I think you're right, sadly.
BBC. (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter COVKIDSNEVERQUIT
- Start date
I think you're right, sadly.
D
Deleted member 9744
Guest
It's important that they do.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
Terry_dactyl
Well-Known Member
I couldn’t agree more.
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
I mean you could listen to a holocaust survivor on the matter of the government’s language:
amp.theguardian.com
I confronted Suella Braverman because as a Holocaust survivor I know what words of hate can do | Immigration and asylum | The Guardian
By demonising refugees, the home secretary causes divisions that can lead to tragedy. We must not forget the lessons of the past, says educator Joan Salter
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
No, you're missing the point. The point is lineker failed to quote from the Nazi propaganda machine and should have done his homework rather than saying simply that it sounded like " something" from 1930s Germany. Are we supposed to just take his word for it then ? Any decent journalist would have backed up these claims with quotes and evidence from the 1930s , but he's not a journalist. Clearly.
D
Deleted member 9744
Guest
let me be clear the ones a
Let me be clear the ones at fault are the Government, not the opposition, but it is disappointing to see Labour Party politicians saying they don't agree with the words Lineker has used.I mean you could listen to a holocaust survivor on the matter of the government’s language:
I confronted Suella Braverman because as a Holocaust survivor I know what words of hate can do | Immigration and asylum | The Guardian
By demonising refugees, the home secretary causes divisions that can lead to tragedy. We must not forget the lessons of the past, says educator Joan Salter
D
Deleted member 9744
Guest
I think he thought most people were clever enough to see it. Try it yourself. Look at Braverman and Sunak's words. It's quite clear they are demonising a group of people. In a democracy we as individuals have a responsibility to hold our politicians to account.
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
I agree with Lineker, but there will be those who feel it trivialises the Holocaust. I understand that.
harvey098
Well-Known Member
What are you going on about? My question was in response to Earlsdon calling people hypocrites for not being angry about other people this has happened to in the last few years… I am just intrigued to know who
He made a point, he doesn't have to back it up with a quote. Not providing a quote doesn't make his point wrong
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
Lineker isn't clever at all though. That's the point. All he had to do was state there were genuine comparisons with 1930s Nazi Germany by providing evidence. He didn't .
harvey098
Well-Known Member
You’ll kick yourself when you find out your tv remote has a volume button.
All those years you could’ve watched in silence as you’re now pretending to prefer.
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
D
Deleted member 9744
Guest
As I said it's for individuals to do this.
So after 200+ posts what do we know?
People who have compassion for other human beings, and believe the woman who said it was her "dream" to send asylum seekers to Rwanda is a bit of a c**t, tend to agree with Lineker.
People who are scared of humans that don't look like themselves, and are too dumb to understand the government is pandering to them for political gain, tend to disagree with Lineker.
Can we move this to off-topic and get on with the football now?
People who have compassion for other human beings, and believe the woman who said it was her "dream" to send asylum seekers to Rwanda is a bit of a c**t, tend to agree with Lineker.
People who are scared of humans that don't look like themselves, and are too dumb to understand the government is pandering to them for political gain, tend to disagree with Lineker.
Can we move this to off-topic and get on with the football now?
SkyBlueCharlie9
Well-Known Member
F-ff to GB News then.... with the other neanderthals ! Ignorant t!t.
D
Deleted member 9744
Guest
A tad blunt but yes basically right.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
This is getting stupid now. Not everyone that wants some kind of control over who we are letting into the country is a racist.
I don't understand why it has to be one extreme or the other, and it really doesn't help things.
D
Deleted member 9744
Guest
No one is saying there shouldn't be any controls. We are talking about rhetoric.
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
Why is this not in the off topic threads really is depressing.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
So basically anyone who agrees with Lineker is a good egg and everyone else is racist.
This was the divisive crap that in part made people nail their colours to the mast with Brexit and it is possible to acknowledge there is a problem and something wrong with the rhetoric. If you're not careful and force into an either or camp only, then not only is that dangerous, but like Brexit, people don't necessarily like being labelled and told what you think they think and you could easily end up with a result you don't want.
ccfc1234
Well-Known Member
I find it very odd that such a serious topic is being debated through the lens of Mr Walkers crisps!
From my perspective there appear to be a number of legitimate perspectives that are both not entirely wrong
1. We should as a rich nation open our socierty to provide refuge for some people who are feeling genuine persecution at the hands of despot war obsessed governments and bigoted cultures.
2. We need to be honest with ourselves that the vast majority of people arriving in boats are young men. With the highest recorded number being from Albania which is not war torn that they are often economic migrants.
Clearly on the one hand we should be opening our boarders to those in need but we also need to be aware that not everyone who arrives in a boat has a right to be here and many are (perhaps understandably) trying their luck in search of a better life. This is why the UK needs a functioning system that looks at each case and importantly considers where in the UK public services can support the new arrivals and where there are jobs. This second part often is poorly managed and as a result integration is poor and people drift to the margins of society and some into crime.
