Labour Party Supporter Anti-fascist Having Brain Stored For Future Cyborg

Daily Bale

Left-wing politically correct anti-fascist is paying to have her Brain stored in fluid so that she can come back in the future as a Politically Correct Robot !

Prototype 114 Politically Correct Robot

Prototype 114 Politically Correct Robot

Imagined image of the future politically correct Robotic left-wing sicko

You just could not make this up !

A Left-wing anti-fascist politically correct fruitcake and all round weirdo is to have her brain preserved in fluid so that in the future it can be transplanted into an anti-fascist Robot and she can continue to spread hatred and division amongst future generations with politically correct garbage.

Sharon Caslon, 26, an alleged member of the UAF anti-fascist organisation and an alleged Labour Party supporter is determined to have her brain preserved in solution after her death.

She wants to have it transplanted into a future politically correct left-wing UAF Cyborg and continue where she left off here to spread her message of Marxist hatred and name calling, by labelling future generations and offspring of present day right-wing respectable Nationalists and Patriots as ‘Fascists’ and ‘Racists’

Unite Against Fascism

Left-wing politically correct fruitcake Caslon is paying for the storage of her brain by saving all her benefit money throughout her lifetime and then hopefully living long enough to be able to pay for the storage of her twisted left-wing politically correct brain with the taxpayers money she has managed to save by the time of her death.

Caslon says she has no intention of working for what she sees as a Capitalist State and that all that matters to her is political correctness and left-wing Communist Marxism.

Caslon to have her Brain stored to be transplanted into a future Left-wing Cyborg

Caslon to have her Brain stored to be transplanted into a future Left-wing Cyborg

Scientists do actually believe that Caslon may be on to something, albeit with taxpayers money, but it may be possible in the future for human brains to survive death in robotic bodies. but would we want to ? especially alongside left-wing politically correct Cyborg weirdos and sickos.

We have had enough of the left-wing sick twisted politically correct fruitcakes, weirdos and sickos in our own time zone, would we really want to have left-wing anti-fascist politically correct Cyborgs running around like they do now shouting about the rights of foreign criminals and rapists, or smashing and defacing war memorials as they do now?

No we don’t think so, we do not want them now in our society, and we are less likely to want them then in the future, causing untold misery and racial division amongst our offspring.

The Scientific possibilities of transplanting a left-wing sickos brain into a Marxist leftist Cyborg

Three renowned scientists discussed whether it’s possible to remove a human brain from a body, even a left-wing twisted warped one we ask ? and put it in a tank, and give it a robotic body.

This wasn’t some bizarre late-night bar discussion: The conversation was a serious talk conducted on stage at a conference at New York’s Lincoln Center.

The University of Southern California’s Theodore Berger, Duke University’s Mikhail Lebedev, and Alexander Kaplan of Moscow University, all believe it’s possible for the brain to survive body-death inside a cybernetic shell.

In their panel at the Global Future 2045 conference, the trio discussed a future that sounds like a combination of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, the recent mouse inception, and Krang, the brain-in-a-box villain of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

The talk, which took place in a mixture of Russian and English, focused on making it possible in our lifetime to conduct brain transplants, harvesting human parts from the body for cybernetic integration, and making self-aware brains comfortable in their new robot homes. It was just another Saturday afternoon, in other words.

Notably absent from the conversation was what the quality of life would be for human brains harvested into robotic bodies.

Although all three researchers come from impeccable neurology backgrounds, the talk centered on mostly whether it would be possible to make the technology work.

Whether it would be wise, or what the experience would be like for both patients and loved ones, wasn’t discussed as much.

The three researchers believe brain transplants are possible because the human brain is the last organ in the body to cease function after death.
Because the death process includes a short window where the brain functions without support from other organs, Berger, Kaplan, and Lebedev all believe there is precedent to have the human brain functioning indefinitely in a non-human carrier—as long as the appropriate support system is there for the brain.
They also stress the fact that nerve cells age slowly compared to other organs.

This brain-in-a-robot would be supported by biological blood substitutes (with “the necessary hormonal-biochemical and energetic substrate”) multi-channel brain-computer interfaces with two-way information exchange, neural prostheses, artificially re-grown human organs, and other biotech tools that we can’t even imagine.

Because there is no precedent for the human brain surviving and functioning outside of a human body, degrees of consciousness, intelligence, comprehension, and a million other existential quandaries that would or wouldn’t exist in a robo-brain simply aren’t evaluated.

The data points aren’t there for us to understand, even if it’s possible to transplant a human brain into a robot, what it’s like to be a human brain transplanted into a robot, even a sick twisted politically correct left-wing brain.

There are even interim holding facilities where living human brains could hypothetically be stored before transplantation.

While their roundtable discussion admittedly sounded like a master’s exercise in strange science, the kicker is that all three are engaged in preliminary efforts to make this happen.
Last year, at the resolutely mainstream MIT Media Lab,
Dr. Berger spoke about hacking the memories of rats.
Berger’s lab at USC is actively working on prosthetic brain implants that both falsify memories and stimulate brain function in damaged neurons.
The lab’s work recently received media attention when it successfully generated new memories in a rat that had its hippocampus chemically disabled.
In literature, Berger emphasizes his technology’s potential for treating Alzheimer’s and dementia through the possibility of “building spare parts for the brain;” on-stage in New York, he said it could also lead in the future to full-on brain transplants.

