The Shocking Words of a Czech Physician Living in England: Female Muslim Physicians Are Refusing to Remove Their Headscarves Upon Entering the Operating Room, Muslim Physicians Leave Their Patients to Go Pray, the Reading of the Koran During Surgery
23 January, 2016, 12:42
For more than 10 years, the Czech physician Vladislav Rogozov has been working at a teaching hospital in Sheffield, England. With this look at the current Islamization of Great Britain, he is attempting to bear witness to this serious danger to our homeland, in order that the Czech Republic might recognize this danger in time and not end up as tragically [as Great Britain]. He speaks of criminality growing out of the clash of different cultures, which was actively kept secret by the police, the politicians and the social workers. The victims of criminal acts have even been threatened in order to withdraw their testimony.
Description: Muslim migrant, illustrative photo
Tell us, how, from your point of view, what did the relatively recent Christmas celebrations look like in ‘good old England’? Have you noticed some difference to what it was like when, eleven years ago, you first came to Great Britain as a physician?
Christmas celebrations looked the same as all of England looks like – two parallel worlds and growing Islamization. In the countryside, where we live, there was a picturesque English Christmas, filled with carols and traditions. In many Muslim suburbs, there was no mention of the origin of Christmas. Its original meaning is intentionally being drowned in commercialization. Year after year, one can feel the growing influence of Islamization and political correctness.
For example, at a nearby school, the headmaster had, for the first time this year, banned the Christmas Tree. On BBC, I have, for the first time, noticed the greeting “Salaam Aleikum Merry Christmas”. And in one comedy show on BBC on Christmas Eve, they did not lay Baby Jesus in the manger, but Baby Mohammed. I guess it no longer surprises me.
Photo: Vladislav Rogozov, MD
What led you to start writing on your blog, the year before last, about the ongoing Islamisation of Great Britain, and to raise the warning, to prevent something similar from happening in the Czech Republic?
In 2005, when I received the offer to work at the Teaching Hospital in Sheffield, I did not hesitate for a minute. It was a professional and personal challenge. I had always admired England for all the good it had brought to humanity. A few days after arriving, on Thursday 7th July, I traveled from Sheffield to London to the General Medical Council. I did not make it to London that day. British Muslims had attacked innocent people, they killed dozens of them and injured hundreds. It was a total shock.
Yet it took me several more years before I would admit to myself that the process of Islamization is going on across the whole country, and that this process is no longer reversible.
In the year 2009 we had a reunion with other former students of the Medical School. When I told them that multiculturalism is not working in Britain, that it is just Islamization, none of them wanted to believe me. That is when I realized how easy it would be to underestimate this risk, if we do not pay attention to it in time. We are dealing with a huge problem, which concerns not just our safety, but the whole structure of our culture. However, the majority of Western politicians has not even dared to name it directly.
How would you describe it yourself?
Today, it is absolutely clear that in Europe there is a growing confrontation between two civilizations — the European democratic one and the Islamic theocratic one.
European culture is based on democracy, freedom, rule of law, individuals, critical thinking, the equality of people of differing opinions and genders. In contrast with this, Islamic culture is based on religious dogmatism, absolute veneration of religion, irrational obedience of the text of the Koran. From this then grows its intolerance of people with differing opinions or sexual orientation, or to the inequality [under the law] between men and women.
The values of these two systems are sufficiently different that they cannot exist at the same place and time without competing with each other. This clash can only have one of two results — either continuing Islamization or a long-term conflict. The probability that Islam might undergo some enlightened renaissance process is very low. For some countries, no good solution exists any longer.
I believe that the Czech Republic may yet avoid this. But not much time remains.
What do you see as the root causes of this?
The causes for the current movement of numerous Muslim populations into Europe are various. In many countries, the starting factor is post-colonial heritage and a myopic solution to the problem of the ageing of the European population due to low birth rates. The desire of closed Muslim communities to integrate into the majority culture is miniscule. To the contrary, their motivation for expansion and Islamization is immense. The existence of these communities has therefore brought great problems to all the Western countries that had, in good faith, undertaken this experiment.
