Patriot Pooftahs?

Homosexuality is a cancer.

It hurts the individual, it hurts communities, it hurts society, it hurts nations.

There are plenty of studies around which show the health implications to the individual which go way beyond HIV/AIDS. We only need look around us to see the effect that the ever-growing homosexual-lobby has had on destroying more and more morality within our nation.

For me, and many other patriots and nationalists, opposition to homosexuality is an essential.

Often, the queers say that we're making a big deal out of nothing because people in the past weren't so "obsessed" with the poof problem.

That's true. But only in the same way that people in the past weren't so obsessed with the race problem -- because it didn't exist to the extent it does today!

In years gone by (read this in sepia tones) the homosexuals were a deranged minority, an underground movement, a disease very much of the idle upper classes, akin to mental illness in that it struck very occasionally and the population at large paid it no more mind than a man in a padded cell screaming "I hate blancmange!"

Similarly race wasn't an issue. Sure their were some immigrants, and pockets of them created unease - even rioting (against Jews, and later against blacks), but in a 99% homogeneous nation, these weren't issues.

It is only since the 1960s that the poof issue has become a worry for the public. And now with pooftah issues pushed in some schools, poofs marching through the streets, public parks and toilets given over to these degenerates and their nefarious activities the worry is etched on more people's hearts... This is why we oppose homosexuality much more than previous generations!

They were no less against it, any less than they would have had a fit if one of their family married a Negro! It just wasn't "in their faces" and when something such as marrying someone was straightforward (she would be white and definitely a she!) why would you even consider it?

We don't worry about breathing.

Yet, if our oxygen was taken from us, we'd clamour and shout against it and campaign for a return to the days of an oxygenated atmosphere.

So those who seek to publish apologia for the faggots like to paint us as "mad extremists" over-reacting... not so!

Our forefathers would have acted thus. In fact, do you think people 50 or 100 years ago would have accepted faggots marching through the streets? I don't think so for one moment!

In fact if you read the reports in FC mag #36 you'll realise that not only are the faggots marching, but that the (politicised) police are on their side, and stand by and do nothing whilst faggots assault and attack anyone who dares to demonstrate against the homosexuals.

No, dear reader, to our grand-parents and earlier generations opposing homosexuality would have been as natural as breathing.

The table here shows that the vast majority of homosexuals are promiscuous, given a lie to the myth, promoted at the time of "civil partnerships" that these people are in 'loving relationships.'

Nationalist friends in Spain and Italy used to amazed that we even had to address such matters because, like our forefathers, for them you had to mentally ill to even contemplate supporting the rights of homosexuals. It wasn't even a subject open for discussion, anymore than you would discuss breathing nitrogen.

They changed in more recent years - and even organised mass rallies in Spain and Italy against homosexual 'rights' -- being forced to speak out on the issue by Socialist governments forcing the faggot agenda on them.

In Spain over a million people took to the streets (showing exactly how a previously "silent" society does treat faggotry with disdain!) and in Italy large nationalist rallies were doubled and trebled in size with many hundreds of 'locals' joining in on an impulse to protest against the poofs.

And so we come to the nationalist movement here. Of course there are those on the periphery who'd like full "rights" for faggots. These can pretty well be dismissed. They are usually practising sodomites and you'd no more pay heed to their spurious arguments than you would a deranged man arguing for the release of the inmates from the asylum to enjoy all their "rights" too.

No, the worrying aspect is this lukewarm approach of "oh what these people do in their privacy is no concern of ours" and also "we can't judge which members are homosexual" - almost a 'don't ask - don't tell' policy.

Let me deal with those li(n)es:

1. "oh what these people do in their privacy is no concern of ours."

OK. Of course there can be no stamping out of homosexuality in totalis. There never has been, never will be. But if you take this line, you are opening the door to an acceptance of the cancer. If you say "people can smoke pot in private" or "paedophilia is OK behind closed doors if it's participants volunteer" it gives the green light to the acts of taking drugs and child abuse.

You have to make clear moral guidelines for society. Just as suicide used to be illegal -- knowing you couldn't stop suicide -- but it was a clear signal, a guideline, to say that suicide was frowned upon. As such it might put off all but the most mentally deranged from trying to hang themselves.

Today we're told "anything goes" and so the suicide rates - especially for teens - have shot through the roof. That is what happens when you give no moral guidelines to society, so they are embedded in individuals, families and communities.

