Greg Johnson on Homosexuality

Counter-Currents

Editor’s Note: I had originally deleted this article, but several of you saw it while it was up and requested that I restore it, so here goes.

In a new article he will probably later regret writing, Greg Johnson has waded into the gay marriage thicket at Counter-Currents.

Here’s my response:

1.) It is natural and normal to marry and reproduce with someone of the same race, but the American elite promotes miscegenation because it hates White Christian America, and celebrating miscegenation is a way to normalize race-mixing, promote perversion, and undermine the culture of the despised White Christian majority.

2.) The American elite actively promotes “gay marriage” (as opposed to “tolerates”) for the same reason it promotes interracial marriage. It is a means to the end of leveling and destroying hierarchical institutions like the White nuclear family that are seen as “reactionary” and standing in the way of “equality” and “progress.”

3.) Just as homosexuality exists in nature, the same is true of miscegenation, adultery, sexual promiscuity, polygamy, and pedophilia, but we once had social conventions like anti-miscegenation laws and anti-sodomy laws that stigmatized and criminalized this behavior and promoted and privileged White heterosexual monogamy as America’s normative cultural ideal.

4.) We already know from bitter experience that the American elite’s promotion of miscegenation, homosexuality, adultery, and sexual promiscuity has successfully undermined America’s traditional sexual mores and the White nuclear family even within White Nationalist circles.

5.) While it may not be possible to dismantle “heteronormativity” and “patriarchy” as an innate biological tendency within the human species, the American elite has already succeeded – as the recent Supreme Court rulings have shown – in undermining “heteronormativity” and “patriarchy” as America’s privileged cultural ideal.

The American elite has succeeded in moving America from “Leave It To Beaver” and the “Andy Griffith Show” to “Sex In The City” and “Will and Grace” and “Girls” and “Keeping Up With The Kardashians.” They have succeeded in promoting bisexuality and homosexuality and miscegenation among impressionable teenage girls.

6.) It is normal and natural for human beings to love their own children, but we live in a society where there have been almost 50 million abortions since 1970. It is normal and natural to dislike outsiders and love your own ethnic group, but we live in a society that systematically redistributes wealth from Whites to blacks and where it is taboo for Whites alone to express pride in their race and culture.

7.) Many a White American husband knows from America’s divorce laws that changing the law has already changed the stability of social conventions like marriage. Since the anti-miscegenation laws were changed, interracial marriage has skyrocketed.

8.) The same people who have been pushing feminism and miscegenation and abortion for decades are now behind the push for “marriage equality.” The push for “gay marriage” (like the push for the legalization of miscegenation) in no way implies that particular form of attack is the only or even the most successful way in which the White nuclear family has been undermined.

9.) If we really want to defend marriage and strengthen the family, we could do all the things that Greg Johnson suggests, and we could also stigmatize homosexuality and ban “gay marriage” and restore heterosexual marriage to its traditional privileged role in our culture like the Russians are already doing.

10.) Greg Johnson attacks a straw man argument that a homosexual cabal is behind the push for gay marriage. Just like interracial marriage and feminism, the push for “gay marriage” is driven by leftwing ideology and animus toward America’s White Christian majority; the welfare and “civil rights” of the blacks and homosexuals is an afterthought to the people who are behind this.

11.) Vice President Joe Biden recently told the world that the Jews did gay marriage. It would be strange then if opposition to “gay marriage” – something which is supported by 76% of Jews in America – is really a conspiracy to “misdirect and dissipate Right-wing dissent lest it give rise to a genuine populism.”

12.) While it is true that abortion in the South is a net racial tailwind, it would be strange if a people who are supportive or indifferent to the abortion of their own posterity would simultaneously be moved to care about something as abstract as the future racial composition of the United States.

13.) If we were serious about “saving our race,” among other things we would support traditional marriage, criminalize abortion among Whites, stigmatize homosexuality and miscegenation, ban “gay marriage,” rewrite the divorce laws, and change the tax laws to promote high fertility among young White couples.

14.) I’m convinced that opposition to “gay marriage” is just the predictable response to the issue by a traditional Christian culture.

15.) Alternatively, we could be “intolerant” and jettison liberalism, which would free us of the guilt of “discriminating” in law and custom in favor of White heterosexual monogamy and marriage, which is the ideal way to “save our race.”

