Zemmour à Londres : évaluation

Hello, my friends. Yesterday I did a live broadcast from Eric Zamor's meeting in Lander. I decided to make the trip to try to see the man up close, to try to tell you a bit about what I saw and what I felt. There were a lot of French people there. I chatted with many of them. And what's extraordinary is that I spoke French so much yesterday that when I was leaving the venue, I almost got pulled over by a car. It's actually quite crazy, but I spoke French so much that I forgot I was in London. And when I was crossing the street, I looked the wrong way. I just want to tell you, I was quite surprised to be recognized by so many people. Many, many people recognized me. Uh, I chatted with a lot of people, some very enriching encounters. And, you know, the risk when you do social media like I do, like you do social media, when people recognize you, like what happened to me yesterday, there's a risk. There's a huge risk. And in fact, it's the risk of getting a big head, you know, that's clear. It's a danger that threatens all people who do social media. And I really hope I can escape that danger. In any case, I felt rather humble compared to the people who were there. People of a very high level, very intelligent people. And the fact that they told me, aldo, I've been watching your videos for 10 years. I've been watching your videos for five years. You've taught me a lot. It's true that I felt very small in a way, because I felt the weight of a responsibility, telling me, you know, you're not talking to yourself in your car to a camera, but you're talking to people who are on the other side, who. Who are listening, who are affected by what you're saying. And I was really. I felt humble in the sense that I saw cultured people, intelligent people. And I said to myself, but what can I bring to these people?

Okay.

But I continue to. I continue to work in the hope of earning their trust and earning your trust. In any case, after the Moore meeting, we had a. I pronounced the MO meeting, like, literally almost in the Algerian way. Yes. I think he's of Algerian origin, Right? I think. I don't know. He didn't say it yesterday, but I think his parents or grandparents come from Algeria. Right. So I was saying that afterwards we were with people who were there with a group of people. We went to a cafe right in front of the place where this meeting took place. We talked. We talked about quite a Few things. Things. And in particular, a discussion that struck me with someone who was on the subject of the number of Westerners who today, in the emergency that we are living through, feel. How shall I say? Feel in a sort of spiritual projection somewhere. It means that there are elements, there are elements that make up a religion, I would say, with all its symbolism, with its fears, with its superstitions and even its excesses at times. It is true that it is something quite common to young religions. I would say sometimes even the old ones fall into these traps. And in fact, my position, you know it, because I was questioned about Westerners converting to Islam. And I can tell you something straight away from Islamic culture, I would say that the problem with Christians is that if I listen. If I listen to the church today and imagine that I didn't know that I. Let's imagine that I. Yeah, I think it's the conjugation. Uh, let's imagine that I. Yeah, possible, huh? Possible that I. Well, no knowledge of the life and history of Jesus and that I had just observed the church today, that I had wanted to imagine his life. I would have imagined him as being the man of many crosses. I would have imagined that when he faced the Romans, he would have said, listen, we got off to a bad start. I didn't come with a cross. I came with many crosses. Uh, I have a cross for you, for you, for you. Uh, you come. You come as you are. You come with your sin. You don't need to get rid of it, but you're going to live it in the shadow of a cross that I'm going to give you. And it is a cross that is there for compromise. You see, it is a bit like the discourse of the church today. So it is a discourse that really came out, let's say, of the rails that came out of Orthodoxy, let's say Christian. And it is not. It is not. It is a discourse that today does not answer the questions of people who are lost. Because if you look, Jesus originally came with an instrument of death. The cross is an instrument of death. No one who went on the cross came back alive. It was an instrument of the end. It is not an instrument of discussion, of compromise. It was not an instrument that said everyone goes to paradise. Do you understand? That is where we are going to say Islam is coming. And it is going to really put the dots on that. It is going to really give a certain number of precepts and principles, and it is going to give them with force. When you have an imam sitting on his Little staircase in the mosque, speaking while quoting texts that are sometimes 1000 years old, and when there is not an iota of variation in the principle, the words and the phrasing of these texts, it is true that it is something that gives in a world that increasingly resembles quicksand. It is something that gives stability, strength and a foundation for the people who need it today. And that is why we are going to find Westerners who convert to Islamic. Conversely, I have even had cases. I have even had cases of Muslims or ex Muslims who converted to Christianity only to sometimes come back out. They come back out because they realize that they are ultimately in a state of relativism. It is something that tells them it is a bit like McDonald's. Come as you are. There's no dress code at McDonald's. You, you can come in your pajamas, you can come in your bathrobe, you can come barefoot. Come however you want.

Okay?

