Replies

00:20 Hello,

So, it has been left to me alone, even though I was informed that the legal aspects will be addressed by two of us, so I had … had I know that it would all be left to me alone, I might have prepared a different report.

Nonetheless, now, I will be [addressing] it all. Well… This is what I have prepared: Dear guests, Today’s conference is supposed to help to answer the question whether we should be afraid of Islam. My answer is straightforward: we should definitely not be afraid of Islam. We should deal with it in the same way in which the European civilization has successfully dealt with all totalitarian and inhuman regimes that it had to face during more than 2,000 years of its history.

In particular, we should fight against Islam, beat it, and prevent its proliferation once and for all, just as in the case of previous monstrous ideologies, declare the very existence of Islam as a criminal act that contradicts human nature, freedom, and particularly human dignity.

Because that’s exactly what Islam is, namely a system contradicting the human nature, freedom, and dignity. It is the same as Nazism, fascism, and communism used to be.

Even though it hides, pretending to be a religion, when in reality it is primarily a criminal state and run by criminals’ ideology, with an unreformable system of governance. Islam is hiding behind the mask of religion for two reasons.

[Interjection: Mme. Doctor, is this not beyond the border?] This is not beyond the border.

[Interjection: No, today, we have agreed —]

[Interjection: I would appreciate (?), but —]

Perfect! So my opinion… that’s exactly — That’s exactly what is possible here! The moment when a person states, when I state my opinion on Islam, which is supported by laws, well, that is not possible! Should I continue or not?

[Moderator: No.] I should not continue. Excellent!

Moderator: Thank you.]

Audience: Shame! Shame!

Panelist: … Some common, factual… (inaudible) [Hum from audience]

Dr. Samkova: Truly unbelievable!

Moderator: We came together here today in order to exchange information, so we could exchange views and opinions.

Audience: In that case, you should first write on the front…

[Audience hum — incomprehensible]

Audience member: So they would first prepare their presentations. Mme. Doctor is stating her opinion. So kindly let her finish speaking!

Moderator: This is not an opinion, this is propaganda. And to promote here individual political opinions

Audience member: In that case… (drowned out) Are you the one who has the right to decide what is propaganda? You know what Mme. Doctor wants to say?

Moderator: I heard (?) Islam!

Panelist: Pardon me, but I think that it would be very good for it to be [spoken] out loud. Because otherwise, she will look like, that, in reality, it is forbidden to say [words drowned out by applause] I have no objection to it, after all, it is (mumbles) I’m just answering all the demands (?), so …legally… do not want to breach rules, some ambassadors… …to hear such… their religion… … that would be… as regards to…

Panelist: if Mme. Doctor were to, a little bit, soften her vocabulary… I would very unhappy if, here, now, how could I say… (?), for now, trying very hard (?) if it would perhaps be possible to unlike those of you who have (?) if, in her presentation, there was emphasis given (?) because this has been, really, the only presentation which contained concrete suggestions whether we shall discuss them, or if we may not have to. So, I ask for one thing: let’s tone it down a little bit The rhetoric, let Mrs. Samkova finish speaking, and then you can revisit it in a good discussion. (?)

Moderator: All right… (?)

Moderator: Mme. Doctor, have you understood? incomprehensible]

Moderator: Which way is it possible to put pressure on you? Through censorship! If, again, you don’t like what I say, stop me!

Moderator: No, as long as you will not as (?), and as your opinion.

Dr. S: I am presenting it as my opinion! As my personal opinion! Does it look like I’m hiding behind anyone?

[Moderator: No, we here… Moderator: you have pronounced here certain (?)… ] And I think that it is so. That is my personal opinion. Thank you! Unlike others, I do not hide behind my employer, religion or even other organizations.

Moderator: Nor do I, and my only aim that how shall I put it, yes, so that all would listen. So that nobody would have a reason to leave this discussion. So, I thank you (inaudible). Islam pretends to be a religion for two reasons. The first is is the historical rise of Islam, which did not permit any different form of ideological presentation other than just [this] religion.

Not even in ancient Greece was it permitted to form philosophical constructs, independently of the State religion, as Socrates could tell us. And it was even less possible to create a conceptual paradigm of a character other than religious in the seventh century A.D., at the edge of what was the civilised world at the time.

The second reason why Islam hides behind the religious mask is its permanent, and purposeful abuse of what the Euro-American legal system and values, which civilisation originally built on Judeo-Christian foundation, have achieved.

There is nothing better and more effective than abusing your enemy’s system of values, while simultaneously not sharing this system. And that’s exactly how Islam behaves. It demands protection according to our traditions, which it thus abuses, without being willing to reciprocate. It relies on our traditions, appeals to them, while behind our backs, it is laughing at us and our system of values.

Let us first of all look at why it is absolutely correct to place Islam at the same level as a totalitarian regime.

Islam, even though it declares itself to be a religion, is primarily a system of governance, in which in which God has only a representative position, while the main content of Islam is the creation of state governance.

Unlike Christianity, Hinduism Buddhism, Taoism or Shintoism, at the core of Islam is law, that is, Sharia law. This is an integral part of Islamic ideology and it is inseparable from it – and in this I fully agree with the currently present Mr. (?) [fellow panelist].

