The following video from Vienna features an interview by Michael Stürzenberger with Michael Ley, an Austrian political scientist, sociologist, and author. The occasion was a reception after a panel discussion about Islam and Jew-hatred. One of the panelists was FPÖ leader Heinz-Christian Strache, the Austrian vice-chancellor.

The interview includes a discussion about “political Islam”, which Henrik Clausen wrote about a few days ago in relation to the hate-speech case against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff. Conservative politicians in Austria have desperately grabbed onto the idea that there is a “political” Islam that can be separated from “non-political” Islam and somehow neutralized. By the time they discover their error, it will, of course, be too late.

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

Video transcript:

00:08 Mr. Ley, your topic is Islamic anti-Semitism,

00:12 and it was also the topic of the discussion here today.

00:16 Are you satisfied with how the discussion went today? —Basically, yes, because we were able

00:23 to convey our message to over 700 people. I see it as a success.

00:27 I think hundreds had to be turned away

00:31 from attending. It seems to have struck a chord.

00:35 I think so, too, and slowly but surely people are starting to understand

00:38 how important this subject is, and how dangerous Islam is.

00:42 Unfortunately, there are still many who don’t see it

00:47 that way. I had the feeling that the moderator,

00:50 representing the press here, an important representative

00:53 of the press, doesn’t seem very aware of this. —No, I don’t think

00:56 he understands very well, but that’s why I think we

00:59 just have to continue. We need to continue until

01:04 these “do-gooders” understand that we are not Islamophobes,

01:10 but we are warning of the very real danger of totalitarianism.

01:14 It is always surprising to me, because this religious ideology has been around for 1400 years and

01:19 has left a trail of blood behind it throughout history —

01:23 people just don’t see that today. —Is that because they just

01:26 don’t want to see it? —I think much of it has to do with the Nazi Era.

01:30 Now everyone wants to believe they are tolerant

01:34 by accepting everything foreign. For that reason it is no longer possible to criticise religion.

01:41 That’s the basic problem. —It seems like they believe

01:45 the Muslims are, so to speak, the Jews of yesteryear.

01:49 However, by doing so, they negate the pact forged with Islam

01:53 by the Nazis. So actually that would make Islam

01:58 a perpetrator in the whole thing, putting it on the same level, comparable with the Nazis.

02:03 As you mentioned here today. —Yes. Most of the “do-gooders” can’t comprehend that.

02:09 They are working with groups today, like the Muslim Brotherhood,

02:14 that collaborated with the Nazis back then.

02:19 Basically, together they killed Jews.

02:23 They don’t want to see that and they can’t see it, because

02:28 they live in this guilt cult. Instead of learning from the past,

02:33 and recognising the new danger, a new anti-Semitism,

02:37 a new totalitarianism threatening us — they believe

02:41 everything foreign is fantastic. —Even though the hatred of Jews in Islam

02:45 has a long tradition, you mentioned that,

02:48 going back to 1095 in Granada. During that pogrom of Jews,

02:51 they were already forced to wear a mark on their

02:54 clothing, a precursor of the Jewish badges worn in WW2. Those with eyes to see, can see, correct?

02:59 Yes, but that’s precisely the problem. These people live by a

03:03 form of false tolerance. They believe when

03:06 they accept everything that is foreign, that makes them tolerant.

03:10 At the same time they are unable to grasp

03:13 that by doing this, they actively destroy our own culture.

03:16 They also don’t want to look at the reality

03:19 in Islamic countries, where no tolerance is practiced at all, but instead massive oppression which

03:24 often leads to persecution and execution. —Basically, it is the denial of reality.

03:27 What they are doing is refusing to

03:30 deal with reality, because of completely misunderstood sense of tolerance.

03:35 We had a Turkish representative onstage.

03:40 He is apparently modern, according to Mr. Broder, but he was

03:45 hell-bent on defending Islam. He also accused you

03:49 of misquoting the Quran. The classic maneuver, right?

03:53 Yes, the classic move — everything is always taken out of context,

03:57 that’s not right, etc. — pure taqiyya.

04:00 So he’s not so modern after all. In his head he’s probably a committed Muslim, who believes he must

04:08 defend his religion here. —Of course, he’s nothing but

04:12 an orthodox Muslim who sells himself as a liberal.

