To applaud Gary Lineker, Alan Shearer and Ian Wright, and think Suella Braverman is looking like a fool for not even understanding the comment

[Nimbostratus100]

Lineker called the immigration policy cruel, and compared the language and attitude of the government to 1930s Germany.

I hundred percent agree with him

Braverman started denying that anything that is happening in UK is comparable to the holocaust

She is spectacularly missing the point. The holocaust didn't happen in the 1930s

What happened in the 1930s was the slow and steady build up of racism and aggression and hate, that resulted in the holocaust in the 1940s

And the noises coming out of the government are very much like 1930s nazis

For those of you that don't have any interest in Match of the Day, Gary Lineker, the main presenter, has been suspended, in spite of being a sports commentator, and NOT a news reader or involved in current affairs programming, and NOT bound by the impartiality clause, and his two top fellow presenters have refused to appear without him

So either the BBC bosses (tory appointees) have scored a spectacular own goal,(unintended pun) in trying to supress Lineker's opinions, and turning them into world wide headlines,

OR!

Maybe they are secretly working against the government by choosing a course of action that will actually make the tories look like complete fools, while pretending to support them!

How many times does it need pointing out to you that it is not and should never be illegal for someone to seek asylum. There method of entry to a country is irrelevant. An asylum seeker by definition cannot enter a country illegally.

Why is it not possible to have a discussion without people using the most basic of untruths?

Ah, that's what it is. I was trying to work it out and it left me somewhat confused, much like some poetry does.

Would you agree with me that safe routes for refugees should be provided for any country that is at war not just Ukraine?

Do you think that safe routes should be provided from all former British colonies? Does that extent to all countries that the UK has invaded in our history. (Noting that means all but 22 countries in the world).

I actually think we should completely rethink asylum and immigration.

People pay a fortune to people smugglers to be put in danger and take weeks / months travelling in the back of vans, unsafe boats etc.

We should have a visa with strict rules that anyone can buy if they have £20 000.

It should be available in every consulate / embassy and have restrictions on where you work / live / length of time you live in the UK.

That would cut out the people traffickers. Allowing people to work stops the black economy.

No one seems to have a problem with the Aussie and NZ 'working holiday' visas. In fact the ages you can apply and how long you can stay are increasing.

www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-new-zealand-expand-schemes-for-young-people-to-work-abroad

Dont know why you’re asking me.
I was identifying the two examples given, not making a political statement or apology for what British people and Governments do.

I live in Germany and we welcomed around 800,000 refugees in 2015 and guess what nobody had to give up their spare room. They were housed in portakabins round my way and the kids were taken in to school and the adults did German courses. They all eventually moved out of the portakabins and got jobs and flats. A couple of the kids are at my kids' school. The Ukrainians started arriving last year and the same will happen to them. We pay our tax money and the government takes care of our responsibilities to refugees. Generally there are far fewer charities here because we just pay for things people need out of general taxation. Britain should try it.

Unfortunately yes.

Because they've been threatened with removal of the license fee.

They are basically impartial unless they are supporting right wing narrative.

Don't be silly. Our taxes are not designed to be used in this way. Our taxes quite rightly go to chums of the government via dodgy contracts. They are the ones who deserve our money, not these shady refugees.

Hopefully the beginning of the end of football on the BBC, it should be on Sky, BT Sport or Prime like other sports mainly are.

Who cares which platform it’s on? Oh, people who can’t afford premium channels perhaps. Is someone forcing you to watch it on the BBC?

They obviously can afford the licence fee.

I am not sure about the current Premier League, but there have been players in this country who were asylum seekers who as children had fled war in their country of birth.

People have to pay for the TV licence and the BBC is taken over by football, if it was on a pay channel you would only pay if you wanted it, everyone wants the end of the licence fee anyway and this would be a good start

If I found one person who does not want the end of the license fee, then your statement would look rather foolish wouldn't it?

There wouldn't have been this fuss if it was on a pay channel

Are you saying that it would be acceptable for the government to silence critics if they did not work for the BBC?

It's licence not license, who looks the fool now.

I have cancelled my licence anyway

Good argument, strongly worded, but polite.

Then your statement that people have to pay the license fee is incorrect. Since you don't have to pay it.

Just to check on best way and how it’s envisaged. People apply o/s and get a yes or no.

If someone is still desperate and a smuggler takes payment and organises a boat of undocumented people who arrive here what happens?

Lol @IClaudine - so well put !!

Uk pay lower taxes than Germany.
Maybe they should be increased to pay for these extra services.

In which case your opinion on this an entirely irrelevant.

Is irrelevant.