That's. That's. How should I say it? There are outfits that you'd be refused in a supermarket, but at McDonald's, they'd accept you like that.

Okay?

So the church is in a logic of raking in the money, okay? And that logic means that they don't rake in anything at all. They're empty. In any case, that's what happened afterwards. And I'm sure you're here to know what happened before, so I'll get to it. I made a gold subject at the beginning of this video. Notice, you know, I think about the subject and Zamor. I think that if I had to retake my baccalaureate today, no matter what question I was asked, I would write an essay that I would call the praise of the off topic. National education, I think, has killed the philosopher, killed the person who thinks many students with this story of their subject being worthless, their subject is worth zero. Whereas many extraordinary discoveries, whether in the sciences, in the arts and others in the professions, are discoveries that have occurred by mistake, that have occurred by a mind that has wandered, that has gone beyond the question it was previously considering. Do you understand? Off topic. I live in the off topic. And I think I invite you to get off the beaten track, the paths of reflection, the paths of thought, and go outside of all that, literally go and wander.

Okay?

You can't get lost. If you have solid principles, you won't get lost. So I was saying that to go back to Zaur at the beginning, it was planned in what was called the Royal Society. We ended up at Libis. He talked about it in a funny joke, as they say. By the way, speaking of funny jokes, he was someone who, at the beginning, hey, the first 15 minutes arrived one hour and 17 minutes late. So, you know, I came and lived in Switzerland. It's true that. It's true that it's something that really offended me. I was angry because, yes, we were told he was stuck. Someone took the microphone. He's stuck in London traffic jams. London traffic jams are not new on Friday evenings. Anyone who has spent a little time with Lander. There's no need to spend time with Lander. You take Google Maps on a Friday evening and you see what the roads in London look like. They're all French red. So it's true that governing means planning. Planning also means planning for traffic when you have 500 people waiting. I didn't come to Zamor as an enemy. I didn't come as a friend either. I didn't come to see this election. I promised myself that I would keep my freedom of time, my. My freedom of thought. I'll tell you things as I see them. I don't have any bias. So I was saying I was offended. There were about 400 people in the room. I thought 500, but they said it was 400. There were 400 people in the room. He arrived after one hour and 17 minutes. He was expected at 6pm he just ran in at 7:17pm at the Encore, didn't he? And so he came up on stage, took the microphone and started speaking. For the first 15 minutes, I didn't see the politician. I saw the history and geography teacher talking about the old relations, the old wars between the United Kingdom and France. And you know that very quickly, knowing the guy, it would be about Prussia, it would be about Bismarck, it would be about the guy over there at the metro station. What's his name? Gamba? Uh, it would be about Milat saying it to Pompidou and all that. And it's true that for 15 minutes I felt like I was attending a history and geography class. That means I was wondering, is this a speech? Is this an election speech? Is this a presidential speech? I don't know. I listened to it and I was a little dubious about his references because at times, given the quotes he gave, I almost had the impression that his concerns were from before 1941. I had the impression that he was projected into this France. That was a little, I almost said, outdated. Well, it's not even outdated. It's something that no longer exists. There's no one who had concerns in 1941 who is still Here today to express them. It's something that belongs to the distant past. But he's a little like that. He's a little like that. He brings up issues and sometimes there's nothing to gain from them. He didn't bring it up yesterday. But since he sometimes brings up concerns about Vichy and all that, it's really nice. But I haven't heard in the last 10 years at least, of French people debating each other's positions on vici at the dinner table. I mean, it's pointless. In any case. I was saying that there were 500 people. Of the 500 people, there were, I would say, five people who were opponents of the event, who had come with placards. There were people who arrived. The first thing I saw when I arrived in front of the hall in front of the Ibis Hotel, I saw people waiting outside. So I saw a crowd. And then there were four or five people a little bit further away with placards. Right? No to hatred. Hatred is not welcome in London and all that. And then there was a bunch of journalists taking photos. By the way, I tweeted something. I tweeted that. I tweeted that journalists focus a lot on four or five people. I would like to retract this tweet, which was, in my opinion, contradicted by reality, because at first, having had a somewhat stormy relationship with the media myself, I thought that, you know, I thought that they would rather focus on these four or five people and then perhaps ignore the rest of the rest of the evening showed me that I was wrong. I saw that journalists went to everyone's homes and gave a lot of people a chance to speak. So the suspicions I had about them have proven to be unfounded. In any case, I would like to thank the people who came with these signs against hatred. Because, I mean, in London, when you come to London on a Friday night, there's so much fun. There's so many things going on. There's so many ways to spend your evening, whether you're spending it in front of a little something like a zebra with a sign and all that. It's true that I recognize a certain level of motivation on their part. What I want to say is that what they've done with their signs is very commendable, because today we're in a place that re energizes old hatreds. Re energizes old conflicts, old stories. A little bit, you know, a little bit like a pharaoh, you know. What's a pharaoh like? What's a pharaoh like? He's Leophilized. No, he's not Leophilized. He's Pharaohized. He's me who's escaping. In any case, let's imagine a Leophilized pharaoh, for lack of better words, and that this pharaoh, we take him and we put water on him, huh? We rehabilitate him in order to bring him back to life. And, you know, there are people who do this with their own fear. They do this with their own prejudices. They do this with their own problem. It could be a problem of simply, let's imagine someone, a problem in their childhood, a problem with their family or with their father or with their mother, or a problem of divorce or a problem of a youth with sad things or other traumas. And the risk sometimes. The risk sometimes is on a personal level, is that we can end up re energizing these pharaohs. We can end up taking these pharaohs, putting them in water and giving them a new life. And so today, unfortunately, we live in a world that brings back the old traumas, let's say, of humanity that is now revitalizing them.

