To wonder what part of this statement reminded Gary L of Nazi Germany?

[marmaladeo]

This is Suella Braverman's statement Gary Lineker was reacting to when he said "This is just an immeasurably cruel policy directed at the most vulnerable people in language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s" ... twitter.com/GaryLineker/status/1633094764865126400

If she was saying she wanted to stop immigration I could understand GL's reaction. But she's not. I don't understand why anyone would not want to "stop the boats" when 1. they're lethal and 2. they're being run by criminal gangs. If GL had made it clear he wanted to stop the boats but thought this policy was the wrong way to do it, then fine. But he didn't - he just made an extremely inflammatory statement. He might be getting lots of love from some quarters, but personally I think he's an egotist who is playing into the hands of the people smugglers.

There’s absolutely no evidence of that in the UK.

and the report you quote shows that the vast majority of assaults were not perpetrated by asylum seekers

But @RotundBeagle that was not the narrative. The Windrush generation were attacked, rioted against, accused of "taking our women" etc. And so on. My point is your tropes are those of racialism in the past, updated.

I’ve noticed a recent increase if right-wingers criticizing ‘greedy’ human rights lawyers.

Human rights lawyers earn far, far less that many other types of lawyer. They are, almost universally, motivated by moral duty and belief in the importance of a fair legal system. You don’t go into HR law for personal enrichment.

The recent increase in hostility towards them is deeply concerning and does not bode well
for the future of the country.

The Rivers of Blood speech.

www.ibtimes.com/enoch-powells-rivers-blood-speech-full-text-290675

(You can imagine the language it contains)

There’s absolutely no evidence of that in the UK.

Yet.

And let me ask the question in a different way.

Do you think that if we accept every single person that wants to come to the UK that it will have an insignificant effect on our population in the next decade?

Or the fact that you posted it as a standalone comment as I was writing mine responding to the post I quoted.
sorry if that’s difficult for you to understand

This Lord Sugar? Yeah, famously never vitriolic or political..

news.sky.com/story/amp/sir-alan-sugar-tweets-picture-of-jeremy-corbyn-next-to-hitler-11310726

Sugar also said in an article in the Sun before the last election to Vote Tory. I’m not dragging him into it. I’m pointing out that someone did make very political comments. I’d argue that a mocked up poster showing Corbyn next to Hitler was pretty grim (no, I’m not a Corbyn fan). But he continued to do his job at the BBC. Why is he allowed to but Lineker not? Is it because one worked in favour of the Tories and the other didn’t?

where has anyone suggested that?

so what’s your solution then?

You claim to have a great understanding of the cultural backgrounds of asylum seekers. You want to stop people in boats coming in, and you don’t want to deport children.

So you probably want better, controlled, immigration routes for asylum seekers and better support infrastructures to help them integrate? Or something else?

Good on Lineker for saying what he thinks and awful of the bbc to silence him.

Let’s be clear here, your “yet” means “no”. And you ignored the part of the report you posted that stated the majority of attacks were not by asylum seekers.

Yet you think it’s acceptable to spread the idea that asylum seekers are rapists and criminals.

Jesus.

Besides, this distinction between immigration past and asylum seekers as interesting. It suggests that in my secret life as a white supremacist I will be able to pick on others which much more freedom than before.

I think I will say something like, your family background doesn't align my values.

Conveniently ignoring my question then?

There’s a difference between wanting to come and having grounds to seek asylum. If we had in place channels that people could use in their own countries to apply quickly for asylum, then a large number of those crossing via the boats wild no longer need to do so. They’d have been processed by the time they arrived here, and wouldn’t need to go to hotels either. The number who had their application rejected may still try to come. I’m not saying they wouldn’t. But some might not bother - knowing you’ve been turned down might mean you decide not to make the effort. At the moment, not allowing anyone to apply until they arrive means
a) you need to come to figure out if you even have a chance
b) you have to go somewhere once you are here while your claim is processed.

Im thinking it would be much easier to identify those who needed to come vs those who wanted to come, if the majority who needed to come had claims examined and the paperwork in place before they arrived.

@RotundBeagle - my point was to show others that engage in the same racial tactics as those of 50 years ago, and that your real feelings are connected with the perception of race, and to some degree, religion.

How should using boats to cross the channel be solved?

Criminal Gangs are trafficking in people in broad daylight. Stealing kids from the hotels they are put in, moving them about the country to be used as drug mules / sellers / processors or for prostitution.
Organised crime in the UK is completely uncontrolled.

i think GL should say what he wants about this but all this talk about GL detracts from the real issues here. Crime, lack of housing, incompetent civil service, laws made in more hopeful times which may or may not helping the situation now.

This is, incidentally, what I mean about red meat for racists. It has only taken a few posts to show it.

so the problems in Germany were disenfranchisement and lack of social integration. And you think they can be remedied how? Because I’m not sure deporting to another country is the solution to those problems?

FWIW It would be easier to have a conversation with you if you didn’t pepper every post with racist stereotypes.

And no one is trying to talk you into anything. There’s no need to be so combative

If we were talking Japanese men, for example, I'd probably not be quite as concerned.

WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK

Red meat for racists

@RotundBeagleThe racism is fucking dripping off your posts mate. Absolute state.

To be fair I answered it and you’ve ignored all mine so I don’t think you have the moral high ground in policing question-answering

I'm not saying that the system is flawless @Anklespraying but there are usually other signs than just the person saying they have experienced trafficking and ways to know someone has genuinely been a victim of trafficking. It's fully investigated over quite a lengthy period of time by a specialist team and if found to be untrue the person may be deported. They will only be offered leave to remain if their claim of trafficking is found to be valid in which case fair enough. I still don't think that the crying wolf occurs as regularly in comparison to the occurrence of genuine victims of modern slavery/trafficking as @Moonicorn would suggest and it certainly shouldn't be used as an excuse to be disbelieving and mistrustful of victims male or otherwise. I'm still waiting for those claims to be backed up. I work with many people who have been trafficked and its very common for them to get part way through their journey and then be held for random, the family asked for more money and if they can't afford it then those men women children are sold into forced labour/sexual slavery/ domestic slavery. Male victims at very regularly found working in construction and agriculture in my area so I've seen first hand what @Moonicorn would suggest isn't there.

The fact that it's considered taboo to discuss it (like the Rotherham scandal) doesn't change the trauma faced by the woman they raped and abused.

The problem isn’t that it’s considered taboo to talk about. The problem is you basing your opinion on things that haven’t happened “yet” and an article that states most of the attacks were not by asylum seekers.

I was raped by a white British (adult) man when I was 15. Sexually assaulted by a pair of white British men less than a year later. Had sexual harassing comments from white British men since I was about 12. And you’ll never see me post that all white British men are sex criminals. That all British men should be locked up. That all white men are sexual deviants. That we shouldn’t allow them in society. That they’re a danger.

Because I’m not going to stereotype an entire group of people based on the actions of some. That’s fucking ridiculous to me and it’s sickening that people can think like that.