Why Are Left Wing Millenial Students Such Nasty, Self Righteous Bigots

Read a story in the Telegraph this morning under the headline:

The rise of flatshares where Tories are not welcome… so why is the rental market hostile to Brexiteers?

(authored by Charlotte Gill)

When Olivia Lever, a young Conservative, went looking for student accommodation, she couldn’t have imagined the reception that she would receive from one household.

Arriving at the flat, there was a sign reading “F— THE TORIES” and, once inside, she found similar literature insulting Boris Johnson and Brexit, and a poster of Che Guevara. Only one of the housemates made the effort to meet her, and later on she received a text from another reading:

“I saw you are the leader of the young Conservative party in uni and you support Brexit. We are a very Left-wing house and I think there could be potential clash”.

When Olivia posted it on Twitter, she received mixed responses, some sympathetic and others not.

Maybe the incident could have been put down as a one-off, but it is in fact part of a sinister trend in the rental market, student and otherwise, where some households have been vetting potential tenants for their political views. Living solo in London, I was oblivious to this phenomenon until August this year, when I’d written for this newspaper about dating apps. I’d complained they’d become too Left-wing, with prejudice rife against Conservatives and Brexiteers.

READ ALL at The Daily Telegraph

So it’s not the housing renal market that is hostile to Brexiteers, it’s leftie losers who have to live in house shares because they can’t afford their own place. The headline is misleading, the story is about what nasty little bigots ‘woke’ students really are. Having some experience of this problem because some of my business associates have property in Lancaster, a town with a large student population and we have talked about what, if anything, can be done about it and failed to arrive at a satiosfactory answer.

I know from reading and being involved in many internet that I am not the only one to have noticed  Lefties in general, and Leftie Students in particular are generally self – righteous, humourless. narrow minded, bigots. They appear to lack tolerance, empathy and respect for peoples’ right to hold differing opinions, and cling onto approved scripts on how to think, look and act.

It is a brave student who will stand up to the Politically Correct Thought Police who dominate the university Student Union, when these people can de-platform eminent academics like Germain Greer, who has never been know to express right wing sympathies, Richard Dawkins who is, as far as I know, non – political but has spoken frankly about aspects of Islamic belief which should be unacceptable to supporters of equal rights and free speech or Milo Yiannoupolis, who is openly gay but whose unashamedly conservative views annul his sexual minority privileges with the student left .

I’m a classical liberal, not so long ago a slightly left of centre position, but now declared by the authoritarian advocates of Cultural Marxism to be ‘far right.’ I am also, unashamedly a Brexiteer, yet I am educated, afluent and middle class. We have seen over the past three and a half years how Remainers and Lefties ridicule and abuse those on ‘the other side’, dismissing us as ignorant, uneducated, xenophobic “Little Englanders.”

Ironic really because these superior types only show they are, for all their professed love of equality and human rights and their reverence for “higher education,” (aka brainwashing,) not sufficiently well read to understand the term Little Englander refers to people who opposed the expansionism of the establishment during the nineteenth century colonial era. Challenge the remainers however, and you will find people gang up on you, call you racist, sexist, Islampohobic, misogynistic, and try to get you banned from the site.

We really are in the first stages of a 1984 scenario, with its parallels to Communism and The Stasi.

RELATED READING:
Left, hate, hypocrisy
Socialist Nazis
Higher education disaster
Free Speech Murdered
University censorship

Remain Alliance Implodes: Caroline Lucas Reveals Lib Dems Hate Brexiteers

Greek debt rally
Caroline Lucas in full flow – Picture: s-i.huffpost.com/

Questioned about the prospects of the so – called Remain Alliance in the imminent General Election, Green Party MP and former leader Caroline Lucas delivered a foul mouthed rant attacking Liberal Democrat leader and wee hag fra’ Fife, Jo Swinson, for her manifesto pledge to revoke Brexit if her party is elected to govern us. While speaking to a potential voter Ms Lucas criticised Jo Swinson for insisting that the Liberal Democrats would revoke Brexit if voted into power.

in an interview with UK news and gossip website Joe.co.uk, Ms Lucas was asked a rambling question on the early progress of the Remain Alliance campaign:

“The Liberal Democrats have been the biggest spenders on Facebook so far. I can understand that as [Ms Swinson ] is a new party leader, people don’t know her very well. So it is an opportunity to get her face out there and get her recognised. What do you think Caroline, how are they getting on so far?”

