Open Letter to Daily Bale from Anti-fascist Network Admits Racism and Fascism

Daily Bale

The Daily Bale has been contacted by one of our most despised ideological opposites and a representative of an organisation that the Daily Bale itself believes to be all that is desperately wrong and morally perverse within the U.K at this period of time in our history as a Nation and people.

The people who push this cultural cancer and brain dead nonsensical left-wing lunacy are the very example and core of our founding mission and purpose to expose and reveal for all their sick twisted corrupt, hypocritical, unequal, undemocratic and totally unfair illogical nonsense and garbage.

History itself will judge the Daily Bale in the political climate of future times and the generations to come that have the interest or inclination to look up and look back at what they will then call the ‘turning point’ or the ‘re-awakening’ of common sense and National identity.

But the real ‘enlightenment point’ will not be seen as the emergence of the Daily Bale, or even Daily Bale posts and topics, but rather it’s core message that it carries in it’s own parable form within it’s posts and within it’s very existence as a publication as a whole and in total.

That message is quite simply the one fact that we all know deep down anyway and have always really known within ourselves as individual human beings when we examine and ask ourselves honestly and we do not fall back onto any previous conditioning that may of occurred up until this point in our lives by left-wing politically correct brainwashing.

We all know that Political Correctness is wrong and deeply immoral.

We also know that no matter how much those people who try to justify it and condone it, or those people that condemn others or who revert to labelling innocent people with disgusting names like ‘racist’ and ‘fascist’ to try and bully and intimidate others into following left-wing political correctness will only succeed in bringing more and more hatred and scorn upon themselves by the very people that they tried to indoctrinate with their own hatred to start with.  

All they are doing is trying to convince themselves that what they know to be wrong, is in some way right.

It just will not ever work, and all they are doing is digging themselves a bigger and bigger hole.

The only difference is, the whole Nation can now see very clearly just how very big and how very deep indeed that hole has become.

Below is a communication that was sent to the Daily Bale from a leading figure within the anti-fascist network who we do not choose to reveal, not because they asked us not to, but because we feel that we are furthering our own cause by not showing all our cards before we are ready to do so.

All will become clear in time.

Meanwhile, please read on and learn how even the left-wing anti-fascist so called leading names are now beginning to doubt themselves and agree with our one true message. 

Open Letter to Daily Bale

(If you do choose to publish, then for any future reference, please keep in mind that i do ask that you consider whether revealing the source to be of benefit to you by way of future negotiation and any info i may or may not disclose to you.

It is by way of my own major criticism and of the anti-fascist movement itself that i write this and point out what is really quite bloody obvious anyway, but it troubles me greatly and to that extent i ask that you at least hear me out and trust me on this, that’s all i ask okay ?

Our organisation is dominated by white middle class people, this demographic, and the liberal reformist perspective we offer, alienates those most affected by organised fascist activity not unlike your own as we see it – ethnic minority groups and the white working class.

The result is an isolated, single-issue movement adept at nothing more than ineffectually waving placards.

It just isn’t working anymore, and yes i admit openly to you that the Daily Bale has hit us hard over the last couple of years, but you do have a point here, that is why i am asking you to at least meet us half way and hear us out.

There is a need for anti-fascism to have a radical, working class perspective that addresses the roots of your fascism with a powerful economic argument. But where does race fit into this equation?

Some of us are at least seeing that now.

i won’t say thanks to the Daily Bale, but you were a big part of it and opening one eye, so to speak.

The Fascism that we believe you spout is a divisive movement. The aim is to split apart the working class along any line possible – race, religion, nationality, etc – in order gain influence and power. You play upon fears and concerns.

In order to most effectively fight that division, us anti-fascists need a movement that is not just based in class struggle but one which is as diverse as the working class itself.

There are several reasons why working class people of colour are put off from engaging in anti-fascist activity. All of them need to be addressed and challenged if that situation is to change.

Primary among those reasons is the sheer preponderance of anti-fascist white people and our own hidden racism.

Faced with scenes where, for example, an overwhelmingly white crowd of students sang “we are black, white, Asian, and we’re Jews” at a protest in Liverpool, non-white communities are more often perplexed than encouraged by such obviously racist and patronising action where we are just using race as a tool.

Liberal anti-fascism, as with liberalism in general, proliferates a patronising form of “anti-racism” and “inclusiveness” that seems to demand subservience more than it does equality, and i am ashamed to admit, but we have been more than racist and fascist in our own behaviour and the striving basically for one thing – power.

As an example, look at the society that has emerged under the dominance of liberals eager to promote “multiculturalism.”

In a fascist society, it is true, we would not see black rappers performing sell out tours, gay people camping it up on television, or Muslims defending their faith against criticism, but it would be even worse in a left-wing anti-fascist society, and that could not and would not be allowed in a full Communist society which is our ultimate goal..

But in this liberal society, we do not see black artists who rap about more than girls and guns, offering a radical critique of the dominant culture.