When you say "sodomy is OK behind closed doors" you give the same signal. Of course you'll never stop the most committed sodomites, but making the practice illegal sends a clear message that society will not tolerate this obscenity - and it will certainly curtail the "fashion" of faggotry in places like London and the descent of public places into cruising areas for faggots.

So this li(n)e should have no credence with nationalists and patriots. Is race mixing OK behind closed doors? How about heroin? Or bestiality? If you'll pardon the pun, those patriots who push this lukewarm line are making asses out of themselves.

This society does not need a return to Tory values of the 80s. It needs clarity and leadership against moral decay.

2. "we can't judge which members are homosexual" - almost a 'don't ask - don't tell' policy.

No you can't. But you can use common sense - which should include expelling any member who publishes apologia for homosexuality or reprimanding any that pushes an overtly liberal line on this danger to society.

Furthermore, it has already been proved that this was/is an absolute lie anyway - more of a smokescreen for allowing faggots in by the (ahem) back door.

The case of one individual based in South London should suffice.

A known and practicing homosexual he was due to be an election candidate. The local activist base said "no way" but were told by the South London regional organiser that this poof was a well-respected member, gave lots of money (there's the reason!) and would be a candidate. End of.

So the local activists (God bless 'em) who are very active, and many of whom enjoy reading FC (saints to a man!) said that if this homosexual were (pardon the imagery) forced upon them, they would stop campaigning throughout South London for the BNP, and switch their allegiance, for the duration of the election campaign, and leaflet and campaign for an NF candidate in a London borough.

This sudden ultimatum which would mean no leaflets going out, met with a back-down.

The back-down was not a moral decision. It was not taken in light of a sudden understanding that the gent in question is a homosexual and that the party is opposed to homosexuality - it was a decision taken because of a threat by local activists!

The gent in question is still a member of the BNP. So the idea that the BNP has a "we can't judge which members are homosexual" - almost a 'don't ask - don't tell' policy is a fallacy.

They have known homosexual members. These people are accepted. Homosexuality is accepted. That sends a clear message, not only to society, but also to patriots and nationalists, that homosexuality is acceptable!

To make public pronouncements to the effect that you want a return to Tory policies of the 80s whilst entertaining homosexuals as members could see Harvey Proctor, that bastion of Tory homosexual hypocrisy, as a member!

So, having dealt with both of the spurious arguments - it's now clear that nationalism should take a clear stance against homosexuality.

The lukewarm approach does not work.

In hindsight we can also say that the lukewarm approach on homosexuality is part of the strategy to "Kosherise" the nationalist movement, pushed first of all by the faggot Pim Fortuyn (pictured here) whose sole strategy in Holland was to oppose Islamic immigration.

The degenerate Fortuyn was greeted as a hero by those who like to style themselves as "modern nationalists" - what they didn't tell anyone was that Fortuyn was a rabid Zionist, a raving homosexual, wanted the integration of coloured immigrants (i.e. favoured race-mixing!) and even stated on Dutch TV that he would like to bugger an Arab boy.

May I make so bold as to say that Pim Fortuyn is the perfect role model for those pushing their Kosher ("modern") agenda on nationalism.

Altogether now Kosherised patriots: "Brave Little Israel... black Britons are OK... homosexuals are OK behind closed doors.... immigrants must integrate... anyone who says different is a Nazi or a "false flag" state operation..."

Let's hope this fad of creeping liberalisation passes quickly.

One thing that's sure. Nationalists who don't fight back will soon find they are outnumbered by people who believe this B.S.

After all, how long before a faggot is foisted on an area where there are no principled nationalists (or FC readers - one and the same thing really!)?

What a great message to send out to the nation...


The graph here shows that whilst the number of heterosexuals developing full-blown AIDS has outstripped the number of homosexuals, the HIV virus is clearly carried by far more homosexuals, just one more threat to the Nation.


There is a clear link between homosexuality and child abuse:
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet2.html

Same-sex marriages are short-lived:
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet7.html

Homosexuality is a disease, says Professor:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-06/23/content_453974.htm

Do drugs allow degenerates to spread more HIV?
http://www.liesexposed.net/nfp/issue0109/aids.htm

The health risks of gay sex
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html

Homosexuality & Mental Health Problems
http://www.narth.com/docs/whitehead.html

Homosexuality & Health
http://www.christianarsenal.com/HomoHealth.htm