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.

For a little light relief for everyone here is Andrew Marr.

twitter.com/implausibleblog/status/1633921418739023878

jgw1 - Stop twisting things to suit your own agenda. Your last 2 posts to me prove my point. This is just one big joke to you.

If as you say land area is important, then Antartica has the largest least densely populated land area, the logical extension of your arguement is to send refugees there.

If as you say having to many migrants in one country is a problem, then the logical extension is that we should be belping Turkey much more to reduce the large number of migrants in that country by taking more in the UK.

I don't know which you think should happen, possibly because you don't know either, which is fine.

I don't have a solution to the growing number of migrants in the world, but I do know two things. Dehumanising people is wrong and so is limiting free speech.

You tie yourself in knots. The pp is responding to a poster saying Turkey took more migrants. It is 3 times the size of the UK so that is relevant, no?

Why are you mentioning Antarctica, an inhabitable continent?

I think if we had safe legal routes the demand for small boats would decrease. Why risk your life whilst fleeing for your life if you don't need to?

I question that we can meet the demand and so there will always be more people willing to risk their lives

It may not decrease crossings much due to this

It wasn’t just the Jews that were targeted either - anyone considered to impinge on the ‘purity’ of the Aryan race was a legitimate target. The Nazis were obsessed with eugenics. Gypsies, other races considered ‘low’, those with certain diseases, drug addicts, alcoholics and physically and mentally disabled people were all persecuted and ended up in the death camps.

This isn’t the first time Tory rhetoric has been compared with Nazi ideology. The Coalition government - basically the Tories, for all the input the Lib Dem’s had - attempted to launch their Welfare Reform Act by subjecting disabled people to discrimination by suspicion and scrutiny in the press and media - framing them as frauds, thieving benefits, leeching the system, and worthy of working for less than the minimum wage. The posters put up in Jobcentres echoed this ideology and were compared with the Nazi campaigns branding the sick and disabled as ‘useless eaters’. The repercussions are still with us now in the form of benefit cuts and sanctions, and subjecting sick and disabled people to humiliating medical examination by incompetent private sector assessors, to prove their entitlement.

Oo you have inside info? Are you Paul Brand.. he always seems to have sources 🤔

When will this resignation be announced, any clues?

That's so spot on. He's so clever.

For a little light relief for everyone here is Andrew Marr

I would point out that Andrew Marr used the word 'illegal' [asylum seekers] several times during the introduction to one of his radio shows last week.

I question that we can meet the demand and so there will always be more people willing to risk their lives

It is worrying about being able to meet demand. But that's where governments across Europe need to work together effectively.

We can't meet the demand of the numbers arriving in small boats. So they have to look at what they have got wrong and how to get it right in this country as well as working together with other countries to make processing claims a speedy process.

As countries such as Germany are already better at this than is they'd be a good place to start looking.

Much of Turkey is uninhabitable too or is that not relevant?

*I question that we can meet the demand and so there will always be more people willing to risk their lives

It may not decrease crossings much due to this*

Given that the vast majority of asylum seekers have their asylum granted, surely processing them before they come and then providing safe travel would reduce the numbers risking their lives in boats?

And of those whose asylum is not granted, surely some would not bother if they knew they were definitely illegal immigrants and would definitely be deported?

It's such an easy fix that would clearly separate those with the right to come and those without, removing all ambiguity about who is illegal and who is not. Cheaper, more efficient, more controlled and more humane. And yet instead the government prefers to renege on their legal obligations and continue the current policy of leaky borders and encouraging deaths of vulnerable people at sea. Why do you think that is? What is it that they're after, given that it's not border control and compassion towards refugees who have a right to come here?

@DotAndCarryOne2 - yes it was a profound trauma as ordinary Germans were pressured as good patriotic Germans to send their disabled children to hospitals instead of being kept at home.

Those children died, and the doctors who facilitated those deaths then went on to facilitate torture and abuse to death in concentration camps.

Nazi Germany was a cult. It trading on prejudice and nationalism to get broad agreement from people who thought of themselves as good Germans. By the time they thought any differently, social pressure to conform was absolute.

This is part of the reason Gary Lineker can say what he likes. If your Government tells your opinion is unacceptable and can get you sacked then you can use your rights to sue them. Those rights are, of course, based on the ECHR.

And yet it has a large human population <density 110 per sq km as opposed to Antarctica 0.01 per sq km> and is a holiday destination.
I don't think 'Antarctica' is a holiday destination. Comparisons should be like for like really for any kind of credibility.

Why are you derailing about Antarctica and when is this bbc resignation coming?

The point of safe routes and resettlement schemes is that numbers area known in advance, and resettlement can be spread through the country in areas with infrastructure prepared to support asylum seekers arrival.

No one’s saying this will completely stop the boat crossings BUT it will reduce the numbers, and reduce the strain on communities and in hotels, and give the home office more leeway to work through the backlog. That’s incredibly valuable.

Unless you want to let perfect be the enemy of good and change nothing because the alternative isn’t 100% perfect, even though the current system is demonstrably awful.

Ok - how many are you saying yes to?

Is it everyone who applies and meets the criteria or once a number, say 50k just to make it easier, is reached is the next person an automatic no?

cakeorwine
I have been paying attention to the language used over the years. Along with the imagery

You literally started your own thread two days ago;
How similar do you think the language of 1930s Germany is to the current Tory rhetoric on people crossing the Channel.

Admittedly you didn't start off quoting 'swarm' on that thread but you did three or four times later on - and you agreed with this poster;
I couldn’t believe it when I heard ‘swarm’ used

When did that poster hear the word 'swarm' from the current government if it was said by David Cameron in 2015?

Umm.

www.vikingcruises.co.uk/expeditions/cruise-destinations/antarctica/index.html

Unless you want to let perfect be the enemy of good and change nothing because the alternative isn’t 100% perfect

I don’t think I’ve been arguing for change nothing.

But I think people are underestimating the number of people who need to leave where they are. And this will get more pronounced

This!

Well the how many question is for government.

It's for the governments across Europe to discuss and agree on.

I couldn't suggest a number because I don't have the facts or figures.

The only facts and figures we have is that there was 45k arrivals by small boat last year and IIRC 160k still waiting to be processed.

Also if they are approved before arriving then they are settled in areas where the infrastructure can cope.

I find it amazing that in the last 2 years 200,000 Hong Kongers have manged to move to the UK by safe routes and no one has said anything about it, and yet when a smaller number of asylum seekers want to come to the UK it is a huge influx. I can't quite fathom the difference.

The number isn’t so important but whatever the number is the next person outside it is still desperate, that hasn’t changed.

People moving from harsh situations isn’t something that always matches safe route numbers. I’d say can’t match it tbh especially in next decades

Stop spreading racist misinformation. You’ve been told enough times that you’re misrepresenting the facts, and that the article you quoted went on to say that the majority of assaults were not committed by asylum seekers.

I can see the worries that you have but misrepresenting facts and repeating racist, far right talking points completely clouds the issue and actually detracts from the point you’re trying to make.