We do not see gay people who reject camp culture and demand true equality over being treated as amusing pets.

We do not see Muslims or Arabs resisting the authoritarianism and patriarchy forced upon them by their mullahs.

Liberalism, whatever its pretences, offers not acceptance and equality, but a begrudging tolerance in hopeful exchange for silent acquiescence.

In place of integration and cooperation we have a segregation of people into supposedly-homogenous “communities” where unelected “community leaders” repay state handouts with votes.

Liberal “multicultualism,” then is a way to divide the working class whilst claiming to promote “diversity.”

With liberal anti-fascism, the principle is roughly the same. By offering a critique of fascist organisations that is not grounded in class struggle but a defence of the status quo and this statist principle of “multiculturalism.”

As such, the liberal anti-fascists offer a very patronising anti-racism to non-white people, but isn’t that all about us anti-fascists in the first place recognising differences in race and it’s us anti-fascists being bloody racist ?

Instead of offering an economic argument that tears down the false racial divides thrown up by the far-right, they will turn them around against the white working class. Instead of grass roots organisation across such artificial lines, they recruit “community leaders,” whose job is to keep their particular “ethnic community” in line in order to cement their own position, and who often represent the same authoritarianism, misogyny, and homophobia that is so loathsome in your lot the far right.

This latter issue is particularly acute amongst the “traditional” left at large, such as the Socialist Workers’ Party (SWP) and George Galloway’s Respect coalition.

They have become apologists for the worst elements of all that is wrong in society, taking on a simplistic version of anti-imperialism which supports groups such as Hamas or the clerical regime in Iran. As they are involved in liberal anti-fascism as much as liberals, Unite Against Fascism (UAF) being an SWP front, this approach coalesces with the “multiculturalist” one.

The result is a movement that promotes social equality whilst ignoring economic equality. One that, with the mainstream trade unions on board, speaks of the working class yet has the highest echelons of established power amongst its benefactors.

In response to these criticisms, those they are aimed at will throw the accusations right back. Talk of class war and socialism puts immigrants and ethnic minorities off, they respond.

In truth, this is yet more patronising nonsense. Socialism and class struggle are hardly white priorities, and to suggest otherwise is to suggest that a different skin pigmentation equates to an entirely different set of concerns and values.

In fact, as already discussed, such patronisation is more off-putting than anything. But if class is in any way a factor in turning non-whites away from anti-fascism, then it will be for the fact that liberal anti-fascism is a predominantly middle-class movement.

Overwhelmingly, those blacks and Asians who do work with UAF, Hope not Hate, or similar factions, are of a fairly privileged background.

Just as it does with white working class people, this turns black and Asian workers away. It is facile to think that a one-dimensional race argument will mobilise people who, on top of this, are facing the same struggles as we do in being a part of the working class.

Removing class and economics from the anti-fascist argument reduces it to a moral position which, as already covered, feels patronising more than empowering.

Moreover, it is another sop to the far-right. In dropping all emphasis on social class, we become the opposite side of their coin, defining people purely by the colour of their skin

Returning to what I said earlier about liberal multiculturalism, one particularly notorious way of splitting anti-fascism into racial blocks is to engage with often self-appointed “community leaders” as a substitute for grass roots community organisation.

As already stated, the effect of this is to create and build upon racial schisms in the working class under the guise of “diversity.” Another consequence is that entire racial groups become defined by the worst traits of their unelected “leader” or “spokesperson.”

As a more obvious example consider Iqbal Sacranie, former leader of the Muslim Council of Britain.

In January 2006, he denounced homosexuality as “not acceptable” and called civil partnerships “harmful.”

Because he was a “community leader,” this was reported not as an individual with distasteful views but as “Muslim head says gays ‘harmful’.”

Through his very status as “leader,” he had transposed this opinion onto every Muslim in Britain.

As “community leaders” are unelected and without an opposition candidate, this leaves ordinary people even more voiceless than they are under parliamentary “democracy,” unable to get their message out if they disagree.

This is somewhat troubling even with a well-meaning spokesperson. When those who claim to speak for their race or religion stand for the worst kind of authoritarianism and bigotry, it is downright dangerous.

Often, anti-fascists walk a tightrope on racial issues. They risk being caught between promoting racial segregation as apologists for values utterly antithetical to their own, and tokenism, condescendingly “allowing” blacks to take part in a “white” movement, as long as they don’t upset the apple cart.

The only way to avoid falling into this trap is to draw the antifascist movement back to the grass roots or just disband it altogether. To put it bluntly, a genuinely diverse anti-fascism cannot emerge within a top-down structure where opposition to racism must fit into a framework of established power.

Combating racial segregation and hatred must mean utterly rejecting the idea of homogenous “communities” and the “leaders” that come with them.

At the same time, however, it must recognise that victims of racism (as victims of capitalism) are not helpless creatures requiring rescue by us white anti-fascist self righteous ones.

