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.

x post there

Itsgettingweird - So 30% of those coming by boat are not entitled to be here then? That's pretty high.

Countries like Africa? You mean Continents?? 😏

It'sgettibgweird - jgw1 was wittering. It was something vague about Singapore and Brexiteers.

@MarshaBradyo agree it would be good to have numbers! But there’s no point us laymen giving numbers as we don’t have access to all the immigration/emigration figures to be able to do that. Not to mention things like trade deals that come with easier/cheaper/free visas to the UK, global conflicts which would change the need and loads of other stuff I’m probably not even aware of.

What is necessary is for the government to be open and clear and honest, and not manipulate and scaremonger with false information and inflammatory language.

Unfortunately that’s not what we’ve got.

'Ah, what can I say - I am sorry if you failed to spot that I was being facetious.'

Sorry, its hard to spot on here sometimes what with attempts at satire etc.

We have some folk seriously suggesting staffing shortages would be fixed by having a free for all on small boats. Seemingly oblivious to the fact it is the illegal/criminal gangs and the dangerous crossings in small boats that many object to not the economic migrants themelves.

The rejection rate for people claiming asylum varies massively when you look at the group applying.

e.g. Albanian men

I have no doubt that there are people who come over on the boats who are economic migrants.

And I have no doubt that there are people who come over on the boats who have genuine asylum cases and have decided to risk the crossing as the "official" route can be hard to access.

I have no doubt that they are people. Not "illegals". They are not invading our shores.

That's the point - how do you treat people, what routes do you offer, and what language do you use?

Even if you think some of them are not genuine refugees.

Will people be travelling to Slovenia.. Hmm not sure seems a bit random, but most people are fine with visas for work, study etc according to polls so student visa can be maintained.

Imo many would appreciate upfront figures (I know people can’t know on here) but if there’s a vote up for grabs be direct.

I think we could benefit from safe routes but I don’t particularly expect boat crossings to fall that much as there will be a limit.

It's the language I object to.

Which is the point of this thread.

It was perfectly understandable, referencing this:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore-on-Thames

If you didn’t understand it you could have chosen to google it and learn something, rather than being rude.

cakeorwine - I live in the South East so I know we're overcrowded here but I am shocked at that figure of over 480 per sq km.

Bewarethelibrarian - I shouldn't need to Google posts.

middle. In 2007, the average UK household was 8 per cent worse off than its peers in north-western Europe, but the deficit has since ballooned to a record 20 per cent.

@BewareTheLibrarians
i find the quote really surprising because up til 2008 (or at least in the early 200s)until the banking crash - the tech industry was booming, the banks were booming, oil industries doing well so the city and therefore tax was up, so imv the coffers were full and we were doing well. Then after tha banking crash we had austerity etc and U.K. went downhill.

I see that wellknown Marxist, George Osbourne, has come out in support of Lineker now.

Just to check though which kind of migration do you mean?

Do you mean work visa

@MarshaBradyo in which paragraph? Total migration numbers (paragraph 2) or the Slovenia example?

Have the International Money Market Marxists made any statement?😆

cakeorwine - So surely an economic migrant coming over by boat knows that they don't have a valid reason for coming here, so they are trying to enter the country illegally, therefore they are an illegal migrant.

Not if they are sent back. It is a problem when they are here for a long time because the governments fucked up it's processing so badly we are really behind and so we absorb the costs of those failures.

I'd rather have those 73% that are entitled here and safe and contributing to our society than no one at all. And I'd rather it be by better routes and so those 70+% still come and the other 30 don't risk their lives trying for nothing.

We really need to find a better way to describe asylum seekers than othering language and support them to seek asylum in a safe way.

And yet most of the people on the boats do get asylum - so they are refugees.

So when people describe the people as illegal immigrants, they are wrong
When they describe them as refugees, they are wrong.
They are asylum seekers - but some of them don't get asylum

They are however people who have crossed the Channel in boats

A neutral term that I think we can all agree on.

As I said earlier in thread, I'll never treat somebody badly in person solely due to their ethnicity/religion etc.

No, @RotundBeagle I’d doubt you’re brave enough. But even if you don’t, the damaging rhetoric you spread online puts people’s lives in danger. So you can kid yourself you’re not treating anyone badly, but that’s not the truth. Every lie, every prejudice you spread, every refusal to retract your misconceptions spreads harm, including to the people running your workplace who respect you.

Does it bother you that they wouldn’t respect you if they knew the truth about you?

I'm actually one of only a handful of white British people in my current workplace, which is run by Indians, and I'm well respected.

I take it your colleagues don't know you spend your weekends being racist on internet forums @RotundBeagle? Must be exhausting not letting your mask slip.

Why do you think they’re risking their life if they don’t have a valid reason? Over 90% of people who arrive by small boats present to the authorities and claim asylum. Given that they’re then stuck in hotels on £8 a week, unable to work for the months or years it takes their claim to be processed, it’s not very sensible choice for an “economic migrant” just coming here for some cash is it.

So. BBC employees can't comment on government policy, but the government can feature them in its propaganda videos. OK. That's all crystal clear.

Glad to see rotundbeagle's racist post was zapped, btw

www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/12/home-office-removed-image-huw-edwards-tweet-migration-bill-bbc-complaints