Klára Samková: “The Full Unravelling of the Rule of Law”

Earlier this year we featured a talk by the Czech lawyer and activist Klára Samková. In the following video from Czech TV you’ll see Ms. Samková engage in a spirited discussion with a mealy-mouthed “sunshiner” (a leftist or progressive) about the European migration crisis.

The situation they’re debating is the 21st century’s actualization of The Camp of the Saints (see Fjordman’s discussion of Jean Raspail’s writings). From the sunshiner’s viewpoint, the boats are coming, the boats cannot be stopped, and the wave of invading “refugees” cannot be opposed. Like France in Mr. Raspail’s imagined apocalyptic scenario, Europe is totally helpless in the face of the immigrant wave.

Many thanks to Xanthippa for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:


08:11   Now we have the next guests at the table with me,
08:15   Klára Samková. —Good evening. —and facing her is Michael Kocab. —Good evening.
08:19   And I will start with the same question for both of you, I’ll start with the lady.
08:23   What feeling do you get when you see these pictures [of migrants]? —The feelings I get
08:27   of a destroyed homeland, my own as well as the one of these people.
08:32   So, of course, the feelings
08:36   are bad. —Your ruined homeland, what does that mean? —The destroyed rule of law,
08:40   which demonstrated that it is clearly non-functional.
08:44   Basically, we see the full unravelling
08:48   of the rule of law of the European Union and the Czech Republic. —And do you
08:52   get a similar feeling, should we be stopping these people?
08:56   Of course, I also get bad feelings from them, who would not…
09:00   What’s more, the predictions are that this problem
09:05   may last for years, that is it possible that their numbers might unexpectedly
09:09   rise, of these immigrants, and the European Union is not ready for this. We particularly
09:13   are not [ready]. We don’t have any infrastructure for integration. We are talking about
09:17   1,500 people that we may take in. Now imagine that
09:21   millions of them will come to Europe, because by now, around 10 million people are already homeless.
09:25   From Syria, and from Iraq. So, of course,
09:29   we are not prepared for it, but on the other hand we have been put into a situation
09:34   where, despite this, we will have to do something about it, because it is really
09:38   an exodus and it is a current catastrophe the like of which we’ve not seen since the World War II.
09:42   So let’s take it one by one. The question is should we be taking them in? Should the European Union
09:46   be benevolent and take them in? —I think that the European Union should take
09:50   the maximum amount of action to lower
09:54   the migration, the number of people. How to achieve that, I can’t tell you. Anointed
09:59   heads in all of the EU and America don’t know what to do. That means
10:03   we should lower the count, probably
10:07   through some kind of intervention, but I don’t want to say by whom, because it is problematic
10:11   to send in a European, American army; this is still Arab
10:15   territory, but an intervention into the cause of this trouble.
10:19   And the people who come here despite this, that is a reality,
10:23   not that anyone had invited them, they are running from war, from
10:27   Islamic radicalism, so these people who come here, they should be
10:31   treated with as much friendliness as possible,
10:36   according the Geneva convention. That means to give them
10:40   all the rights due to escapees, even though I know this is very difficult in such large
10:44   number, and not to turn them — and this is most important — not to turn them into future
10:48   enemies. This means those who are escaping from radical Islam
10:52   not to strengthen their anti-European, anti-Christian position by
10:56   the growth of xenophobia and possible actions against them; we’ll anger them
11:00   and thus we will turn them into another problem for the next decade.
11:05   Let me put the same question to you, to be fair. Should we be taking them in? —No. —Why not?
11:09   Under no circumstances, because this is the result of criminal activity.
11:13   Let’s be aware that this people have not just appeared here by themselves
11:17   They have come to be here through very sophisticated
11:21   criminal activity of smuggler gangs,
11:25   which we, in essence, though this, would be directly
11:29   and indirectly financing. And by granting
11:33   them asylum — and I do know that this sounds very anti-humanitarian,
11:37   yet it is reality — we are increasing the strength of these criminal
11:42   elements of the roughest calibre.
11:46   These are people who, in essence, trade
11:50   in people. They are trading in migrants. —Yes, but what about people
11:54   running from war. —I have been to Calais.
11:58   There are no people running away from a country in which there is war. —But Syria, the war is there
12:02   There [in Calais] are people
12:07   who look like
12:11   exactly like an armed army,
12:15   full of young, muscular men who have
12:19   nothing in common with being a refugee.
12:23   I’d like to read you something, if I may. Question: “Your husband is also considering emigrating?” Answer:
12:26   “He was the first one to come up with this idea in our family. I was hesitating, and am hesitating still.
12:31   I’ve been trying to achieve something for five years, without results, and the Czechs think I am nuts, naïve
12:35   an idiot. Were my parents not here, I would probably leave.” That was a sentence that
12:40   you addressed to the journal ‘Male Fronty iDnes’ in the year 1997.
12:44   That means that you, too, had considered emigrating. Why do you say, now,
12:48   that somebody else would not have that same right. —Have I really ever considered
12:52   that somebody, at some time, would be feeding me? That I would, somewhere… — Pardon me,
12:55   but the question was that I would sit somewhere, with my hand stretched out
13:00   and that I would not make myself useful?
13:04   That I would, somewhere… —Pardon me, the question was —
13:09   You had once considered emigrating, we have it here, black on white, and now, somebody else
13:12   should not have the same right? No! You are completely twisting
13:17   my words. Yes, you are.