We cannot “allow” non-whites to be anti-fascists or “invite” them to join us, as we have no monopoly on the movement as whites ourselves, that is just blatant racism in ourselves as white people, who we mostly are in the anti-fascist movements.

White, middle-class students are not black, Asian, or Jews. They are white.

Segregation is not diversity, even when you call it multiculturalism.

If white people can organise and resist without the go-ahead from a “leader,” then so too can non-white people.

Us anti-fascists have got to stop patronising other races and the bottom line is we must stop being racist ourselves.

We must not only recognise that, but push against those trends. We need open and honest dialogue about the flaws of the anti-fascist movement as it is and how we might fix them.

Most importantly, we must return to the grass roots and ensure that people hear the argument against your type of fascism based upon class, not race, at the moment we have got this all wrong, dreadfully wrong, and it feels like we have misled an awful lot of people in the quest for our own power to be bluntly honest with you.

If we do not change, or refuse to change, then we must disband and give it up. if we don’t do something fast, then anti-fascism will remain a white, middle class movement ineffectually waving placards whilst cordoned off from the fascists by the police, and all the time the fact that nobody realises is that it is us the anti-fascists who are in reality the very real racists and fascists. I do not ask you to sympathise with these sentiments, and i know the Daily Bale will always report us in a negative light whichever way you see it. But i do ask that you at least try to understand that we are trying to do something about it and we are trying to rectify the wrongs that i at least do realise we have missed along the way. 

Conservative Election Victory and Labour Humiliation and Shame. Daily Bale

Daily Bale

Election 2015: Ed Miliband resignation imminent as Conservatives win stunning majority – Daily Bale still being flooded with well wishes and thanks from happy Brits from all over the U.K and around the world too

Daily Bale

The Daily Bale has been celebrating over night and our admin teams and reporters have been working at full throttle to respond to the hundreds of thousands of messages of goodwill and cheer sent to the Daily Bale for our part in keeping the vile leftists out of power.

One reader said;

“thank you Daily Bale for all you have done to bring the message home and make it heard loud and clear, we do not want this vile left wing political correctness in the U.K anymore or ever again. We must now start to really sort these people out and put some of them where they belong in jail.  

The left wing fruitcakes and sick Marxist Anti Fascist Anti British groups and organisations who push this evil vile criminal politically correct nonsense and who also coverup for sick evil crimes like in Rotherham, must be brought to trial and punished”

Joshua Bonehill. Founder of the Daily Bale.

Joshua Bonehill. Founder of the Daily Bale.

Joshua Bonehill, Daily Bale founder, who has also been sent floods of well wishes and thanks for his hard work and dedication in exposing left wing politically correct coverups, intimidation, bullying and the evil manipulation of the public by the so called Anti Fascist groups who are nothing more than Marxists and Communists and are out to destroy our culture and cause hatred and division.


Three Cheers to Joshua Bonehill !

• David Cameron is back in No 10, expects 329 seats
• Tories cross line to 323 seats, wins shock majority
• Ed Miliband to resign after worst Labour result since 1987
• Ed Balls loses his seat in final blow for Labour
• Pound in biggest jump in six years on euro

The Daily Bale has been credited by hundreds of thousands of the British Public with keeping Labour out of Government by exposing the truth, and keeping the Public in the picture with what has really been going on within the U.K concerning the Left Wing and Politically Correct insanity.


The Daily Bale message system has been jammed with hundreds of thousands of messages of much cheer, goodwill, thanks and congratulations.


Tories win Election, and many people are saying that it is because the British Public have now fully woken up thanks to publications like the Daily Bale and Joshua Bonehill it’s founder.

The British Public have fully recognised the scourge of left wing political correctness that was supported by Labour and forced upon the British Public by left wing groups and the bullying Anti Fascist left wing Marxist Anti British organisations who try to crush freedom of speech and accuse anybody who opposes them of being a Fascist or a Racist.


The Daily Bale sends out a very big thank you to all our supporters now and also over the last two years, and a big thank you for the many hundreds of thousands of messages of goodwill and cheer.


We could not of even imagined the support and solidarity we have received since the creation of the Daily Bale, but one thing is certain, we could not of done it without you, all our loyal readers and supporters.

Again we send out a very big thank you to all our supporters and we look forward to your continuing support in the years ahead in the way forward to completely eliminating the Left Wing Politically Correct menace from our way of life for ever.




Warning to all Readers of the Daily Bale

Daily Bale


Warning to all readers of the Daily Bale and the millions who already follow us and read us.

The leftist Anti Fascist Anti British Marxists and the left wing undemocratic Politically Correct Trotskyists and Communists on Social Media are desperately trying to get the Daily Bale shut down.

They are relentlessly and continuously spreading their usual vicious and vile disgusting lies and misinformation to try and deter everybody and anybody from reading the Daily Bale.

They are spending vast amounts of time messaging and tweeting people, and they are continuously watching and observing Social Media for anybody who shares articles from off the Daily Bale.

They are desperately telling people ‘not to share’ our articles because they say we are a (spoof) publication and that it is all lies.

