Europe, Boring Until it's Not

[The Conservative]

So you gloss over

broad range of skills, excellent operational abilities

and

"She's a respected, able officer, exactly the sort of person we should encourage to rise to the top of policing.

"There is a lack of diversity at the top and this kind of focus on a female officer's hair is partly why.

and read between the lines to conclude

It's an affirmative action hire.

OK Columbus.
That's some 4d shit I just can't match.

And yet, there is nothing there stating that she had anything beyond and above what the other candidates had except a pair of tits.

[Haumana]

[Montegriffo]

Tory rebels and opposition MPs have defeated the government in the first stage of their attempt to pass a law designed to prevent a no-deal Brexit.

The Commons voted 328 to 301 to take control of the agenda, meaning they can bring forward a bill seeking to delay the UK's exit date.

In response, Boris Johnson said he would bring forward a motion for an early general election.

Jeremy Corbyn said the bill should be passed before an election was held.

In total, 21 Tory MPs, including a number of ex-cabinet ministers, joined opposition parties to defeat the government.

After the vote, Downing Street said those Tory MPs who rebelled would have the whip removed, effectively expelling them from the parliamentary party.

No 10 had hoped the threat of expulsion - and an election - would bring would-be rebels into line.The prime minister said the MPs' bill would "hand control" of Brexit negotiations to the EU and bring "more dither, more delay, more confusion".

He told MPs he had no choice but to press ahead with efforts to call an October election, adding: "The people of this country will have to choose."

The result means the MPs will be able to take control of Commons business on Wednesday.

That will give them the chance to introduce a cross-party bill which would force the prime minister to ask for Brexit to be delayed until 31 January, unless MPs approve a new deal, or vote in favour of a no-deal exit, by 19 October. The BBC understands the government intends to hold an election on 15 October, two days before a crucial EU summit in Brussels.

To call an election under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, Mr Johnson would need support from Labour as he requires the backing of two-thirds of the UK's 650 MPs.

But Mr Corbyn said the legislation backed by opposition MPs and Tory rebels should pass before any election was held, to "take no deal off the table".

The BBC's chief political correspondent, Vicki Young, said the government was framing the situation as the Labour leader trying to block Brexit, and that would be its argument going into a general election.

SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford said he was "delighted" that MPs had expressed a "very clear view" in favour of a law to block no deal.

"Boris Johnson and his government must respect the right of parliamentarians to represent the interests of their constituents," he said.

"Yes, there must be an election, but an election follows on from securing an extension to the [Brexit deadline]."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49573555

[Montegriffo]

Britain's former Prime Minister Theresa May leaves parliament after a cross-party alliance defeated Boris Johnson in a bid to prevent him taking Britain out of the EU without a divorce agreement.


Schadenfreude is a German word isn't it?

[C-Mag]

Britain's former Prime Minister Theresa May leaves parliament after a cross-party alliance defeated Boris Johnson in a bid to prevent him taking Britain out of the EU without a divorce agreement.


Schadenfreude is a German word isn't it?

The globohomo's are working overtime across the globe to maintain their crony corporate control and keep the big bucks rolling in. Frankly, I don't know why so many people, so quickly back the control of their globohomo overlords.

Overall it is once again a political scheme, run by elitists, to stop the people within Britain from removing politicians who want to remain in the EU. Brexiteers -vs- Globalists.

If a Snap election were held, Brexit Party Leader Nigel Farage would rally the British people to remove the globalists in both parties. The Snap election would likely wipe-out the Remain/Globalist assembly in both Labour and Conservative parties. This would then force a no-deal Brexit, and Great Britain would finally be out of the EU. So Jeremy Corbyn cannot allow a Snap election until after he can get the “no-deal law” passed.

Analogous:
The Brexit party is essentially the MAGA coalition.
The Conservative party is essentially the GOPe Republicans.
The Labour party is essentially the Democrats.

What is happening in the U.K. is essentially the same uprising happening all over the globe. Nationalists, the ordinary middle-class (ie. Trump voters), are rising-up and confronting the elitist-minded Globalists.
In an effort to remain in power, the globalists are furiously working all kinds of schemes to fend-off the nationalists. The schemes, many of them funded by multinationals and lobbyists defending their financial stakes, include uniting with the socialist elite.

Globalism writ large requires Big Government, central planning, and full control of systems by political elites. Socialism requires exactly the same structure. Through globalism you have multinational corporations, financial elites, making rules for the underclass. Socialism requires the exact same top-down distribution process.
A few high powered political institutions (think Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren) decide the wealth distribution and sharing processes used to support the masses. They retain power through control at all costs. Within this alignment you see financial elites, globalists in every sense of the word, accepting socialism as a tool to retain corrupt power and influence; and defend against the independent action of lower-class rubes.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/20 ... ore-170008

Prove me wrong.

[C-Mag]

The price of fucking over your fellow citizens

LONDON (Reuters) – All 21 lawmakers from the ruling Conservative Party who voted against the government to back a motion to seize control of parliamentary time to try to block a ‘no deal’ Brexit are being kicked out of the party, the BBC’s political editor said on Tuesday, citing government sources.

[Montegriffo]

Britain's former Prime Minister Theresa May leaves parliament after a cross-party alliance defeated Boris Johnson in a bid to prevent him taking Britain out of the EU without a divorce agreement.


Schadenfreude is a German word isn't it?