Okay?

So I am always respectful towards people, even if I think they made a mistake about the person yesterday. Because it wasn't. It wasn't. We weren't doing evil collectively. There wasn't. It wasn't a supremacist rally or a hate rally or anything like that. No, there were people from all social classes, all ages. There were diverse and varied people. So I think that the presence of these signs, there was no reason to be there yesterday. But I understand, I understand. And I can only congratulate these people for their presence. In any case, I was saying that Zamor spoke for a quarter of an hour like a history and geography teacher. And it was only after a quarter of an hour that we started to find a little bit of politics. That means that he started to talk about things. The speech was very short because given how busy he was, he talked about what I remembered that he wanted to amend the French constitution to ensure that French laws would be above, you know, international treaties, for example, signed by France, so that would give France more independence. There I found politics again. On the other hand, what he does is that he has a tendency, if you like, to throw out formulas. You know, he has a way with quotations, he has a way with formulas. So he has. He has an easy way of phrasing certain subjects that are his favorite subjects that are part of his repertoire. But he left me hanging on the political level. That is to say, I'll give you an Example, Zamour, the fact that France belongs to the European Union. There are many constraints that come from this membership and that mean that France loses part of its, I almost said its sovereignty, but in any case loses part of the control that it could have see over its own functioning, its borders, its economy, its finances. Because many things come from abroad. If I knew France, it had the French franc, today it has the euro. Sorry, but the Euro is not a French currency. It is not a Franco French currency. It is a currency belonging to a union. Right? And France does not really have any flexibility in this regard. For example, to give you an example, Samur does not want to talk about Frexit. I do not think he is a Frexit supporter. He does not want to talk about it because if he does, he knows that he could alienate part of the electorate. Now he knows that part of his electorate is anti European. So he will have to satisfy them. To satisfy them. What does he do? He comes out with a statement by Jacques Chirac. Are they going to wage war on us or should they just wage war on us? What does that mean? It means that for him, I do what I want, if I am the French president or I do what I want, I ignore the European Union, I ignore the international treaties that have been signed, and then I do what I want. And then if they are not happy, they can just wage war on us. Do you see what I mean? It's an attitude. It's true when you have an audience that is won over and applauding, laughing and all that, it's true that it's nice to hear someone say, yeah, well, Europe for me. But in reality, in practice, having experienced it here in the United Kingdom through Brexit and all the debates and issues that have arisen with Brexit, that's not a realistic proposition. It's not a realistic proposition. We can't. Lets imagine on an individual level, at some point I say to myself, okay, uh, I've made, I don't know, I've signed contracts with people, I've taken out loans, I have things in my life I've made, commitments, I've signed. But today I want to start over from scratch. I want to start a new life, a new way of managing my business. And you know what? What I signed yesterday, I don't know. I don't know at all. But I can't just ignore it completely. I need an exit strategy. If I'm not happy with an agreement I've signed, I need to find a strategy to get out of it honorably, with the least damage. Ideally, I shouldn't have signed, but I signed out of error. I need to find a way out. Zamor doesn't propose an exit methodology, has no plan, no clear exit plan. He doesn't even mention it. When I say exit plan, I. I don't necessarily mean frexit. You know, you can suggest something else. Suggest something else, but any kind of exit plan. He doesn't have an exit plan. He only makes jokes. Yes, we'll do what we want. We can't do what we want. We can't do what we want. It's not possible because these are legally binding agreements. These are agreements that are associated with financial sanctions. These are failure to comply. Becoming a country that doesn't comply with its agreements also means that we can suffer enormous damage. That means that, for example, France's word can be considered null and void. That means that on an international scale, let's say France's word will be worth absolutely nothing, and then the collateral damage that it can cause is enormous. So I'm not really into these jokes. I was expecting something more concrete on the questions. When he answered the questions, there was someone sitting in front of me who wanted to ask a question about the health crisis. The question was rejected by the moderator, let's say, who was there to do a bit of filtering. When he approached people, he would say, yes, you have a question. What is it about? Okay, so people would say yes, about the economy or Europe. But when someone said about COVID the question was said, no, no, no, He. He's already talked about COVID on the radio, all that. He doesn't want to talk about it. The problem is that it made his speech sound like it was from 2016. That means he would have given this speech in 2016. Okay, fine. Except that today, I mean, yesterday, a crowd was shot at in the Netherlands and the situation is getting out of hand. It's worrying millions of people. That's a question I would have expected him to answer. It's a question he preferred to avoid, probably. There's a logic to maintaining ambiguity. To maintaining ambiguity. Because it's a question. It's a question where he says to himself, I can't gain anything here because if I talk about it, there's so much hysteria and hype around this issue that if I talk about it, I'm just going to. I'm not going to gain anything right, uh, now. I'll talk about another topic later. But it's true that for me, for me, uh, as I felt It I don't have. I don't have a bill to prove it. And I would be happy to be proven wrong. I would be happy for someone to tell me, no, Aldo, you're wrong. I would have liked someone to tell me that. But at this point today, at this point today, I consider that he is on the same line as Macron. That means, I consider that on this subject, he is on more or less, maybe a few details. He is exactly on the same classic Doxa of Macron and others and other European regimes. I don't see it. I don't see it as very different. That means that on this level, if this plan concerns you, I don't think you will change anything.