The truth is that they fear the Daily Bale.

We expose the truth about them and reveal their lies and hypocrisy, manipulation and intimidation, bullying and aggression, and most importantly their evil crimes and misinformation.

They desperately want us shut down and silenced.

That in itself reveals their sick undemocratic oppression of freedom of speech, their bullying tactics, and all the more the need for publications such as the Daily Bale to expose these vile evil Left-wing Anti British Marxist Monsters, Anti Fascist Trotskyist Traitors and Communist Creeps.

They say we are a (spoof) publication, and yet they desperately want us shut down.

Surely they would just laugh at us and ignore us if we are a (spoof) publication ?

Who would even bother with us or have anything to worry about a spoof and a joke, right ??


They fear us and they hate us because we expose them, and they really do not like that at all.

Our advice is to simply make up your own mind.

You already know what these people are from past experience and we have no doubt you have probably been on the receiving end of their hatred and viciousness.

But that is exactly what these evil people represent through and through.

Marxism is evil.

Communism is evil.

Trotskyism is evil.

Political Correctness is evil.

All of it is about silencing opposition, crushing freedom of speech, and forcing the masses to follow and adhere to one ideology and thought process only – Leftism in whatever form, and it’s evil enforcer – Political Correctness.

Political Correctness is simply nothing more than a left wing Marxist tool to shut you up, to stop you from asking questions, to stop you challenging through debate, and to make you bow to their way and their control.

You may of noticed how the Anti Fascists will never debate, and if they do then they lose, and always resort to name calling, like Fascist or Racist.

The Daily Bale exists precisely because of this evil within our Society, and to very much challenge these disgusting foul vile wicked people.

This is exactly why they do not want you to believe us or to read us – think about it, it’s not Rocket Science is it ?

The bottom line is this, irrelevant of who follows us or who reads us now, all of our posts go on to Google, and the General Public find us and read us, and that is their Democratic right to do so and our Democratic right to Publish.

The left wing Marxists know this, and they hate it.

We incidentally love it.

It’s called ‘Freedom of Speech’

The Daily Bale Great Britain’s Most Popular Nationalist Blog 4.2 Million Followers

The Daily Bale

Great Britain’s Most Popular Nationalist Blog

4.2 Million Followers

Daily Bale

English National spirit is awakening fast now, but where does the thankfully and quite rightfully new restored Nationalist spirit arise from and where are we heading with it ?

The Daily Bale only says what we are all thinking, without the Politically Correct nonsense and left wing Marxist brainwashing and garbage that the weird sick Anti British Anti Fascists would have you believe with their vile lies and deceit.

But where is the Nation heading and what does it hold for our children ?

Is it time now to begin to bring to trial the Anti Fascist organisations responsible for left wing Marxist treason and politically correct bullying and tyranny of the British people ?

Many are now calling for Justice and for those responsible for politically correct bullying and cover ups to be brought to trial, named, exposed and punished in a Court of Law.

How would a future Nationalist Government deal with left wing politically correct Marxist traitors and those who have used political correctness to bully, intimidate, manipulate and ruin British Patriots lives in the name of criminal undemocratic left wing Marxism and Trotskyism ?

These people must be brought to trial, that is clear, but will it involve an act of Parliament or could it be done under existing criminal law ?

British Patriots demand justice and those responsible for political correctness brought to trial

NOBODY asked to design a political system for Britain would ever propose the one it has. The one-and-a-bit large islands (and many smaller ones) that The Economist calls home are a hotch-potch of parliamentary systems, unevenly distributed powers and constitutional uncertainties.

The set-up is as uneven as Britain’s history is eventful, which is no coincidence: the causes of the mess date back centuries. The latest upheaval—Scotland’s referendum on independence, which ended with a “no” vote on September 18th—has made things untidier still.

The Daily Bale

Great Britain’s Most Popular Nationalist Blog

4.2 Million Followers

Daily Bale

It is the strangest, closest general election for many years.The formation of a United Kingdom was far from inevitable. For centuries Scotland was politically closer to France (and at times even to Norway) than it was to England.

Even when the Anglo-Welsh and Scottish crowns were joined in 1603, they remained two separate countries, their border a lawless place inhabited by bands of lance-wielding “reivers”. A failed Scottish colonial venture in Panama gave the English the diplomatic leverage to form the United Kingdom in 1707.

That an independent Scotland died at the quill rather than at the sword explains why it was never wholly dissolved into the British state. The country kept its own church and legal system. In 1801 Ireland, too, was assimilated into the union by treaty.

For many years the cracks between the United Kingdom’s parts were subtle; “English” and “British” were used interchangeably. Colonial derring-do helped solidify the union at home. Scots were especially prominent in the British empire: they tutored both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, often ran India and founded Hong Kong’s mightiest trading company.