13:21   Emigration is one thing. What is happening here is a refugee wave
13:25   which is artificially directed
13:29   and which is demolishing Europe. I don’t know if you are aware,
13:33   but the Muslim Brotherhood has the year 2015
13:38   coded in and stated to be the year of conquering Europe.
13:42   Well, that I don’t know. So let’s stay with what you said… — Well, you should add
13:45   to your education. Does it matter that criminal gangs are taking a part in this?
13:50   The fact that there are [people] smugglers.
13:54   This is even reported on Czech TV. Isn’t this an argument in support for the position that these people
13:58   have forfeited any status that would make them eligible to stay here?
14:02   Well, the denunciation is correct, in the sense of course I agree that because of the smugglers
14:06   gangs, steps need to be taken against them.
14:10   There is no debate about that. But, on the other hand, they are just taking advantage
14:14   of this catastrophic situation at this time. And they are simply offering
14:19   help, unfortunately, for a lot of money… —They are not offering
14:23   Help; this is a business for them. They don’t care at all.
14:27   …for people who truly do need it.
14:31   We know that the Islamic State is creating absolutely catastrophic conditions there,
14:35   a murderous situation, and people are fleeing. They are fleeing from
14:39   that radicalism, from that war. Some may be taking advantage of it.
14:44   But that does not mean that the people, the refugees, have lost
14:48   their claim to get our help. Should we, from among the people
14:52   who are already here, truly, in Europe, there are already tens of hundreds of thousands of people,
14:56   so, should we pick from among them?
15:00   We should not be picking from among those who are in Europe, who have consciously broken our laws
15:04   who are destroying the rule of law… —What laws have they broken by,
15:09   for example, arriving in Greece and requesting an asylum there?. For example,
15:13   by entering without a proper entry visa and without any legal
15:17   procedure… — They were requesting asylum. —No,
15:21   they had entered a country where they had no business being. There are
15:25   thousands and tens of thousands of people in refugee camps, who
15:29   are properly requesting asylum in countries
15:33   which they have not yet entered. These migrants here are
15:37   establishing completely, in essence, blackmail tendencies.
15:42   I would answer your question: Of course we must select.
15:46   Why aren’t the girls here who were, in Mosul, repeatedly
15:50   so brutally raped so that
15:54   they have completely torn up insides? Why are these not in our medical care?
15:58   Why are there no Kurdish children? —Pardon me.
16:02   Why are these people not here, but why are the people who are blackmailing us here?
16:06   Who have just said: Well, we are here, do something about it, this is your problem!
16:10   Well, this approach could, in a small way work,
16:15   but this is an exodus. This is a migration… —This is not an exodus!
16:19   This is a focused destruction of the European Union.
16:23   Even if, Klára, you were [using formal address]
16:27   right in some of this, and accept that it is a directed action more than
16:31   I personally think, I think this is truly an escape;
16:35   even if we accepted that, we will still not have any ability
16:39   to stop this. After all, this is something that is happening against the will of all the European states.
16:44   There is no state that is sponsoring it. After all, we are not going to shoot at them!
16:48   After all, we won’t let them drown in the Mediterranean Sea.
16:52   We simply are faced with a completely new, unexpected situation;
16:56   we don’t know how to solve it. If you, Klára [using formal address], were the one in charge, you
17:00   would not be able to solve it. And so you can take a radical position of a person who
17:04   criticising the steps being taken, but is not responsible for these steps.
17:08   Michael, [informal address], we’ve been addressing each other informally for a long time, so I’m not going
17:12   to pretend that we address each other formally. —OK, so we won’t. —You were responsible for, for example
17:17   for the Roma people. [Klára Samková is a Roma rights activist]. The results of your action are
17:21   completely catastrophic and desperate. So… —Pardon.
17:25   And I hope that the same thing will not happen in the matter of the refugees.
17:29   Let’s leave the personal plane and let’s talk about the topic on hand, yes?
17:33   OK, so what would be your solution? —The European Union
17:37   is completely helpless and completely powerless.
17:42   And Michael is right on this, because it does not know at all what it should do.
17:46   We have the Schengen zone, which is not functional.
17:50   We have reached agreement — Forgive me, I am approaching it as a lawyer.
17:54   Which is good for nothing. That treaty
17:58   does not factually exist because it is not possible
18:02   to implement it. So, the first thing we have to do
18:06   is to repeal the Schengen Treaty. —Yes, but…
18:10   That will not solve this problem, Klára. What is it, to repeal… —Michael, this will solve, at least
18:15   To repeal or not to repeal, we could, by the way, reach the same position as you,
18:19   the breakup of the European Union and Schengen, but
18:23   that will simply not stop the migrants! We have to adopt a solution,
18:27   certainly, in this strongly unhappy situation that we’ve
18:31   gotten to. Despite this, we have to solve it. We have to harmonize the current level of human
18:35   rights — I know that you may react to this, perhaps, aggressively…
18:39   Human rights, that means, I bring up again
18:43   the Geneva Convention, that means to treat them humanely and, if possible, in a friendly way,
18:48   and to be aware of all that they had to live through when,
18:52   with little children in their arms they make such marches. In Turkey, there are
18:56   27 million people in camps and 100,000 infants.
19:00   These people are in catastrophic situations, compared to which the smuggling gangs
19:04   are totally minor.
19:08   They may organize it, but the suffering is at a much greater level.
19:12   We have to harmonize this with the fact we are not able… —If you would permit me,