04:16 So basically, he does nothing else but accuse anyone who criticises Islam of being a

04:22 Islamophobe, extreme right and so forth.

04:26 What he is doing is the classic form of Islamic taqiyya. He’s lying.

04:30 Yes. Many do. Sad to say, many political representatives of the establishment and the media,

04:38 also believe these lies because they want to. —Yes. That’s why I think we just have continue.

04:43 What you do, which is very successful. What I do. We just have to keep going.

04:49 You just had the Austrian vice-chancellor by your side,

04:54 who is now also active in the fight against political Islam;

05:00 at least that’s a start. A part of Islam is being taken out and declared illegal.

05:04 I think it was good that [Heinz-Christian] Strache was

05:09 a part of the panel and that he explicitly took a stand

05:13 against “so-called” political Islam.

05:21 You see, we’re a step further. —We, of course, know that Islam

05:25 can’t be separated from its political side.

05:28 It is a construct. Right from the beginning a unit.

05:31 It is a bit easier for political parties this way so they can

05:34 then get out of falling into the trap of discussing religious freedom over and over again.

05:40 Yes, I think we are just at the beginning of a discussion process

05:44 and at least the first step is right,

05:49 and that must continue. —You need a lot of patience in this fight,

05:53 because you have to drill through thick boards.

05:58 Yes, patience is necessary by all means. —Bishop Laun was sitting

06:01 in the front row listening, and I just talked

06:04 to him. He said he was criticised by his own colleagues

06:10 in the Catholic church for criticising Mohammed.

06:16 So even in the Catholic Church they don’t want to see the danger.

06:20 Of course, Mr. Laun has become an

06:24 outsider in his own church. He is one of the very few

06:28 who clearly see the problems of Islam.

06:35 That’s incredible, considering that hundreds of thousands of Christians are being persecuted

06:39 in Islamic countries. Instead they choose to

06:42 stab a colleague in the back for addressing this exact problem.

06:45 They’re just going along with the mainstream,

06:49 and don’t seem to realise that they negate their own religion

06:54 and culture by doing so. —Like Bishop Marx and Bedford-Strohm removing their crosses

07:01 on the Temple Mount. —Basically they betray their own religion, I say that as an agnostic.

07:10 Their own religion and their brothers and sisters in faith

07:14 who have had their heads are cut off. —Naturally.

07:17 A more scandalous portrayal is that these dignitaries

07:21 have always been collaborating with the powerful.

07:26 It was similar with the Nazis, in regard to the Catholic Church,

07:30 the Evangelical Church and the powerful.

07:34 They always sang the same song with the powerful back then, and so maybe it is comparable to today.

07:38 Not quite. During that time the powerful cooperated

07:42 with the National Socialists. Today, you don’t have to

07:45 cooperate with Islam. It (Islam) is not yet in a position of power.

07:49 Now something completely different is happening.

07:54 They believe that the guilt can be removed by being friendly

07:59 to Muslims, but by doing this, the same exact mistake is made that the church

08:05 made in the past. Once again, they are working together with THE worst anti-Semites.

08:08 I actually meant that the church cooperates with the political powers, the ruling government which

08:15 sends the signal to trivialise Islam. That’s how the church participates.

08:20 Naturally, but it’s more that just playing along

08:26 with those in power. It’s a complete swindle that they’re pulling.

08:30 They believe that “Islamophobia” is the new

08:35 anti-Semitism, which makes them especially tolerant.

08:39 By doing this, they betray Judaism for the second time as a church.

08:44 What kind of experience do you have as a result

08:48 of your publishing activities and appearances in the media?

08:51 Is the backlash still as strong as it used to be, or do you

08:54 sense a breakthrough? Are we slowly breaking through

08:57 the wall? —I see things changing, very slowly. In the past,

09:01 everything was just completely rejected, you were called

09:04 right-wing, and an Islamophobe. It is just now beginning

09:09 to soften up. —That is probably only because of

09:14 the experience with reality, the worsening circumstances.

09:17 Naturally, it is not just what we are writing, or videos

09:20 like the ones you make. People are experiencing it on the street now,

09:24 in family circles and they are increasingly being confronted

09:29 with more and more violence. Women aren’t going out in the evening

09:33 as freely as they were before. All these

09:36 experiences are slowly forcing people to start thinking critically.

09:41 Very slowly. —A reality that opens eyes.