Since the spring of 2020, after having decreed the general mobilization and used the weapon of fear to try to impose the new sanitary order, the governments have systematically discredited their opponents of all sides. To do this, supported by the vast majority of the so-called mass media, they resort to the techniques developed during the world wars and the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century. Rather than debate, in an open democratic setting, the merits of their policies, it is easier to anathematize them with supposedly infamous labels. The « traitors to the fatherland », « Judeo-Bolsheviks » and other « capitalist hydras » were followed by invectives against « conspiracy theorists », « supplicants of the extreme right » and other « confusionists ». For the same purpose, the mainstream media uses these vague and catch-all labels to lump together all their opponents. Thus, in demonstrations, the emphasis is always on the few filmed and spectacularly staged images of clashes between a handful of thugs and the police to suggest that the demonstrators are endorsing the violence. In the same way, the few flags brandished by Civitas supporters, who actively participate in the demonstrations, are regularly highlighted by these same media to denounce the supposed infiltration of the Catholic far right.
Against such an amalgam, Kairos has decided to refuse any a priori ostracism but, on the contrary, to engage in dialogue with Civitas. This is a paradoxical exercise on our part, because although we regularly meet during the big Sunday events, we evolve in very different intellectual and political worlds and, to tell the truth, we hardly know each other. By giving the floor to Alain Escada, the president of Civitas, we try to understand the philosophy and the political positions of this movement, beyond caricatures and prejudices. Such an exchange should allow us to identify our convergences, some of which are due to the same opposition to health dictatorship, but also our fundamental differences, which are very marked, as this interview clearly shows.
After this first debate, Kairos intends to conduct a series of interviews with other components of the opposition to the liberticide measures. It is thus a question of refusing to exclude anyone a priori on the basis of the caricatures and infamous labels of government propaganda, but also, by clarifying our respective positions, to fight against the amalgam of this same propaganda.
Kairos: Hello Alain Escada, you have been president of Civitas since 2012, a movement created in France in 1909. What is your movement? Why and how to defuse insults to him?
Alain Escada: Civitas is a movement whose ambition is to promote traditional Catholic values and to fight against the globalist machine. We have been working on this for several years, starting in France and trying to develop it throughout the French-speaking world. Today, there are Civitas chapters in Belgium, Switzerland and Quebec, soon in Spain. It goes beyond the strictly French-speaking field, the Civitas model is popular in other countries. I think we have a common enemy, globalism, against which many European Catholics believe that we must organize ourselves on an international scale. But, to discredit us, the media prefer to define us…
K: …far right, nationalist?
A. E. : Civitas does not define itself as extreme right wing. On the other hand Catholic, absolutely. On the Belgian scene we have a commentator, a so-called expert appearing in all the media who has a monopoly on saying who is right-wing and who is not, it is Manuel Abramowicz. First of all, we must remember that he is a communist militant since his early youth. It’s a bit like asking a Bayer Monsanto director to say what’s good and not good in terms of food!
K: Just because he’s a communist doesn’t mean he can’t think, right?
A. E.: I’m not saying that he can’t think. I am simply saying that if you start with a personal political prism, then obviously the analysis you produce is not neutral, nor objective, it is militant. He is the media expert…
K: … who criticizes very little, it must be said, the media, because he is included in it.
A. E.: Yes, it is part of it. It should be remembered that for several years he was paid by the Center for Equal Opportunity, an office directly dependent on the Prime Minister’s office. Can we call Abramowicz a rebel? It has a direct link with the State. So obviously, for these people, anyone who challenges the official truth, government policy or globalism is in some way an extremist. And they will systematically try to link all the actors of the protest together to label them as extremists. So these TV set experts have no credibility and are untrustworthy. I assume that I am not a leftist. But I also consider that today the left/right debate is totally outdated. We need to break down all these old patterns that date back to the 18th century. Today, the only thing that can frighten the powers that be is precisely that all the actors of the rebellion against this New World Order have the intelligence to talk to each other, to collaborate and to converge against a common enemy. If the popular protest succeeds in bringing together people from Civitas, people very much to the left, independents, workers, unemployed people, veiled mothers and African students, then the authorities will tremble!
