough, a very tough fighter against radicals. But I'm a very great friend of those who just want to live here in peace. And I don't care whether they are Christians, Muslims, Jews. I don't care. This is what has made France so great in the last century. But this includes, this means that we have to include the Muslims that just want to live in peace, because if we, if we leave them in the middle of the field and we don't drag them to our end, then they will be pulled by the others, because you cannot stay in the middle. This is a huge stake in the coming years and months, because the more France is falling, and we are falling, uh, the more violence is increasing, and violence is tremendously increasing in France, and has been in the last three, four years. The the the the more we, we, we have a risk that we end with blocks, and this would be an absolute disaster. Is there any hope in the 2027 election? >> I'm built on hope. So I hope, I hope yes. I hope yes. It's going to be very complicated. But, uh, if I was hopeless, then I, I would withdraw from the public debate. Uh, live my life with my beloved. I, I made money, so I don't have money problems, and you know, just watch the ship sink. And I know I would be among the last to to to reach the water. But, but that's not what I >> That's a great thing, cuz I'm about your age. I'm a little older than you. So I understand that now. >> But that's not who I am. And that's, I don't know how I'm going to end, but, uh, it's, I, I'm, I'm ready to, to, to go into politics. And I'm, the thing is, I have not met any, I know all the politicians of course, >> uh, personally, and I haven't met one whom I think today can can take the lead with awareness and self-preparedness and readiness to to take the wheel and avoid the war. Uh, but I also think that a lot of people in France want a big change, because you know, I've been with my think tank, I've been, um, I've been doing a lot of public meetings with people. So they come, hundreds come, and we, we have a discussions, very interesting. And, um, almost every time I have this sentence which is said to me, quote, "It's not the people who got us sick who will cure us." Okay. So there's a big, uh, rejection of the actual, uh, political class, because we have more or less the same guys who've been ministers for the last 20 years. And so there are professional ministers. And, look here, look where where we are in America. Uh, you can say a lot about the political class in America, but there are changes. There are changes. >> And we have term limits in many for the president, for example. >> Yeah. And in France, you have also terms for the president, but, but, but not for the others. So you have people who have been in charge for 20 years, and they all protect themselves. You know, it's a falling system which is protecting, protecting itself. It's very interesting. And a one of the reasons we are falling is that there, this, there's a democratic crisis, because the people don't find themselves represented by people they trust, and this can be very dangerous.
How many people do you think are aware of the problems posed by radical Islam? Is it, it would seem to be that a minority of people are aware of that? >> Depends. Okay, first, the, the honest answer is I don't know, but I'm going to try to go beyond that. Um, it depends how high you go into the system. If you take the population, the basic population, people in the countryside, in the small towns, you know, just regular people, many of them. Then the more you move up into the society, uh, the more, uh, people have their own interest, well, mostly for things for reasons we've already talked about. >> Yeah. >> Not to ask themselves the question, or at least not to give the answer. Uh, but when you talk privately with people who own businesses, with, uh, you know, in real life, they just see, they see the, they have, because they face the problems, the daily problems. For instance, if you're a business owner, then you have a lot of guys who are very young, and who ask for, uh, time for the prayer, things like that, who it didn't exist like five years ago. What percentage of Muslims, and this probably an impossible question, but would you say participate in a kind of radical Islam? >> Well, we have polls that are very interesting. They are contested because in France, it's forbidden to have all sorts of ethnical statistics, and, uh, but still, you have ways to to >> I read that, uh, survey by Francois Krauss about that. Yeah. >> But, but you have interesting surveys and, uh, and polls, and there's, um, the, what we know for sure is that if you take the pyramid of ages, >> Yeah. Yeah. >> If the the youngest you get, you go, the more radical they are. >> So this is the worrying thing. >> Very bad. >> For instance, the, you have questions like, "Are you shocked by caricatures? Do you think religions, do you, do you think blasphemia should be forbidden? Uh, do you think it's normal? It's okay for young girls, uh, to to have their head with the scarf and thing like that?" The younger the guys are, the more yes, the answer is. Okay. So this is a very interesting thing, and it's worrying. Why? Because the younger you go into the population, the more Muslims you