This would work in tandem with Kaplan’s and Lebedev’s specialties.

The two Russian scientists research brain-computer interfaces (BCIs)—plug-in interfaces which meld the human brain and nervous system to computer operating systems.

While BCIs are most commonly found in toys that read brainwaves to detect stress or concentration, they have revolutionary potential to change the lives of stroke victims and the disabled.

When combined, brain prosthetics and brain-computer interfaces could lead to brain transplants decades from now.

Would you want to spend decades or even a century living inside a robotic body at the mercy of a software interface to navigate the world or listening to even more left-wing garbage from politically correct anti-fascist Cyborgs ?

We’re just beginning to grasp the ethical, philosophical, and scientific implications. But with the right amount of funding, research, and cooperation, it’s entirely possible.

Anti-fascist Left-wing Politically Correct Sicko in Animal Outrage

Daily Bale

Yet another shocking Left-wing politically correct outrage by a Left-wing anti-fascist sicko


Shamed left wing politically correct computer geek and alleged anti-fascist Paul ‘lefty’ Lovell, 61, escaped jail for trying to have sex with a sheep after a cow turned him down.

Unite Against Fascism

Left-wing Lovell, believed to be a member of Hope Not Hate, the anti-fascist organisation in the U.K, stripped to his socks and shoes and tried to insert his manhood into a cow’s mouth in a field next to Tottenham’s new training ground.

When the animal ambled off, left-wing Lovell then turned his politically correct attention to a bemused ewe and tried to have sex with it from behind.

Jurors laughed out loud when they heard the detail of the case and were told to get over their giggling fits by Judge James Patrick at Wood Green Crown Court.

Daily Bale

You just couldn’t make it up, as far as the politically correct Lefties are concerned, anything goes.

Leftist Lovell was handed a four month custodial sentence suspended for 18 months.

‘This is a case which as far as I am concerned is unique,’ Judge Patrick told Lovell.

British Tree surgeon Lawrence Stephen, 23, was enjoying a picnic with his girlfriend underneath their favourite oak tree when they were startled by the sight of the married man frolicking with the animals.

‘The way he was walking around the field, I could tell that he felt like he was the only person in the field,’ Mr Lawrence said.

‘He seemed like he was very comfortable with what he was doing – as if it was normal.

‘He was trying to thrust his waist towards the cows and using his hands to get the cow’s mouth towards his crotch.

Daily Bale

Left-wing politically Correct ‘Lefty Lovell’ loved the Cow’s Muzzle

‘I can’t remember him forcing the cow – he wasn’t actually grabbing the cow, but he was trying what he could.’

But the cows wandered off into the next field, leaving lefty Lovell to walk over towards some sheep, clutching a can of Skol and a Sainsbury’s bag with his clothes in, the court heard.

The bag also contained an adult nappy.

‘The sheep don’t stand still, they turn to just walk away or move their head so he was unsuccessful a number of times after going towards the main flock of sheep,’ Mr Stephen said.

Daily Bale

Left-wing Lovell then turned his depraved Left-wing lust towards the sheep, no animal was safe

‘I don’t know what he was trying to do but it seems he was trying to get some sort of sexual act performed from sheep,’ he said.

‘I felt sick for what was happening, it sort of disturbed me, I felt worried about him, also it is not right to do that to animals you know?’

Looking visibly shaken, Mr Stephen’s girlfriend Natasha Brennan, 23, told the court that she was ‘horrified’ by the disturbing acts.

‘Well, it was quite bizarre.

‘I don’t think that was normal behaviour and I was concerned for his mental well being,’ she said.

Daily Bale

The Left-wing politically correct fondness for anything Un-human or unnatural

Prosecutors claim he was trying to get the sheep to perform oral sex on him and then attempted to insert his penis either into the animal’s anus or vagina.

Left-wing politically correct Lovell said he had been sleeping and the idea that he had thrust against sheep was ‘completely ridiculous’.

‘The only time that I saw the sheep was when I woke up… I was surrounded by sheep about 2 metres away, about 10-12 sheep, something like that,’ he said.

‘I don’t particularly like animals hanging around me when I am sleeping so I sat up and sort of clapped my hands a bit but they didn’t take much notice of that so I stood up briefly and stamped my feet on the ground and clapped my hands again,’ he said.

‘I can understand that somebody from a long distance away would have wondered what was happening when I was trying to chase the sheep away from my location.’

Police claimed when they arrived Lovell had his shorts down, but he insisted they were up at all times.

Prosecutor Richard Hutchinson insisted Lovell was ‘interested sexually’ in the farmyard animals.

‘Mr Stephen and Ms Brennan saw him attempt to make a penetrative motion, thrusting towards the rear of the sheep’s vagina or anus again and again.’

Lovell then lay down in the field and pulled his shorts up, the court heard.

The shocked and disgusted couple rang 999 and Lovell was found in the field near Archers Wood by the police and taken to Edmonton police station.

He told the police he was ‘just relaxing’.

Left-wing Lovell, of Enfield, was found guilty of outraging decency by trying to commit sexual acts with animals in public places by a jury at Wood Green Crown Court.

