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.

Yes, I’m pointing out what the phrase “economic migrant” actually means. Hence me using words like “work legally” in the description. 👍

People keep conflating economic migrants and asylum seekers and illegal immigrants and seem not to know that those three terms refer to three separate categories. Misusing the terms detracts from the point.

@Janiie yes, I'd like to know about these legal routes that apparently exist too. Since our own Home Secretary was unable to identify any. Some links would be great.

Just to add. I work in Child protection so often this crosses over to working with trafficking of women and children and also asylum seekers. Ignoring the fact that it is simply fate of birth. You have never had to pick up your child and flee at huge monetary expense/ show such personal resilience/blind faith, what exactly is your issue with these people? Many are very highly skilled and would be a massive asset to the UK if we allowed it. I work with women sitting in one room all day with their children who were economists, medics etc. who would love to work. This includes women and children who have been trafficked and forced into sex work. Before I got to work with them they were usually stuck in a shite hotel and the people who brought them here quickly found them and guess the rest..... .

Legally and controlled as in Australia? Yes, absolutely

Not when you’re having to read it 😂

Maybe there are very few and the process is difficult because we cannot take any more

Australia is pretty tough wrt immigration control. If that’s what people are after

What is untrue is your statement about numbers of asylum seekers.

You may not have seen my previous posts sharing this video that will explain the law around asylum seekers for you.

twitter.com/crimlawuk/status/1634330359839031301

If you don't have time to watch, the law is quite simple, no limits on number, anyone has the right to seek asylum in any safe country they choose, getting their by any means with or without documentation.

I do really find it is best before one tries to argue about something to know at least a little bit about it.

'They say ignorance is bliss.'

I know! it's like it doesn't matter how many times you see asylum seekers aren't the problem its those entering illegally via criminal gangs that are the issue.

Why do some folk have such low regard for legal processes. Do you think that someone who has 10k to pay a gang should queue jump?

@MrsandProud I have very pleased to hear that you are now happy with the legal migrants who cross the channel in small boats doing so. Perhaps the next step is to join me writing to the home secretary who repeatedly does not seem to understand this.

But @MrsandProud the Australian system is not legal
amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/jul/08/un-human-rights-expert-decries-boat-turnbacks-as-australia-criticised-for-secrecy-of-on-water-matters

so you’re advocating for a process that breaks international law and deprives people of their human rights?

I'm Jewish and think Lineker is right.

It's also worth noting how other countries (including UK and USA) closed their doors to Jews in the 1930s. People wanted to leave and had nowhere to go.

Hateful rhetoric is the predecessor to violence and we need to be on alert for it.

@Janiie I think I have finally understood where the confusion lies.
Very many people have given the impression that they are aghast at the people crossing the Channel in small boats the majority of whom seek and are granted asylum in the UK.

In fact what you are cross about is the 1-2000 people in amoung the asylum seekers who are not asylum seekers. Thank you for that clarification.

This and this and this.

Which legislation specifically are people arriving in boats to claim asylum breaking @Janiie ?

And yet pretend to be surprised when such a policy is compared to 1930s Germany.

@Janiie Those entering illegally by criminal gangs - do you mean people who are trafficked, or something else?

Hopefully not too off topic, but the new bill has stated that victims of trafficking will not be able to access legal or safeguarding support and will be deported. I’m sure that no one agrees that the victims of trafficking should be punished while the criminals running the trafficking gangs escape any kind of punishment. It’s quite backwards, isn’t it. And with the news last week that many trafficking gangs were based in the UK, it means that UK based trafficking will grow and grow, as the victims can’t go to the police, can’t seek medical care and are trapped. I don’t think anyone, regardless of their views on asylum seekers, can agree that this is ethical.

Except the majority are. Have a look at www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/.

A few points worth noting:
There are 6.8 million people currently displaced from Syria.
Turkey currently hosts 3.7 million refugees. They may not all be from Syria but I bet a good number are.
Which links to the fact that 69% flee only as far as their neighbouring country.
74% of refugees are taken in by low and middle income countries. Which the UK is not.

According to The New European, the top 10 countries taking refugees are:
Turkey. Lebanon. Syria. Germany. Uganda. Bangladesh. Greece. Canada. Pakistan. USA. Sweden.

UK doesn’t feature. I am also trying to find the piece I listened to the other evening where someone interviewed an Afghan interpreter who was trying to get across on the boats because there is no legal way for him to apply for refugee status in Afghanistan - he did not make it to the airport in time for the exodus when The UK and the USA pulled out. He is now living in hiding because he is under threat because he helped the British forces by acting as an interpreter. There is no system for him to legally apply for refugee status from outside the UK, but if he comes here via the only route he can manage, he will be illegal and deported under these rules. All because he helped us.

Putting in place a system where people can apply from where they are would immediately cut the crossings.
And a recognition that the vast number do stop in the first safe place they come to would be nice. The idea that everyone is headed here is just wrong.

The treatment of immigrants by Australia is no example to follow. What happened in Nauru was terrible and the treatment inhumane.

The language Braverman has used is definitely similar to language used in 1930s Germany IMO. There are deliberate attempts to escalate tensions. She's a force for bad, in my view.

How do they remain in the UN and what is the downside to them? I don’t see much in reaction to this

My grandmother was a child refugee from Czechoslovakia in 1939. She lost many family members to the holocaust - almost all those who couldn't make it out.

I say the opposite - anyone whose family was genuinely affected by the holocaust is far more likely to be deeply troubled by this policy and the rhetoric surrounding it.

But what are the routes? I mean, if anyone should have that knowledge available it's the Home Secretary, and she couldn't answer what really should be a very basic question.

Hint: there are no legal routes outside of the Ukraine/Hong Kong/Afghanistan resettlement schemes. None. At. All.

And if you didn't know that you are either wilfully ignorant or perfectly OK with that.

Correction to your post @marmaladeo

it stopped the boats landing. Not coming.

instead the Australian government sentenced people to death by pushing boats back and hid the data on it.

amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/jul/08/un-human-rights-expert-decries-boat-turnbacks-as-australia-criticised-for-secrecy-of-on-water-matters

it’s essentially state-sanctioned genocide towards victims of human trafficking and refugees.

Is that what you're advocating for?

Say Putin starts a third world war in Europe. All European countries are unsafe, you manage to escape with your family across France and Spain, getting a boat into Morocco which is unaffected by the war. You hear boats are leaving for the USA, Canada and Australia and you can just afford tickets with your remaining cash/valuables.

Are you staying in safe Morocco to claim asylum or getting on a boat?

@babybythesea One of the horrors of the Afghan resettlement schemes is that many eligible people filled in their paperwork and submitted it through the proper channels, but never got an answer from the UK government. When they chased it up, there was a lot of confusion about which govt department was dealing with what, and they were left in limbo at severe risk from the Taliban. They’re included in the people entering by small boat. People who supported our military, derided as “economic migrants” and criminals.