Caroline Lucas replied: “The position of revoking Brexit as a manifesto pledge, at that point I just felt that this is taking party interest above national interest to such an “unforgivable degree. To be honest, if you wanted to send a message to 17.4 million people that you don’t give a f*** about what they voted for, why don’t you just say so?”

Despite the outburst by the respected and popular Green Party MP, viewers of the video were not quick to criticise Lucas.

One Twitter user said: “If that is the case, Caroline, the Greens should break out of the Remain pact with Plaid and the Liberal Democrats and stand in competition against Swinson.

After all, the pact is only a Lib Dem power trip and Caroline Lucas has been totally honest.”

That comment will resonate with many voters who in the referendum supported Remain; they are aware their side lost but claim Leave voters did not understand what they were voting for and have campaigned for another referendum. While Boggart Blog does not agree, having always taken the line that the EU is an undemocratic political organisation committed to establishing a bureaucratic dictatorship in Europe. In 2016 the nation voted by a narrow majority to Leave the EU. It is reasonable for people who voted remain to campaign for ANOTHER VOTE, but utterly unreasonable and hypocritical for the Liberal Democrats to announce that in the (extremely unlikely,) event of their winning a majority in the General Election they would simply ignore that Leave voting majority and cancel Brexit is illiberal and undemocratic.

The Liberal Democrats ceased to have anything in common with the Liberal Party of Lloyd George and Gladstone long ago, but under Jo Swinson they appear to have more in common with Hitler’s National Socialists or Mussolini’s Fascists than with the Liberal Party under any of its leaders.

MORE ON BREXIT

Illiberal Undemocrats Now Hate Catholics As Well As White People, Britain & Heterosexuals

Don’t Pannick, Captain Johnson, Don’t Pannick

EU Brexit organiser & former Chief Phlegm Guy Verhofshit rants about Empires again

Court Overturns Fine Imposed By Biased Electoral Commission On Brexit Supporter.
A large fine imposed by a kangaroo court under the auspices of the UK’s democracy watchdog (allegedly,) The Electoral Commission, on a young, working-class Brexit campaign organiser, Darren Grimes, has been overturned in the law courts. The case, which many Remain campaigners have used in their efforts to discredit and overturn the result of the 2016 referendum on EU membership.

How Much Does The UK Actually Send To The EU

Big kerfuffle this week over Conservative leadership contender Boris Johnson facing trial for his claim, during the EU Referendum campaign, that Britain sends £350million a week to Brussels. Originally the Remainers claimed somebody in the Leave camp had said all the money would go to the NHS. Nobody actually said that but if fanatics want something to be true, they can easily convince themselves it is.

The claim is in fact true but misleading. If the amount paid into the EU budget is taken, then it is close to £350million a week. Our net contribution (i.e. after the amount paid by the EU to fund various EU supported projects means the net amount we contribute to the EU is somewhat less. However that £350million is not the full story:

 

Little Donny Tusk The Polish Has-Been Tells Britain How To Vote.

Donald Tusk, who is the President of the European Council and was the centre-right Europhile Prime Minister of Poland from 2007 to 2014 made the remarks in support of his former Deputy Prime Minister, Anglo-Pole Jan-Vincent Rostowski who is standing as a Change UK candidate in London for Thursday’s election.

Farage Shredded By Welsh Ministry Of Truth Newsman?
An obscure far – left website https://inktank.fi reported that while campaigning for the European Parliament elections in Wales, Nigel Farage was confronted by a BBC Wales reporter, Arwyn Jones, who asked him a question about Brexit, which you’d expect would be easy to answer: Farage didn’t answer, how could anyone answer such a stupid question posed by an idiotic reporter working for an ogranisation tasked by The Fourth Reich’s ruling bureaucracy in Brussels and their puppets in Westminster with presenting pro – EU propaganda as news …

Farage Says New Brexit Party Will Spark “A Political Revolution” And Terrify The Tories

Nigel Farage, who led the successful Brexit campaign, warned backsliding elitist politicians on Tuesday that his brexit Party would spark a political “revolution” – a cliched line but appropriate given the mood of the country – and strike fear into the hearts of ineffectual Tories who have so far failed to deliver on the promise of the Brexit referendum if the UK is forced to contest EU Parliament elections as part of Prime Minister Theresa May’s, the Sun newspaper reports … MORE>>> .