It forms the most intrinsic content of Islam, in which rules, which are declared to be religious, or perhaps ethical, make up only the secondary and marginal content of this ideology.

In Islam, the idea of religion as a private matter, as a personal affair of each individual, is absolutely unacceptable. Yet, it is precisely on this principle on which today’s Christianity, and the civilization which grew from it, are built.

It is a private relationship of an individual with God, facilitated, more or less, by one of the religious organizations. Even those members of our civilized sphere which pronounce themselves to be atheists, that is, those who claim that they do not believe in a God, automatically draw their attitudes to life from the Christian traditions, while these traditions take the form of either folklore or the form of cultural elements automatically presumed, thanks to which even they share in generally Christian European and America’s spirit.

It is necessary to stress again that this attitude is not just unacceptable to Islam, but is denounced by it and directly called a crime. Islam rejects the individual conception of belief in God, and in a totalitarian manner, it prohibits all doubts about it itself.

If anyone believes we have no right to judge what is totalitarianism and domination, and that we have no right to say this about Islam, then I say that in a country which spent 300 years under the domination of foreign rulers, and in the last 78 years, spent 48 years under totalitarian regimes, we have trained our antennae rather well to detect precisely totalitarianism and domination, and we can recognize it at first glance.

We have the right and the ability to recognize it and judge it. Islam does not share the European concept of enlightenment of social progress, which lies in the future. According to Islam, the good times have already passed, — in the era of Prophet Mohammed.

The best things that could be done, have already been done and the best, and the only, ideas that make sense have already been written, that is the Koran.

In its essence, Islam is a religion based on the book of Ecclesiastes which, more than a thousand years before Mohammed stated: “What benefit does man gain from his unending toil, from toiling under under the sun? Generations come and generations go, but the Earth remains forever.”

Judaism, Christianity, and the civilization that arose from them, this unjustified skepticism, this contempt for one’s own self, all this [our civilization] has overcome.

But Islam has remained the still-born child of gnosis, deformed and monstrously mutated, longing for return into a merged union with the Universe, into a retarded obsessive, psychopathic, paranoid concept of the exceptional nature of one’s own path towards the reunification of the essence of the devotee with God.

[Moderator: Well, this is again your opinion.] [Moderator: nothing more.]

Dr. Samkova: It is an opinion, Mr. Editor [sound covered up by noise]

[Moderator: If you are going to…] [unclear]

Dr. Samkova: (?) perhaps it will be necessary… to return to Gnostic texts of the third [very unclear, best approximation] [unclear]

Moderator: And that was supposed to be [unclear] serious?

Even that is my right. From this concept, even through Islam, there flows the all-encompassing notion of equating matter with Evil, from which springs the contempt for our civilization, which is thus considered matter-based, Evil in its essence, and in opposition to God.

It is real tragedy for the Muslims themselves, that by entering this blind alley, Islam has forever closed its path to God. Depression, extinction, disbelief in humans and their individual irreplaceable value, disbelief in the dignity of every human being, regardless of their characteristics, such as religion, social status, gender and nationality, this is what defines Islam.

Islam has rejected philosophy, as we know it, that is, as an opportunity for a rational and critical view of reality. This attitude to Islam blocks even just thinking through ideas on human freedom, dignity, the role of a person and the State, and, paradoxically, also reflecting on God, which have become, in the context of Euro-American civilization, an integral component of the thoughtful deliberations pursued by top scientists astrophysicists, mathematicians and biologists, who, through the results of their research, touch the essence of the Universe and thus the very essence of God.

However, for Muslims, this contact with God is forever, until the Day of Judgment, closed, since their own ideology lost its contact with God though the death of Mohammed. How immensely desperate their life must be when it’s essentially just waiting for death!

The results of this total space-time paralysis of Islam are the very nations suffering under Muslim ideology, who are the ones most devastated. It is they, and their citizens, who are through this dismal pseudo-religious state, stripped of their dignity, and cannot fulfil their potential, which has been given them as human beings as their birthright, and for which they consciously or subconsciously long. Just as the most pitiful and most numerous victims of Communism were Russians, when totalitarian communism arose. Just as the first victims of Nazi Germany were Germans, in the same way, the victims of inhumane totalitarian Islam, the ones most devastated are Arabs and other nations that live under Islamic domination.

Here and now, I would like to express my deepest sympathy with these people, especially to Muslim women, who suffer the most.

However, for Muslims, there is no other path than the path to destruction, because they are denied that which forms the essence of human nature, that is, development.

Islam, and its sharia legal system, is incompatible with the principles of European law, especially with the rights embedded in the Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

As (?) has said, how is it possible that our lawyers do not know this? How is it possible that they are silent?

How is it possible that they accept all of the Muslims’ demands, as they wave Article 9 around, of the above quoted Convention, which guarantees freedom of thought, conscience and religious faith? And how is it possible that if the Muslims request protection according to this legal provision in our world, that our own legal code cannot, at the same time — there cannot be extended an equal protection to those opinions, thoughts and religious convictions that oppose Islam?