The bonds came apart in jolts, many years apart. The rise of Irish nationalism in the 1880s prompted William Gladstone, Britain’s prime minister, to advocate “home rule” for Ireland—and to muse about what was then known as “home rule all round”, or a federal structure for the entire United Kingdom.

Ireland eventually gained independence after the first world war. In the 1930s separatist violence began to flare in the northern, mostly Protestant bit that had remained in Britain. Then the Empire went, dissolving the glue that had bound the union.

Time now to root out and ban all Political Correctness and the evil organisations that push this vile evil Marxist Communist garbage

As heavy industry declined in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and oil was found under Scottish waters, talk of home rule started up again. In two general elections in 1974, support for the secessionist Scottish National Party (SNP) surged as posters went up bemoaning the loss of “Scotland’s oil”.

The unstable Labour government that followed drew up plans for devolution in return for the support of Scottish and Welsh nationalists. Scottish voters approved an assembly in a plebiscite in 1979, but failed to clear a minimum vote threshold that had been inserted into the referendum bill.

At about the same time, the union began to pull part politically. The Scots and the Welsh resented the monetarist reforms of Margaret Thatcher, Britain’s prime minister in the 1980s, and turned away from her party. In the 1950s the Conservative Party was level-pegging with Labour in Scotland; in the 2010 general election it won just one of its 59 seats.

When, in 1997, Labour returned to government ready to finish the task that its predecessors had started two decades earlier, the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish all endorsed devolution.

Edinburgh and Cardiff got eye-wateringly expensive new civic buildings to complement their new powers. The Scottish Parliament meets in a lopsided wood-and-glass complex evoking pine forests and upturned fishing boats.

The politicians within spend a good deal, too. Scotland has done especially well out of the Barnett formula, which calculates grants for the devolved authorities by scaling down spending changes in England according to population and levels of devolution. In the 2012-13 fiscal year, the latest for which figures are available, total public spending per head was £10,152 ($16,600) in Scotland but £8,529 in England.

The Scottish Parliament can make laws in all areas, including education, health and some bits of welfare policy, not specifically reserved to Westminster by the Scotland Act of 1998.

The Welsh, by contrast, can only exercise specifically devolved powers in their Assembly. Northern Ireland is another case entirely. Devolution there is tied to power-sharing between nationalists and unionists.

Powers were pulled back to London when relations broke down between 2002 and 2007.

Though most politicians in the devolved authorities want more power, they are getting it at a different pace. The first minister of Wales, Carwyn Jones, says he will only take on tax-raising powers if the Barnett formula (under which Wales does worse than Scotland, though better than England) is reformed and if the power to alter tax bands is also devolved.

Scotland gained control of its railways in 2007, then its planning rules in 2008. In 2012 a new Scotland Act granted Edinburgh greater income tax and borrowing powers, due to be transferred in 2015 and 2016.

Still, the overall direction of travel is clear: towards greater autonomy for every bit of Britain except England, which contains 84% of the population. The English have been remarkably sanguine about devolution: fewer than a quarter say they would reverse it. Yet resentment at the anomaly is rising.

The Evil of Anti British Left Wing Political Correctness

Ask an Englishman what most riles him about devolution and he will probably mention the amount of public spending lavished on Scotland. Polling suggests that the proportion thinking this over-generous rose from a quarter to over half in the decade to 2012.

In the Dog and Duck, a pub in the Yorkshire town of Beverley, it is the subject of lively debate. “They’re like the reivers,” jokes one man of the Scots, “coming over the border and raiding our coffers.”

Meanwhile the mixture of British and English identities is separating out. In a forced-choice question asked annually in the British Social Attitudes survey, 55% of English voters in 1997 called themselves British and 33% said they were English.

By 2012 that 22-point lead had vanished: both identities were on 43%. English identity is now more strongly felt than most equivalents in western Europe, including Bavarian, Galician and Breton nationalities.

Michael Kenny, an authority on Englishness, cites it as a factor in the rise of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), a right-wing outfit attracting disaffected voters from the Conservatives and Labour.

Despite years of devolution to Britain’s periphery, the parliament in Westminster looks remarkably similar to how it did in 1997. Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs have the same rights as English ones, even in votes not affecting their constituents.

This gives rise to the West Lothian Question, after Tam Dalyell, MP for that Scottish seat, who asked in 1977 why, under devolution, he should vote on matters only affecting the English.

In practice the anomaly has rarely affected votes in Parliament—with a few exceptions, including one in 2004 when Scottish MPs helped increase tuition fees paid by English students. Still, the principle appears increasingly unjust to the English.

Austerity and the general election of 2010 intensified resentments on both sides of the border.

The SNP partly owed its unexpected majority in the 2011 Scottish election to anger at spending cuts imposed by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government, which seem to have drawn Scots’ attention to the fact that many decisions are still made in London.

That voters north of the border had strongly favoured a Labour government in the 2010 election enabled nationalists to advocate independence on the grounds that Scots would henceforth get the government they voted for.