16.) Dissolving the Union would separate the South from the culture that has given us abolition, civil rights, feminism, women’s suffrage, and now “gay marriage.” The Left defeats the Right, not because it wins “metapolitical battles,” but solely because it is the dominant force in the majority section of the United States.

The Left lost the “metapolitical battle” on “gay marriage” in the South and Interior West. Every Southern state has passed a constitutional ban on “gay marriage.” In the 1960s, 95 percent of Southerners in Congress voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but because of the existence of the Union, Jim Crow was crushed from Washington by federal power and resistance collapsed when its supporters were demoralized.

The lawsuits are already being filed to overturn gay marriage bans in Arkansas and Alabama. The issue will go to the federal courts where a federal judge will strike down the law. The same thing happened with Alabama’s HB 56.

17.) I also believe that “gay marriage” like illegal alien amnesty, affirmative action, gun control, “global climate change,” abortion, and Obamacare is a distraction from the real issue – the existence of the Union – which is the only reason we are even debating these matters.

In an independent Southern Republic, “gay marriage” would be a non-issue. Heterosexual marriage would be restored to its traditional privileged role in our culture. The anti-sodomy laws would be restored. There would be a sea change in taboos overnight as the Christian majority reasserted its preferences.

Because of the existence of the Union, the tastes and attitudes of the Northeast, West Coast, and Upper Midwest will keep being imposed on the rest of the country. These people never really “win” the argument. They never won the argument on abortion or segregation. They resort to force.

This entry was posted in Homosexuals. Bookmark the permalink.

142 Responses to Greg Johnson on Homosexuality

  1. No-man says:

    This topic was explored at length here months ago Lew. Wilde and Michelangelo were not “homosexuals”. Please stop.

  2. Mark says:

    Mattonto Parrot, Dances With Fags, “we’re all brothers in Christ” who knowingly told lies about Hunter to defame him has the chutzpah to still post here.

  3. When you say make sodomy illegal, I assume you mean between males? Men and women do that sex act too.

    My take on all of these issues – abortion, homosexuality, feminism, women’s suffrage, gender confusion, etc. – is that we should dissolve the Union and go back to the system we used to have in the South.

  4. The argument could be made that non-vaginal and non-procreative sex among males and females is similarly recreational.

  5. The argument could be made that non-vaginal and non-procreative sex among males and females is similarly recreational.

    Homo apologetics.

  6. Finally, there is nothing more Jewish in spirit or practice than aggressive anti-homosexuality.

    To my knowledge, the Jews are aggressively pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, pro-feminist, except for Orthodox Jews, who are the least problematic.

  7. That depends on how the argument is made.

    It could also be used to condemn people who have relationships but intentionally don’t have children.

  8. Mark says:

    Anyone who thinks a southern woman does not have some form of power is seriously deluded. Any real southern man knows that. The others have never been in a room with such ladies.

    Women have power that men bestow upon them. Post-modern, spoiled women forget this and think that they themselves have power of their own which they often use against men.

  9. No-man says:

    Ladies shop, garden club, volunteer, play tennis, lunch, get their pictures taken by professionals, go to the beach, have sex, micromanage their kids/grandkids and eat breakfast in bed. They don’t post on the internet.

  10. Apuleius says:

    “We need to return to the Old South model on all of these issues: the husband is the head of the household, the wife and children are subordinate to the husband, abortion and sodomy are illegal, ladies and gentlemen, divorce is rare, men are men and women are women, etc.”

    I would question the motives of anyone who would cede any sort of moral authority to sodomites. The beginnings of this and other subversive developments are well known.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_love

    Despite the fact that some inhabitants of the utopist section of the empire like to muddy the waters and claim the Jews as the source of all our woes, the master subversives are themselves only very enthusiastic late joiners to the dogpile on tradition.

    Deo Vindice

  11. Mark says:

    Finally, there is nothing more Jewish in spirit or practice than aggressive anti-homosexuality.

    Nonsensical, you’re just repeating the distorted sodomite teachings of fag Johnson and James O’Queera. Jews are at the forefront of pushing the homosexual agenda.

    Go wave your rainbow flag somewhere else.