have. So, for instance, uh, so if you take the, let's say, the 20 to 25 years old line, you have, it's very difficult to say, but maybe one on six is a Muslim, maybe one on seven, one on six. And among these Muslims, the answer yes to questions that can lead to radical is more than 50%. But >> More than 50%. >> Yes. But, but where the thing is very difficult. So if you take this abstract, you have the don't cut it because it's a hole. >> The the the the thing, it's very difficult to define what is a radical because if what >> I was thinking that in our conversation, >> what is a radical? So if people would, um, oppose to me that you can be for the scarf, and you can be, uh, for timeouts for prayers in the business, and you can be, uh, for things like that without being a radical. But I contest that, because my definition of being a radical is to, uh, push to put a leverage pressure on the society to change the way of life, the public way of life. I mean, when you're in your home, you do absolutely what you want, but we have, um, a civilization. It's not only laws, it's a way of life. >> Okay. Is and this is the the limit for me is when you go against the way of life. >> Yes. And is is that seen as a far-right position? >> Depends who's saying the the far left calls far right or what is >> Anybody is far right. >> Anybody is far right. Far right to them. >> Uh, the What is, uh, what is very sad, but it's not sad, it's stupid, but, uh, stupid can lead to sad to to sadness, uh, it's it's that, um, a lot of medias, you know, mainstream medias, not all of them, but some of them, well, they claim that all the people who go on this, uh, field of interest and claim that we have to protect our way of life and civilization in itself, it is a far-right preoccupation, which is to totally crazy, because it's preserving the civilization. >> Preserving the civilization has nothing to do with far, far right. It's just a, it's just common sense. But for many people, common sense is far right. >> So one thing I've been thinking about a lot lately is that truth has been considered far right. Anything that, so it's not that the facts, data, and evidence are wrong. It's that the presentation of those facts, data, and evidence itself is far right. And if you present that, you are far right. >> Yes. But this leads us to another question. What is being far right? And the word, the has been totally changed lately, because if you look at the history, far right is something very accurate. It has been defined in the 1930s in Europe with the rising of Nazism and fascism. So you exactly know historically what is far right, and it's certainly not what we're talking about. >> Absolutely not. >> It's used as a smear. >> Yeah. Exactly. >> So I, I'll tell you a thought experiment that I've had, and I've asked a dozen people this so far, and then I'll ask you, and then I'll answer the question if you want me to. >> So let's say I had a big basket here. >> Okay? And we put in the basket everything that someone on the far right believes. The way that that's used today, the term far right. We put in that basket all of the policy proposals, the beliefs, everything. >> Here we have the basket. And then I removed one item from the basket, and that's immigration. >> It's the only thing I removed from the basket. What else is in the basket? >> A far right. >> Yes. Or almost, or what is common sense people, uh, people, people who say that there's an increasing. Yeah. That's right. >> Sorry. >> No, that's my. Yeah. So >> That's you know, that's the most honest answer. Of course, I can elaborate it, but >> No, but that's what I keep asking people, like, what's left in the basket? And no one can seem to tell me anything other than immigration. No, but to be a far right today, if, if I claim that, uh, there is a, uh, the the justice, the legal system, the justice system doesn't work anymore, because criminals get away with it much too often, that cops don't dare go to the do their job because they are prosecuted for what they do. You know, cops, they always, they often tell me, today I'm very scared to get out of my car for an intervention because I know that I will finish either in the hospital or in jail. So this is a, this is reality. But if you say that, far right. >> Wow. >> That, but, but let's go further. We can go beyond that. If you, people who said, "Okay, uh, you have, uh, humanity is made of men and women, and women carry babies." >> Far right. >> No, but not everybody thinks that. I know. I know. >> But some people, and, and this is, and, and you laugh because it's because it's it's absurd. So it's funny. >> Right. But that's why I'm laughing. >> But, yeah, I understand. But I, I, if you observe >> this >> Yeah. This is very serious. Why? >> Because this kind of belief is breaking the pillars of our civilization. >> And, and then when it comes to dust, who comes on the dust? Radical Islam. So people who, who are, you know, the wokes, people like that, even if they are not pro-Islamists, they don't realize that they're, we have an expression in France, they, they make their bed, they prepare their bed for Islamism, because breaking our, our pillars is setting the place ready for others. >>
Can I tell you a quick story?