British Community Initiative and Spirit. British Communities United in Identity

Daily Bale

Daily Bale Community Initiative events

People often comment these days that local communities are becoming more fragmented by left wing politically correct bullying, intimidation, manipulation and the evil of leftist Anti-fascist Anti British treachery.

Also we hear more and more that –

‘society isn’t the same now as it was 50 or 100 years ago and that we have been corrupted and ruined by leftist perversion and politically correct sickness’

Also, that we don’t know our neighbours, and we don’t know our local shopkeepers.

We think those claims are very true, and we absolutely know who is to blame.

The Left-wing politically correct parasites and leftist lunatics.

But the Daily Bale Community Initiative  is taking a great step towards fixing all that.

The Daily Bale has always encouraged celebrations in communities to bring patriots together like the Queen’s Jubilee and the excitement of the London Olympic and Paralympic Games.

The Daily Bale is looking at establishing a series of community created events to take place in outdoor and indoor recreational space up and down the country – all organised by local people and helping to bring local communities together, no matter of faith or identity, apart from politically correct leftist lunatics, of course.

Daily Bale

The Daily Bale  is all about exposing the evil of left wing political correctness and the hypocrisy of the left wing Anti-British Anti-fascist criminals who pretend to be about equality, but who in actual fact just breed hatred and division.

Left-wing Politically Correct Anti-fascist Organisations Dividing Our Communities

Left-wing Politically Correct Anti-fascist Organisations Dividing Our Communities

The Daily Bale takes the lead and encourages the people of all communities to come together in National spirit and enjoy themselves outdoors and indoors to bring all communities together in true identity, without the concerns of being labeled or branded by the left wing as fascists or racists, or some other vile race hate disgusting terminology that these sick Marxist leftist parasites use to divide communities and cause hatred and misery and the further segregation of British communities with their vile leftist hatred of anything or anybody who classifies themselves as British or part of the British community as a whole.

Daily Bale

All over the country there are dog shows, car races, bike races, sports tasters, boxing clubs, woodland walks, youth clubs, hiking clubs, dance clubs – anything and everything. The Daily Bale will be only too happy to provide our logo and our support in the name of decency and community togetherness.

In Somerset in July last year, around 1,000 people from the local community came together to celebrate their own community togetherness  with lots of live music and entertainment.

Daily Bale
There were free bouncy castles and sumo wrestling outfits, and when they were hungry a free barbecue was provided – all funded by local community groups and businesses.

At Gillespie Park in Islington last September, the Friends of Gillespie Park had over 2,000 people attend their community event and many local organisations were delighted to be involved.

Students with learning disabilities ran an organic café, Arsenal Football Club came and set up a football game and the local fire service brought along a fire engine for the kids to explore.

The Daily Bale did not run any of these events, but it goes to show you that all of the community events that took place were a great way of getting people active and outdoors in unity and identity as a community.

What’s more, with future Daily Bale Community initiative associated events, organisers would feel it helps them to build new relationships with local people and bring the whole community together without the evil vile left wing politically correct interference or Anti British negativity from Marxists and degenerate leftist Anti-fascist parasites.

If you are interested about getting your community together in true pride and togetherness, then get a local event contact page or event organiser going, and ask everybody how they can provide and bring to your community event.

The left wing Anti-fascists will try to stop the event and will probably call your organisers and helpers all kinds of vile disgusting race hate and fascist racist names, but in these circumstances it is essential that you inform your local community about who is doing this, what they are doing, and always notify the Police.

This is the very reason that community events work, because they bring all people together, and they show a community united spirit, and expose the true evil of the left wing Anti-fascist anti-British criminals.

People often say that communities “aren’t what they used to be” but if you get involved with a Daily Bale Community Initiative  event then you might just be surprised at how many people from all identities within the community want to get involved and just how much the Great is still in the Britain.

The Daily Bale Community Initiative- bringing communities together in true unity and spirit.

Laugh at the Left-wing Campaign. Daily Bale Launches ‘Laugh at a Leftie’

Daily Bale

Daily Bale launches ‘Laugh at a Leftie’ campaign to bring some humour to the ridiculous nature of Left-wing political correctness that we have all had to endure for so long, but now thankfully we have a Conservative majority Government in power and a return to common sense hopefully.

Labour is facing at least three decades in the wilderness, party warned.

Leftie fruitcakes thought that the people actually supported them or worst still wanted a Labour leftist Government in power !

Tony Blair, John Prescott and Lord Mandelson lead criticism of Ed Miliband’s failed strategy, as concern grows for the future of the Labour party that nobody wants, likes, or even votes for anymore never mind ever wants in Government ever again


Left wing politically correct weirdos and sickos have been shouting and blubbing about how unfair it is towards their politically correct twisted warped feelings that nobody supports left wing sick policies, and the left wing Marxists along with the dangerous Anti-fascist violent organisations have been protesting and defacing war memorials again in London after the Election last week because they did not like it that they are a small minority of weirdos, sickos, and cranks that nobody listens to or even takes seriously at all or in any way.

Hope not hate. Anti Fascist.

The Daily Bale says – we must now start to petition strongly to have these violent evil left wing Anti British so called Anti-fascist groups banned and outlawed as criminal unlawful groups.