    There is nothing more Jewish in spirit than deception, which you and your ilk engage in repeatedly. Making fallacious appeals to academic degrees and faux intellectualism. If that is your measuring stick then bow down to your Jewish overlords.

  12. Lew says:

    This topic was explored at length here months ago Lew. Wilde and Michelangelo were not “homosexuals”. Please stop. – No-Man

    If you mean Wilde and Michelangelo didn’t understand themselves in terms of the modern homosexual identity, you’re right. I agree with this. Their natural inclinations were still toward sex with other males, and their contributions speak for themselves. Outside of the cultural sphere, Alexander the Great, who I believe you are on record praising, engaged in sex acts with men.

    You’re no idiot. The fact that a given man engages in sex acts with other men doesn’t preclude making contributions to society, or even “greatness.” History proves this.

    I’m not stopping anything.

    The complete ignorance and dishonesty of these philistines needs to be exposed. Someone might be reading this who is unaware that homosexuals have disproportionately contributed to Western high culture.

    Although, I’m pretty sure that their speaking in terms of “fags” and such things already discredits them in the eyes of anyone who matters (educated and an IQ on the right side of the bell curve). “Fags” language plays well with left-bell curve types.

    I don’t understand why it’s unreasonable just to pursue a policy of no gay marriage and no putting it on the same level as man-woman marriage, and otherwise just leaving them alone. This, again, was pretty much the policy in Greece and Rome. No recognition, but they didn’t go out of their way to hound them either.

  13. Mark says:

    except for Orthodox Jews, who are the least problematic.

    That’s true, typically the Orthodox are more insular and less involved in trying to change White society. In documentaries such as Defamation you’ll often see the Orthodox Jews being critical of secular Jews and playing down anti-Semitism.

  14. Lew says:

    The book of Leviticus holds the proper penalty for homosexuality is death.

  15. No-man says:

    Intercrural sex is not good, but it’s not sodomy either. Johnson’s attempts to equate buggery to less emotionally, physically and spiritually destructive acts is out of bounds.

  16. Apuleius says:

    “Anyone who thinks a southern woman does not have some form of power is seriously deluded. Any real southern man knows that. The others have never been in a room with such ladies.”

    And most would not stay long upon finding themselves in such company.

    Such feminist twaddle degrades true southern women who are demure and ladylike.
    Southern women are best known for their feminine qualities, including a tendency to hysteria, not for mannish, butch lesbian qualities, which are more properly characteristic of the northern shrew. Such gender bending is absurd.

    The opposite side of the “strong woman” coin:
    http://www.estatevaults.com/bol/archives/2013/01/25/men_who_sound_l.html

    Lew is a victim of the homosexual propaganda that was recently outlawed in Russia.

    Deo Vindice

  17. Few American Jews care what the Book of Leviticus or the Talmud says on any given issue.

  18. Joe Biden said that the Jews were at the forefront of pushing for gay marriage.

  19. Lew says:

    Apuleius,

    Lew is a victim of the homosexual propaganda that was recently outlawed in Russia.

    These comments make my position clear.

    I don’t support gay marriage, civil unions, or any form of legal recognition for homosexuals, or upholding homosexuality as a norm, or the contemporary gay agenda. It doesn’t mean it’s rational to persecute them. – Lew says: July 2, 2013 at 3:46 pm

    I don’t understand why it’s unreasonable just to pursue a policy of no gay marriage and no putting it on the same level as man-woman marriage, and otherwise just leaving them alone. – Lew says: July 2, 2013 at 4:14 pm

  20. haroldcrews says:

    Earl, you are correct as to unmarried women and widows. But certainly that would have been a small minority of women except for perhaps the war widows.

    http://womenshistory.about.com/od/marriedwomensproperty/a/property_rights.htm

    I have never doubted for a moment the inner strength of Southern women. But that doesn’t make women the equal or the same as men.

  21. Anon says:

    “I don’t understand why it’s unreasonable just to pursue a policy of no gay marriage and no putting it on the same level as man-woman marriage, and otherwise just leaving them alone. ” – The problem here is that we are all innate status seekers. We’re not going to just leave each other alone. And thats the important part, they’d have to cut the crap also.