Parallel worlds with parallel values were created, even including parallel legal systems. For example, in Britain, there exist dozens of Sharia tribunals.
The integration of Muslim communities had failed. It is not possible to integrate someone by force, against their will. The British government invests great resources and will into various integration programs, without results.
For example, David Cameron announced that he will provide £20 million for a project to teach Muslim women to speak English, because a large majority of them do not even speak English. He immediately faced criticism from many Muslims that this is discriminatory and putting labels on people, and the British Muslim women don’t even have to speak English because they only go outside with their husbands, and so on.
Do we want to once be facing similar problems in the Czech Republic?
So, is Islam to blame for this state of things?
It is difficult to blame Islam for self-propagation; this is what it has always done and it has never attempted to hide it. The main problem is the weakness of our current European society and a crisis in values. If any living system, from a single cell to the whole of human community, gives up on its own defense and on maintaining its own integrity, it will most certainly perish. And it will free up living space for those more capable of survival.
Europeans have been lulled by long-lasting safety and prosperity. They have given up on the vigorous defense of its basic values; they consume experiences and give birth to too few children. It would be unnatural if such a weakness were not exploited by another, expansive culture to spread further. After all, freedom, democracy and the rule of law are not the products of safety, but its preconditions. If we do not defend these values, even with the use of force [if necessary], we will lose it all.
Has Europe not primarily caused these problems for herself?
A terrible mistake has been made with the series of unnecessary interventions in the Middle East. The result is our own weakening, the rise of Islamic terror, regional wars, chaos, unrest, the migrant crisis. Instead of exporting democracy — using force — into places where it has no chance to work, we should focus on vigorous defense and promotion of democratic values at home in Europe.
Another observation from here, in England, is the national self-flagellation. English people are raised to feel guilty for colonialism and from this flows this need for self-sacrifice in favour of peoples from the former colonies.
One of my friends, an English teacher, told me recently: “Thank you for opening my eyes. Until now, I had actually been ashamed of my English identity. Now I see that I have something to be proud of.” I think that many Germans have also approached this migrant wave while under the influence of the lingering shame for the war. However, we can do great harm with ill-considered acts of goodness.
You work at the cardiovascular clinic in a teaching hospital in Sheffield, you are teaching University students. How has it affected you personally, when the situation has led you to admit that you have started to fear Islam, that you have become an Islamophobe?
We meet almost daily with the manifestations and effects of Islamization,.and every day its evolution truly greatly worries me. I fear the loss of our cultural identity, ideologically motivated violence and the danger of increasing fascism of a part of our European community. When I look at how England is changing, I become very sad. Many places now look like the streets of Pakistan. Yet much more important than appearances are the values that Islam brings with it.
I have deep respect for every human being, including every individual Muslim I have come into contact with, be it as a patient, a relative or a fellow physician. However, I do not have respect for the Islamic culture — it brings us unequal position of women before the law, intolerance to differences, racism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, honour killings, female circumcision, Sharia, torturing of animals and other medieval “advances”.
Yet, an even worse danger is ideologically motivated violence. It is a proven fact many times over that Islam has the potential to inspire its followers to commit violence against innocent people. For that, it is sufficient to follow the daily news. Nobody can deny the fact that in the 21st century, the largest source of ideologically motivated violence comes from the Islamic environment.
Quite simply, until Islamic culture places human life above obedience to Allah, some Muslims will not stop killing in the name of Allah. And that is a sufficient reason to be afraid. However, Islamic culture cannot be forced into a renaissance of change; it has to arrive at it itself. Until that happens, we either have to defend ourselves against it or let ourselves be Islamized.