The globohomo's are working overtime across the globe to maintain their crony corporate control and keep the big bucks rolling in. Frankly, I don't know why so many people, so quickly back the control of their globohomo overlords.

Overall it is once again a political scheme, run by elitists, to stop the people within Britain from removing politicians who want to remain in the EU. Brexiteers -vs- Globalists.

If a Snap election were held, Brexit Party Leader Nigel Farage would rally the British people to remove the globalists in both parties. The Snap election would likely wipe-out the Remain/Globalist assembly in both Labour and Conservative parties. This would then force a no-deal Brexit, and Great Britain would finally be out of the EU. So Jeremy Corbyn cannot allow a Snap election until after he can get the “no-deal law” passed.

Analogous:
The Brexit party is essentially the MAGA coalition.
The Conservative party is essentially the GOPe Republicans.
The Labour party is essentially the Democrats.

What is happening in the U.K. is essentially the same uprising happening all over the globe. Nationalists, the ordinary middle-class (ie. Trump voters), are rising-up and confronting the elitist-minded Globalists.
In an effort to remain in power, the globalists are furiously working all kinds of schemes to fend-off the nationalists. The schemes, many of them funded by multinationals and lobbyists defending their financial stakes, include uniting with the socialist elite.

Globalism writ large requires Big Government, central planning, and full control of systems by political elites. Socialism requires exactly the same structure. Through globalism you have multinational corporations, financial elites, making rules for the underclass. Socialism requires the exact same top-down distribution process.
A few high powered political institutions (think Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren) decide the wealth distribution and sharing processes used to support the masses. They retain power through control at all costs. Within this alignment you see financial elites, globalists in every sense of the word, accepting socialism as a tool to retain corrupt power and influence; and defend against the independent action of lower-class rubes.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/20 ... ore-170008

Prove me wrong.

When Mag's said this she was talking about international capitalism (now called Globalism)

There Is No Alternative: Why Margaret Thatcher Matters is a 2008 biographical account of the premiership of Margaret Thatcher written by American author Claire Berlinski.

The title is a reference to Margaret Thatcher's fondness for the slogan "There is no alternative" which she used to describe her belief that despite capitalism's problems, "there is no alternative" to it as an economic system, and that neoliberalism must push back against socialism. The phrase became something of a rallying cry of arguments in favor of free markets, free trade, and capitalist globalization, with Thatcher and her followers believing that it is the only way which modern societies can advance themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_Is_ ... er_Matters

[Montegriffo]

Supporters believe that by the late 20th century those they characterized as "ruling elites" sought to harness the expansion of world markets for their own interests; this combination of the Bretton Woods institutions, states, and multinational corporations has been called "globalization" or "globalization from above." In reaction, various social movements emerged to challenge their influence; these movements have been called "anti-globalization" or "globalization from below.

The movement aims for an end to the legal status of "corporate personhood" and the dissolution of free market fundamentalism and the radical economic privatization measures of the World Bank, the IMF, and the World Trade Organization. Activists are especially opposed to the various abuses which they think are perpetuated by globalization and the international institutions that, they say, promote neoliberalism without regard to ethical standards or environmental protection.[11] Common targets include the World Bank (WB), International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) and free trade treaties like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement (TPPA), the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). In light of the economic gap between rich and poor countries, adherents of the movement claim that free trade without measures to protect the environment and the health and wellbeing of workers will merely increase the power of industrialized nations (often termed the "North" in opposition to the developing world's "South"). Proponents of this line of thought refer to the process as polarization and argue that current neo-liberal economic policies have given wealthier states an advantage over developing nations, enabling their exploitation and leading to a widening of the global wealth gap

The movement has no singular name, chiefly because it has no singular leader or consensus to give it one. It has been called a variety of names based on its general advocation for social change, justice, and radical activism, and its general opposition to capitalism, neoliberalism, and corporate globalization. Activists also resisted using a name conferred by corporate media to smear the intention of their protests. Some activists were also not necessarily against globalization.[18]

Many participants (see Noam Chomsky's quotes above) consider the term "anti-globalization" to be a misnomer. The term suggests that its followers support protectionism and/or nationalism, which is not always the case – in fact, some supporters of anti-globalization are strong opponents of both nationalism and protectionism: for example, the No Border network argues for unrestricted migration and the abolition of all national border controls. S. A. Hamed Hosseini (an Australian sociologist and expert in global social movement studies), argues that the term anti-globalization can be ideal-typically used only to refer to only one ideological vision he detects alongside three other visions (the anti-globalist, the alter-globalist and the alter-globalization).[19] He argues that the three latter ideal-typical visions can be categorized under the title of global justice movement. According to him, while the first two visions (the alter-globalism and the anti-globalism) represent the reconstructed forms of old and new left ideologies, respectively, in the context of current globalization, only the third one has shown the capacity to respond more effectively to the intellectual requirements of today's global complexities. Underlying this vision is a new conception of justice, coined accommodative justice by Hosseini,[20] a new approach towards cosmopolitanism (transversal cosmopolitanism), a new mode of activist knowledge (accommodative consciousness), and a new format of solidarity, interactive solidarity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-glob ... n_movement

Anti-Globalisation is more of a left-wing ideology than a right-wing or Nationalist movement in origin.

Anti Globalist protesters were chanting ''Maggie Maggie Maggie out out out'' in the 1980s in the UK.

[Speaker to Animals]

It is not exclusive.

[Fife]

Could have been because Maggie was a globalist warmongering satanist ...