K: We would be in a vertical struggle rather than a horizontal one…
A. E.: Absolutely! This would be a dynamic that finally cares above all for the common good. Because in this case, we are all victims of the New World Order, regardless of our background.
K: What would you say to Manuel Abramowicz? He accuses you of being far right…
A. E.: But what is the extreme right? Then I would ask him if the real extremism today is not in power.
K: What we call the extreme center.
A. E.: Yes. Today totalitarianism is governmental. Have we ever seen a so-called extreme right-wing political power have the means to impose what the Belgian, French, German, Canadian, Australian and New Zealand governments have imposed on their populations? Confinement and compulsory vaccination, which is contrary to the Nuremberg Code. I remind you that the vaccine is at the experimental stage, so it’s totally crazy! When I see the repression of demonstrations, censorship, tracking tools, digital applications, politicians telling us how we should behave at home, to receive our friends or family, when we are told how many people we can have at the table, including at Christmas, when some ministers, especially in Germany, when some ministers, especially in Germany, have even gone so far as to dictate sexuality in Covid times, when the elderly in old people’s homes or in hospitals have been left to die, without being able to have family members visit them, then I’m sorry, but if this is not extremism, not the most complete totalitarianism, then I need to be re-explained the definition of extremism and totalitarianism. For me, extremism and totalitarianism are in power today. Totalitarianism is precisely the interference of the State in all the corners of our existence. And here we are, it is the worst of abominations. How could we admit, as a population supposed to be awake, that our parents, our grandparents are locked up like prisoners in hospitals or in old people’s homes, without being able to go and embrace them, to hug them before their last hour. Is there anything more despicable than that?
K: Would you be willing to debate with Manuel Abramowicz or others?
A. E.: I am ready to debate with anyone, I have no taboos.
K: The invitation is out! At Kairos, we want to create debate, but that is simply not possible right now. On your site, Civitas presents itself as a political movement defending the sovereignty, the national and Christian identity of Belgium, inspired by the social doctrine of the Church, natural law and the patriotic, moral and civilizational values indispensable to the national rebirth. Can you tell us more?
A. E.: First of all, we are Catholics, but we do not recognize ourselves in the discourse that is carried today by the Vatican. And for us, the analysis is very clear. The occupant of the papal throne is an agent of the New World Order. Today, Pope Francis dares to say that vaccination is an act of love. Could anything be more absurd when we know what Big Pharma is all about and what it is trying to do to impose compulsory vaccination with its accompanying depopulation plan? When Bill Gates and his foundation signed protocols with African countries to use them as testing grounds for vaccines containing electronic chips? That should be enough to make you understand that behind this, there is a truly Machiavellian plan. This pope and this Vatican 2022 are really controlled by the New World Order. I remind you that in the WikiLeaks, it appeared that bishops and cardinals are sponsored by the foundation of George Soros, one of the most influential globalist billionaires, along with Bill Gates. Modernist Rome has nothing to do with Catholic values.
K: They are representatives of the power…
A. E.: Yes, there has been an infiltration of the Catholic Church to take over all its workings.
K: It was already known that they had collaborated during the Second World War…
A. E.: There are different readings of history, but today the Vatican is a vector of the New World Order. This is not the kind of Catholicism we are defending. To return to sovereignty, we consider that all nations of the world must be able to decide their own fate without being dependent on supranational powers. Today, it is well known that none of the European nations has the power to take its destiny in hand through its own leaders. The European institutions, among others, dictate the rules to them. And the project is then a world government which we would like to believe would be better able to make general decisions for the good of all. I am a localist, I believe that the political power must be close to its citizens. I feel much more interested in a political representative at the municipal level than in a political representative at the national level. And I feel much closer to a political representative of the national level than to a political representative of the European level and even more so than to a representative of the world government.
K: Isn’t there a risk that with the values of sovereignty and national identity, one recovers the « fascist », the real one, if only indirectly?