19:17   that we are unable to take in so many people.
19:21   I think that it is necessary to start
19:25   calling things by their proper names. The European Union did
19:29   absolutely nothing to stop the growth of the Islamic State.
19:33   Our NATO ally, Turkey, is bombing
19:37   the only real fighters who are actually fighting
19:41   the Islamic State, and these are the Kurds.
19:46   In my view, Turkey has forever disqualified itself
19:50   from the company of polite
19:54   countries, and that —Well, I have been to these camps — and that is a matter
19:58   that needs to be systematically declared. Here, simply,
20:02   Turkey has, in fact, abandoned the policies of NATO
20:06   and the European Union, and has turned
20:11   against the European Union. By economic
20:15   and political means, it completely brutally
20:19   abuses. They themselves are holding these people as
20:23   hostages. I feel just as sorry for them, Michael, like you,
20:27   but, unfortunately, these,
20:31   like you have, but these people
20:35   are being abused, and if we do not stop it one level higher
20:40   that means, with the people who are abusing them,
20:44   then the individual help cannot ever be helpful, it is endless. —I agree
20:48   regarding the smugglers, I fully agree,
20:52   I agree, but there are people here,
20:56   a hugely large movement into the European Union.
21:00   You know as well as I do, Mr. Editor knows this even better because he daily
21:05   works on it, that we are not able to stop it. —That is not true! —Four thousand
21:09   kilometre long border of North Africa and Southern
21:13   Europe, we cannot either make a hunger wall, nor
21:17   a naval blockade, nor can we manage it through other
21:21   means. This means that we are in a situation where the one and only
21:25   thing we can do —and I hope you will agree, Klára. And it concerns
21:30   misunderstood and perhaps poorly executed pro-Roma policies. One and only thing
21:34   we can stop, and that is up to us. To stop in ourselves the growth of xenophobia.
21:38   When in front of your house, a train or
21:42   a bus full of Norwegians or Germans stops, who have gotten themselves into difficulties
21:46   you cannot house them all. Perhaps you can feed them
21:50   and meet their most basic needs, but you cannot
21:54   manage it, and you will not try to make yourself regard them negatively, that they are some parasites.
21:59   They are in a situation where we don’t have to make ourselves regard them negatively …
22:02   —If you would permit, Mr. Editor, I would also like to get a bit of space here.
22:07   Permit me. Regarding these northern nations, I live at St. Wenceslas Square,
22:11   and I have to say that drunk Danish students greatly
22:15   bother me! That is one thing. —You had said
22:19   that we can stop this. We have to set us such legal
22:24   conditions so that this is exodus stopped. That means
22:28   Schengen Zone truly does not exist.
22:32   No, it does not exist. —Klára, Schengen has nothing to do with the exodus…
22:36   You’d have to intervene inside the Arab states… —No, no, no, no.
22:40   So, to hermetically seal all borders, how…
22:44   Please, Mr. Editor, let me finish speaking. The Schengen Zone
22:48   prevents individual states from defending their
22:53   borders. Because this
22:57   task, in essence, was delegated to the European Union.
23:01   Individual states, the Czech Republic
23:05   does not have the right, as a member of the Schengen Zone, to protect
23:09   its own borders. —How should Italy defend its borders? How should Greece defend its borders?
23:13   We have, at most, the right to defend our airports. So,
23:17   that is the first thing. —What does this mean? To hermetically seal all the borders?
23:22   Yes, close all borders. —Build fences? —Yes. Reject
23:26   migrants, and at the same time very radically
23:30   attack the Islamic State. —So, build fences and
23:34   reject refugees, and stop the Islamic State. —Stop the Islamic State
23:38   and tell Turkey that their dealings, as a NATO member,
23:42   are completely unacceptable. —I understand, on the other hand —And
23:46   to take even such steps as
23:50   ejecting Turkey from NATO. —Ok, let’s look at one
23:55   last question. Do you have a short response?
23:59   Yes, quickly. Stop, to set up borders
24:03   in European states means the disintegration of the EU, that is clear.
24:07   It has already disintegrated. —Yes, all right, but this
24:11   would not be a good result. Basically, I would say that is what the
24:15   Islamic radicals wanted. That is, the decomposition inside the EU.
24:20   I don’t agree with this. Massive action
24:24   and military intervention — and, again, I am not saying by whom
24:28   against the Islamic State, that I agree with. Because if this is not stopped,
24:32   their spree, then this exodus will also not stop. So it is,
24:36   my colleague, that we can agree on. —Well, that is wonderful. To close.
24:40   Last question, time
24:44   please, brief answer. These people are here. They are here
24:49   You can say it’s because of borders, that’s your opinion. What can be done
24:53   to make our society stop rejecting them and being xenophobic? Our society is not xenophobic
24:57   A society has an elementary sense of
25:01   self-preservation. I reject the accusations that we are,
25:05   that I would be accused, —I have not accused you —people, the people who
25:09   who are of the same opinion I am, and this is the vast majority
25:13   to be accused of being xenophobes, racists, Nazis, and the like, as I hear
25:18   daily. —I would also not accuse society
25:22   of xenophobia, because this is a really difficult problem and everyone has to
25:26   deal with it themselves. But, what can we do for it?
25:30   We must think of the future, because if we think of the future, and we permit
25:34   the growth of xenophobia inside of ourselves — we have to forbid this within ourselves —
25:38   then we will turn them into enemies who will already be inside our countries,
25:42   and then they’ll give us such hell, that God protect us. So, we only have one
25:46   option, and that is to accept
25:51   those who arrive here. We’re not talking about why they get here. Just the ones who do arrive here
25:55   That will be the end of today’s talk. Thank you.