    “Intercrural sex is not good” – It is neither a defense against pregnancy, nor does it wreck anyone’s pair bonding mechanism.

  22. Apuleius says:

    “Few American Jews care what the Book of Leviticus or the Talmud says on any given issue.”

    Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the Bible can see that the “stiff necked people” have been in a continual intermittent struggle against their own God since the beginning. The rabidly Jew obsessed easily forget that we used to pray for the “perfidious Jews.” Now many eagerly join their perfidy while simultaneously claiming to denounce them. How ironic.

    Deo Vindice

  23. Occigent says:

    “I don’t support gay marriage, civil unions, or any form of legal recognition for homosexuals, or upholding homosexuality as a norm, or the contemporary gay agenda. It doesn’t mean it’s rational to persecute them. – Lew says: July 2, 2013 at 3:46 pm”

    I think it’s clear at this point that overt but subtle cultural persecution of homosexuals is necessary. There’s no way we’re going back in time now, and a little bit of continuous pressure would have gone a long way. Same with Jews. Our culture has no idea how to say “no” anymore. Except to Whites, borders, decency and anti-semites.

  24. Mosin Nagant says:

    Hunter wrote: “In the Bible, homosexuality is just a classification of sexual sins, no worse than adultery.”

    They are both mortal, damning sins, and both are called “fornication” as is LOOKING lustfully at women to commit adultery with them in your heart. However among them only homosexuality is called “abomination”.

    Re: “Women’s suffrage and feminism were considered radical Northeastern ideas in the 19th century South.”

    I wasn’t recommending feminism or women’s suffrage at all, Hunter. I agreed with DixieGirl (and the Bible) on the “Queen”-like role and behaviour of Christian white women with white Christian husbands in a traditional, rural setting.

  25. Mark says:

    Lew is just just another troll here, and there are many. He talks out of both sides of his mouth and argues in opposition no matter what you say. Everything he says is worthless antagonism.

  26. The only difference I think morally between recreational sex with women, and recreational sex with the same sex, is that recreational sex with women could just be stop gap when you eventually intend to have a child. Whereas if you are with a homosexual, clearly the only motive is the sex itself. Unless you plan on rejecting monogamy, homosexuality is blatantly claiming “my sex is always just about sex.” Whereas potentially a man and a women could be having recreational sex in the short term, but in the long term intend to change that behavior.

    On the other hand, if your end goal isn’t to procreate eventually, what is the point of spending all your cash on a women, slaving away at a corporate job for women, buying a huge house for women, putting up with a women, risking stds from a women, risking getting a women pregnant, just to have sex, especially considering that human beings have manual appendages that work as well as another person would? It’s also not an accomplishment to find women, anyone could do it.

  27. What was Nazi Germany’s stance on homosexuality? Would Hitler have supported gay marriage? I ask this only because Counter-Currents is usually a pro-fascist and anti-Jew website, but in this case sounds more like Organized Jewry.

  28. Mark says:

    The argument could be made that non-vaginal and non-procreative sex among males and females is similarly recreational.

    That’s a fallacious argument, it’s not similar. Claiming that all recreational sex is equal, no matter who or what you do it with.

    Then on top of that stupid shit, saying that it’s Jewish to oppose homosexuality is the most ridiculous nonsense ever. Whoever says gibberish like that is as stupid as a nigger and as mendacious as a Jew.

  29. “it’s your duty to the state to procreate” i think was what one of the leading nazis said.

    another quote:
    http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/sub_document.cfm?document_id=1558
    ‘According to Nazi ideology, homosexuality was “unnatural” and homosexuals were shirking their national duty to establish families.”

    I’m by the way not saying it’s your duty to have children. I am saying the thought of having children is the only thing that would ever drive me into a relationship and right now I am not planning on it. Otherwise it’s pointless.

  30. Apuleius says:

    “It could also be used to condemn people who have relationships but intentionally don’t have children.”

    Marriage is properly ordered towards procreation. That is the traditional and common sense view. Anything else outside that bond is fornication or worse. Everything has its own nature. The nature of marriage is to produce offspring. Deliberately sterile union is a perversion of that nature. You don’t need to be married to fornicate.