The so called Anti-fascist groups use violence, intimidation, threats and fear or manipulation to try to make the Public bend to their way of seeing things, and anybody who opposes them or questions them are met with a barrage of threats and evil vile race hate name calling like ‘Racist’ or ‘Fascist’

The British Public Must Be Protected From These Criminals.

They also use Social Media and set up anonymous accounts to try and bully and intimidate Social Network users who follow legitimate political Parties like Ukip and other respectable groups.

HOPE not hate

Left wing politically correct looney tune fruit the loop ding dong cuckoo cranks 

Labour has been plunged deeper into crisis as some of the party’s most senior figures warned that they would be out of power until at least 2025 or even 2035/45 by other opinions.

As the search began for a new leader, former Cabinet ministers joined members of Ed Miliband’s front-bench team to call on the party to “skip a generation” and pick a candidate who is untainted by the failures of the past, and also people want all the garbage of left wing politically correct nonsense gone.

Tony Blair, John Prescott and Lord Mandelson entered the debate with withering assessments of the current state of the party.

The former Prime Minister called for Labour to reclaim the political centre ground. He said the party had to show it stood for for “ambition and aspiration” as well as compassion and care”, making clear a change of direction was needed if the party was to regain power.

Mr Blair defended Mr Miliband’s “courage under savage attack”, but Lord Mandelson gave a brutal assessment of his leadership, describing his attack on “predatory” capitalists as “completely useless” as he said the decision to abandon New Labour was a “terrible mistake”.

Dan Hodges: Labour forgot the golden rules of politics

The Labour peer said the party is facing its worst challenge since the 1980s, when it spent 18 years out of power: “We were sent out and told to say we’re for the poor and hate the rich, ignoring the vast swathe of the population who exist in between.”

Speaking on the Andrew Marr show on BBC One, he described Mr Miliband’s campaign as a “giant political experiment” which had ended in the public “ripping stripes off our shoulders”.

Mr Prescott also unleashed a blistering attack on the Labour campaign, pouring scorn on Mr Miliband’s “Hell yes, I’m tough” claim and accusing him of failing to defend the previous Labour government’s record on the economy.

Tony Blair: Labour must reclaim centre
Lord Mandelson delivers excorating verdict on Miliband

John Prescott launches bilstering attack on failed campaign

In its worst election night for 30 years, Labour finished with just 232 MPs – 99 behind the Conservatives and 26 fewer seats than Gordon Brown won in 2010.

Blame quickly fell on a series of strategic blunders, including “gimmicks” such as Mr Miliband’s courtship of Russell Brand, the comedian, and his decision to engrave his manifesto pledges into an 8ft slab of limestone.

Ed Miliband appears on camera with Communist Marxist Russell Brand

Mr Miliband’s own standing as leader was also seen as “a personal drag” on the party’s prospects which candidates had to overcome on the doorstep, shadow cabinet ministers said.

But in a display of public recriminations, some of the party’s most prominent MPs clashed openly over whether Labour’s “old-school, socialist” anti-business agenda had put voters off – or whether the party had not been Left-wing enough to win.

One shadow cabinet minister said the pledge stone – which became ridiculed as the “Edstone” – was “a disastrous gimmick” that cost the party credibility.

In truth, however, the Labour leadership had known for months that winning a majority was going to be all but impossible.

Since the turn of the year, when all the major parties moved to an election footing, some of Mr Miliband’s closest advisers have been planning to rule as a minority government. Yet even this limited ambition came to nothing.

David Cameron’s new Cabinet
Dan Hodges: The fight is on for the soul of the Labour Party

On Saturday Ben Bradshaw, Labour’s Blairite former culture secretary, pleaded with his party not to lurch even further to the Left when choosing a new leader and a fresh strategy.

“Please, colleagues in the Labour movement and outside commentators, don’t try to claim we lost because Labour wasn’t radical, Left-wing or distinctive enough,” he said after retaining his seat in Exeter.

“Ed and his team bet on the British people moving to the Left in response to the global financial crisis. The whole of our strategy was based on this. But it was not true.”

In a damning critique of Mr Miliband’s anti-business agenda, he called for Labour to choose a leader who will “celebrate our entrepreneurs and wealth creators and not leave the impression they are part of the problem”.

Mr Bradshaw’s lament was echoed by members of Mr Miliband’s inner circle, as the profound disappointment at the results exposed deep divisions within what had previously been a united team.

Liam Byrne admits being ‘burnt with shame’ at ‘no money’ letter

One shadow cabinet minister said: “We failed to connect with aspirational voters who want to know how we are going to make their lives better. We must speak to the whole of Britain, not just sections of Britain. There was too much fear and not enough hope.”

Diane Abbott, one of Labour’s most strangest MPs, disagreed and urged her party to adopt an even more radical, pro-immigration agenda. She wrote on Twitter: “Alarming that myth is taking hold that Ed Miliband lost because he was too ‘Left wing’.  We have news for you Diane, he was too left wing, and so are you !

Blairites, however, warned that the party must return to the centre ground.

Some people we spoke to just want the Party gone altogether.

Lord Hutton of Furness, a former business secretary, said Labour should choose a leader from a new generation.

“We’re back to where we were 30 years ago. Few of us after the Nineties success [under Tony Blair] thought we’d ever be in this position again. There’s a limited appetite for the old-school socialist menu which we had on offer,” he said.

