Generation Identity by Markus Willinger: an indictment against the liberal establishment and the 68ers

You can order it at http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/1907166416/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1 where I have reviewed it.  It is reproduced below:

It is short, sweet and strong as well as a compelling read. I must say I relish the thought of liberals reading this book and quaking in their boots, for they cannot refute any of the accusations Willinger makes with facts or logic.

As for British identity (which is currently Dipso, Fatso, Bingo, Tesco, ASBO and Paedo), it will change for the better when the right laws are in place.

The right laws, as far as I am concerned anyway, will be in place after the following take place:

1. after the repeal of the Equality Act 2010
2. after the repeal of the European Communities Act 1972
3. after the repeal of Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1975
4. after fault is taken into account in any divorce settlement
5. after a flat rate income tax of 20% is in place
6. after the welfare-dependent and low-waged are disenfranchised
7. after the civil partnership and inheritance tax is abolished
8. after the welfare state is dismantled
9. after the NHS is broken up and sold off
10. after it is again shameful to have a child out of wedlock

The right laws would be the laws that undermine the foundations of the West's entrenched matriarchy that have made its government and people so venal, irrational and immoral. It would not be difficult at all to entirely discredit feminism as a viable, moral or intellectually respectable ideology when our voices are loud enough.

Generation Identity significantly increases the volume.

For an explanation of 68ers, http://www.counter-currents.com/2013/07/markus-willingers-generation-identity/ does this quite well:

In May 1968, wildcat strikes across France initially sparked by student rebellions brought the entire nation of France to a standstill, with President de Gaulle going so far as to flee the country. The slogans of the ’68ers were a classic example of postmodern Marxism, a cry for a life more meaningful than what was possible under capitalist alienation. “A cop sleeps inside each one of us. We must kill him. Drive the cop out of your head.” “It is forbidden to forbid.” “Be realistic, ask the impossible.”

Though de Gaulle was able to defeat the would-be revolution, and his Center-Right party even gained seats in the elections that followed, May ’68 had a huge impact on European society, government, and culture. It heralded the establishment of Cultural Marxism [feminism, in other words] as the default culture of educated Western opinion. The rebellious young figures of the uprising, like the charismatic Daniel Marc Cohn-Bendit (aka “Danny the Red”), have gone on to become the boring old bureaucrats of the European Parliament, lecturing the people of Europe on what products they are allowed to use, what they are allowed to say, and what they are allowed to think. Instead of the beginning of a new era of freedom, May ’68 was the beginning of what Keith Preston has called “Totalitarian Humanism.”

What is the difference between someone saying "Homosexuals should be executed" and "Paedophiles should be executed"?

Or even restoring the death penalty?

http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/national/sign-petition-restore-capital-punishment

None, I would suggest, since they are only proposing a change in the law.

Since they are expressing a political opinion, someone (such as a homosexual or a paedophile or a murderer of children or police officers) who holds the opposite view is bound to be offended.

So, while I profoundly disagree with the female student who declared that it would be right to execute homosexuals, I would defend her right to say it.

The Middle Eastern studies undergraduate who secretly filmed the discussion asked a member of the society whether, “in the Islamic society in which you strive for,” they would “feel comfortable, personally and morally, to kill a gay man".

The female student replied: "Absolutely," and described homosexuality as an "atrocity, because it goes against what God says".

The student was also asked if she, in her "ideal" Islamic state, would feel confident to kill a man if he "did something as com­pletely innocent as kiss another man outside the Students’ Union," to which she replied: "Yeah, abso­lutely ... "

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/02/25/manchester-student-society-kill-homosexuals-shuts_n_2764273.html

I would also point out to her that the Koran does not in any case says homosexuals should be executed, it only says punish them.  They could be fined, or be lashed 100 times just like those who are guilty of fornication or adultery, or God could ordain another way.

All the Abrahamic faiths are "homophobic" in any case.

Koran:

4:15.