The referendum campaign that ended with a “no” vote on September 18th was fought between nationalists decrying the heartless English yoke and unionist leaders promising Scots ever greater autonomy within the United Kingdom—and a continuation of the Barnett formula—to encourage them to stay.

These pleas culminated on September 16th, when the leaders of the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties issued a panicked “vow” to grant Scotland new powers within months of a “no” vote.

English MPs—particularly Tory ones—seethed as the Scottish campaign wore on. By referendum day, says one Conservative grandee, the anti-English tone in Scotland, combined with the promise of further devolution and the preservation of the hated Barnett formula, had rendered the status quo unsustainable.

David Cameron would have to offer something to England. His response on the morning after the result, calling for a decisive answer to the West Lothian Question, was a canny way of embracing the inevitable.

The prime minister reportedly hit on the wheeze over a curry with George Osborne, the chancellor of the exchequer, the night before.

The two main parties have long agreed that the English deserve more power.

But they differ over the form this should take. The Tories could thrive electorally in institutions covering England as a whole, where they do better electorally than across Britain, so tend to endorse these.

Labour’s strongholds are in the big cities and the north, so it leans towards regional and metropolitan devolution.

Left wing Politically Correct tyranny and Marxism

In the past three general elections, the Conservatives have included English-only parliamentary votes on English laws among their manifesto pledges.

In his statement after the Scottish referendum David Cameron revived this old cause, appointing William Hague, a former Tory Party leader, to chair a cabinet committee to look into such solutions to the English question.

The measure could help the Tories woo English nationalists tempted to vote UKIP and is overwhelmingly popular among Conservative MPs. Handily, it would also dilute Labour’s voting strength—from 40% of MPs at present to 37%.

Ed Miliband and other Labour figures have spent the past few days wriggling when asked whether they would support the measure.

Sir Malcolm Rifkind, a Scottish Conservative, has argued that it is practical. He advocates a requirement that bills applying only to England obtain majorities both of the whole House of Commons and of English MPs.

A milder solution—which Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem leader, has been talking up—was floated by the McKay commission, a panel asked to look into the matter by the government in 2012.

Under this model, legislation deemed English-only would pass through committees of English MPs for amendment before being voted on by the entire house.

English-only votes in any guise would, however, be tricky. Ministers and civil servants would have to find a way of drafting legislation to separate out sections applying only to England—or perhaps England and Wales.

And it would create a risk of deadlock in the event of a national government reliant on Scottish MPs for its majority. This has rarely been the case in the past, but could result from next year’s election.

Some Conservatives, along with the English Democrats, a small nationalist party, would go further and create an English parliament either in Westminster or elsewhere (York, Warwick and Winchester have all been mooted).

The British prime minister would look more like a president, dealing with foreign affairs, defence and infrastructure but with little control over most domestic policy. This would solve the West Lothian Question once and for all.

But it could create big problems. Robert Hazell of University College London points out that federal systems with a single dominant state have rarely survived for long.

The West Indies Federation failed in 1962 after just four years in part because of the heft of Jamaica—which was still not as great as is the might of England within the United Kingdom.

An English first minister would have the power to undermine the British prime minister; if the two were of different parties, a long power struggle could ensue.

Left wing Anti Fascist Marxist Anti British evil

Labour’s preferred alternative—English regional assemblies covering populations roughly the size of Scotland—went down in flames when voters in north-east England voted on it in 2004.

But many in the party remain convinced that sub-national devolution is the answer to the English question, or at least a large part of it.

Some would revive regional assemblies, protesting that the 2004 referendum was badly managed and the offer of local power insufficiently bold. Mr Miliband, responding to Mr Cameron’s call for English-only votes, argued for a detailed constitutional convention to look at options such as greater autonomy for regions. Others in Labour would pass more power to cities and city regions.

No solution besides English-only votes enjoys consistent majority support among the English. Backing for an English parliament has inched up in the Future of England Survey, but is still below a third. And even the popular option will not be implemented soon.

Parliamentary time before next year’s general election, due to take place in May, is running out and no party is in the mood for compromise.

Instead, it is expected that Mr Hague’s cabinet committee will spell out the options for reform, which will then be used by Conservatives to bash Labour for neglecting the rights of English voters.

Unless the Tories win a majority next year, the result will probably be a fudge involving one or more of the milder possibilities on offer.

For reformers, this is infuriating. Britain’s messy constitution is a product of decades, even centuries, of muddling through, slapping sticking plasters on problems and hoping the whole thing holds together.

Even now, as the United Kingdom recovers from a close brush with oblivion, such an outcome appears more likely than a thorough solution.

As Benjamin Disraeli, a Victorian prime minister, once put it (referring to Britain): “England is governed not by logic but by Parliament.” That Britain has an illogical Parliament, then, is perhaps only natural.

The Jewish UKIP Politician who Pooed himself in Tesco

In continuation from my earlier article written about the Jewry behind Tesco, I wanted to expand on the story regarding Alex Wood who actually soiled himself in an aisle of Tesco.