And here, I will indulge in a brief aside. How well Muslims are willing to listen to different views, that we have seen for ourselves here. [i.e. the Turkish Ambassador and others walked out during her presentation] Can our lawyers count up only to 14, when Article 14 of the Convention says that the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms described by the Convention must be guaranteed without discrimination based on any criteria?

I am amazed that not even Mme. Professor, not even Mme. Dr. Vysova, have been called upon to comment on the following Article, That would be Article 17 of the Convention on Human Rights and Basic Freedoms, which states: “Nothing in this may be interpreted so that it gives the state, a group or individuals any right to develop activities or commit actions directed towards destroying any of the rights and freedoms acknowledged herein or restriction of these rights and freedoms acknowledged herein or restriction of these rights and freedoms in a greater scope than that determined by the Convention.”

This provision of the Convention was pushed through personally by Winston Churchill, and he did so for a specific reason, as protection against totalitarian regimes. He himself had, of course, been thinking of the regimes of that time, communist regimes. I am thinking of Islam, which is equally totalitarian in my eyes, as equally threatening as those regimes, against which Winston Churchill fought and over which he was victorious.

The protection by Article 17 correctly applies against any ideology, and the fact that the European countries which lie within the jurisdiction of the Convention have, so far, decided not to apply it, this absolutely does not mean that they do not have the will to!

These countries are too kind, and are too aware of the price which they have paid for their knowledge of the highest value of humanity and they are also too patient.

The assumption of Muslim countries and leaders — who have decided to terrorise Europeans with their concept — that the cause of this seeming indifference of Europe is its weakness, is wholly erroneous. Europe came to its opinion, to its world-view, has worked towards this view at the cost of tens of millions of human lives sacrificed, at the cost of suffering that no Muslim can, perhaps, even imagine.

Now, Europe must still, over and over, ask Muslims: “Do you want to live with us?” Because it’s not whether we should fear Islam, and this is the acute, crucial question, which must be answered, and which can be answered only and alone by the Muslim nations.

So far it seems that the Muslims don’t want to peacefully share the planet with the rest of the non-Muslim world.

Their terrorist acts, loudly declared and committed in the name of Islam, demonstrate that they are not interested in brotherhood among nations, and among peoples.

This reminds one, not just once, that in the name of Christianity, no such [criminal] actions were committed, and thus it is neither necessary or possible to hold a conference: “Should we fear Christianity?”

It perhaps, seems to be clear no-one, perhaps, from past terrorists nor from the brigades (?) terrorists, each of whom (?) Europe (?) [incomprehensible] neither Christianity, nor (?) Muslims shout out words about the superiority of Islam, and its legal system, and words that mean we should submit to them.

We find no reason nor proof that Muslims do not feel superior to us. To us, women, homosexuals, or whoever does not strictly adhere to the Koran.

In the near future, Europe will continue to pose this question to Muslims, about peaceful coexistence. Then, it will come to a metamorphosis of this question and it will sound quite different, no longer “Do you want to live with us?”, but it will say: “Do you want to live?” Do you, Muslims, want to survive, because if you, devotees of Islam, want to survive, Europe will do what it has already done twice, when it was threatened with the danger of ideologies threatening the substance of humanity.

Even there, it will enter the battle and crush its enemy. Part of this battle will again be as in past wars, grand scientific technical and technological advance, this time unmistakably aimed at gaining a total advance in energy.

I have no idea, how it will happen in practice. Perhaps we will succeed in finishing tokamak [a device using a magnetic field to confine plasma as a torus] Perhaps we will succeed in drawing energy from a null field. Perhaps we can draw some dark matter from space into our service.

However, in every case resulting from the violent acts caused by Muslims, and the resultant war, will come the total destruction of the Islamic ideology. Islam will be believed in by just a few degenerate individuals, who have crawled into the desert, from which there will vainly leak, into unending bogs, unneeded and unasked-for oil.

Today, perhaps, the daughter of the artificial thought is that Europe is where people should shake [in fear] for their future, their culture, their philosophy and its identity (?). The exact opposite is true. Just as through their malevolent acts, the Muslims have taken the first steps towards their own absolute doom. And it needs to be said that I, myself, take no pleasure from this. I would like to take the opportunity of this meeting to call on all Muslims, and all countries who claim that their religion is Islam: Stop it. You are heading down the wrong path. You are heading down a path that leads away from God. You are on the path of murderers. Your death will not bring you to Barbela, to the land of the real God, but to nothingness and nameless uselessness.

Nothing will be left of you, and the name of your so-called religion will be pronounced with disgust. It is often said of Islam that it contains apocalyptic elements. Thus, I would like to remind everyone of Revelation of St. John, Chapter 12, which is called “The Vanquished Enemy.” And there appeared a great sign in the Heavens: a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and a crown of twelve stars upon her head. This woman’s blue cloak flies in each flag of the European Union. The crown of twelve stars is on each European Union flag.

The Muslims ought to be asking: who is that snake or dragon that this pregnant woman crushes beneath her feet and over whom she is victorious? Muslims have brought Europe once again into a state of war. It is up to them to stop it. Should they not do so, it will be done by (?). Thank you.