If any of your women
Are guilty of lewdness,
Take the evidence of four
(Reliable) witnesses from amongst you
Against them; and if they testify,
Confine them to houses until
Death do claim them,
Or God ordain for them
Some (other) way. 

4:16.

If two men among you
Are guilty of lewdness,
Punish them both.
If they repent and amend,
Leave them alone; for God
Is Oft-returning, Most Merciful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_homosexuality

Old Testament:

Leviticus 18 and 20
Chapters 18 and 20 of Leviticus, which form part of the Holiness code, contain the following verses:
22 Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable. (Leviticus 18:22 NIV)
13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. (Leviticus 20:13 NIV)

New Testament:

Romans 1
“ 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.(Romans 1:26-27 NIV)

"Phobia" means an irrational hatred and fear of something.

Is it ever irrational to hate and fear those who promote homosexuality?

METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF CALDERDALE ELECTION OF A COUNCILLOR THURSDAY 25TH OCTOBER 2012

https://www.calderdale.gov.uk/council/democracy/election-information/notices/persons-nominated.html

Sarah Teather to go in Cameron's reshuffle? Priti Patel to take her place?

Sarah Teather failed to back the Government’s flagship welfare reforms.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2097987/Lib-Dem-minister-Sarah-Teather-quit-welfare-reform-revolt.html#ixzz25ITiDVgf

Children's Minister Sarah Teather to go.  Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Who should take over? Someone who is a proper Conservative.   This means no white person should take over because there are no white people any more who are proper Conservatives in slut and bastard Britain, and certainly not in Cunty Cameron's degenerate Cabinet.

Cameron talks about Asian family values and I can think of no one better suited to the job than Priti Patel.

Priti Patel MP - a pretty good choice?  She is the person most able to take the SSM bull by its slutty horns, cos she is not white and has this thing Cameron calls "Asian family values".  She won't be afraid of calling a spade a spade or a slut a slut, hopefully. 

Her views on the death penalty are http://www.theweek.co.uk/people-news/1961/furore-priti-patel-urges-return-death-penalty are exactly as I would wish too and totally utterly unlike a member of the white liberal establishment who are the scum of the earth.   

Dying with Dignity

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/killer-ronnie-lee-gardner-executed-by-firing-squad-2003949.html

I would choose firing squad too, rather than be put down like an animal.

I would prefer a public execution too, so one can wave, nod and wink at friends, ask for a last cigarette, smoke in a public place ....

In Tudor times beheadings were reserved only for the aristocracy.  They made a final speech, put their heads on the block and then raised their arms to indicate they were ready for the chop.  Female members of the aristocracy were supposed to take it like a man too.

http://www.the-tudors.org.uk/anne-boleyn-execution-speech.htm

http://www.corvalliscommunitypages.com/Europe/england/catherinehowardall.htm

BNP may win enough votes in Barking if they get the right racially-inclusive message on the death penalty

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8450052.stm

No doubt Nick Griffin will use this murder of a Sikh in Barking by two black youths to put the case for the return of the death penalty in his general election campaign in Barking. This is something that will unite all the races in this country on a matter which the liberal establishment has conspired to thwart majority opinion for far too long.

This - http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/law_final.pdf - is UKIP's 2008 policy on crime, which I find very disappointing, as I was under the impression that they wanted the death penalty. I searched the document for any references to "death penalty" and "capital punishment". Nada. If you want the death penalty you would have to vote BNP.

http://bnp.org.uk/manifestos/mini-manifesto-2007/ (page 6, Crime and Justice)




Vote: Should the death penalty be re-introduced in some form, eg for the worst cases of murder?

http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=7

Half of us want the death penalty

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?Half_of_us_back_death_penalty&in_article_id=747748&in_page_id=34

Because we want it, they will of course not give it to us. But if Labour offered us a referendum on the death penalty, we might vote for them, mightn't we?

If they offered us a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, we might vote for them on that basis.

Or whether to withdraw from the EU altogether.

Why don't they just give us the stuff the Tories won't give us?

