3 ms·

The home office released this milquetoast video about stopping illegal immigration. Watch it. It's only a minute long.[0] Gary Lineker, who presents on the BBC

The home office released this milquetoast video about stopping illegal immigration. Watch it. It's only a minute long.[0] Gary Lineker, who presents on the BBC, responded with hysterical comment "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'". Tim Davie, a director at the BBC, said "If you want to be an opinionated columnist or a partisan campaigner on social media then that is a valid choice, but you should not be working at the BBC." If this is the BBC "moving right", it's hard to imagine that such a change is a bad thing. [0] https://twitter.com/ukhomeoffice/status/1633022905628884992 https://twitter.com/ukhomeoffice/status/1633022905628884992

ndsipa_pomu 4y ago
Well, I certainly don't agree with Braverman's words there at all. If people are crossing the channel to apply for asylum, then I don't see how it can be determined that they are illegal. It's not possible to apply for asylum from outside of the UK, so they can only apply once they hit our shores and yet Braverman is branding them all as "illegal"? The immigration services have been completely stripped back by the Tories, so a lot of the statements are a result of their toxic-environment policy on immigration. Honestly, the asylum issue is a right-wing dog whistle and it's not actually a big problem with the UK.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- marcusverus 4y ago
  It's all well and good to disagree with the policy, or the choice of the word "illegal". Had Gary Lineker done so, we wouldn't have heard a peep. But he called it Nazi rhetoric, which is hysterical, divisive and harmful to the public discourse. > If people are crossing the channel to apply for asylum, then I don't see how it can be determined that they are illegal. Intentionally circumventing legal entry points when entering a given country is generally illegal. > It's not possible to apply for asylum from outside of the UK, so they can only apply once they hit our shores and yet Braverman is branding them all as "illegal"? The UK doesn't grant asylum to people who travel to the UK through a 'safe third country'[0]. Why would sneaking across the channel be made any less illegal by making an invalid asylum claim? > The immigration services have been completely stripped back by the Tories, so a lot of the statements are a result of their toxic-environment policy on immigration. Tories were elected to implement immigration reform. What makes it toxic? > Honestly, the asylum issue is a right-wing dog whistle and it's not actually a big problem with the UK. The Tories are in power and this issue matters to their constituents. Waving it off as a "dog whistle" assumes bad faith which is, in my experience, a poor substitute for understanding the other side's arguments. Also, "It's not that big of a problem" is an odd formulation. You acknowledge that there's a problem, but don't want it solved? Help me understand this mindset. [0]https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum/eligibility https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum/eligibility
  - madaxe_again 4y ago
    You don’t seem to do anything here except for spout right wing rhetoric. Perhaps you’ll find yourself more at home on parler or on the stormfront forums than here.
    - marcusverus 4y ago
      If you can't make a substantive contribution to the conversation, perhaps silence would suffice? This sort of surly mud-slinging is unbecoming.
  - ndsipa_pomu 4y ago
    He did not use the word 'Nazi' at all, he compared the language used to the language of 1930s Germany - a comparison which is justified. The asylum "issue" is being exaggerated by right-wing media to distract from the many bigger problems that have either been caused by or exacerbated by the Tories mis-management of the UK. Personally, I think that refugees need to be shown some empathy and kindness. In terms of solving problems, I'd much prefer that the financial crimes were prosecuted more harshly and that tax loopholes were closed.
    - marcusverus 4y ago
      > He did not use the word 'Nazi' at all, he compared the language used to the language of 1930s Germany This is a distinction without a difference, as you well know. > a comparison which is justified. And yet you're unable to actually make such an argument. The argument, of course, isn't the point. The point is associating your political opponents with Nazis. > The asylum "issue" is being exaggerated by right-wing media to distract from the many bigger problems that have either been caused by or exacerbated by the Tories mis-management of the UK. The Tories were elected in large part to address immigration issues, remember? Who convinced you that enacting their platform is somehow nefarious? > Personally, I think that refugees need to be shown some empathy and kindness. The ones who are safe and sound in France or Germany, who're affected by this new law? Why do they need your empathy when they're in a safe third country? Is this refusal of empathy sufficient to brand someone a Nazi?

ndsipa_pomu 4y ago

Well, I certainly don't agree with Braverman's words there at all. If people are crossing the channel to apply for asylum, then I don't see how it can be determined that they are illegal. It's not possible to apply for asylum from outside of the UK, so they can only apply once they hit our shores and yet Braverman is branding them all as "illegal"? The immigration services have been completely stripped back by the Tories, so a lot of the statements are a result of their toxic-environment policy on immigration. Honestly, the asylum issue is a right-wing dog whistle and it's not actually a big problem with the UK.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
marcusverus 4y ago
It's all well and good to disagree with the policy, or the choice of the word "illegal". Had Gary Lineker done so, we wouldn't have heard a peep. But he called it Nazi rhetoric, which is hysterical, divisive and harmful to the public discourse. > If people are crossing the channel to apply for asylum, then I don't see how it can be determined that they are illegal. Intentionally circumventing legal entry points when entering a given country is generally illegal. > It's not possible to apply for asylum from outside of the UK, so they can only apply once they hit our shores and yet Braverman is branding them all as "illegal"? The UK doesn't grant asylum to people who travel to the UK through a 'safe third country'[0]. Why would sneaking across the channel be made any less illegal by making an invalid asylum claim? > The immigration services have been completely stripped back by the Tories, so a lot of the statements are a result of their toxic-environment policy on immigration. Tories were elected to implement immigration reform. What makes it toxic? > Honestly, the asylum issue is a right-wing dog whistle and it's not actually a big problem with the UK. The Tories are in power and this issue matters to their constituents. Waving it off as a "dog whistle" assumes bad faith which is, in my experience, a poor substitute for understanding the other side's arguments. Also, "It's not that big of a problem" is an odd formulation. You acknowledge that there's a problem, but don't want it solved? Help me understand this mindset. [0]https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum/eligibility https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum/eligibility
- madaxe_again 4y ago
  You don’t seem to do anything here except for spout right wing rhetoric. Perhaps you’ll find yourself more at home on parler or on the stormfront forums than here.
  - marcusverus 4y ago
    If you can't make a substantive contribution to the conversation, perhaps silence would suffice? This sort of surly mud-slinging is unbecoming.
- ndsipa_pomu 4y ago
  He did not use the word 'Nazi' at all, he compared the language used to the language of 1930s Germany - a comparison which is justified. The asylum "issue" is being exaggerated by right-wing media to distract from the many bigger problems that have either been caused by or exacerbated by the Tories mis-management of the UK. Personally, I think that refugees need to be shown some empathy and kindness. In terms of solving problems, I'd much prefer that the financial crimes were prosecuted more harshly and that tax loopholes were closed.
  - marcusverus 4y ago
    > He did not use the word 'Nazi' at all, he compared the language used to the language of 1930s Germany This is a distinction without a difference, as you well know. > a comparison which is justified. And yet you're unable to actually make such an argument. The argument, of course, isn't the point. The point is associating your political opponents with Nazis. > The asylum "issue" is being exaggerated by right-wing media to distract from the many bigger problems that have either been caused by or exacerbated by the Tories mis-management of the UK. The Tories were elected in large part to address immigration issues, remember? Who convinced you that enacting their platform is somehow nefarious? > Personally, I think that refugees need to be shown some empathy and kindness. The ones who are safe and sound in France or Germany, who're affected by this new law? Why do they need your empathy when they're in a safe third country? Is this refusal of empathy sufficient to brand someone a Nazi?