Alan Johnson, a former home secretary, said: “This is a 10-year task. This is a job for the future.” He said the party had lost the ability to appeal to people’s “aspirations”, which Mr Blair had done in 1997. “That was one of the big successes that won us three elections.”

As Mr Miliband – who resigned – and his advisers sought to console themselves in private, attention turned to who could take over and lead a party ravaged by a second devastating defeat.

• Ed Miliband ‘sorry’ as he resigns as Labour leader

Within hours of the result being announced, as many as 10 senior MPs began testing support at Westminster for potential leadership bids. Others were contemplating running for deputy leader after Harriet Harman announced she would also stand down.

Andy Burnham, the shadow health secretary, and Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, quickly emerged as favourites to stand for leader, with both keeping a notably low profile as they considered their options.

But the two front-runners are both New Labour figures who served in the governments of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, and both have been key figures during Mr Miliband’s doomed election campaign.

Chuka Umunna, the shadow business secretary, is seen as the leading “modernising” candidate and, at 36, would be young enough to build support in opposition and gain experience while appealing to a new generation.

However, speaking on condition of anonymity, some of Labour’s leading figures – whose endorsement will be fervently courted by the candidates – warned that none of the contenders seemed capable of steering the party back to power.

They complained that Miss Cooper is “too technocratic” and does not seem to embody the right “values”, while Mr Burnham would be too Left-wing and vulnerable to claims that he was a puppet of the unions.

One member of Labour’s front-bench team said the party was bracing itself for being out of office until at least 2025. “We have a massive task. We are 100 seats behind. This is a 10-year job,” the source said.

“Anybody involved in the Blair-Brown wars cannot be chosen, but I don’t think anybody else has emerged yet,” the figure said. Another leading Labour figure, and former minister, said the next leader must be a “moderniser”, which would rule out both front-runners.

Mr Burnham “is not a modernising candidate at all. Ed believed in things and he was prepared to stand by them, like Europe, whereas Andy is a Left-wing populist,” the source said. “Yvette? I think her moment has past. She is too much the Blair-Brown

On Saturday night there were growing calls for Labour to turn to a younger generation of so-called “clean skins” who did not serve in the New Labour governments, with Mr Umunna, the shadow business secretary the clear favourite.

Other fresh faces believed to be plotting their campaigns include Tristram Hunt, the education spokesman and a television historian, Liz Kendall, a health and care spokesman, and Dan Jarvis, a former soldier.

Stella Creasy, who has fought popular campaigns against payday lenders, and Mary Creagh, the shadow international development secretary, are also being urged to run.

One Labour MP, who was close to the Miliband leadership, dismissed them all: “None of them is very convincing.”