Of course.
So, uh, I do jiu-jitsu pretty seriously, okay? And I was with a, a, a group of guys who are policemen because a lot of police officers do jiu-jitsu and military guys do jiu-jitsu. And we were in the locker room and this guy told me a crazy story.
So they were on a stakeout. You know, those things where you like observe someone else's apartment and you're the police? They were on a stakeout and nothing was happening on the stakeout. And they have body cameras, you know, so that I don't know about France, but here, same here. Okay.
And, uh, something came across the police radio that said there's been a shooting on the block that these, where they were doing the stakeout, the exact block where they were. And, uh, you know, it was like, there is a shooting, officers requested, or I don't, not a cop, I don't know what the exact verbiage was. So they get their gear on and they start running down. And then it came across the radio. It said, suspect is a black male. Now, remember, they're on camera. So they, they can't have to be careful what they said to each other. And then one of the guys said, "Oh, I think something's going to happen during the stakeout." In other words, they didn't want to go because if they shot a black man, their lives would be hell. I mean, they would be hell, but yet that's literally their job, independent of the color of the person. They are there for public safety, but it wasn't worth it to them. And I'm not, I'm not blaming them. I'm not, I'm not, I'm not in that position. I'm in no position whatsoever. But I just thought that was so interesting how the society and the roles in the society had changed based upon the identification of the perpetrator or the alleged perpetrator.
Yeah, we have a lot of issues like that in France with people claiming that police is always going after the same, which would allegedly be only, uh, blacks and Arabic people. And, uh, uh, which is of course absolutely not true. But the good question to ask is, who are the criminals in France today? This is a good question. And the answer should be that if a criminal is a criminal, then no matter how it looks, he's just a criminal.
I'm going to, I'm going to tell you a story. Please. In, uh, 20, I don't know, it was the late 2010s, maybe 17, 18, something like that. I have a discussion with a politician who had responsibilities on the security field. And, uh, we are at a party, so it's an off-the-record discussion. And this guy is, uh, from the left, okay? But he's aware of security problems, but from the left. And at that time, as quite often, there are issues, uh, with, uh, public associations who say that the police is always are going after the same and controlling the same people. And they said that, uh, people who are controlled by the police should have a receipt. And then, uh, you cannot be controlled twice in the same day. So this is completely stupid because of course it's not, you don't need to be very clever to understand that you go for a control, you have your receipt, and then you can do whatever you want the rest of the day. I mean, like it doesn't...
Who thought that?
That's so stupid.
I mean, that's just so truly stupid.
You don't need 10, six or 10 years of college to understand that. Anyway, so, uh, I say that to the, to the guy and the guy say, I agree with you.
And I said, but that's good. I said, "But thanks." And he said, "Because a lot of policemen have explained to me that, uh, they know the places where the deal, it was drug dealing, where the deal happens. And so they know the, how the suspects look because they work on blocks. So they know each other. And so that's why they keep on controlling the same guys because they know that a guy can be empty pockets at one hour and five hours later having drugs or or big money." Anyway, common sense.
So I tell, so I, I asked the guy, but that's a very interesting, uh, why don't you go on French on TV or radio to explain that? Because you're, you're a politician.
Right.
