From: hjkhjkhd@hhhh.com   
      
   Edward Belsky"  wrote in message   
   news:D8fnh.330031$Fi1.236214@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...   
   >>   
   > Brass, this shows how cheek returns on the speaker. The quote that you   
   > think   
   > shows the effect of drugs was composed by you in 2001.   
      
   Indeed. Things Change, as His Dirgeness says. Let me aboslutely clear how my   
   feelings on the subject of the death penalty work: in a calm everyday   
   environment (not that there's much of that anymore) I oppose the idea of the   
   means of executing a citizen in the hands of the government. Then along   
   comes some fucking disgusting murder -- usually by droogs or nutcases who in   
   a society less liberal would have been seen as trouble a long time   
   previously and punished and supervised effectively long before they got a   
   chance to murder -- and the only fitting punishment is not 12-odd years of   
   watching television, but a harsh and memorable punishment that makes an   
   example of them. The high jump immediately suggests itself. Some people, as   
   Nigel said, are so bad it's the only way.   
   Short sentences are unjust and immense sentences cruel and pointless. You'd   
   have to be a cunt -- as Lord Longford was -- to read about the Moors   
   Murderers and not conclude that the best thing for them and everyone else   
   was to execute them. Brady's always wanted that anyway.   
      
   Let me very clear: as lib-left lawyers make ever more advances in the UK,   
   life is getting cheaper. They want to break murder down into handy lesser   
   categories. This will mean more people behaving in savage ways and getting   
   less punishment for it. I promise you that. London is now a society in which   
   an agressive undertone is to be found in most public places and the threat   
   of violence glares from sullen eyes at almost every corner. Affluence in all   
   classes has never been greater. You lefties work it out.   
    I was in a pub last night and I said to my mate Judgy - who has his leg in   
   plaster after beeing violently robbed abroad by a gang of Africans in   
   Tenerife - your life is worth about 8 years. We were watching some yobs   
   playing pool and I speculated that if one of them killed us in a random   
   hissy fit - they happen often - our lives would be worth about 8 years of TV   
   and creative writing in Wandsworth. Dunno about you, but if get stabbed   
   through the heart by some ragamuffin, I, my family and friends would want   
   the most severe punishment. And this is the question, what shall be the   
   punishment be? What does the murderer *deserve*? Another reason I hate the   
   trendy left is that they talk purely in terms of rehabilitation. That is NOT   
   a matter of first or second importance.   
      
   Peter Hitchens, the priggish brother of The Hitch and a man who proves the   
   truth of Flaubert's aphorism about revolutionaries (Tom D likes to take the   
   piss out of me for going on about P Hitchens), consistently says several   
   things that I really admire him for, because they are obviously true and yet   
   rarely uttered anywhere else in the media (Orwelline, that): the liberal   
   elites are not harmed or stung by their right-on legislation and ideas; they   
   don't get randomly mugged, stabbed, murdered; they don't have their children   
   bitten by Pit Bulls owned by sociopaths that the authorities can do nothing   
   about; their kids are not victims of the dumbed down, leftist education   
   system they publicly espouse (and then send their kids to private schools);   
   they don't have their wages kept at rock bottom for a decade because of mass   
   immigration (no, they enjoy cheap 'help' and lower prices and buy second   
   'buy-to-let' homes - see Will Hutton of the Guardian). If immigration was a   
   threat to the liberal elites' work and income it would stop in a fortnight   
   and the debate would stop as well.   
    The death penalty reveals more of their hypocrisy. It 'appalls them' but   
   they don't live close enough to the mayhem and the injustice of liberal   
   sentencing for it to ever be taken seriously by them as a punishment for the   
   most heinous crimes. This high-handed bien-pensant attitude hurts the   
   poorest and weakest in society more than any other. All they want to do is   
   fob them off with more public money and hope the problems will go away by   
   blaming them on 'racism' and 'relative poverty'. It is why I am convinced   
   George Orwell would have said much the same as me if he was around now.   
    It is impossible to say how many murders the death penalty prevented when   
   it was on the books, but what has happened since convinces me that it did   
   prevent murders and kept gun crime down - it has been escalating for years.   
      
   The Leftie's idea that execution satisfies blood-lust and atavism in   
   ordinary people is a part of a sort of Rousseau-driven inversion whereby   
   villains are actually nobles gone wrong and the law-abiding ordinary man is   
   a vicious animal that has somehow  gone right.   
      
   I though most of the above in 2001 but in unformed and uninformed ways.   
      
   As for your comments about my attitude to non-whites. I do not dislike   
   groups of people on the arbitrary principle of skin colour. I have known a   
   lot of people in my time - most of them working class - and I have only met   
   about two people who do that. It's a view the Left like to take because it's   
   neat and makes their hearts soar with militant self-righteousness. I've said   
   it before and I'll say it again: don't import the outrage of American   
   race-relations into England.   
      
   The true objections under the race debate are cultural and mostly   
   legitimate. This angle is the dirtiest and most repressed secret in the   
   British public psyche today. The elites won't countenance dicussion of it -   
   Gramsci's Hegenomics (racist! Fascist imperialist! plonk! Anything but   
   discuss it...).   
      
   I'm reading Dominic Sandbrook's 'White Heat', a history of the 60s. The   
   chapter entitled 'Why Lucky Jim Turned Right' has some laughs in it.   
   Principally from two men of letters. Amis K said in 1967 that he was sick of   
   progressive education, sick of socialist improvement, and sick of the   
   appeasement of Communism abroad; above all he was sick of the 'whole   
   abortion-divorce-homosexuality-censorship-racialism-marijuana package'.   
      
   We know that this led him into supporting silly and destructive things, like   
   Margaret Thatcher and the Vietnam war; but his comments about higher   
   education 'more will mean worse' have turned out to be completely correct (I   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)