There are sheeple who want to remain in the EU at any price, and then there are people who understand the EU

I am not sure people really are up for reading EU related documents or a whole load more people would be less excited about the EU. If people read the chequers plan and the political declaration they would know the only people who leave the EU are the financial sector. Everyone else stays in without a vote or veto for two years whilst we negotiate the long term deal…

The Daily Stirrer
Climate Lies Composite

Parliamentary Report: No Evidence of Russia’s Alleged Interference in British Politics

Ever since Boris Johnson stepped up to the role of Prime Minister we have seen rabid lefties, Remainer MPs opportunistic media luvvies and showbiz wankers conducting a witch hunt, trying to make big deals out of everything Boris is alleged to have done or nor done. One aspect of that witch hunt that bore a remarkable similarity to the idiotic efforts of the US Democratic Party’s efforts to remove Donald Trump from office because of his alleged collaboration with Russian government agencies to steal the 2016 election from Hillary Clinton.

Yes our rabid lefties, media luvvies and general cunts tried to accuse Boris of collaborating with Russia (well nobody could ever accuse lefties of being imaginative or original, groupthink is an official policy of socialist movements, diversity is something that only relates to skin colour and sexual preference.

The allegation was that Bris was trying to block publication of a Parliamentary Security Committee report on Russian meddling in British politics. but was he and were they?

from sputniknews.com

Boris Johnson came under scrutiny this week after he reportedly blocked the publication of a dossier cleared by British intelligence that looked into Russia’s alleged role in the 2016 Brexit referendum.

The UK Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee did not find any solid evidence of past Russian interference in British politics, but said that the risk of such meddling could still exist in the future, Bloomberg reported, citing two sources familiar with the findings of a secret report.

The committee conducted an inquiry into Moscow’s alleged meddling in Britain’s internal political process following the government’s repeated accusations that Russia was interfering in the UK’s 2016 Brexit referendum by providing misleading media coverage and resorting to fake social media accounts to influence the vote, but no “smoking gun” evidence of these allegations has been reported so far.

 

The committee’s report was rumoured to have been approved by intelligence agencies as the final step in a long process that began back in March 2019. Downing Street had been expected to approve the report’s final draft by the end of last week. However, the government insisted that the report was still in need of final clearance by the prime minister’s office, and therefore should not be published before the General  Election due on 12 December.

The delay caused some consternation in parliament on Tuesday (5bNovember), which was the final day before the legislative body was dissolved ahead of the election. The committee’s chairman, Dominic Grieve, an avid Europhile who has been deeply involved in several plots to thwart Brexit,   accused the Prime Minister of trying to prevent publication of the document because it contained revelations that would harm the Conservatives campaign, while rejecting the government’s claims that it needed “more time” to ensure that the sources of the information remained secret.

While the government officialy insisted that the report contained nothing that the Conservative government wished to hide, the report, which was commissioned to investigate concerns that Russia had played a part in influencing the outcome of the vote, but accordinto sources quoted bt BuzzFeed it failed to provide any solid evidence of collusion with foreign agencies.

So as was the case with the now notorious Mueller report into the Trump campaign’s alleged Russian collaboration, the allegations that Russia meddled in the Brexit vote and possibly changed the result are now proven to have no substance. Will the left ever learn that in this age of internet news and open journalism, it is not a good idea to try to win elections by telling lies about your opponents.

Don’t Pannick, Captain Johnson, Don’t Pannick
Farage Says New Brexit Party Will Spark “A Political Revolution” And Terrify The Tories
Dutch Referendum This Week Shows why We Should Leave The EU.

Leavers Decry Boris’ Deal But RemainersAre Panicking

 

As Britain gears up for a General Election on December 12, accusations fly from both sides in the Brexit debate about Boris Johnson’s deal.

“It’s a betrayal, not really Brexit, it will leave us still subject to EU laws and trade regulations,” Leave supporters say.

“It will trash our economy, destroy the value of the pound, cause massive increases in unemployment and leave us politically isolated in a hostile world,” say the people who for three years have tried all sorts of stunts to thwart Brexit.

So where does that put the majority of us who voted Leave on the basis of a considered review of evidence rather than some ideological agenda?

No, you can’t always get what you want
aaaah
No, you can’t always get what you want
aaaah
But if you try sometime, you just might find
You get what you need

So sang the rolling stones more years ago than I care to remember. It was good advice that I, as a Leave voter who voted LEAVE (in capital letters), not leave with a dodgy deal, leave but stay in a customs union and subject to EU laws and certainly not “think about leaving and then decide to have another referendum,.” after my experience of working for the EU I wanted a clean break.