Okay?

I think it's a continuation of the plan of the previous plan. So I said that, and in fact, that's what happened. It happened very quickly. After that, he took maybe two or three questions and then he went to the journalists. There were a lot of journalists on the floor. I saw lci, I saw cs, I saw Radio France Internacional, I saw rtl, I saw lots and lots of media outlets, journalists with cameras, and even radio journalists with little things there to record. He signed two or three books and then he left. Okay, fine. So to tell you, here's what I'm sharing with you. A little bit of my experience and my feelings. So there you have it. I was a little bit uncertain. I was a little bit uncertain. There you have it. But to tell you, the room was won over by him. He's a man who knows how to talk to the public. He's a man who knows how to formulate his thoughts, who knows how to be impactful. Uh, I think that here I found the intellectual, I found the debater, I found the man of the television man, the radio man that he is. So there. It's true that. It's true that on this level, and often, an election will be decided on this, in fact, huh? An election will be decided on this. An election is not decided on. Look, uh, I don't want to say anything bad, but look, look at Oslino, for example. Lino is a very intelligent man. He is a man who has plans. Uh, he is a man who. On many topics, huh? If you talk to him about Europe in Solino, you talk to him about the Euro, you talk to him about unemployment, you talk to him about international treaties. He is someone who will speak to you like a Polytechnician. And he has plans, he has an extremely deep analysis. The problem is that it doesn't take off, it doesn't take off in the polls, it doesn't take off in the election results. Why? Because that's precisely the problem is that elections today, democracy today, are really a show. It's a show, okay? I mean, the best showman wins. It's not the one who has the best understanding or the best analysis or who has real solutions and all that. No, because we're talking to an audience that has been, I'm sorry to say it this way, that has been dulled by decades of television and national education and all that. I mean, today, if you want to get ratings and get voters and all that, you can't really improve your intellectual skills. Notice, notice. It's very simple. I'll give you an example. Compare the audience of a channel like a. To a channel that does reality TV shows. I don't know the names of reality TV shows, but we understand each other. People are locked up in lofts, like Loft Story or things like that. Or they are filmed with cameras and then they come and sing, they come and compete and. And. And talk about their. I don't know what. In front of the camera and all that. Do you understand? What gets the most viewers? Okay, so Oslina would rather be the Art of Politics. Zamor is not necessarily the love story of politics either. It's mean to say that to him, but he's someone who, in my opinion, from what I perceived yesterday, there's 20% politics, 80% show. Anyway.

Okay?

There weren't any Claudettes either, right? You have to know how to keep a level head. If someone tells me, no, Aldo, you're wrong. Come on, I'm ready to backtrack a little and say 70% show, 30% politics. That's where we are.