    It may upset the modernist apple cart with its need for individualist self expression, but without marriage there is no real notion of family based on the common kinship of its members. Other “nontraditional” arrangements are arbitrary, artificial, and subversive of authentic familial relationships, which are the most elemental of human relationships.

    Integrity cannot exist without being true to the nature of things.
    Subversion rests upon the destruction of such integrity.

    Deo Vindice

  31. I’m planning to do my duty soon.

  32. Lew says:

    Mark,

    Just because you don’t care to recognize the fact Judaism has a 1000s-year old tradition of anti-homosexuality doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

    How do you think a healthy society should handle homosexuals? Execution? What is your solution to the problem you perceive?

  33. Apuleius says:

    “How do you think a healthy society should handle homosexuals? Execution? What is your solution to the problem you perceive?”

    Ostracism and exile. Those who violate the rules of any well ordered society remove themselves voluntarily from its protection. Any pariah should be treated as such by the community. This also used to be common sense.

    Now the “love that dare not speak its name” cannot shut up.
    Disorder is the order of our times.

    Deo Vindice

  34. Mark says:

    What was Nazi Germany’s stance on homosexuality? Would Hitler have supported gay marriage? I ask this only because Counter-Currents is usually a pro-fascist and anti-Jew website, but in this case sounds more like Organized Jewry.

    NS Germany criminalized homosexuality, expanding indecency laws. They closed down homosexual clubs and sentenced homosexuals convicted of indecency to prison.

    By 1938, German courts ruled that any contact between men deemed to have sexual intent, even “simple looking” or “simple touching,” could be grounds for arrest and conviction.

    Counter Currents tries to co-opt WN, NS and traditional Germanic society with deception and reinterpreting history to suit their agenda, like Jews do, such as claiming that the Männerbund was homosexual in nature.

    My dislike of them has more to do with their nature and their deceptions, rather than just their homosexuality, albeit the two typically go hand in hand. Some asshole over there wrote a nonsensical piece about how the South was always pro-Jew (despite the lynching of Leo Frank), it was rife with inaccuracies and bad reasoning (which even O’Meara admitted).

    They don’t care about the truth, they’re biased, so because they dislike Hunter and he advocates for the South, then now the South is pro-Jew. Those who don’t approve of homosexuality are now Jewish in spirit, etc. People like that are pathologically anti-Semitic.

  35. Prussiancroat says:

    Lew

    To answer your question homos need to be kept in the closet that’s what the new law in Russia does and that’s what America did up until the 1960s that’s what all normal societies do some are more harsh some are more easy going but they all keep the homos in the shadows. Even Old Testament Israel followed this way on paper you got stoned for fucking a guy but you needed two witnesses to get a conviction as long as the homos used discretion they went unharmed if they tried to start a Jericho gay pride parade they got stoned.

  36. ? “Outside of the cultural sphere, Alexander the Great, who I believe you are on record praising, engaged in sex acts with men.”

    This may be due to the fact that ATG was born with one brown eye and one green eye.

    (actually, two brown eyes and one green eye)

  37. Mark says:

    Just because you don’t care to recognize the fact Judaism has a 1000s-year old tradition of anti-homosexuality doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

    How do you think a healthy society should handle homosexuals? Execution? What is your solution to the problem you perceive?

    It’s just one fallacy after another with you, that’s a straw man.

    The Abrahamic religions are anti-homosexual, that doesn’t mean that they’re the only source of it. It’s a cultural norm, no culture is pro-homosexual and only tolerant of it as much as it is kept hidden, unlike today’s progressive agenda. Much of the anti-homosexuality backlash is because of pushy homosexuals.

    It’s relevant what religions are doing today, not what they did in ancient times. Christianity and Judaism have adapted their religious interpretations to be less anti-homosexual, some churches and synagogues welcome them. Looking at popular opinion among Jews, the majority of Israelis support same-sex marriage, while it is still officially not legal. However they will probably follow suit with America.

    I support indecency laws similar to what NS Germany had, and obviously I don’t support same-sex marriage, homosexuals shouldn’t have adoption rights, and there should be no advocacy for homosexual rights or the homosexual agenda. Their deviancy should be kept in the closet as it historically always has been.

  38. Jim says:

    “Other “nontraditional” arrangements are arbitrary, artificial, and subversive of authentic familial relationships, which are the most elemental of human relationships.”