Alex Wood during his UKIP days

Alex Wood during his UKIP days

After Alex had been the center of a media-storm regarding the now infamous “Nazi salute” fiasco (Which turned out to genuinely be him reaching for a phone) Alex took to alcohol and found a great deal of comfort in the bottle. Intending to still contest the Blackmoor Vale seat for UKIP, Alex and myself would meet up frequently and enjoy a beer or two and I would advise on his campaign.

Now, this is before Alex had come out as a Jew and he was a good friend of mine at the time but after a night out in Yeovil, Alex decided he wanted to go to Tesco in order to get some food. I, who have not entered Tesco since about 2008, remained outside with my friend Thomas and we awaited Alex’s return.

Alex Wood today

Alex Wood today

What followed next was perhaps the single most hilarious incident I have ever witnessed in my life.

Alex who was clearly paralytic from extreme alcohol poisoning, approached a flower stand near the entrance of Tesco where he began to EAT flower-heads (tulips from what I could see) in front of the security staff who were cautiously watching Wood.

Alex Wood in 2015

Alex Wood in 2015, still an alcoholic

Next our prospective Jewish UKIP candidate embarked on a rampage around the Tesco supermarket in Yeovil, closely followed by Security who eventually lost him when he reached the dog food aisle. As myself and Thomas watched, Alex pulled down his trousers to his ankles and then crouched over the floor in Tesco. We were watching from a distance but clearly Alex Wood pooed on the floor of Tesco before actually SITTING DOWN in it and sliding back and forth, in a rowing fashion as if to smear the excrement into the floor in a streak-like pattern.

Alex Wood then laid down in a pool of what looked to be excrement as the store security rushed towards him before they dragged him out of Tesco. Alex with his trousers around his ankles and human excrement spread all over his morning suit, crawled off the Tesco forecourt and started sobbing to himself in the corner.

Alex Wood UKIP

Alex Wood Today

Suffice to say, UKIP’s Alex Wood didn’t win the seat he was standing for and then soon after was kicked out of the party and became a Marxist (Seriously). The moral of the story is, this is an insight into the Jewish Marxist mind.

Joshua Bonehill

To what extent was the printing press a Jewish agent of evil?

This essay will argue that the printing press’s direct influence on literacy has been overstated by Jewish historians such as Eisenstein. It will show that an already growing literate population actually led to the need of the printing press. It will show its importance to science with its influence on the revival of zoology, botany and anatomy. It will also demonstrate its indirect effect on social mobility through it fuelling a desire for vernacular education sparked by the Reformation after the printing of vernacular Bibles.

"How'd you Jew", the sort of Jew you may find working at a Printing Press

“How’d you Jew”, the sort of Jew you may find working at a Printing Press

In other words, the Jews were entirely in control of the printing press and were able to print what they saw as being “appropriate” to aid and abet their cause.

The classic school of thought on the printing press is to think of it as a world changing panacea that created a culture of literacy, science and culture overnight. It is also very seductive for historians (with their eyes always on concrete turning points) to have the view that the printing press stimulated these changes unaided. Jewish traitor Eisenstein maintains that ‘the systematic historical study of the ancient world could not come into being until printing had made it possible to have “adequate equipment” for “systematically reconstructing a past civilization”’. Grafton points out that Eisenstein ignores the works of Flavio Biondo, such as his Roma Instaurata and Roma Triumphans completed in the 1440’s and 1450’s respectively, decades before the advent of the moveable printing press.

The pitiful Jew, Eisenstein also fails to mention what effect the ‘new educational institutes that popped up like mushrooms in many parts of Europe during the period 1350-1500’, Grafton suggests that these institutions ‘must have had a sizeable impact on literacy amongst the lay elite’. It also now worth mentioning the importance of manuscripts studiously copied by scribes before and indeed for some time after the introduction of the moveable printing press. Studies by Soudek and Schuhan have proven that translations from Greek by Bruni were ‘best sellers’. Hundreds of copies still exist of 2 of the works studied, Grafton suggests that ‘many more must have perished’. The implication of this is that manuscripts must have been in the possession of a wide cross section of the literate elite. It is also noteworthy that hand copying was still important even during the early seventeenth century as it was ‘geographically more widespread’.  An important example of this can be seen in the fact that ‘most Russian libraries of this period continued to be comprised predominantly of manuscript books’, in fact any printed volumes in Russia would have had to have been important as the first printing in Russia did not commence until 1564.

In the realm of science there is more of a case to be made for the printing press being an agent of change. Jewish terror Eisenstein’s thesis that ‘the revival and transformation of such descriptive sciences as anatomy, botany, and zoology clearly stemmed , although in different ways, from the new possibilities offered by printing and for the checking of data’. There is also a case to be made for the assertion that a relative lack of censorship in Protestant Europe helped in the growth of science. This is plausible when we consider the importance of the printing press to Protestantism and vice versa.