Okay?

Whereas someone like Oslino, he'll do 100% politics, for example. Okay, there you go. Regarding his lateness, I would have preferred him to apologize. I think I absolutely have to talk to a French teacher here. I would have preferred him to apologize. Ah, in my table, is it like that or that he apologize? The French language is complicated, isn't it? It's true that when you see the complexity of the French language, you think it could only have been given to a great people, an intelligent people. It's not everyone's language. Now, it's true that this reasoning quickly reaches its limits, because you look at Arabic, which is extremely, extremely complicated. It's true that it didn't take us very far. That's on another subject, right? Ah. And that's it. And I'd like to tell you Something else, You know, I went to some Jews a week ago in London. Uh, it was a bar mitvah. I invited you to a bar mitvah, so I'm not hiding anything from you. And in fact I spoke to some Jews and it's true that Zamor is starting to become a very recurring topic among French speakers in London. And in fact, so I would say that how he is perceived by Jews. So this is what I was told about him. There was generally a certain sympathy. A certain sympathy, but I wouldn't say that they were pros, I wouldn't go that far. There was a certain sympathy. I wouldn't even say sympathy, I would say a certain complacency towards the guy. But there were a lot of people who were bitter about some of his positions. Like for example, his position on vici. Don't understand what his position on vici was. There was also a position that made him. I won't even repeat it because I don't want to revive this kind of thing. But you know, there is something regrettable in France and I mentioned it in videos years ago. You know, France is a country where if there is a bus accident, lets imagine that a bus falls into a ravine. I hope that doesn't happen. But we understand each other. If there's an accident caused by a bus falling into a ravine, what's the difference between France and another country, huh? If this accident happened in Algeria, for example, well, well, the people will be buried in Algeria. If the accident happens in France, the people on the bus will be buried in 15 different countries. Okay, It's a bit like. Let's imagine that someone has a heart attack on a tennis court or in a tennis club. They're playing tennis and they fall, right? We're not going to bury them in the tennis club, do you understand? Unfortunately, the relationship with France is not a carnal enough relationship for many people to justify their burial in France. Do you understand? So we can say that in general, I will never hold it against a particular person for not being buried in a particular place. Look, I don't know, uh, the last one who died there, Alodei, where is he buried? Elid, he's buried. I don't even remember where, but I know at the end of the world. He has the right. He has the right and everyone. Brie is buried at the Marquis Brasson. Buried where? I hope for his sake that he's buried on the beach at 7. Well, what I'm trying to say is that we can't hold it against a particular person and say, you should have been buried in France. We can't do that. People have that choice. People have that choice, okay? Uh, as individuals, they do what they want with their death. If someone wants to be buried, I don't know, In Antarctica, at McMurdo, they have the right. Everyone there are people they want to. Especially today, today, burials, and that will justify another video are truly becoming a territory, one of the last territories that consumption has not only taken over, but we find a little bit of consumerism. We find stories of people who want to turn themselves into rings, people who want to be burned and sent into space, people who want stuff. We find it strange these days, but we can't blame a particular person for living without mourning in a particular way. And if this mourning requires that the deceased be transported to another country, that doesn't bother me. But on the other hand, it's true that on a collective level, on a collective level, it, it's a marker. If I see that in a country, if I see in a country, many dead people are buried elsewhere, abroad, it's true that it concerns me on a sociological level. What does that tell me? What does it tell me? Okay, that strikes me, yes, there is reason to be challenged, but I'm not going to hold it against any particular people. But don't hesitate. And, and to quote a Jew, and I'll end on this. He told me, he told me because Zaur is a Jew. Ah. He has. He sometimes has this desire to do more. He sometimes has this desire to, uh, to do a lot. To do too much, right? And sometimes he does too much. In any case, yesterday he didn't do too much. He didn't do enough, I thought. And there you have it. It was like I told you, I'm giving my testimony about what I experienced and I wasn't there as an observer. That's all. I think we've said everything. There you have it. Ah, I really hope you have a great weekend and I'll see you when I see you again. Right. I'm working on some more complicated videos. Videos about. You know, I've been talking about Islam lately. Just to tell you why I'm talking about it, let me tell you something. Uh, you know, back in the day when there was shooting in the subway in France, everyone was talking about de radicalization and radicalization. Today we act as if it doesn't exist.

Okay?

For me, today is the day. We have the time, we have the peace of mind to do some in depth work. That's all.

Okay?

We're not waiting for shooting to start before we get the job done.

Okay.

I'll leave you, and then we'll meet again.