Posted on 10/21/2025 3:38:00 AM PDT by C19fan
The controversial President-elect of the Oxford Union has been dramatically sacked following outrage over his remarks over the death of right-wing US influencer Charlie Kirk.
A resounding vote of no confidence by the membership of the prestigious debating society in George Abaraonye resulted in a more than 2:1 majority, with 1,228 votes in favour and only 501 against, well beyond the two-thirds majority needed to force his resignation.
The 70 per cent no confidence majority means he will be deemed to have resigned, effectively having been sacked after calling the vote himself to try and shore up his support.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Not sure about that, but they do have brief moments of clarity.
CC
He’s claiming election fraud...
https://www.gbnews.com/news/oxford-union-george-abaraonye-removed
Pretty rich since I’d be willing to bet the cat has his tongue when it comes to councils having their elections postponed...
Congrats to Oxford. They’ve shown some class. Now, let’s look at Harvard.........waiting.......waiting.
Still 501 voted against.
Charlie had debated there just weeks prior to his murder. It was clearly a woke cesspit. Maybe the worm has turned here (?).
The “Charlie Effect” reaches from the grave yet again.
I’m celebrating this far-left, assassin-loving, back-shooting Luigi heading down to the unemployment office. Stupid retard.
The guy sucked at defending his position. He ought to be gone.
That pic: He’s got asshole written all over him.
This is proper and just. The entire reason for debate is to solve differences or create innovation with words, ideas, beliefs and reason, not with violence or privilege.
Kinda like DHogg’s ejection.
Love the boo hoo girl.
You’re not wrong....
Poorly written; the first sentence of the second paragraph makes little sense. Anyone UT editors anymore?
Try this:
Members of the prestigious debating society delivered a resounding vote of no confidence in George Abaraonye by a majority of more than 2:1, with 1,228 votes in favour and only 501 against—well beyond the two-thirds majority needed to force his resignation.That said, what does “UT editors” mean?
What makes you say that? I've watched dozens of their debates. The audience members do not scream and cancel opinions they disagree with, although some may let out some groans, laughs or scattered applause. I don't know, but I've never read that they had to hire extra security for conservative speakers like in the U.S.
In recent times it’s become clear that the majority of the students are indoctrinated leftists. It’s not a matter of becoming violent, requiring protection from security. It’s more the level of regurgitation of left-wing thoughts, devoid of facts and reality.
So many are stuck on “criticize Islam = racism”. They’re literally hammered with this from every media direction, multiculturism being “good” as required thought.
Thank goodness they’ve chosen to retain at least a modicum of respectability by firing his worthless ass.
It sure looks like typical leftist-voting-shenanigans-possible-due-to-an-unarmed-populace to me.
Are you talking about American students, or the membership of Oxford Union, which is not a part of the Oxford University? If you make broad-brush claims in absolute language as you did, be prepared to defend your claim with actual facts and citations.
I’m talking about those UK students that participate in the activities at the Oxford Union. And I’m referencing a number of speaker instances you can watch on YouTube; Charlie Kirk, Ben Shapiro, Konstantin Kisin, Yoseph Haddad, ...
To say the students are ‘woke’ would be an understatement.
I didn’t notice any outbreaks of wokeness during the Charlie Kirk debate. Strange that you did. I’ll have to check out the others you mentioned.
But I stand by my earlier observation that there is no comparison to the behavior of American woke audiences in which conservative speakers have been shouted down, shamefully denounced or eve. terrorized while campus police stood by passively allowing it to happen.
I think he got fired for coming to the debate looking like an utter slob. I think the Brits, especially those who run these organizations, feel he discredited the organization and made them look bad. Some still have a sense of decorum.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.