Algeria: Sarah Knafo’s Posturing Amid Biased Figures, Stigmatization, and Confusion – An Analysis of a Toxic and Dangerous Discourse

In the wake of the open letter published on April 11, 2025, by the Global Security Organization Against Corruptionfor and Crime (OMSAC), and following the official announcement of an imminent legal complaint against Ms. Sarah Knafo for incitement to hatred, defamation against a sovereign state, stigmatization of a population, and endangering public peace, we are today releasing a comprehensive and well-documented analysis of the statements in question.

This initiative responds to a pressing need for truth, transparency, and justice. It is essential that both national and international public opinion fully grasp the real danger posed by such remarks which, under the guise of pseudo-political discourse, spread a narrative that is stigmatizing, false, and deeply divisive.

Not only does OMSAC firmly dispute the astronomical figures cited without foundation or rigor, but it also provides here a factual and quantitative rebuttal, based on official data corroborated by independent sources.

We remind all that no one is above the law, not even those who hold parliamentary mandates. Public responsibility requires restraint, respect, and truth — especially when words become weapons.

Through this publication, OMSAC reaffirms its commitment to social cohesion, mutual respect between peoples, and the fight against all forms of manipulation or hatred disguised as political opinion.

Justice will have its say. And we will ensure it is called upon in accordance with the rule of law.

Following the recent public statements made by French MP Ms. Sarah Knafo, the Global Security Organization Against Corruptionfor and Crime (OMSAC) has decided to publish this detailed analysis. This initiative serves a dual purpose: to alert national and international public opinion to the seriousness of these remarks, and to demonstrate — with evidence — the deliberate manipulation of statistics aimed at stigmatizing a specific community, namely Algeria and French-Algerians.

Through this document, OMSAC underscores that the dissemination of false information and hate speech — even when coming from elected officials — must not go unpunished in a state governed by the rule of law.

We invite everyone to carefully read this analysis and to evaluate, in full awareness, its implications, accuracy, and potential consequences.

Video of Sarah Knafo's statements

1. “In a single year, Algeria costs us 136 million euros in development aid”

Semantic analysis: The phrase “costs us” suggests an imposed burden, as if the aid were involuntary or unjustified. Likely intent: To frame Algeria as an economic liability from the outset, thus conditioning the audience. Intended effect: Stir feelings of resentment or injustice among French taxpayers.

2. “100 million in unpaid hospital bills”

Analysis: No context or evidence is provided about these “unpaid bills” — are they from students, tourists, or residents? Repetitive pattern: Large figure → blame Algeria → induce outrage.

3. “880 million in pension fraud”

Severity: A precise number is used to imply large-scale “fraud” — a term with strong legal and moral weight.Intended effect: To associate Algerian immigrants and retirees with criminality.

4. “Around 2 billion in lost tax revenue due to remittances”

Deceptive claim: Remittances are legal private transfers and not a form of tax evasion. Labeling them as a “loss” amounts to taxing family solidarity.Intent: To stigmatize diasporas and portray dual loyalty as harmful to France.

5. “1.6 billion in welfare benefits” / “1.5 billion in public housing”

Danger: She targets French social policies by attributing them to a specific population, feeding a narrative of “foreign privilege.”Impact: Triggering feelings of dispossession or exclusion among French citizens.

6. “380 million in university expenses”

Manipulation: Foreign students pay university fees. This figure seeks to discredit their presence and educational contribution.

7. “260 million for their illegal immigrants” / “2.2 billion for their criminals”

Violent rupture: These are the most extreme claims. The possessive “their” is dehumanizing and assimilationist.Root of danger: A specific nationality (Algerian) is equated with illegality and criminality — these are discriminatory and hate-inciting statements.Recurring “cost” narrative: She constructs a story in which each Algerian is a burden or potential threat.

8. “In total, I must announce with seriousness that Algeria costs France over 9 billion euros per year”

Rhetorical device: She assumes the role of a solemn spokesperson for a wronged people. The phrase “with seriousness” lends her tone an air of grave responsibility.Intended effect: Justify a political shift or even a rupture in relations with Algeria.

9. “9 billion paid every year by French taxpayers to Algeria, whose government insults us every day in every possible way”

Defamatory statement: No proof is offered of these alleged insults. She fabricates a climate of hostility.Emotional link: Aims to provoke collective indignation.

10. “That’s three times the budget for French Overseas Territories”

Toxic comparison: Algeria is pitted against Overseas France to fuel a sense of national betrayal — a powerful tool to incite anger in neglected regions.

11. “That’s the price of our leaders’ weakness in the face of a hostile regime”

Political motive: She directly attacks the French government, accusing it of submission — a veiled call for diplomatic rupture.

12. “9 billion a year paid by French taxpayers — it’s intolerable and must stop”

Violent closure: The phrase “must stop” reads as a call to action — potentially political, diplomatic, or legislative in nature.

General Conclusion

✅ Intentional repetition: The figure “9 billion” is hammered home repeatedly — a classic propaganda tactic to anchor a false idea.

✅ Major risk: The speech promotes a rhetoric of exclusion, victimhood, and confrontation, which can inflame community tensions.

✅ Implicit incitement to hatred: The narrative sets up a divide between “good French citizens” and “foreign profiteers”, specifically targeting Algerians.

✅ Diplomatic danger: These statements are liable to spark a crisis between France and Algeria, by reinforcing mutual rejection and potentially triggering cascading political responses.

Department of Integrity & Investigations – OMSAC