A no less disturbing effect of Islamization is the danger of radicalization of indigenous Europeans. Unless political representatives find the courage to name and solve this problem in a timely way, we may fear the rise of extremist and fascistic tendencies.
Less than a year ago you wrote that in multicultural Britain, there is an absolutely never-before-seen range of brutal rape and sexual slavery of children, and that the majority of the perpetrators are British Muslims of Asian descent, and their victims are white English children. This information has not surfaced here, and you have been accused in some discussions that you are making this up and that the officials did not cover this up. What would you say to that?
This is a specific type of crime which arises from the clash of differing cultures. Because it deals with criminality with a racial motivation, nobody dared to publish the truth for years. It was actively hidden by the police and social workers. Victims of criminal acts were even threatened, to make them recant their testimony. It is absolutely shocking, where Islamization in combination with political correctness leads. But I have described that in my post “About the Rape of Children…”
If you are asking me about personally assigning guilt, I do not solve this. Idiots exist everywhere; they are cowardly and hide behind anonymity. Everything I have written about this problem is supported by evidence published by British institutions and thus easily provable. The victims’ testimonies are available for viewing on-line on BBC iPlayer. I personally know the mother of one of the victims.
What are the loudest [most ostentatious] personal experiences you or those closest to you have had with the impact of Islamization on your lives?
Unfortunately, those experiences could fill a whole book. I have written about some of these already on my blog. So, randomly…
Islamization directly affects many aspects of life, from shopping to picking schools. For example, when we were picking a school for our growing daughter, we were quite surprised. Not by the number of Muslim children in the classrooms, but with the attitude of the personnel. Everywhere, they welcomed us as foreigners, that they are proud of their institution, and proud of their multicultural approach. Then, when we toured the classrooms, every single notice-board was dedicated to the teachings of Islam.
We decided to sell our house in the city and to move to the countryside. There we finally found a traditional English school and community — exactly what we had wanted our daughter to still experience. This is a general trend: because of growing Islamization, many people are moving from the cities into the outlying regions.
We also had to solve a number of problems in the hospital — physicians and medics refuse to remove their headscarves upon entering the operating room, Muslim physicians leave their patients in order to go pray, demands for breaks for prayers, and so on. Just last week, our operating room nurses were complaining that one Muslim anesthesiologist, in the middle of a surgery, started reading out loud from the Koran and urged the rest of the personnel to also read from it. And I have to note that here, in the teaching hospital, this is much less pronounced than in a number of smaller hospitals. There, the situation is much worse.
And do fears of terrorism manifest themselves somehow?
The fear of Islamic terrorism is unpleasant and ever-present. Even MI5 admits that it is only a question of time before something happens. I remember how my friend, also a Czech doctor, phoned me in a panic when there was that terrorist attack at Glasgow airport. One of his colleagues, a Muslim physician at his hospital, was one of the perpetrators.
Publicly, nobody speaks about these problems openly: it is discussed only among good friends, behind closed doors. Criticizing Islam can easily be classified as fanning religious intolerance, and that is a criminal act in Britain. The situation is similar to what it had once been with any criticism of communism [behind the Iron Curtain]. Some negative manifestations were publicly named, but they could not be connected to the cause. Open discussion existed only in private; public critics were punished.
How do the local media react, face to face, to this growing Islamization of Great Britain, whether it be the publicly funded BBC or private outlets? From your previous answer, one may presume that instead of open transfer of information, they prefer political correctness, just as it is here as well as in most of the countries of the European Union.
No politician ever asked their electorate if they wanted the Islamization of their countries. When the majority culture, horrified, started to wake up, it was too late. Politicians cannot now ignore millions of their Muslim citizens, they have the same rights as non-Muslims. And they are voters. That is why it was necessary to create political correctness, as a tool to suppress criticism and cause the gradual erosion of the freedom of speech.
In the name of maintaining non-violent coexistence of different cultures, the politicians themselves have no choice, whether they like it or not, about aiding the peaceful Islamization of society.