There is a 3rd consideration that again seems missing from the debate is the numbers the UK can legitimately support. The Tories have run the countrys public services very badly and allowed public services to be in as bad a state as they have been in decades, however, even if that was rectified there is a point that if numbers were not managed integration, jobs and welfare would stop functioning and this would be detrimental to everyone, including settled refugees.
It's a real shame this issue is debated with such an esclatory tone and sadly I can see the rhetoric getting far worse before the elections as its the dog whistle issue that the conservatives know might just dig them out of the corrupt mess they have made!
From my perspective there appear to be a number of legitimate perspectives that are both not entirely wrong
1. We should as a rich nation open our socierty to provide refuge for some people who are feeling genuine persecution at the hands of despot war obsessed governments and bigoted cultures.
2. We need to be honest with ourselves that the vast majority of people arriving in boats are young men. With the highest recorded number being from Albania which is not war torn that they are often economic migrants.
Clearly on the one hand we should be opening our boarders to those in need but we also need to be aware that not everyone who arrives in a boat has a right to be here and many are (perhaps understandably) trying their luck in search of a better life. This is why the UK needs a functioning system that looks at each case and importantly considers where in the UK public services can support the new arrivals and where there are jobs. This second part often is poorly managed and as a result integration is poor and people drift to the margins of society and some into crime.
There is a 3rd consideration that again seems missing from the debate is the numbers the UK can legitimately support. The Tories have run the countrys public services very badly and allowed public services to be in as bad a state as they have been in decades, however, even if that was rectified there is a point that if numbers were not managed integration, jobs and welfare would stop functioning and this would be detrimental to everyone, including settled refugees.
It's a real shame this issue is debated with such an esclatory tone and sadly I can see the rhetoric getting far worse before the elections as its the dog whistle issue that the conservatives know might just dig them out of the corrupt mess they have made!
Somebody asked; ‘When will the BBC put a Russian hat on Lineker?’
The backgrounds of BBC senior executives tell how utterly right wing the corporation has become. And Ofcom has failed to demand proportional balance on its flagship political progs. Every major U.K. newspaper is now owned by offshore billionaires who have no interest in civil liberties or social justice.
And nobody - not even Lineker - has the guts to point out that refugees from the global south are often a consequence of proxy wars that we either prosecute or benefit from by arms sales.
Lineker is right to be alarmed by the extreme tenor of Tory rhetoric but he rejected a socialist govt the only administration that might have militated against this drift right. This therefore is on him and all other mugs who couldn’t anticipate the direction of travel.
The backgrounds of BBC senior executives tell how utterly right wing the corporation has become. And Ofcom has failed to demand proportional balance on its flagship political progs. Every major U.K. newspaper is now owned by offshore billionaires who have no interest in civil liberties or social justice.
And nobody - not even Lineker - has the guts to point out that refugees from the global south are often a consequence of proxy wars that we either prosecute or benefit from by arms sales.
Lineker is right to be alarmed by the extreme tenor of Tory rhetoric but he rejected a socialist govt the only administration that might have militated against this drift right. This therefore is on him and all other mugs who couldn’t anticipate the direction of travel.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
I didn't realise you had to call out all bad things to be able to call out one particular bad thing.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Twitter being renowned as a source of academic journal articles....
fatso
Well-Known Member
Let's just re-read some of the headlines about covid19 and substitute the word virus for Jew and see how it looks.
It ain't me that's missing the point.
The immigration debate is not targeted at a specific race, colour, or religion, but hey, let's not allow the facts to prevent a hissy fit.
Wtf is the world coming to when loonies want to deliberately misquote someone in order to try and highlight a nonsensical and frankly offensive argument.
I'm off for a coffee, ...... but nodoubt that will get changed to invade western Europe.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Well….
Saddlebrains
Well-Known Member
Well boring thread
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Thought it was going to be about Big Black Cocks?
fatso
Well-Known Member
I totaly agree, but an ever increasing population and an ageing population will eventually result in its collapse. There will never be enough money to turn it round while demand continues to escalate.
My guess is that eventually we will have to move to a private insurance based system,
Which will effectively mean a 2 tier system with those that can afford health care, and those that can't.
Terrible to comprehend but I fear its becoming inevitable.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
You're right, it will collapse.
And if we don't have an ever increasing population to support the growing number of elderly people who need social care it will collapse even sooner under the current model, (this isn't unique to the UK).
Though no doubt, like other serious challenges, the politicians will keep kicking the can down the road rather than come up with a solution.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
We have to remember that this is a policy that directly bans the most helpless in the world - as if they haven't suffered enough, this government wants to turn them into criminals for fleeing persecution! It would be an absolute nonsense to conflate this with immigration as a whole... but that's what governmentwant people to do.
You just can't be an illegal asylum seeker, and the government's cruel vindictive policy aims to tie into a general immigration debate, whereas what it actually does is persecute a minority.
You just can't be an illegal asylum seeker, and the government's cruel vindictive policy aims to tie into a general immigration debate, whereas what it actually does is persecute a minority.