At last..just simpke common sense, people are adding so much sht that he must have written the longest tweet ever. It really psses me off as well that because you have a tendency to look out for others less fortunate, like Lineker who housed a refugee, get called a snowflake! The JokersI don’t really understand the issue with this. His point was all about the use of language by people in charge to demonise or alienate specific groups.
The most famous example of someone doing that was in 1930s Germany - it’s still a key part of the school curriculum. Yes he could have said “not dissimilar to that used during the reformation” but then most people would think what was that?!
It’s not comparing actions, it’s saying that there are similarities in the enablers.
I don’t really understand the issue with this. His point was all about the use of language by people in charge to demonise or alienate specific groups.
The most famous example of someone doing that was in 1930s Germany - it’s still a key part of the school curriculum. Yes he could have said “not dissimilar to that used during the reformation” but then most people would think what was that?!
It’s not comparing actions, it’s saying that there are similarities in the enablers.
The tories are not the BBC, however much they seem to want to be.I think Lineker is perfectly entitled to express his opinions - whatever they are - and I‘m hugely against ”cancellation” of anyone or groupthink by coercion. But the BBC has to walk a tightrope of impartiality (apart from football !) because of its unique cultural position. Gary knew what he doing and that he was putting the BBC in an impossible position.
It matters not that he was “freelance”, if I employed an expensive leading consultant on a project who was then briefing against or publicly criticising it he’d be off the job in an instant. Words have consequences.
By Invoking Nazi Germany in his original statement and then gleefully doubling down in the following days, left the BBC little choice in the matter: it was a direct challenge - him basically squaring up to them.
I think there’s no way back for him but he’s a very wealthy man so no problem, but I’m sure the BBC will find a way over the coming week to move forward with putting shit punditry back on our screens.
It isn't that difficult? Seriously? It is extremely difficult and trying to trivialise the extent of that difficulty is not very helpful at all.
I believe that may be closer to the Mick Channon spelling.208 pages in and you can't spell his name, make an effort ffs
An idea!!!! So playing devils advocate with this, I'm an asylum seeker, I travel to one of the major European countries but my preference is the UK. Why do I not just go to the British Embassy? Are you saying that currently the British Embassies don't do vetting?You're right that many people could hypothetically afford to fly, and apply for asylum at passport control in the UK. The problem is that they won't be allowed on a flight if they don't have a visa to enter. The absence of safe and legal routes is what compels people to make those dangerous journeys over land and sea.
Thats nonsense we know exactly how to separate genuine from none genuine, we and other countries have been doing it for years, other countries still are. This government decided to dismantle the system, and the system for returning unsuccessful claims and are now overwhelmed with the backlog they created. They won’t go back to the system we had or one that would work for purely ideological reasons.I think you have summed up a very difficult problem exactly. Virtually everyone wants to help genuine cases but the problem is how to identify the genuine cases and how do you deal with the non genuine cases. Apart from the two lunatic extremes of 'let no one in' and 'let everyone in' then no one has come up with an answer. The trouble is that any attempt at a reasoned debate ends up toxic as the far right and far left seem to be very well represented on all political forums.
The tories are taking dehumanising language to the fore ,to whip up their base to get support for the next election , pulling up the drawbridge behind them, the three or so kids of immigrants in the cabinet , making the public hate anyone trying to come here , the days of this kind of language should be over, not continuingI suppose it’s how you view the context, I see it as shock tactic & comparing with Nazi therefore “you nazi’s”. As you rightly describe the key part of the curriculum described the propaganda but equally it concentrated on the death camps. Icertainly wouldn’t cancel him but I’d say you’ve gone a bit far there.
I would say dehumanising has been used throughout history particularly by our empire. Let’s hope that the main issue of migrant welfare improves then I’ll be the first to say the shock tactic worked.
If that is so then I am fully with you. Why do Labour not just suggest that rather than going after criminal gangs?Thats nonsense we know exactly how to separate genuine from none genuine, we and other countries have been doing it for years, other countries still are. This government decided to dismantle the system, and the system for returning unsuccessful claims and are now overwhelmed with the backlog they created. They won’t go back to the system we had or one that would work for purely ideological reasons.
The tories are taking dehumanising language to the fore ,to whip up their base to get support for the next election , pulling up the drawbridge behind them, the two or so kids of immigrants , making the public hate anyone trying to come here , the days of this kind of language should be over, not continuing