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.

1. How on earth did you get that from what I said? Where did I mention “skilled work”? and
2. it was YOUR IDEA that people get a “migrant visa” to come here and work. You replied to a comment that said “let them work, let them thrive” by asking why they didn’t just get a (non-existent) “migrant visa” to come here.

Here’s a list of work visas:
www.gov.uk/browse/visas-immigration/work-visas

Here’s a list of other visas:
www.gov.uk/apply-to-come-to-the-uk

Which of either of those lists do you think asylum seekers would currently be able to apply for? And where should they apply for it?

You know that the vast majority of asylum seekers are coming from reasonably well off probably what you'd describe as middle class families where they've had decent jobs because these are the people who can actually afford to get their family out. It costs an unbelievable amount to smuggle someone out of the country and there's no guarantee that traffickers won't come back looking for thousands more. So yes a lot of them will have been working but we won't let them do that here or recognise their qualifications. One of my friends was a doctor in his country of origin. Here he's in training as a paramedic because his medical licence isn't recognised.

Which of your rights do you think lawyers would stop protecting if the government stopped demonising asylum seekers?

So if your brother for example lived in the UK. You'd stay in France where you don't know the language? Where you aren't allowed to work and where you don't know who is a friend or there to exploit you? Or would you try and get to your brother? This isn't just a case of saying 'France needs to fix it' these are real human beings who have a right to decide where they live and what they will accept as a decent quality of life as do the rest of us.

This is just anecdata and convenient speculation. Neither you nor I know the background of these people

And don't start me on doctors who would like to practice here without recognised qualifications.

You absolutely can! 😊

They’re not able to practise without relevant qualifications. As @Lavender14 stated.

Did you miss the part where I explained that I work with asylum seekers? I may not know everyone but I would put money on it that I know more personally than you seem to.

So if your brother for example lived in the UK. You'd stay in France where you don't know the language? Where you aren't allowed to work and where you don't know who is a friend or there to exploit you? Or would you try and get to your brother?

I would stay in France and not try to enter the UK illegally. My family situation and personal convenience is not a something the British public should be concerned with

How very privileged you are to think this is what you'd do. I think if you were actually that desperate you'd be deeply traumatised and in survival mode (certainly wouldn't be classing it as personal convenience) and you wouldn't be thinking twice about the concerns of the British public. You'd be trying to stay alive.

You'd be trying to stay alive.

Exactly. I would try to stay alive and not get on a dinghy risking death when I am already safe in France

And personally, if it was me, I wouldn’t for a second think that I could demand an inalienable right to human rights while other people were denied access to those same rights.

Horses for courses I guess.

There’s the rub. Why do you think some people do then? Do you think they just really like water sports?

They are not denied access to human rights. They are exercising them in France

Once again. This is not something we need to get involved in. These people are safe and exercising their human rights.

I would stay in France and not try to enter the UK illegally. My family situation and personal convenience is not a something the British public should be concerned with

They're not entering the country "illegally". At least try and get the most basic of facts right @MrsandProud

But seriously - do you actually think people get on those boats for their own 'personal convenience' how desperate would you need to be to get on one? What on earth makes you think you value your life any more than they value theirs? That is how you know they are absolutely desperate. They may have watched people die on previous crossings. Your lack of empathy is staggering.

@MrsandProud

See, this is where knowing the contents of the new bill comes in handy. By penalising (detaining and deporting) asylum seekers for coming to the UK, the government are going against asylum seekers human rights.

“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states in Article 14 that “everyone has the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution”. The Refugee Convention built on this with the establishment of a regime of international refugee protection, which was ratified by the UK in 1954.”
”It also includes the right not to be penalised for being in or entering a country without permission where this is necessary for them to seek and receive asylum.”

www.amnesty.org.uk/right-asylum

This is why people - including conservative MPs - are coming out against this bill.

By the way, that second paragraph in my last post doesn’t mean “necessary to come to the UK rather than any other country”, it means “necessary to enter the country to claim asylum as no legal routes are available”.

It's extremely safe crossing the channel on a small boat. I do it regularly. There's at least 100,000 small boats in marinas along the channel and that's just the UK side.

We are out there all the time, fishing, swimming, racing. It's amazingly safe.

They are not risking their lives. The RN is out there transferring them to the shore all day and all night.

The only deaths are when the smugglers hand them a boat in bad weather and the people relocating are so dumb they get in a pathetic little boat in dangerous conditions. But hey!

If you actually take note of the weather forecast the channel is so safe people actually swim across it for fun!

What a load of nonsense people believe about this. The guardian turns your brain to mush. Empathy empathy empathy. They have absolutely no empathy for you.

I honestly think, when people voted Brexit, they thought that was the end to immigration, or any kind. People saying ‘it’s France’ problem’ have no idea about how asylum works.

they’re among us

FFS, meant to say Islam is a religion not a race. Not the other way around.

I thought Marxism was against religion, China is against Mislims. I often wonder if one day if the left like China will turn on them in the west, where will the Muslimd then get refuge?