Key events in the 2015 General Election campaign
March 30
David Cameron our Prime Minister and the British People now rejoice in victory.
David Cameron informs the Queen of the dissolution of Parliament and fires the starting gun of the election. Returning to No 10, he says: “Together we are turning our country around and for the sake of you, your family, and your children’s future, we have got to see this through.”
April 1
More than 100 of the country’s most senior business figures warn that a Labour government would “threaten jobs and deter investment” in the UK. In a letter to The Telegraph, they praise Conservative economic policies and warn that a “change in course” would “put the recovery at risk”.
April 2
Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, fails to break through in the first election debate since the dissolution of Parliament, with minority parties emerging as the winners of the contest. Mr Cameron finishes the debate as voters’ overwhelming choice to lead the country, according to a snap poll. The Prime Minister urges voters not to send the UK back to “square one” by electing Mr Miliband.
April 4
A leaked memo seen by the Telegraph claims that Nicola Sturgeon, privately said she would “rather see” Mr Cameron win the general election because Mr Miliband is not “prime minister material”. The official account of a discussion between the SNP leader and the French ambassador appears to confirm that her party would privately favour another Tory-led government because it might help to stoke up anti-English sentiment. Both the French ambassador and Ms Sturgeon deny she made the comment.
April 7
Mr Miliband announces that Labour will scrap the non-dom tax status enjoyed by those who are British citizens but do not pay tax on earnings made outside the UK. He claims that the 200-year-old scheme costs hundreds of millions of pounds a year and has made Britain “an offshore tax haven for a few”. Duncan Bannatyne, the entrepreneur and Dragons’ Den star, above, says the policy “gets my vote”, having previously backed the Tories’ economic plans.
April 8
One of the most memorable images of the election campaign emerges when Mr Cameron visits the Sacred Heart Roman Catholic Primary School in Westhoughton, Bolton. Six-year-old Lucy Haworth, sitting next to the Prime Minister, becomes overcome with shyness when he asks if she will read aloud from a book. “Why don’t I do a line and you do a line, is that fair?” he asks, prompting her to rest her face on the desk.
April 13
Mr Miliband publishes Labour’s election manifesto, which focuses on economic competence. Measures include a £2.5?billion NHS Time to Care fund in the early years of the next parliament, 25 hours of free childcare for working parents of three and four-year-olds, and smaller class sizes for five, six, and seven-year-olds.
April 14
The Conservatives launch their manifesto. It includes a pledge that working families with three or four-year-old children will get 30 hours of free childcare a week. The manifesto also includes plans to revive Margaret Thatcher’s right-to-buy policy to enable 1.3?million families in housing association properties to own their home.
April 16
Nicola Sturgeon delivers a strong performance in a live BBC debate in which she sets out the terms of a deal to work with Ed Miliband and “lock David Cameron out of Downing Street”. Pledging to “make Labour bolder”, the SNP leader dominates the debate.
April 21
Sir John Major, the former Conservative prime minister, suggests the party’s campaign lacks passion. At a question-and-answer session with Tory activists he says: “Behind this sloganising of economics, about growth and matters like that [are] lives, people that really matter. We should focus on people, people, people.”
April 25
David Cameron accidentally jokes that he wishes everyone supported West Ham — a Premier League rival of the team he is meant to back, Aston Villa.
April 27
The Prime Minister makes a speech aimed at rejecting claims that his campaign has lacked energy and passion. Mr Cameron says that he is “pumped up” and has more desire to win this election than he did in 2010. “If I’m getting lively about it, it’s because I feel bloody lively about it,” he said.
April 29
Russell Brand releases an interview with Ed Miliband in which the Labour leader says he wants to confront “the richest and most powerful” in Britain. The video, filmed for the comedian’s YouTube channel, is uploaded after Mr Miliband was pictured leaving Brand’s home at night. Brand praises Mr Miliband for “understanding how the country feels”.
April 30
Mr Miliband, David Cameron and Nick Clegg appear separately in a BBC Question Time Leaders’ special during which the Labour leader is lambasted by a business owner over his party’s record on the economy. Catherine Shuttleworth, 48, from Leeds, says Ed Miliband should fire Ed Balls, after the shadow chancellor claimed that a note stating there is “no money left” was nothing more than a joke. Mr Miliband is widely mocked on social media when he trips in the studio.
May 3
Ed Miliband is accused of suffering his “Neil Kinnock moment” after pledging to install an eight-foot limestone monument to his manifesto in the Downing Street garden. Critics dub it a “policy cenotaph” and “the heaviest suicide note in history”. In an embarrassing gaffe, Lucy Powell, Labour’s campaign vice-chairman, later suggests Mr Miliband could still break the pledges.
May 7
A bombshell exit poll released as voting finishes at 10pm suggests David Cameron is on course to sweep back into Downing Street with 316 seats — a far greater number than his party expected. Labour insist the results are likely to be wrong: they show a very different picture from the party’s private polling. However, over the next 12 hours it will become clear that the Conservatives have gained more seats than even the poll suggested.
May 8
David Cameron announces he is forming the first Conservative majority government for 23 years, after winning 329 seats by early afternoon yesterday. Nigel Farage, left, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband resign as leaders of their parties within the space of around an hour. Mr Clegg describes the result as “the most crushing blow to the Liberal Democrats since our party was founded”.

Feminist Left Wing Politically Correct Fruitcakes Even Hate Women Now

Daily Bale

The ‘self-described feminists’ who have contributed to Freedom Fallacy do not like women. They can’t stand Beyonce, Madonna or Miley Cyrus. They hate Fifty Shades of Grey author, EL James.

Women who become ‘mail-order brides’, work in the sex industry, have cosmetic surgery or read glossy fashion magazines are reviled if powerful, written off as irrevocably afflicted with ‘internalised misogyny’ if unrepentant, or pitied as victims if they have expressed any regrets.

They reserve a special loathing for women they describe as ‘third wave’, ‘popular’, ‘liberal’ or ‘choice’ feminists.

Freedom Fallacy brings together some 20 writers and academics all intent on exposing ‘the limits of liberal feminism’. This new brand of feminism is apparently very popular because it champions ‘the fallacy that substantive equality has already been achieved and that the pursuit of opportunity lies solely in women’s hands’.

In contrast, this book sets out to tell women that, irrespective of what positions of power and responsibility they might be in, they are still oppressed. If women think that they are free to determine the course of their own lives, Freedom Fallacy is here to put them right.

The central argument of Freedom Fallacy is that so-called ‘choice’ or ‘liberal’ feminists propagate falsehoods about female autonomy while ignoring the structural inequalities that limit the freedom of women.

For example, choice feminists who argue that the (rapidly diminishing) gender pay gap is largely down to the choices people have made are criticised for overlooking the many material and psychological factors that reportedly hold women back in the workplace.

Likewise, feminists who suggest that women, as adults, might freely choose to go on a diet, have plastic surgery, or pose topless in exchange for money, are criticised for presenting oppression as something women freely enter into, rather than have inflicted upon them.

The liberal feminists are accused of recasting women’s liberation as an individual pursuit and therefore rendering it ineffective at bringing about real changes.

Freedom Fallacy contains a frustrating amount of hyperbole and lacks critical engagement with either data or counterarguments. We are told that there is ‘a dangerous, global epidemic of male entitlement’, that ‘the trafficking of women and girls [is a] booming global businesses’, and we are alerted to ‘the global pandemic that is violence against women and girls’.

But we are given no evidence to substantiate these claims and little historical or geographical context in order to evaluate them for ourselves.

The reality for most women in the Western world today is far removed from this bleak image: women are less likely to be victims of violent crime than men; domestic abuse is in decline; girls outnumber and outperform boys in education; and young women earn the same or even more than their male contemporaries.