The same goes for the media. On BBC, you can watch original shows about Muslims, or, perhaps, about how great it is to convert to Islam. The media carry information about current events — even about rapes, honour killings, female circumcision, terrorism — but nobody dares to link it with Islamic culture and its value system. They call it different things — the influence of a perverse ideology, extremism, radicalization — yet nobody dares to criticize Muslims. Even David Cameron says that these are “not Muslims, but monsters” — who have twisted and misused Islam. They never explain just how.
More and more, British Muslims are affecting the view of Britain on the international scene. The country that gave humanity democracy and the Beatles has thus become renown for its export of jihadists, who cut the heads off of living people.
Monday’s discussion in Parliament was symptomatic of this. The MPs had to debate barring Donald Trump from entering Britain — the subject of a petition signed by hundreds of thousands of British Muslims. One of my English colleagues told me yesterday just how ashamed he is of British image in the world. And it will get worse. As the Muslim community grows, it will promote its needs more vigorously.
That huge migration wave which rolled into Europe last year, according to the views of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, appears to be unstoppable. After the New Year’s attacks by hundreds of migrants on women and girls in Cologne-on-Rhine and also other and not just German cities, might the approach of the political elites [to the migrants] change? What reactions to these events have you noted in Great Britain?
German politics regarding the migration wave was perceived here with criticism. One could often hear the opinions that it is one-sided politics which endangers the stability of Europe. Information about the Cologne attacks was carried by all the major outlets, including airing the victims’ statements.
However, the news reporting was, of course, politically correct. I did not notice a single report where one of the commentators would draw an unequivocal link between the attacks and Muslim immigration. Nobody bothered to note that there might, perhaps, be some similarity to the thousands of attacks by Muslim men against English women.
If you have written off the future of Great Britain in light of the basic cultural and demographic change to the society and their vanishing identity, how do you see the chances of the continental countries of the European Union — primarily Germany and France, but, of course, also of the Czech Republic?
We do not experience the happenings in France as directly as we do those in England, even though we do go over to visit my sister-in-law and my niece is studying in high school there. However, I do think that France is about on par with England when it comes to Islamization. There is no good solution — either continuing Islamization or prolonged conflict.
What the politicians did in Germany — that is suicidal, dangerous and careless, both with respect to their own citizens and to surrounding countries. Who, in God’s name, have they taken counsel with regarding this decision? We will feel the results for a long time. And with the coming spring, the problem will return with a renewed intensity.
The European Union has failed. The Schengen area is crumbling; now it functions in reverse – its outer borders are porous, yet the internal borders between the States are being closed. There are very few reasons to think that the European Union will be able to deal as a united entity or defend itself as a whole. Protecting the integrity and security would appear to be more and more dependent on individual states.
Therefore the Czech Republic should not act as an afterthought to events, but should be prepared to take control of its borders at any time. In this context, the Visegrad area [Hungary, Slovakia, Poland and the Czech Republic] would appear to grow in importance. I think that the preservation of cultural identity and the prevention of Islamization lies in the close cooperation between these countries. It is quite possible that the tables will turn and that the bastion of democracy on the continent may, in the future, lie in Central Europe. Perhaps once the former inhabitants of Western countries will try to emigrate to us [Central Europe] just as once we had lined up to emigrate from there to escape totalitarian regimes. We tried out communism for them; they have tried out Islamization for us. We will be even. We must be ready to help them.
How can the citizens of the Czech Republic help ensure that their country will not follow in the footsteps of the Islamized Great Britain, and how should they face the accusations of xenophobia, Islamophobia and racism, to which they are subjected the moment they dare voice their disagreement with accepting migrants?
The only non-violent way to defend against Islamization is to not permit it to even start. To the West of us, we have plenty of case studies in how large Muslim migration changes society, how the formation of isolated ghettos came about along with a parallel value system. Therefore, preventing mass Muslim immigration and the creation of closed communities is the only protection from Islamization.
