Gary Lineker

[cstand]

7 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

I never watched it, but almost did to see what was mentioned and how they did it. I imagine lots of people did the same.

Never watched it for years , never watched it last night.

Think the format is out dated.

Edited March 12, 2023 by cstand

[sage]

38 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

I respect your opinion. But (I think) you are relatively young.

Irrespective of how disgusting the policy might be (and again that is a personal opinion), Lineker has made a crass comment regarding it, comparing it similar ‘in language’ to 1930’s Germany. Not only is that insensitive to the Jewish community in particular, I think many who lost friends and family in the subsequent war have found it a pretty offensive comparison too. The proposed policy, and even the language used, is nothing like what was fermenting in 1930’s Germany. My opinion, again for what it is worth, is that Lineker should be free to say what he thinks, but not without consequences to his contractual relationship with the BBC, and that on this matter in particular he has been offensive to a great many.

I am still waiting for even one poster on here to give me examples of language being used by politicians over here that are not too dissimilar to that being used by Adolf and his cohorts in the lead up to WW2.

100 million people...and they are heading our way

Invasion...swarm

Letterboxes

Piccaninnies and watermelon smiles

The campaign poster with the long line of people which was very similar to a Nazi one

 

Edited March 12, 2023 by sage

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

38 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

I respect your opinion. But (I think) you are relatively young.

Irrespective of how disgusting the policy might be (and again that is a personal opinion), Lineker has made a crass comment regarding it, comparing it similar ‘in language’ to 1930’s Germany. Not only is that insensitive to the Jewish community in particular, I think many who lost friends and family in the subsequent war have found it a pretty offensive comparison too. The proposed policy, and even the language used, is nothing like what was fermenting in 1930’s Germany. My opinion, again for what it is worth, is that Lineker should be free to say what he thinks, but not without consequences to his contractual relationship with the BBC, and that on this matter in particular he has been offensive to a great many.

I am still waiting for even one poster on here to give me examples of language being used by politicians over here that are not too dissimilar to that being used by Adolf and his cohorts in the lead up to WW2.

I think the argument doesn't stem from direct qoutes but from actions. As has been stated, the Nazis assumed total control by slowly increasing the power of police and security forces, destroy unions, restrict opposing opinions and building up an imaginary enemy to demonise and put in a them versus us propaganda campaign. This hasn't just been done by Nazis though, all totalitarian government's follow this playbook.

Our current government is attempting to increase police powers, is actively fighting unions, acting dishonestly and actively overstating the number of immigrants that could 'flood in' to the tune of 100 million according to Braverman to whip up division.

The parallels are there. It's not necessarily 1:1 Nazism but it's got all the hallmarks of a government attempting to restrict freedoms and increase control over the population. Call it totalitarianism if you want to put a more generic label on it. It's a legitimate concern of mine shared by a lot of other people.

[ariotofmyown]

2 minutes ago, sage said:

100 million people...and they are heading our way

Invasion...swarm

Letterboxes

Piccaninnies and watermelon smiles

The campaign poster with the long line of people which was very similar to a Nazi one

 

We've been invaded by 45k illegal immigrants who are simply trying the game the system. This helps put us 18th in Europe in accepting refugees. Something to be well proud of.

We are a badly run poor country with wealth concentrated in the hands of a few people. We can't afford to look after more people. Even though we have loads of unfulfilled jobs and no one willing to do them.

Enough is enough, we must stop the boats.

When people attack hotels detaining these people, they must make sure they don't attack based on social media rumours.

[Norman]

7 minutes ago, sage said:

100 million people...and they are heading our way

Invasion...swarm

Letterboxes

Piccaninnies and watermelon smiles

The campaign poster with the long line of people which was very similar to a Nazi one

 

Is this the language used in the new government asylum policy?

[ariotofmyown]

2 hours ago, The Last Post said:

Maybe I can shed a little light on this.

Not all make it in a boat of their boarding, As when 3 miles out from France our boats are waiting to save/pick them up, Do they choose the UK or are they swept up into a lorry container and moved to a Country where the traffickers can then unload their paying customers, All monies paid before boarding said lorry, And some not all are forced at gunpoint into boats, 9 died in Bulgaria a few weeks ago.

Spain is the easiest route from Africa, Then Malta or swerve this Island and head to Italy, Movement from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Albania and Greece is a long trek for those who want a better life, Germany take/have more than most EU Countries, Research Sweden and refugees you may be surprised with what you read.

As for why people would risk their lives to get to the UK, A question I can only guess, Mobile phones will be used by those who are already here to tell family and friends what they can expect in the UK, A hotel room, Food and a little spending money, For some an opportunity to get finances an illegal way, There's a chance a slim chance they will be able to settle and start a new life. 