Freedom Fallacy’s assertion that women are still victims of oppression hinges on a concept of ‘patriarchy’ which is evoked repeatedly throughout the book. We are told that when it comes to patriarchy, ‘we need to bear in mind that the main problem is men: men’s choices, men’s ways of seeing and treating women’.

Exploring the material conditions that shape women’s choices is entirely laudable; however, when it is done with minimal evidence and with a predetermined conclusion — women are victims of patriarchy — the focus shifts immediately from structural inequalities to the behaviour of men.

Despite all the evidence to suggest that wealthy, highly educated, Western women have more choices than ever, and more choices than working-class men, the authors of Freedom Fallacy are determined to present women as ‘kept down’.

They do this first by arguing that all women form a global ‘class’ with collective interests in common and then by extrapolating from the problems experienced by some women living in extremely impoverished countries to all women in the world.

So, when the authors make horrific claims about the trafficking and mutilation of girls, they then argue ‘these injustices exist on a continuum with other issues of inequality such as the sexual division of household labour’.

Drawing an equivalence in the experiences of women around the world masks the huge differences in the economic circumstances between people in different countries.

The authors of Freedom Fallacy, so critical of ‘choice’ feminists for ignoring the structural inequalities faced by women, ask no questions about the causes of global poverty and make no suggestions as to how poor countries can become more prosperous.

Instead, they complain about the behaviour of men. Changing the behaviour of men might mean, at best, that disadvantage is distributed a little more equally, but it will do little to lift whole nations out of the poverty that so restricts individual freedom and choice.

When faced with relatively few opportunities to make a better, more prosperous life for themselves and their families, some women choose to escape poverty through marriage, pornography or prostitution — options that make Western middle-class feminists squeamish.

Aware of the limited options available to them, women who choose sex work or ‘mail order’ marriage have decided that this is the best choice for them. Presenting these women as weak and vulnerable, as victims of male behaviour who have been deluded into thinking they were able to make a choice about their future, does them no favours whatsoever.

The authors of Freedom Fallacy draw parallels between women who choose a desperate route of poverty and wealthy Western women who, for example, opt for cosmetic surgery. They argue that both lack autonomy and the ability to consent freely to such decisions.

This denies the real political and economic gains many women around the world, but especially in the more prosperous West, have made. It attaches victim status to women who are in socially and financially powerful positions, while at the same time trivialising the very real problems experienced by women in developing countries and the lengths some go to to break out of poverty.

The contributors to Freedom Fallacy are critical of women who challenge the view that patriarchy creates ‘a dominant group (men) that holds systemic, individual power over an oppressed group (women)’. They either scorn or pity women who want ‘sexual harassment rebranded as harmless banter’ or argue that ‘objectification is the new empowerment’.

Unfortunately, this, like much of the analysis presented in Freedom Fallacy, seems to be at least a decade out of date. The description of a generation of sassy, confident women telling the world they are free to make their own choices stands in sad contrast to many of today’s young feminists, who seem all too ready to declare themselves vulnerable to everyday sexism, fat-shamed by adverts, the targets of rape-culture if they are catcalled in the street, or victims of lad culture if they are chatted up in the university bar.

Calls for censorship, trigger warnings and safe spaces seem to be far more the hallmark of modern-day feminism than women arguing sexual harassment is harmless banter. In such a climate, suggesting that women are oppressed, have little agency and are unable to make ‘authentic choices’ simply reinforces mainstream feminist thought.

The authors of Freedom Fallacy are right that the notion of personal freedom today is all too often trivialised as an ability to make spurious choices between different types of consumer goods. They are right that the power and freedom we have to make real choices over our destinies is all too limited.

They are also correct that ‘liberation cannot be found at a purely individual level’. To achieve this liberation we need to stop dividing people according to gender and pitching men against women. Freedom Fallacy argues that issues of gender should transcend politics, but this would leave us forever locked into our biology.

Instead we need politics today to transcend gender squabbles. Everyone benefits from having more control over their own lives, more freedom and more meaningful choices to make. We need to celebrate the power and agency we do have rather than desperately searching for arguments that will allow some of the most powerful people in the world to attach the label ‘victim’ to themselves.

Students Challenge Politically Correct Suppression of Freedom of Speech

Daily Bale

Americans now challenging left wing Politically Correct sickos with lawsuits.

Politically Correct weirdos in Universities are suppressing freedom of speech and trying to suppress debate with left wing fascist oppression of freedom of speech and leftist pathetic ‘Alice in Wonderland’ speech code that has absolutely nothing to do with reality or the real world.

British Anti-fascists want to bring Joseph Stalin body to the U.K

Daily Bale

British leftist loony tune freaks and Left-wing politically correct anti-fascist sickos and weirdos want to bring evil communist dictator Joseph Stalin’s body to Britain.

Joseph Stalin was responsible for 50 million deaths during his reign of terror and purges of ‘politically incorrect enemies’ of the Soviet regime under the leftist communist anti-fascist tyranny.

The left wing so called anti-fascists, who are in reality just Politically Correct ‘fascist’ freaks and perverts, want to bring the body of the evil Communist dictator Joseph Stalin back to the United Kingdom so they can glorify it by giving it a resting place in the U.K so they can worship the ‘God of Political Correctness and anti-fascism’ as a hero to left wing ideals.