But I was under no illusions, you can’t always get what you want annd knowing the political and legal establishment, the media, much of the business community and academe were rabidly pro EU and all that it stands for it would have been unreasonable to expect we’d get clean away.
The EU did not want to let us go, our own political parties and opinion makers were hopelessly divided and gave no leadership, .and when the Conservative Party backroom deal makers shoehorned Theresa May into Downing Street I almost plunged into despair.

Boris’ deal is not great, there are some strings attached that may be hard to break, but unlike the Leavers who are claiming it is a betrayal or it is the same as May’s deal, I’m willing to give him a chance.He called the EU’s bluff and managed to convince them he was serious enough about No Deal to make them reopen May’s surrender treaty and not only secure some concessions but also open a few gates to amending the terms of our relationship with the EU later.

And we have dates at which various states of the transition will be completed.

So let’s not fool ourselves that a ‘no deal’ exit would have meant totally in the EU one.day, totally out the next, that was never going to happen just as when two commercial organisations merge they do not become a new organisation overnight.

I did not get what I wanted, but given that Boris and his team have rescued us from May’s awful deal, I’ll settle for what is on offer for the present and keep working to expose the EU for the Cultural Marxist project it is, hoping that in some small way I can influence our politicians to progressively increase the distance between London and Brussels and encourage voters in other EU states to step up the pushback agains the EU Commission’s imperal ambitions.

After all it might be what we need to strike a bow at the foundations of the European project to create a federal superstate from Europe;s sovereign nations.

MORE on Brexit
Europe Unglues

Parliament’s Problem With Brexit

The verdict of the Supreme Court, that Boris Johnson’s suspension of parliament, NOT for the purpose of stopping pro EU factions from preventing the UK having a no strings break from the EU as a (long overdue) result of the 2016 referendum, and it’s result which surprised the elites and the citizens of our recently renamed capital city Wankeristan, has divided the country even more deeply than the brexit vote itself.

Answers given to this question posed on Quora.com reveal that above all, the pro EU side, while totally opposed to referenda which do not return the result they want, are quite happy with judges who overreach their judicial authority and usurp the lawmaking powers of parliament to their unelected selves, so long as their verdict is the one Remain supporters want.

What does it say about Boris Johnson when 11 senior judges unanimously call his prorogue unlawful and he still says they are wrong?

ME:

What does it say about the judiciary when 11 Supreme Court Justices ignore the law because they are determined to stitch up Boris Johnson. Article 9 of the Bill Of Rights (1689) clearly states that “That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament;”

The Supreme Court Justices, showing that they are corrupt rather than stupid although they may well be both, chose to pretend they believed proroguation was not part of the normal proceedings of parliament. In fact it is a routine process that must be performed in order that one parliamentary session can be ended and another one begun.

 

Mark Gallaway

You are incorrect. They determined in this case that no reason was given and no reasonable reason could be given for suspending Parliament for five weeks. They are saying the the PM does not have the right to suspend Parliament for no reason or for a length of time not consistent with the reasoning for the suspension.

If this had not been up held the Government could close Parliament indefinitely. That clearly should not be allowed.

I also notice that you are calling these judges corrupt with any evidence.

 

ME

I have plenty of evidence that the Supreme Justices are corrupt and repeatedly find in favour of certain interest groups, and that the Supreme Court is a politcal device created by Tony Blair to rule on constutional matters he could never hope to get past parliament, and that its members are not the most senior judges in the land but most of it is not relevant to this question, is far too long to summarise meaningfully in a comment and is being fully covered by online news and commentary sites like Unherd and Spiked.

The point people are missing here is that these court cases need not have happened had the combined opposition parties tabled a no confidence motion and brought down the government or supported one of the governments attempts to call an early election. Instead the opposition decided to put their political interests ahead of the national interest and leave us without an effective government rather than face the prospect of losing an election..

The opposition’s problem is while there is no majority in parliament for Leave means Leave, there is also no majority for Leave With Theresa May’s Deal or Remain, and the as long as parliament will not allow Leave With No Deal, the EU will not agree to renegotiate May’s withdrawal agreement.

Most of the comments on the Quora question above and the Supreme Court ruling on the proroguation of parliament (including my own I have to admit,) went with the respondant’s wider position on Brexit, but it is interesting to note that of the answers from people who claimed legal expertise, none mentioned this rather important fact:

via robertkariakides.wordpress.com
The eleven justices all made a single judgment; there was no dissenting opinion, which is odd considering that equally senior judges including the Lord Chief Justice, the President of the Queen’s Bench Division and the Master of the Rolls already made a decision which was precisely the opposite of that of the Supreme Court decided.