Is it all worth it...some think so.

That is a good point I never thought of. That the trafficking starts back closer to their home countries. They pay the gangs money there with the promise of arriving in the uk. By the time they are been pushed onto dangerous boats, it's probably too late.

Maybe we should treat them as victims rather than vile scum trying to game out not very generous system. 

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

2 minutes ago, Norman said:

Is this the language used in the new government asylum policy?

Some of the language stated there is being used by people in our current government to promote the proposed assylum policy.

[Norman]

Just now, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

Some of the language stated there is being used by people in our current government to promote the proposed assylum policy.

Where are those statements with those words being used to promote the new asylum policy?

[ariotofmyown]

5 minutes ago, Norman said:

Is this the language used in the new government asylum policy?

Of course not. But it's the toxic tone of many in government over the last 10 years or so. Demonise "others" wherever possible. That is similar to 30s Germany.

And demonising others has left the country in a right mess now. So let's double down on it.

It's all the fault of the boat people!!!

Hopefully only year left of this grim period and we can start to have a little humanity return.

[sage]

10 minutes ago, Norman said:

Is this the language used in the new government asylum policy?

The first 2 lines yes. It's not written in the policy but in advocating it. 

I would add making political appointments across senior positions in state media in all a bit early 1930s Germany.

 

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

4 minutes ago, Norman said:

Where are those statements with those words being used to promote the new asylum policy?

Suella Braverman wrote the following which was published in the Daily Mail...

"There are 100 million people displaced around the world, and likely billions more eager to come here if possible.

They are already coming here in their tens of thousands. And they will not stop until we've made it crystal clear: Arrive illegally and you will be liable for detention and swiftly removed – to your home country or to a safe third country like Rwanda.

That is precisely what the Illegal Migration Bill will do. That is how we will stop the boats."

[PistoldPete]

11 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Of course not. But it's the toxic tone of many in government over the last 10 years or so. Demonise "others" wherever possible. That is similar to 30s Germany.

And demonising others has left the country in a right mess now. So let's double down on it.

It's all the fault of the boat people!!!

Hopefully only year left of this grim period and we can start to have a little humanity return.

So comparing the first PM of colour in our history to a Nazi is not demonising?  

[PistoldPete]

5 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

Suella Braverman wrote the following which was published in the Daily Mail...

"There are 100 million people displaced around the world, and likely billions more eager to come here if possible.

They are already coming here in their tens of thousands. And they will not stop until we've made it crystal clear: Arrive illegally and you will be liable for detention and swiftly removed – to your home country or to a safe third country like Rwanda.

That is precisely what the Illegal Migration Bill will do. That is how we will stop the boats."

Apart from the exaggeration in the first sentence what is wrong with that? 

[Comrade 86]

 

[AndyinLiverpool]

20 minutes ago, Norman said:

Where are those statements with those words being used to promote the new asylum policy?

The Home Secretary said this in the House of Commons when introducing her bill.

'There are 100 million people around the world who could qualify for protection under our current laws. Let’s be clear. They are coming here'

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

4 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Apart from the exaggeration in the first sentence what is wrong with that? 

Apart from the fact the whole process is legally and practically unworkable and she already knows it?

The idea that every displaced person is thinking of coming specifically to the UK despite the fact we take in orders of magnitude less immigrants than loads of other countries is obvious nonsense.

The whole statement is designed to make the problem look far worse than it will ever be in reality.

Taken alongside her previous invasion rhetoric it all adds up to a very unpleasant message.

 

Edited March 12, 2023 by JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta

[GboroRam]

51 minutes ago, FindernRam said:

Also it appears that a huge percentage are from Albania (a European country last time I looked).

Not what I found. 

[Rev]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/nov/06/suella-braverman-was-warned-hate-speech-could-inspire-far-right 

 

[PistoldPete]

13 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Not what I found. 

Ah comparing us to Lichtenstein. I mean apart from fact that people have to cross the Channel to get here but are still willing to risk their lives. That is some problem, much as Lineker and co would like it not to be. 

[G STAR RAM]

48 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

Suella Braverman wrote the following which was published in the Daily Mail...

"There are 100 million people displaced around the world, and likely billions more eager to come here if possible.

They are already coming here in their tens of thousands. And they will not stop until we've made it crystal clear: Arrive illegally and you will be liable for detention and swiftly removed – to your home country or to a safe third country like Rwanda.

That is precisely what the Illegal Migration Bill will do. That is how we will stop the boats."

Bloody hell that's awful. 

Infact I couldn't even read it without doing a Hitler accent whilst goose stepping around my living room.