Of course, it makes no sense to hold a primary war against Islam. The primary thing should be the protection of our own values and way of life. Of course, not at the cost of closing ourselves to the world — that would be suicide. It is necessary to remain open and friendly to newcomers — to be attractive for those who want to accept our culture and its values, and wholly unaccepting of those who do not wish to respect this. Thus, the answer is a strong democracy, an open society that knows its values and knows how to use any means to protect them against those who either do not respect it or hate it.
That also goes regarding the freedom of speech. Political correctness is censorship, a barrier to freedom of expression, we should wholly reject it. If we do not call problems by their real names, we cannot solve them.
So, you do not see the worst of human qualities behind rejecting the migrants, as some ‘do-gooders’ would have us think?
Everyone has the right to voice their disagreement with accepting the migrants. The first concern of individuals must be their family, then surrounding area and then their country. If there exists strong proofs regarding negative impacts if imigration on safety, it is absolutely their place to worry about the effects of unchecked immigration. Anything else would be hazardous. There is no other way nature can work. If anyone calls well-supported fears xenophobia, we are dealing with implementing the principles of Political Correctness. Politeness, freedom, courage and truth – these are effective tools to fight Political Correctness.
Of course, I feel sorry for all those suffering from war. It is our moral duty to help those who need help, that is one of our core values. The more we help, the better the world around us will be and even we ourselves. Helping helps cultivate individuals and societies.
On the other hand, it is clear that we cannot help all those who need help. We can only help within the frame of our abilities and from our own free will. Helping at the cost of our own safety and integrity is suicide. Then, we will not be able to help anyone.
Of course, it also holds that helping does not mean moving everyone into your own home. It is possible to help the needy in many different ways.
If you follow the happenings on the Czech domestic scene, how would you comment the opinions of the President, Milos Zeman, with respect to the other side as represented by the Prime Minister, Bohuslav Sobotka, the defeated candidates of direct presidential election Karel Schwarzenberg and Jiri Dienstbiere, or the leader of the opposition, Miroslav Kalousek, on the migration wave to Europe? Does the President have the right to say that this is our country?
Of course, we follow domestic developments. Now, I do not want to address individual statements, there are so many of them and they are evolving so fast. However, I am afraid that the majority of our politicians still do not admit just how pivotal these times are in which we find ourselves. The current evolution of events will forever affect the shape of our country.
The politicians must defend the interests and safety of their own citizens; that is why they were elected and why we pay them. They must protect the country against dangers and risks, which also include uncontrolled immigration. Therefore, the [Czech] Republic must be ready to protect its borders. If it comes to the growth of the numerous Muslim community, Islamization will begin and there will be no way back. Such a basic decision regarding the mass immigration of an incompatible culture ought to remain under the overarching control of each member country. And they [the decisions] ought not be made by politicians elected for just a few years — this should be decided upon by citizens, in a referendum.
Yet there is something even more important here. The public and the politicians are facing a basic task – to guide the ship of democracy between the cliffs of Islamization on the one hand and fascism on the other. The longer politicians delay in naming things by their real names, the closer to these cliffs we will come. It is obvious that navigating between them will take effort and sacrifices. Let’s hope these will be just material sacrifices.
In order for people to be willing to give up parts of their comfort for the benefit of immaterial values and for future prosperity, they need motivation in the shape of political vision. We do not need politicians who are afraid or who are scaremongers. We need politicians who will inspire. We don’t need to say what kind of country we do not want, but rather what kind of a country we do want to live in — not showing people what to fight against but what to fight for. We need politicians who will give people a vision — “shared values, which are worth defending”.
And that even at the cost of more expensive gas and lowered pensions. If our culture is to survive, we have to define our values and protect them from all ideologies, which either do not respect or hate them. Already we have handed our country over without a fight twice – first to fascism, then to communism. Will we succeed in protecting it against Islam? I still believe that yes, we will.