Now clearly those Remain supporters who claimed that legally the Supreme Court judges are the most senior legal authorities in the land have far less knowledge of the judicial hierarchy than one would expect from legal professionals. Perhaps the fact that the Supreme Court is not an ancient and venerable institution but a recent politically innovation created at the behest of the traitor and war criminal Tony Blair and packed with New Labour political appointees (probably for the purpose of protecting Blair and his cronies from justice should their war crimes and acts of treason ever be prosecuted,) has something to do with it.

It is widely suggested that the whole of the judiciary has a pro – EU bias, ans the Supreme Court Justices are not the first to allow their political prejuduces to overrule their duty of impartiality.

The judge in the Robin Tilbrook case, in which the plaintiff argued that Theresa May had overreached her authority in agreeing an extension to Article 50 without putting it to parliament and therefore the UK had legally left the EU on March 19, 2019, in the words of Tlbrook’s case, ” wilfully deliberately knowingly and intentionally failed to declare his ‘conflicts of interest'” – which by the way mainstream media failed to inform the people about!

The MSM could not report honestly about the judge’s conflict of interest, because they would then have to explain what the case was about. What scant coverage it was given presented Tilbrook, a legal professional, as an obsessive nutcase driven by hatred of the European Union The Establishment are desperate to suppress any mention of the Tilbrook case, which is why there were been a total news blackout about it. If the Tilbrook case was generally known about, then there would be inexorable public pressure for Robin Tilbrook to at least be given a fair hearing. Any fair, impartial court would almost certainly find in Robin Tilbrook’s favour – and we would immediately be out of the EU. Hence the total news blackout. 

Judge LJ Hickinbottom ruled Tilbrook’s claim ‘Totally Without Merit’. Hickinbottom is a Fellow of the European Legal Institute and therefore sworn to promote EU law throughout the ‘Community’ as well as the recipent of many lucrative commissions by virtue of holding that position.
Biased, much?

The EU is of course a lawers’ wet dream, the giant bureaucracy produced swathes of new laws every week, most so arcane only an army of lawyers could interptret them in any meaningful way. The practice of Law mis certainly the fastest growing industry in the EU and given the collapse of manufacturing and agriculture due to the burden of bureaucratic law placed on producers might sooon be the largest industry.

The Daily Stirrer, September 2019 
British MEP Reveals Undemocratic EU Stitch Up Of Top Jobs
 

Don’t Pannick, Captain Johnson, Don’t Pannick

ss-composite-image-2019-9-17-9-12_trans_nvbqzqnjv4bqqvzuuqpflyliwib6ntmjwfsvwez_ven7c6bhu2jjnt8
Gina Miller. Boris Johnson and The High Court

Having concluded ]it’s three-day hearing in a case that will determine whether Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s decision to prorogue parliament for five weeks was lawful or not the judges, most of who displayed a definite anti – Brexit bias during the proceedings, must now ponder the legal – and not the political implications of the case. Their Lordships should bear in mind, though if the Remain factions wins the argument they will not, that the English ill Of Rights, which became law in 1689, states unequivocally, “That the freedom of speech, and debates or proceedings in parliament, ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of parliament.”

Picture: Zero Hedge

Lord Pannick QC

The decision of the justices is expected early next week. As thus point, it is imposssible to predict a verdict, but should they let their own political prejudices interfere with their oath of impartiality and rule that the suspension was indeed unlawful, that ruling would mean that technically the prorogation actually never happened.

Lord Pannick QC, the lawyer who represents the lead plaintiff, lawyer, millionaire businesswoman and Brazilian totty Gina Miller, told the court that Speaker Bercow should then be entitled to reconvene parliament as early as next week. Furthermore legal pundits who have obviously not familiarised themselves with the quoted clause from the Bill Of Rights are claiming Prime Minister Johnson, who effectively stands accused of lying to the Queen about his motives to suspend parliament, could face jail time. This is bollocks, to refer back to the Bill of Rights , debates or proceedings in parliament, ought not to be impeached or questioned in ANY court.”