22 thoughts on “Klára Samková: “The Full Unravelling of the Rule of Law”

  1. This is guy is borberline retarded, no imagination what so ever.
    “What do you want us to do, hermetically seal the the boarders?”
    YES YOU IDIOT!!!, (jump up onto the guys desk and spike the microphone down like a football, into his glass of water)

    At least that’s what I would have done.

  2. Down memory lane, Michael Kocab reminded me very much of my father, who was born a Czech before being rebordered into Austria and thence to the United States as a refugee from the Nazis. But, Michael Kocab displayed not only very similar mannerisms, but the same logic (or lack thereof) structure, the same overriding left (in my father’s case, socialist) dogmas and underlying it all, the same absolute inability to appreciate that peoples are simply different, culturally and genetically, and some wrongs you cannot right, regardless of guilt or innocence.

    My feeling is that Michael Kocab will never, ever change his political (and “ethical”) principles, regardless of their real-world consequences. He’s not an evil person: you probably wouldn’t want anyone as a better neighbor. But, enough of him in the electorate, and your country is gone, disappeared.

      • Indeed. And when you come to think of it, that’s exactly the kind of position that the likes of the Shirtless Wonder Justin Trudeau represent, as well. Probably not a horrible neighbour, but too many of this type and the country goes down the tubes.