    “Nontraditional” arrangements, upon examination, illustrate how positively unlike true marriage (which is in harmony with nature) they truly are. They are propositional, not ethnic. It’s like comparing ones children to the guy you drink beer with. One relationship is permanent by blood, the other is strictly voluntary, subject to termination at any moment.

  39. No-man says:

    Get a pre-nup Hunter. If she loves you she will understand. Since you’re a public person she could play race card against you in a BRA court.

  40. Mark says:

    I would recommend that all men on the political fringe get a pre-nup or not marry. Women’s loyalty and respect are highly emotional, and once crossed they can turn on you viciously and irrationally. They will lie, cheat and steal just to spite you.

  41. TJ says:

    I don’t agree with outlawing their acts. I am a libertarian and thus believe the problems are best addressed in a cultural context rather than a legal one. If they flaunt it I do believe they should receive a swift and potent reaction from the public. I wouldn’t tie the hands of normals.

  42. Mark says:

    http://www.cafemom.com/group/115189/forums/read/18688892/My_husband_is_racist_and_Im_thinking_divorce_is_in_order

    My friend starting dating a black man and my DH made a comment that she was “ruined” forever now. I had to do a double take and then I asked him what if when our daughters get older they brought home a black man? He said they wouldn’t allowed in his house. By now, my jaw is on the floor. I said so would you rather them bring home a decent, smart and nice black man or a dead beat, unintelligent white man?

    It makes me sad because besides this, he’s an excellent husband and father. But I just don’t think I can be with that kind of person..I don’t want our daughters subjected to those views.

    She wants the divorce?? How about the husband, he should GTFO as fast as he can and try to get custody, which is doubtful with our courts.

    What kind of a stupid bitch asks absurd questions like that. Always get to know who you’re with before you marry.

    It makes me sad because besides this, he’s an excellent husband and father.

    If he’s excellent at everything else maybe he’s right, you ever think about that you stupid cunt?

    Women are terrified to be contrary to public opinion, they’re so timid and meek, borderline paranoid. The worst ones, like her, are incorrigibly stupid while also being pompous and condescending.

  43. No-man says:

    White women in the 60′s realized the white man had given up the ghost. They decided they were oppressed again, making common-cause with the ascendant Negro against white power patriarchy.

    The white woman was terrified of the communist black male. She took matters upon herself.

    “Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them friends?” – Abraham Lincoln

    http://www.interviewmagazine.com/files/2011/07/11/img-gloria-steinem_131133481105.jpg_v_thumb.jpg

    Beware movement groupies. They are a privileged group in BRA, their dissent is suspect.

  44. Mark says:

    Women’s loyalties are highly subject to how they are treated, they are typically without inherent principle, they’re opportunists.

    I’ve converted a few women from liberal ideas, not with logical arguments, but through their emotional connection with me. That’s why you always earn a woman’s adoration first before you talk politics. You don’t win women over with facts and reason.

  45. No-man says:

    Good points Mark.

    I don’t set-out to convert anyone, I speak plainly to western men and they usually quicken. You can’t ‘convince’ the masses to do anything against modernity since appealing to the masses, “bartering” with them is the core of modernity.

    Women that survive the gynarchy can crawl back to us.

  46. Sam says:

    Mark says:
    July 2, 2013 at 6:44 pm

    ‘It makes me sad because besides this, he’s an excellent husband and father.’

    He’s an excellent husband to her and excellent father to her children but she wants to RUIN all that.

    For what reason?

    He does not want his daughters with niggers?

    She is out of her mind!!!

  47. Denise says:

    Re: “My husband is a racist” thing – that looks like total agitprop. I don’t BELIEVE the poster is real.

  48. G Prune says:

    Sodomy is sodomy is sodomy is sodomy. There’s no full climax in it. The individual’s who engage in it. Just doesn’t know how to love his/hers partner. Basically. There mentally ill as was/is listed in the medical field.

  49. G Prune says:

    Sodomy is sodomy is sodomy is sodomy. There’s no full climax in it. The individual’s who engage in it. Just doesn’t how to love women his/hers partner. Basically, its mental illness as was/is listed in the medical field.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>