Ah yes, but that act was passed 330 years ago, and times have changes the rabid Remainers screech, showing their usual disregard for the law when the law denies them what they want. It was passed 330 years ago, but until it is repealed by act of parliament it stands. And as for Johnson misleading The Queen, that’s bollocks too, we cannot know what was actually said in their exchange because conversations between Monarch and Prime Minister are private and are never discussed publicly but The Monarch has her own legal and constitutional advisers who would not allow her to be conned or bullied into doing anything of uncertain legality

While this would be sensational stuff in normal times, and possibly force the resignation of Mr. Johnson, these are not normal times. The opposition having twice voted down acts proposed by the government to advance Brexit, have on each occasion declined to call a vote of confidence and force an election (because they know they would lose,) and have twice voted down government efforts to call an election, thus leaving the country paralyzed politically in their determination to thwart the democratic will and stop the UK leaving The Fourth Reich The EU in line with the result of the 2016 referendum. Reports circulating in political circles suggest Boris Johnson’s government  is already publicly contemplating whether, should a Remainer alliance in the Supreme Cort and parliament force the recall of parliament, the government might immediately impose a further suspension and thus run down the clock to our default leaving date, October 31st. If you are a Leave supporter there’s no need to Pannick yet, there are a few more constitutional tricks available to Boris and every silly stunt aimed at stopping Brexit ensures that when the inevitable election is held, the defeat of Labour and The Liberal Democrats is completely crushing.

MORE on Brexit
BoJo To Go For Election Again On Monday After Chlorinated Corbyn Chickens Out
Don’t Pannick, Captain Johnson, Don’t Pannick

How Much Does The UK Actually Send To The EU
Big kerfuffle this week over Conservative leadership contender Boris Johnson facing trial for his claim, during the EU Referendum campaign, that Britain sends £350million a week to Brussels. Originally the Remainers claimed somebody in the Leave camp had said all the money would go to the NHS. Nobody actually said that but if fanatics want something to be true, they can easily convince themselves it is.

UK Given 12 Days To Agree Brexit Deal Amid Chaotic Court Scenes Over Parliament Prorogation

The debate over Boris Johnson’s bid to negotiate a Brexit deal within deadlines agreed by his predecessor is going on amid amid a fierce legal battle in the UK Supreme Court that entered a third day on Wednesday. The case is in esssence a bid by the Labour and Liberal Deomcrat parties to usurp power without having to face an election which Labour would surely lose, while political minnows The Liberal Democrats would fall well short of a majority.

Legal challenges to the government argued Johnson suspended the Parliament to silence the MPs over the EU exit, while the prime minister had earlier referred to the move as one scheduled to pave the way for the Queen to deliver a speech on the country’s legal course for the upcoming year. He stressed the prorogation had been given royal consent, with Mr Rees-Mogg, who travelled to Balmoral for the Queen’s approval, hitting back it was “nonsense” to suggest she had been misled over the decision.

One has to believe Rees – Mogg, the Monarch has her own team of legal advisers would would have told herr to withhold the Royal Assent from anything of dodgy legality.

The defence in the Supreme Court on behalf of the UK government is arguing the decision to prorogue Parliament was a political matter and is not in the courts’s jurisdiction.

Earlier in September, Boris Johnson suspended MPs’ work for five weeks (a period which included what would have been a four week break for party conferences, with the parliamentarians not scheduled to return until 14 October after the combined opposition, having voted down government proposals to effect Brexit, twice ducked the opportunity to force an election and voted down government motions to hold an election election, as the  debate in the country around a no-deal exit from the EU became exceptionally heated, totally polarising the nation.

Despite having rejected the opportunity to put the dispute to the electorate, MPs voted en masse for a bill that forces the prime minister to delay Brexit until the end of January if there is no agreed trade deal with the EU.

MORE on Brexit
Just When You Thought Brexit Could not be A Bigger Cock Up
Anarchy In The UK And Elsewhere

Greenteeth Elsewhere:
[ The Original Boggart Blog] … [ Writerbeat ] … [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]…[Little Nicky Machiavelli]… [ Ian’s Authorsden Pages ]… [Greenteeth & Daily Stirrer on YouTube ] … [ It’s Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] … [ Minds ] … [ <a href=https://medium.com/@greenboggartIan on Medium ] … [Scribd]…[Wikinut] … [ Boggart Abroad] … [ Grenteeth Bites ] … [ Latest Posts ] … [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] … [Latest Posts] … [ Tumblr ] … [ Authorsden blog ] … [Daily Stirrer News Roundup]
… [ Boggart Network News ]

[ Ian at Facebook ]