Joseph Stalin used the Communist ‘Marxist Political tool’ called Political Correctness to silence all opposition and crush freedom of speech by labeling anybody who spoke out against the Communist Party as being Politically Incorrect, they were then executed as enemies of the State.

Supporters of the weird left wing Politically Correct sicko anti-fascist groups in the U.K have been gathering donations and funds from supporters of their weird organisations, so they can offer the Russian authorities a large sum of money in order to purchase the body of Joseph Stalin and bring it back to Britain.

HOPE not hate

An anti-fascist leftist informer told the Daily Bale –

“yes we want to do this, and if we can get enough funds together, then we shall offer the Russian authorities an appropriate sum of money to purchase Joseph Stalin’s body. It means an awful lot to us to get the body back to the U.K and where we feel it belongs.

We believe fully in all forms of Communist Political Correctness, and Joseph Stalin enforced it perfectly and correctly. Yes there may of been some unpleasant happenings during the Soviet time under Stalin, but Joseph Stalin got the job done, and those that were killed were classified as being Politically Incorrect.

We who identify ourselves as anti-fascists do not see what the problem is here, it is all for the common good. We believe in mass immigration and totally open borders for all to come here, but we cannot have that if people are not following Political Correctness and doing what they are told is best.

It’s all for the common good at the end of the day, so it has to be good right ?

We do not accept that British people should come first. What matters is the common good and smashing fascist opposition to Political Correctness. What is the good of Political Correctness if people will not follow it and do what they are told to do ?

That is the whole point of our ideology, we know what is best for the common good, and we see that in itself as absolute righteousness and moral authority on our part.

We may of failed to get the Labour Party back into power this time because the British people do not want left wing totalitarianism, but that does not stop us from enforcing our will with our anti-fascist organisations and the use of Political Correctness .

That is why we have the golden rule, if anybody disagrees with this policy, then they will be labeled as a fascist and a racist. At the end of the day you have a choice, agree or disagree. But disagree to your own peril

The Daily Bale has contacted the two main anti-fascist organisations in the U.K  ‘Hope Not Hate’ and ‘Unite Against Fascism’  for an explanation of this disgusting alleged intention to bring Joseph Stalin’s body to the U.K, but we are still awaiting a reply from the organisations themselves.

Hero of the left wing Anti-fascists in the U.K. Joseph Stalin in happier times when informed of the roundups and executions of all Politically Incorrect opposition and those who dared to question the left wing ideology of Communist Politically Correct anti-fascist fascism. 

Stalin had been a dictator and a tyrant. Yet he presented himself as the Father of Peoples, a wise leader, and the continuer of Lenin’s cause. After his death, people began to acknowledge that he was responsible for the deaths of millions of their own countrymen.

Russia had to ‘de-Stalinize’ after Joseph Stalin’s death, and the Russian people rooted out all Political Correctness left over from Stalin’s evil regime of intimidation and bullying by sick evil Politically Correct immorality.

Nikita Khrushchev, first secretary of the Communist Party (1953-1964) and premier of the Soviet Union (1958-1964), spearheaded this movement against the false memory of Stalin.

Khrushchev’s policies became known as “de-Stalinization.” On February 24-25, 1956, three years after Stalin’s death, Khrushchev gave a speech at the Twentieth Party Congress that crushed the aura of greatness that had surrounded Stalin. In this “Secret Speech,” Khrushchev revealed many of the horrible atrocities committed by Stalin.

Joseph Stalin. Godfather of left wing Political Correctness and left wing ‘fascist’ anti-fascism.  

Five years later, it was time to physically remove Stalin from a place of honor. At the Twenty-second Party Congress in October 1961, an old, devoted Bolshevik woman, Dora Abramovna Lazurkina stood up and said:

  • My heart is always full of Lenin. Comrades, I could survive the most difficult moments only because I carried Lenin in my heart, and always consulted him on what to do. Yesterday I consulted him. He was standing there before me as if he were alive, and he said: “It is unpleasant to be next to Stalin, who did so much harm to the party.

Joseph Stalin now buried within the Kremlin wall, because the Russians view him as a tyrant.

This speech had been pre-planned yet it was still very effective. Khrushchev followed by reading a decree ordering the removal of Stalin’s remains.

  • The further retention in the mausoleum of the sarcophagus with the bier of J. V. Stalin shall be recognized as inappropriate since the serious violations by Stalin of Lenin’s precepts, abuse of power, mass repressions against honorable Soviet people, and other activities in the period of the personality cult make it impossible to leave the bier with his body in the mausoleum of V. I. Lenin.

Joseph Stalin personally viewing slave labour camps for those who had been Politically Incorrect.

A few days later, Stalin’s body was quietly removed from the mausoleum. There were no ceremonies and no fanfare. About 300 feet from the mausoleum, Stalin’s body was buried near other minor leaders of the Revolution. Stalin’s body was placed near the Kremlin wall, half-hidden by trees.

A few weeks later, a simple dark granite stone marked the grave with the very simple, “J. V. STALIN 1879-1953.” In 1970, a small bust was added to the grave.

Deaths under Joseph Stalin and anti-fascism are estimated at around 50 million