A. E.: A national identity, again, what does that mean? Who doesn’t want to preserve their traditions, their customs or their land? I have African friends. Obviously, if I go to dinner at their place, I want to eat an African dish, not a burger from McDonald’s. I talk with Africans, Moroccans or others I am introduced to. Neither they nor I want a standardized world in which we would all be reduced to consuming the same products and repeating the same unique thought. The one that is presented as extreme right-wing wanting only Belgian white and blue, it is part of the imagination maintained by the media. I was trained for two and a half years in political philosophy by a Gabonese priest, Father Ndong Ondo. He obviously did not teach me white supremacism as a driving force in political philosophy! And I would like to point out that I live in a completely multicultural neighborhood, I have neighbors of all origins with whom I get along very well. And these people know that I have anti-globalization positions. We live in perfect conviviality, we debate, we exchange, we invite each other regularly and that does not pose any problem. But I consider that the worst scenario is the globalist one, which aims at making us all grey, eating the same junk food, wearing the same clothes, adhering to a unipolar world of the Orwellian type. The richness of the planet is in its diversity, in the fact that each one preserves its customs, its traditions, its identity, its soil, its culinary and linguistic particularities. I’m not in favor of everyone speaking English through a standardized novlanguage, nor am I in favor of everyone drinking Coca-Cola and eating a bad burger, listening to the same music, and dressing alike.
K: Coming back to the extreme right, don’t you think that it is used by the political power and globalism as a caricature? However, there is a real extreme right…
A. E.: Of course there is an extreme right. But I think that today the current embodied by Civitas is the worst case scenario for the authorities, as long as we are ready to break the classical pattern.
K: You are instrumentalized too. On the RTBF, you can see Civitas flags in the demonstrations all the time. To discredit.
A. E.: We’re not going to complain about it! I think the intelligence of the public is to say « who cares what the media says? If you talk to people who have understood that the media is lying to them about the health situation, among other things, they will conclude that it is also lying to them about the political, economic, social and religious analysis. The media are at the service of power, except for the alternative media, of course. And so let’s stop trusting them. I say it again, break your televisions because they are instruments of mental manipulation. Civitas was the first movement in France and Belgium to lead large-scale campaigns to warn against the health dictatorship. So we have a legitimacy to be present in the demonstrations, because we were among the first to gather financial means to stick thousands of posters, to distribute tens of thousands of leaflets, to alert people about the globalist tyranny under the pretext of health.
K: It may seem strange that activists who claim to be of the extreme left and opposed to the extreme right can be found in media like RTBF, RTL, Le Soir, La Libre Belgique that they do not criticize at all.
A. E.: For me, there is no rebellion among these people, although they present themselves as rebels. They are auxiliary militias of the power.
K: The demonstration on January 23, which gathered hundreds of thousands of people, should have been a great success. But something strange happened, the demonstrators were divided.
A. E.: There was a strong organization on that day, with material and organization, with big financial means.
K: It went on as usual, that is to say, people making the usual journey from the Gare du Nord to the Cinquantenaire, peacefully. People of all ages.
A. E.: And from all social backgrounds.
K: This time, not only Flemings, Walloons and Brussels inhabitants, but also French, Polish and Swiss. And again, the same scenario on arrival at the Cinquantenaire: thugs on the Schuman side. Those who were organizing asked to stop the demonstration, then changing their minds ten minutes later. But it was too late, the damage was done, many had already left. The police pushed the thugs into the park!
A. E.: From Schuman onwards, the cops pushed the demonstrators towards the top of the park. And at the Cinquantenaire Air Museum, a series of fire engines and a police deployment quickly turned into violent repression. I asked why we were chased in this way, since the police, on the Schuman side, chose to push the demonstrators towards the demonstrators instead of chasing them, and then chased the demonstrators to the point where the police vehicles appeared and prevented the people from leaving the Cinquantenaire Park. There was something that seemed totally inconsistent to me. And when I asked law enforcement officials to explain the decision-making process, I was told that as soon as the organizer of the demonstration, Tom Meert, admits that he has no control, the police have a green light. However, it is the organizer of the demonstration who should try to control the demonstration as long as possible, instead of letting the demonstrators down. It is also the responsibility of the organizers to provide a well positioned security service. I think that one of the major flaws took place when the mass of demonstrators entered the Cinquantenaire Park, without the presence of the demonstration’s security service positioned on the Schumann side, in order to show that there was a total disassociation with the thugs who were confronting the police.