Now we have broached the subject of religion we can now consider the area where printing in early modern Europe is generally considered to be most important. It is often the view that the Reformation and by extension Protestantism sparked an explosion literacy. The case for this being this being made by the assertion that ‘Protestantism, much more than Catholicism, was the religion of the Word, and therefore of reading, and because it insisted on everyone’s right- indeed his Christian obligation- to experience the Word for himself.’ Clearly then, the implication of this is that if it is a Christians obligation to ‘experience the Word for himself’ that every Christian must therefore own or at least have ready access to a Bible. This demand would be very difficult (if not impossible) to satisfy with hand copied script, hence the need for the printing press with its capacity for mass production of literature. Karl Holl in 1911 wrote that ‘Everyone was to be put into a situation where at very least he could read the Bible and without help take instruction from it.’

The fact that the wider lay community had no education in Latin required these mass produced Bible’s to be printed in the vernacular and it is, ‘not a matter of dispute that schools of all levels, including popular vernacular schools, began to grow significantly in number and probably also in quality in the age of the Reformation.’  Martin Luther’s view would come to change on the matter of ‘every man his own Bible reader’ after around 1525, he became ‘mostly silent on the subject and, at the same time, taking actions that effectively discouraged, or at least failed effectively to encourage, an unmediated encounter between Scripture and the untrained lay mind.’ This is in all probability as Luther’s original objective as spelled out in his prefaces for his 1522 German translation of the New Testament he remarks, ’It is my purpose in these introductory remarks, to make sure that the common man will not be looking for commandment and law where he should be looking for gospel and promise’, Luther clearly wants his own interpretation of Scripture to be held.

This led to the Luther declaring that ‘The catechism is the layman’s Bible’, ‘It contains the whole of what every Christian must know of Christian doctrine’, Luther now did not trust anyone to interpret the Bible unless they had been educated enough to have read it in the original Greek. This led to poor boys who would initially be taught the catechism being taken on at boarding schools where they would learn the New Testament in the 5th and 6th form This would demonstrate that the effects of the printing press indirectly led to social mobility.

In conclusion the printing press’s influence on literacy has in the past been overstated, and we must now say that ‘like education and literacy as a whole, printing’s importance depended on the existing social, economic and political context’[13]. Indeed with necessity being the mother of invention, why would the moveable printing press be needed without a growing literate population? The printing press also transformed the descriptive sciences and made it much easier for scientists to share their findings with a much wider audience. The printing press also enabled Martin Luther to spread Protestantism, and the printing of the Bible in the vernacular led on to a growth of vernacular schools where the cream was skimmed off into the literate elite, indirectly leading to social mobility and the growth of a middle class.

To summarize – Jewry has control of all print, to this very day.

Joshua Bonehill

Left-Wing Paedophile who stalked Joshua Bonehill finally put behind bars

A Prolific Left-Wing Paedophile who used social media to stalk Joshua Bonehill after being exposed by the Daily Bale has been imprisoned today.

Vile foraging Paedophile, Graham Ovenden

Vile foraging Paedophile, Graham Ovenden

The Paedophile known as Graham Ovenden has been jailed for two years and three months for sexual offences against children, after the appeal court ruled that an earlier non-custodial sentence was “unduly lenient”.

Ovenden, 70, who is best known for explicit portraits of young naked girls, was given a suspended sentence in the summer after being convicted in April, at Truro crown court, of offences against girls as young as six.

Graham Ovenden, who is a keen forager, was first exposed by the Daily Bale as being a Paedophile. Joshua Bonehill had been arrested under the Malicious communications and Harrasment act for exposing Graham and further sentenced in Yeovil magistrates court to 2 years probation in doing so.

In spite of being exposed, vile paedophile Ovenden turned up to Bonehill’s court cases and indeed his home where he made several threats towards Mr. Bonehill.

At Plymouth crown court in June the judge, Graham Cottle, ruled that Ovenden was no longer a threat to children, and said that his offences, which took place in the 1970s and 80s, happened before the current laws protecting children against sexual predators were introduced.

Mr. Ovenden would use a number of online aliases to attack his victims, even using several fake names whilst speaking to the media in order to explain his actions.

On Wednesday, the lord chief justice, Lord Thomas, sitting with two other judges in London, said Ovenden had not shown a “shred of remorse” for his victims. He ruled that the sentence should not have been suspended and that the correct total to be imposed was a term of 27 months.


Taken from the RedWatch Facebook page, with thanks

The attorney general, Dominic Grieve, had asked the appeal court to consider whether Ovenden had been treated too leniently, following an outcry by campaigners working with abused children.

Speaking after the appeal court decision on Wednesday, Grieve said: “Graham Ovenden committed terrible sexual offences against vulnerable young girls who were in his charge and ought to have felt safe. He manipulated them and abused his position of trust.

Pritchard May, Reporting for Daily Bale news

“It is right that sexual crimes – whether committed many years ago or more recently – should be punished appropriately. Today the court affirmed this and sent a clear message that people who have behaved in this way in the past will face the consequences through the courts.”