    • He’s a rather decent guy, yes. Very moral, high-principled. Christian, son of an evangelical priest, 80s rock musician, former politician, staunch anti-communist. The problem is, he’s awfully stubborn, idealistic, or perhaps even deluded, when it comes to the so-called human rights – to the point even his own daughter (musician as well) considers it necessary to openly disagree with him. He sees himself as a man on a quest for better good, as a champion of oppressed and downtrodden; pretty much everybody else sees him as a pathetic eager-beaver.

      Yet another great example why artists shouldn’t mess with politics: it almost always ends up in embarrassment. 😉

      • Do you hsve any idea why this wave of immigrarion started? Do you really think that those people are happy to come through circumstances and individuals they have to deal with? What is your connection between wars in Middle East and Africa and immigration? None obviously. Plus consciousness about reality is not decided by political or social status or by ability to play a keyboard.

  3. Female panelist: Succinct, professional and a credit to her nation!

    Male panelist: Spineless, effete, simpering, intellectually neutered, atypical
    Example of modern western “manhood.”

    God help Europe!

  4. “….then we will turn them into enemies.”
    No dear, they are ALREADY enemies.
    They start as enemies. They are INSTRUCTED to be enemies.
    The West is Dar al Harb, the Realm of War.
    The non-muslim is the enemy of Allah, and thus of every muslim.
    Spend a little time at The Religion of Peace website. It is all there.

  5. We are all going to vomit if we hear these two excuses much more:

    If you do this________, it’s exactly what ISIS wants you do do.

    If we do this_______, we are going to cause more people to become terrorists.

  6. This man does not get it. He keeps saying that we must treat them well, so that in the coming years, when there is more of them, they will in turn treat us well! OMG. But he is far from alone. Andre Vltchek opened his recent piece (http://www.greanvillepost.com/2016/08/25/hillary-clinton-is-spreading-islamist-extremism) with this mindboggling baloney:

    “If the West in general and the U.S. in particular, left the Arab and Muslim world alone and in peace, we would most likely never see all those terrorist attacks which are rocking the world from Indonesia to France. There would be no Majahadeen, and its mutation into al Qaida, in Afghanistan and elsewhere. There would be no traces of the ISIS….”


    • Somehow the past 1400 years of history of Islam and its expansion have been conveniently forgotten. In a sense, Westerners in their decadence have become narcissistic, blaming themselves for every problem in the world in a mad desire to give meaning to their lives. A bit like someone who cuts himself in order to feel alive because the problem of hunger has been solved.

  7. How is it that none of the people in these discussions within Europe and the United Kingdom are demanding answers from the Saudi States as to why they are not taking them. Seems like such a simple answer as you can be damn sure that if millions of Europeans were fleeing into the Middle East, the brakes would have been put on within one week.

  8. Invasions have happened throughout history. But rare is the case where the invaded population simply sits on its hands and argues that the invaders will treat them well if the former are treated well and not resisted.
    – As a non-Westerner and an immigrant myself, I find it shocking that people in the West are so pliable and willing to give up their hard earned freedoms. It is one thing to be defeated by an advanced culture; it is another to be destroyed by goat herders with a 7th century ideology.
    – I cannot stop thinking about the invasion; but everywhere I look I see people who are barely aware of what is happening. In fact, one is told to celebrate the invasion.

  9. I remember many moons (sic) ago listening to an African rant at Speakers Corner in London about how “the Whiteman came to Africa with the Bible and while the natives were looking up and not paying attention, the Whiteman took their land…”. Now I understand what you were saying.

  10. Sorry, but this is a very simple problem. We are being invaded by people who have very backward uncivilized ideas, but we have had political correctness drilled into us for so long that we are unable to use our brains and SEE that we are being invaded by backward people who belong in their own desert area, where they can head-chop to their hearts’ content. But not here!

    The other problem I see is nobody is taught history so they do not know about previous invasions, nor even the original reason for the words “Gates of Vienna.” They never heard of Jan Hus (sp) either.

    People who don’t learn from history have a tendency to repeat it. I think Europe is seeing it and we may be next, even though America is a big country and with a decent president, it would all be over quickly. Let us pray.

    • Much of what I know of Czech history comes from the events and personalities that inspired their great composers, Smetana and Dvorak. So huge respect to Jan Hus, who opposed the power and corruption of the Catholic church a century before Luther.

      Yet the Reformation led to the Enlightenment, which led to the US constitution (good) and the French Revolution (mixed?), plus the emancipation of women and the abolition of slavery (both good)- but also, inevitably, the rise of secularism. Given the consistent failure of Christian religious authorities to live up to the standards apparently set by Jesus, this is also good, imho.

Comments are closed.