K: The association Ensemble pour la liberté, which organized the previous demonstrations, was also presented in the media as extreme right wing.
A. E.: It’s so convenient! We’re all far right, that’s the classic pattern. I remind you that the demonstration of January 9 organized by Ensemble pour la Liberté went well. And then Tom Meert appeared with very, very large financial means to impose himself as the organizer of the January 23 demonstration. Strangely enough, he refused to be a member of Ensemble pour la Liberté, perhaps because he thought it was an unpleasant organization. I don’t know. But in the meantime, perhaps those 140 stewards of Ensemble pour la Liberté would have been useful, if they had been well positioned, to prevent this new manipulation that put an early end to the demonstration of January 23.
K: Where do you think these people who organize come from? Who show up out of nowhere as activists and work in banks? I ask myself: who is given the right to organize demonstrations? What is your position on this idea?
A. E.: It is certain that, when I see suddenly the appearance of previously unknown organizers in a process that had been initiated on November 21, the date of the first large demonstration, and then regular demonstrations, I am astonished.
K: With a Dutch militia…
A. E.: Yes, the January 23 demonstration depended on a massively Dutch organization. All these giant screens, the trucks, the sound system worthy of a rock concert, it’s very expensive equipment that came directly from the Netherlands that day.
K: And a platform…
A. E.: … giant, guards to surround the stand, a company specialized in communication came equipped with drones and multiple cameras. We’re really into very large global budgets. Tom Meert comes from a business background; I’m not saying that all business people serve the New World Order, but it’s true that you have to wonder when you see an organizer who came out of nowhere supplanting the organizers who had properly taken over the previous demonstrations. An organizer full of money who announces a giant event and brings in celebrities from all over Europe, such as Professor Péronne, Alexandra Henrion-Caude, Richard Boutry and many others, only to fail to do what is necessary for them to talk to the crowd.
K: There were even dancers.
A. E.: The organizational scheme, for me, was completely messed up. Anyone who has observed the previous demonstrations against the health dictatorship knows that it was never possible to speak for more than an hour without the first police interventions with gas, tear gas and fire pumps. And on the 23rd, the organizer chooses during one hour and a half to propose only second knives, with all the respect that I have for those who took the floor and dancers that we could have done without. All the celebrities who were waiting, they were left on the side of the road, they moved without being able to speak, while the public was waiting for them. For me, it is a calamitous management!
K: It’s that currently the power still controls everything. He has the controls in hand.
A. E.: Power is often several steps ahead.
K: Not to mention the Freedom Convoy, for example.
A. E.: The European version was a complete fiasco. Is it because the initiators were incompetent or remote-controlled or threatened or a mixture of all of these, in any case in the end what was supposed to be a gigantic gathering from all over Europe was essentially summarized by a few hundred French people abandoned in Brussels in a nameless mess. Beware of manipulators who make glittering promises of mobilizations to the finish and then desert and leave in total disarray those who have trusted them.
That said, once again, it is up to people to take charge, to invest in determined actions.
K: Like the Yellow Vests?
A. E.: Of the Gilets Jaunes type and of all kinds! I believe that the only way to undermine the New World Order is to be multifaceted in action. Petitions and demonstrations are well underway, but they will not sway a power that has the police force and surveillance systems in hand. So there comes a time when you have to be creative on all fronts. I think we need an economic boycott, mobilizations of truckers that must occur during the week and not only on weekends. We must shake the multinationals that support this power and tyranny. We must shake up the European political summits, force them to back down, to cancel their big meeting.
K: We can go back a little to the religious. In Charlie Hebdo it said that Civitas is calling for the repeal of the law on the separation of church and state, and for the re-establishment of Catholicism as the state religion.