This sort of thing would happen in a rational world. What a shame that this country is not part of the rational universe.



Vote: Should the death penalty be re-introduced in some form, eg for the worst cases of murder?
http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=7

A religion that explicitly specifies the death penalty ...

017.033

YUSUFALI: Nor take life - which Allah has made sacred - except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand qisas or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the Law).

PICKTHAL: And slay not the life which Allah hath forbidden save with right. Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir, but let him not commit excess in slaying. Lo! he will be helped.

SHAKIR: And do not kill any one whom Allah has forbidden, except for a just cause, and whoever is slain unjustly, We have indeed given to his heir authority, so let him not exceed the just limits in slaying; surely he is aided.

Sharia-compliant threesomes and mini-orgies?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2130668/Male-priests-marry-in-Anglican-church's-first-gay-'wedding'.html

Male Priests' Civil Partnership Blessed in Church by Rector

This could never happen in a mosque because the Koran specifically states that homosexuality is a sin to be punished, in rather the same manner as adultery.

HOW EXTRA-MARITAL RECREATIONAL SEX IS PUNISHED IN ISLAM

4 witnesses would be required in the case of gay and lesbian lewdness as well as adulterous wives.The relevant verses in the Koran are:

4:15 (lewd acts between women)
4:16 (lewd acts between men)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html

24:1 (adultery - punishable by 100 lashes)

Those that defame honourable women and cannot produce 4 witnesses shall be given 80 lashes. If a husband accuses his wife but has no witnesses but himself except himself, he must swear 4 times by God that his charge is true, calling down upon himself the curse of God if he is lying. But if his wife swears 4 times by God that his charge is false and calls down His curse upon himself if it be true, she shall receive no punishment.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/024.qmt.html

You can't say fairer than that, can you?

In theory extra-marital recreational sex is all forbidden and punishable horribly. In practice, under a liberal interpretation, acts of homosexuality and adultery are tolerated provided it is not flaunted in front of more than 3 witnesses (making a threesome legally unproblematic and, dare I say it, halal, even if any of the three participants were prone to self-accusation). The same could be said of a threesome (of any combination) with no more than three voyeurs, witnesses or observers, call them what you will.

If we now have sharia-compliant investments, then I see nothing haram in organising sharia-compliant threesomes and mini-orgies, whilst adding to the gaiety of the nation and the umma. It is a shame the Christians didn't quite got round to articulating this sort of thing in a Word of God Book coming from one source, ie Muhammad. Instead, their moral code comes from the Old and New Testament, written by different people over the ages. No wonder schism is endemic and inevitable when Christian ideology is so messily articulated.

Old Testament: Leviticus
http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Leviticus&chapter=18&verse=22
"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Leviticus&chapter=20&verse=13
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

"New Testament: Romans 1:26, 27
http://net.bible.org/passage.php?passage=Romans%201:26-31

It does after all say in the Old Testament that homosexuality is an abomination, but some New Testamenters seem to think this does not apply to them.

Perhaps it is because New Testamenters like to think that the Old Testament cannot apply to them in any of its literal and illiberal entirety, when so many transgressions we now regard as minor to trifling could lead to the death penalty?

For an impressively long list of sins which Old Testamenters regard as deserving of the death penalty, see http://www.wvinter.net/~haught/Bible.html

In contrast, under a liberal interpretation, the Koran is a model of mercy and clemency.

The Koran restates the Ten Commandments and adds a few more of its own. No rational Muslim would argue that an act specifically stated to be a sin in the Koran could possibly deserve the blessing of any Islamic clergy! The most that could be argued in an Islamic context is the "ask us no questions and we'll tell you no lies" principle, which would be the perfect compromise between puritanical censoriousness and the libertarian ideal.

In these circumstances, homosexuality would be tolerated, provided it is not flaunted. How can anyone reasonable, whether religious or atheist (like me) deny that this is the perfect compromise? Or that the Islam of the Koran is structurally sounder, better-drafted, more coherent and sexually liberated than Judaism or Christianity?