And you're from the left, so it, so you should. But I, I explained him like that. I said, because if it's only the guys from the right who say that, then it gets, there's a confusion and it's bad for the country, it's bad for the police, and it's bad for the population. So it's a, it's a lose-lose situation. So please go.
And he said, "Oh, no, no, no. You know, you know, I cannot do something like that. It's not possible for me to go and say it, but I mean, exc, pardon my French, but what the [ __ ]?"
I mean, when you start, when you're a politician.
And I mean.
And you say that off the record.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
You know, they just.
And it didn't seem to have any problem.
Yeah.
Stating that.
Yeah.
But I mean, it's it's terrible.
You know, it's really interesting. I have a, a, a friend who who wrote the book, The Gift of Violence, Matt Thornton. And the data that he gives in the book, it, it's pretty clear. We know that there's a very small number of people who continually commit. And Buchi in El Salvador has attempted to do something about that by locking them up. And he's had mass incarcerations and they've been incredibly successful. Now, El Salvador is one of the safest places in all of Central America. And the, uh, Costa Rica, the, I can't remember her name, but she's running on a platform. But basically, the, the problem, the murder rate was nowhere near what it was in El Salvador. But to replicate that. So in the United States, one of the things about which we have a problem is we have these judges who are playing fast and loose with the rules and they let out the same people. It's the same people who are committing pretty horrific crimes. And the rate at which those people get out of prison and go back is extremely high. But yet we can't seem to implement any kind of meaningful judicial reform. So, I don't know, maybe misery loves company. I don't know. Maybe we're suffering a kind of similar problem, although I'm not sure it's at scale and it's not religious, but there are, I think sentimentally it's, it's has elements the same.
You've been extremely generous with your time and I'm, I'm really grateful. A few quick questions. Is there anything I should have asked you that I didn't ask you?
Uh, I can, um, I can tell you a word about, uh, what I consider being the crucial turning point for the western world and especially for France, of what happened in Israel, the 7th of October 2023. Because that day, I'm not talking about the, the horror in itself of what happened in Israel, but that day, for the first time in the contemporary history, all the Islamists of the world realized that a very strong accidental state could be defeated. And we could see in France that it made a huge shoot of energy for all the Islamists. And the next day, the 8th of October, literally the next day, hate against Jews exploded in France.
Right?
And second point, the far-left, the political far-left started to use the, uh, Palestinian question, uh, against our states, the France, Europe, United States. So they started, the far-left identified this issue as a possible political major issue in order of course to drag to them all the Islamists and all the people who are not Islamists but because they lack of culture and because they can be influenced in the Arabic culture, the numerous Arabic people of or Arabic culture people in France who could be seduced by such, uh, a speech. And this is a huge worrying for me, not only for me, but this is something that is a, a sign, one of the numerous signs of worrying about the situation because, uh, it was a, it, it was, um, kind of a game changer in in the in the head of all these people. I don't know if I'm clear.
Yeah.
But it's so, so very, very concerning point.
It's terrifying to me. I'm incredibly grateful not only for your talk but for what you do for your country. I think you're a true patriot. I truly do. And I think we need France. Need. I think in America, you know, I told people I was coming here and I, I'll just be continue our relationship of bluntness and so many people said, "Ah, the [ __ ] are you going to go there for? They're doomed. It's over. They've lost. It's like there's no point in going there." And I think if more people were willing to speak up like you and more people were willing to just literally not even do anything, but just be honest about the nature of the problem. I think if you're just honest, truly honest about the nature of the problem, well, first of all, if you're honest about the nature of the problem, you wouldn't be here now. But it's never too late. No, no problem is ever solved by not being honest about it.
Never.
And so I'm just, the people are incredibly lucky to have you. So thank you very much.
Well, thank you. And I, I just consider that, uh, you, you, you cannot lose. You cannot lose. You, you can be removed from the fight one way or the other. But this is a fight that we literally cannot allow ourselves to lose.
Thank you so much. So grateful. Thank you.
Thank you for your invitation.