A. E. : For the moment, I must say that Camus, the journalist of Charlie Hebdo, at this level does not say anything stupid, but it is in the interpretation of what it means that he lies completely. Indeed, we are in favor of a return, in France as in Belgium, to a union between the State and the Church. Obviously, at the moment this is a purely theoretical line because this project is based on the idea that the State and the Church are in good hands again. As long as state and clerical power is in the hands of the minions of globalism, it is obviously of no interest. In fact, one can even say that there is already a union of Church and State, but on the basis of mundialist objectives and therefore exactly the opposite of what Civitas wants. I would like to make it clear from the outset that, contrary to what Charlie Hebdo wrote, the re-establishment of Catholicism as the state religion would not mean that everyone would be obliged to become Catholic.
K: And that the Catholic religion is superior to others.
A. E: It would mean a privileged situation, linked to our history, but which would have as a consequence, above all, that in this configuration, the Church and the State seek to collaborate in order to ensure that the laws are just, ethical and moral, among others. Anyone can understand that it would be better if laws were subject to an ethical and moral requirement, rather than to materialistic interests, generally to the advantage of multinationals, bankers and speculators.
K: The Church, but not only; the State could also listen to other actors…
A. E.: In any case, even if the separation between the Church and the State were to end, this does not mean that the State would no longer have any other interlocutor, if only the professional categories which are the basic interlocutors of a well-organized society. But today I have no confidence in the unions, because they are agents of the system. This is clearly seen when different professional categories are ordered to vaccinate themselves under penalty of dismissal, and are not supported by the trade unions.
K: The teachers’ unions are even asking that their members be vaccinated more quickly!
A. E.: There is something to be said for raising awareness about the true nature of trade unions. Many unions have huge fortunes and collaborate with employers, who finance some of the major union events. I think it is better to have contacts by professional category.
K: I would like to talk about immigration, abortion, gay marriage, adoption by these couples, things that make Civitas qualify as a far-right movement. Let’s start with immigration.
A. E.: I will try to be very pedagogical in my reflection, in the face of the caricatures of the media. Today, I think that anyone — native Belgian, native French or person of immigrant background — can reasonably understand that immigration organized since the 1970s by the top management is part of the plan of the New World Order.
K: To break the wages…
A. E.: To break wages, to obtain cheap labor, to have pedestrians who can be forced to work at will. And today we must observe how the massive immigration to Europe is done…
K: …by the Bolkestein directive, among others.
A. E.: Yes, and by the role of George Soros and his Open Society Foundation, regularly reported in major media such as Der Spiegel — so it’s not conspiracy. His foundation releases hundreds of millions of euros to facilitate non-European immigration to Europe. Is this just philanthropy, in your opinion? Immigration on such a scale is only good for exploiters, human traffickers, pimps, slum landlords and multinational company bosses. I think the Third World needs its elites to stay at home.
K: Elites that the West has exploited, the Cinquantenaire Park being a beautiful symbol.
A. E.: Africa has enormous potential, and not only because of its exceptional natural resources. It makes no sense for African academics to be in Europe rather than in Africa; it’s brainwashing as it is labor looting. But not all Africans who are in Europe are academics, there are many young men who arrive here and who in my opinion would be more useful in their country. Organizing mass uprooting does not help anyone.
K: If the process is controlled by the employers for the moment, what about the victims, the undocumented migrants who have children here? The other solution, advocated by extreme right-wing movements — sending them home — does not take into account a certain human suffering.
A. E.: All this must be the object of a great collaboration between different countries, different peoples. Today, many African countries are saying this. They would like to see the people who have immigrated to Europe return to their countries to contribute to internal development. This is where the media distorts the analysis, presenting immigration as something great, as if everyone could find happiness in our Eldorado and as if there was nothing interesting to do in their countries. The media say that African culture is great, they make us listen to African music, they praise African artists, who are perfectly respectable, but why then do they make us believe that Africans could not find fulfillment at home and should necessarily find it here? For me, it is collective, organized uprooting. It is possible to have a plan over several years, even several decades of course, to organize an intelligent remigration. It would not be military trucks that arrive in immigrant neighborhoods to organize roundups of people to be parachuted into their country of origin. It is in everyone’s interest to stop this immigration process organized by the globalists. This would be much better for everyone, for the development of many countries, for the preservation of their traditions as well as ours. I can take you to meetings where I speak, made up of a largely immigrant and particularly Muslim audience, who end up understanding and agreeing with the point I am making in a much more substantiated way than in the conversation we are having right now.
