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.

'As soon as they reopen legal routes, these "illegal" crossings would dwindle to nothing!'

There are legal routes. Just queue jumping via illegal gangs and their dinghies should be tolerated or encouraged.

Oh where to start, the UK takes on a per head basis far less asylum seekers than any other major European country. Asylum seekers are legally allowed to use any means necessary to access a country to apply for asylum, this includes boats. The government have shut down most of the legal access routes to apply for asylum in the UK cause ya have to be in the country to apply for asylum, what other choice do they have? The gov have slowed / stopped processing asylum applications, Braverman said in interview the other day, that some asylum seekers were still waiting for their applications to be processed 2 years later, why? Because approximately 85% of applications are approved and have that on the Stat's doesn't further their far right rhetoric! Process the applications quickly, return the few who don't succeed and get these people out working, paying taxes, paying national insurance, contributing to our public services, contributing to our economy. Its not rocket science, the UK gov are deliberately creating this mess are a diversion and to make them look like they can lead, we all know the bill breaches international law, that's its never gonna happen, not one plane has left for Rwanda after all, they are just blowing hot and riling the ganmons up

What a beautiful tolerant attitude.
Why are you trying to prove Lineker's point for him?

Please can you stop othering a group of people by calling them illegal.

What does 'othering' mean?

If someone is illegal you are not 'othering' them, you are just saying that they are illegal.

The small boats are a result of there being no safe passage for migrants to claim assylum in the UK. The UK goverment lags way behind in taking its share of those fleeing war or persecution and the calous attitudes of the tories and Braverman have rightfuly been compared to the ultra nationalist policies of 1930 Germany (*not not the holocaust).

This wedge issue has been whipped up to win votes in the up-coming election and a line in the sand from the conservative donor BBC chair has led to the disruption of the sporting coverage as his colleagues have stood with GL.

As many have pointed out GL was free to criticise Qatar's human rights record on air. Therefors it seems reasonable that he is also allowed an opinon on human rights in the country of which he is a citizen. Let us not forget that the right to claim asylum is a human right deemed so by the UN.

It seems to be the case that he is permitted to discuss human rights when it is in keeping with the general consensus but faces being censured when his comments are an inconvienance to the tory party.

This is a useful resource on asylum..

www.amnesty.org.uk/right-asylum

It's you who are deliberately and knowingly using false equivalence. It's like people haven't learned to use a sense of analogy and abstract thinking, and realise that someone isn't saying specific details are identical - he is saying that language used to describe a group of people is similar, and that can lead to dangerous consequences, without either the people or the consequences being exactly the same.

Exactly.

Ya got it spot on there, the UK gov wo t sanctioning murdering but total authoritarian I can totally see

The small boats are a result of there being no safe passage for migrants to claim assylum in the UK.

Are you suggesting that 100% of the people crossing on boats would be granted assylum if claimed via legal routes? Sure

I think the UK is heading to be more like North Korea

😆

Please, stop calling a group of people illegal. It is deeply offensive. It is reminiscent of the behaviour in Germany in the 1930s.
Asylum seekers are not illegal. They can enter any safe country they choose in any way they choose.
For a more detailed explanation please watch this video.

twitter.com/crimlawuk/status/1634330359839031301

So far, it's well up in the 80% bracket, with another 10% or so being granted on appeal, so it's certainly getting up there...

OP - why bother asking the question if all you'll do is argue with anyone who disagrees with you? You've decided your stance already.

This is not true,

@MrsandProud
The same people bashing SB are the ones complaining about food shortages, the state of the NHS, lack of places in schools, pollution, etc. Do you think uncontrolled immigration will make these problems better or worse?

Well every single economic study has stated that migration is of net economic benefit to the UK, coupled with the ageing population and extremely low birth rate I'd say that migration is not just desirable, but absolutely necessary.
And the state of the NHS and lack of school places has nothing to do with the administration of the health service of a mass exodus of teachers from the profession, no it's the fault of the immigrants. Try expanding your sources from Richard Littlejohn and the Daily Express.

Why the utter irrelevances? Anyone seeking asylum has the absolute right to do so in any safe country they choose. That right obviously is not dependent on whether they end up being granted asylum.
Please watch this video in order to understand the laws more.

twitter.com/crimlawuk/status/1634330359839031301

Why are you repeatedly proving Lineker's point for him?

There are very few, if there are any legal routes for asylum seekers to enter Britain. If there was why would they not use their 1,000's to get on a plane to apply? Its legal for asylum seekers to use any means necessary to enter a country to claim asylum, cause they have to be in country to do that. UK gov needs to process then in a timely manner, some been waiting to be processed for 2 years, but if they do that the stats will show something like 85% of are approved. Get them processed, return those that don't met the criteria and get the rest integrated and contributing to our taxes, national insurance, our economy etc, win win all round

@HannibalHeyes
Any sources for those (untrue) stats?

How would you know?
You have already demonstrated repeatedly on this thread you have little knowledge of the law in this area?

If he was racist and othering towards Jewish people in what he said, how come there are Jewish people backing him (and yes I know there are Jewish people who aren't backing him too)?

'It is not illegal to cross the channel, I have done it several times.'

Without a passport?

You do know people smuggling and trafficking is illegal? Illegal is a legal word, it is not an insult.

I think you have a point, in that Lineker has over-egged this.

As an aside, it's also nice work, if you can blow it off to show solidarity with another over-payed celebrity. How many presenters do we hear croaking their way through the news, because they can't afford to take a day off?

He is a prat with an immense ego.
Hoping he will never darken our screens again.
Why he thinks anybody wants to hear the inner ramblings of his brain cell is beyond me.