K: Doesn’t this « open society » serve to conceal neo-colonialism, the fact that we need these countries?
A. E.: If we empty these countries of their brains as well as their arms, of their young generation which is essential to their recovery, then we leave the whole field of economic decision making again and again to the multinationals, which will exploit Africa, corrupt its leaders and dictate to the Africans how they should manage their country. I think that everyone should be master of their own house, each nation should regain its sovereignty. Of course, the problem is that power is in the hands of corrupt leaders who turn a blind eye to the exploitation of their people.
K: I interviewed a Burkinabe who had tried ten times to cross the Mediterranean. And after the 10ᵉ time, he had succeeded. When I asked him if Thomas Sankara had remained in power, he answered no. He finally returned home, because he did not find the Eldorado here.
A. E.: That’s a point that really needs to be emphasized: there are immigrants who return home. This scenario, we really have to explain it and show that it is not caricatured, nor racist, nor hateful to suggest to people to refuse uniformity in this global world, to keep their identity.
K: You said at the beginning of the interview that you live in a multicultural neighborhood. Do you ask your neighbors to pack up and go home?
A. E.: I don’t tell them to go home. But when they tell me how bad they feel about this company, I invite them to think about it: is your presence here necessarily the right choice?
K: Maybe so, if their country is destroyed…
A. E.: We must not maintain the media caricature: not all the countries of black Africa are at war, nor the countries of Latin America, nor Turkey, nor the Maghreb. The media constantly sell us immigration as the result of wars, while this is mostly false. Immigration is primarily economic. The real answer is to develop their country of origin and not to make them believe that Europe is an Eldorado that will be able to absorb the unfortunate people of the entire planet, give them decent housing, an acceptable job and dream leisure activities, which is a vast deception.
K: At the moment, an LGBTQI+ flag is flying in front of the Pfizer headquarters in Ixelles, in addition to the Red Cross flag. It is certainly funded by Soros. I would now like to hear from you on the issues of abortion, PMA, GPA, gay marriage and adoption.
A. E.: Once again, it is not a question of establishing a morality police, but of considering that for 2000 years, in all civilizations, in all corners of the planet, marriage has been considered to be the union of a man and a woman. It is an anthropological reality, because only this union allows to have children in a natural way and to perpetuate humanity. But all of a sudden, for the last few decades, the same globalists who have organized anarchy in many areas have given rise to the development of an extremely powerful lobby called the LGBTQI+ lobby. It’s worth thinking about. There is a link with the globalist plan. Look at the LGBTQI+ propaganda in Africa, Latin America, Eastern Europe, supported by the embassies of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada — all extremely influential nations in the globalist process -, the Open Society, the foundations of Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, etc. Again, I come back to this notion of sovereignty. A country has the right to consider that LGBTQI+ propaganda in schools or gay marriage is not part of its customs. It is always the globalist forces that seek to prevent this sovereignty and to impose this globalist vision of what the new sexuality, the new morality, the new family should be, asking us to be tolerant. When a French television program director says that there is no more room for white men over 50 to host programs, it is the demonstration that in fact we have completely reversed the processes and legitimized new discriminations. And it is not innocent. It is not out of tolerance, it is not out of love for our neighbor. Behind it, there is a plan — I know I will be accused of being a conspiracy theorist again — there is a globalist plan that aims at subverting all the foundations of civilization to make us totally rootless beings, beings without God, without homeland, without family and without defined sex, reduced to the state of docile consumers and tomorrow transhumanists.
K: A lot of psychoanalysts talk about it, notably Jean-Pierre Lebrun in conversation with Charles Melman in a recent book. They explain that the will to be other than oneself has always existed. But the problem is that now we make the desire feasible. The proportion of children of teenagers in Great Britain who ask to change their sex is increasing. Again, as with the extreme right, this kind of topic should be discussed.
A. E.: We need to speak out on this subject to show to what extent, behind the official truth, there are actually tragic situations that are multiplying because people are deceived and manipulated.
K: Alexandre de Croo, Young Global Leader, was in Johannesburg to praise » equality « In a rousing speech, he evoked Bill and Melinda Gates. We talked about Pfizer’s ties to the LGBTQI+ movements, and of course gender equality. Some warned that giving the same rights to those who decide to marry each other, whether women or men, could be an open door to other rights such as GPA. In India and in the United States, sperm banks are very successful, even with fertile couples, who select the embryos… Can we talk about eugenics?
A. E.: Yes, completely. There are companies that « sell » turnkey children, we could say, some of these companies even offer buyers to choose the characteristics (eye color, hair, …) of the child they will acquire as a common commodity.
K: During the containment, babies were held at the borders in some sort of child production farm.
A. E. : Yes, which shows once again that behind the caricature of Civitas, there are important debates that are made impossible today. Because the media, under the orders of the New World Order, only want a single thought. We will be told that on the one hand we must defend women, fight against the commodification of their bodies, against prostitution in our country. On the other hand, we do the opposite, we commodify the woman through GPA. And organized immigration has never provided so many prostitution networks.
And this, Jacques Attali had cynically explained it well. This globalist agent now considers that his side has already won, he dares to unveil a whole series of measures that will be taken in the future. And the problem is that it doesn’t alarm many people, except for an awake minority, and it doesn’t allow us to bounce back enough to prevent it. All this is deeply diabolical.
K: An LGBTQI+ flag in front of Pfizer’s headquarters in Brussels is amazing!
A. E.: It should show the collusion, that all this is not natural, that this lobby did not emerge all of a sudden after 2000 years of history of our civilizations. Let’s go back to surrogate motherhood. Behind this scheme, some people want to cut sexuality from procreation. The idea that sexuality should only be recreational and that procreation should become entirely artificial. The next step is the artificial womb and transhumanism.
K: Why don’t you want a morality police that tells people what they can and should do in bed?
A. E.: We are not here to check what people do in their bedrooms. But this does not mean that we should promote total debauchery, otherwise society will end up accepting pedophilia and zoophilia as respectable options.
K: I would like to come back to some points to conclude. The death toll from covid is overestimated by the media and the government. The inventor of the PCR test said himself that this test is not reliable. PCR testing is the Achilles heel of this crisis. The President of Tanzania, for example, had samples of papaya and goat tested and found positive by the laboratory.
A. E.: This is what we wrote in our leaflet, and what earned us the classification of « conspiracy theorist » by RTBF. What we have written is quite official. Just go to the Tanzanian media. I would add that, as if by chance, the President of Tanzania, who refused the vaccines offered to his country by the Bill Gates Foundation, died in a rather curious way after almost disappearing from the public scene for more than a week, and that his replacement then benefited from a press release from the WHO welcoming his appointment.
K: The mortality from the vaccine is dramatic. But I recall that Alexander De Croo said in a press conference that there was only one proven side effect of the vaccine in Belgium. Those who present others as liars are themselves the main liars.
A. E.: The media are not neutral or objective. They sought to completely discredit the leaflet distributed by Civitas in Belgium. However, the arguments that RTBF puts forward are real arguments but they cannot be debated. It is strictly forbidden to discuss these issues. RTBF regularly organizes debates on Wednesday evenings, sometimes on topics related to covid. They talk about all the sanitary measures of course, always to legitimize the official policy. RTBF claims to give voice to different trends. On the health pass, the QR-code and the mandatory vaccination for caregivers, they had consulted different associations to ask them to send people on the set to debate. And the association Ensemble pour la Liberté, which has a Dutch-speaking majority, had proposed that I be their representative at this French-speaking debate. RTBF’s answer: it is out of the question that we give the floor live to Mr. Escada. I’m sorry, but if I’m an idiot, if everything I say is absurd, false, incoherent, they should instead be happy to give me the floor and ridicule me live.
K: We have given you the floor, we will give it to others. We officially invite Manuel Abramowicz to come and debate with Alain Escada. Are you ready to do it?
A. E.: Absolutely. I told you at the beginning of this program that I am ready to debate with anyone. The wealth of intelligence is being able to speak.
Interview by Alexandre Penasse, January 2022.