Suella Braverman - sacked as Home Secretary (p394)

[Eds]

We can start with the most recent ones she made that Lineker felt he should comment on but frankly it’s not to dissimilar from one’s she has made since becoming Home Secretary.

Not being funny but what is the quote you are referring to, there are so many.

 

[rabby]

I'm not Mystic Meg or a time traveller so I'm unlikely to give you an informed answer.

But I'm not sure you are getting the message. Perhaps you might want to book yourself on a tour or read some books rather than create daft tangents.

How about a uninformed answer then or what's the point in you engaging as you're not adding much to the discussion.

 

[Mr Fraser]

How about a uninformed answer then or what's the point in you engaging as you're not adding much to the discussion.

We've been here before

Recent press reaction to asylum seekers arriving in Britain seems uniquely virulent. Surely this country gave a warm welcome in the past to refugees - such as those escaping the Nazis? Not so. Anne Karpf finds unpleasant parallels, then and now, and discovers how it feels to be the target of...

www.theguardian.com

 

[stonerblue]

what else do you call men on fucking shit money dying in the heat - you selfish prick

Macclesfield - lol, you got 6 fingers?

'slaves' don't get paid 'shit money'. They get paid fuck all dickhead

 

[blueparrot]

How about a uninformed answer then or what's the point in you engaging as you're not adding much to the discussion.

It doesn’t matter if it leads to the same point nobody can know , well obviously it would matter , but for this discussion it doesn’t.
What was said and done in 1930 Germany was very bad, what is being said and done in the the UK now is very bad. In 1930 it led to far worse things, it probably won’t here and nobody is really saying it will but it doesn’t make what the government is doing and saying any better. Better to point it out now though and stop it than take any risks however slight, is it not.

 

[hilts]

By realistic solution you mean rejecting the 1951 UN convention on Refugees on the grounds it wasn’t recent enough? As if lack of immediacy is the problem here. I mean, the US system of Government is based on a 1789 document so I think we can live with the 1951 convention for a few years yet.

More than a few posters have pointed out common sense and realistic solutions such as properly resourcing a vetting system and setting up processing centres in France. The boat crossings are a direct result of Govt policy and stunts like the Braverman bill will do nothing to solve the issue and will only add to the death toll. These stunts also tarnish the UK’s international reputation, but then events over the last seven years or so have pretty much fucked that anyway.

Haha you quoted the US to try and prove a point that old ways are fine. America really? Pmsl

Anyhoo if you think updating something or trying something new to reflect the times we live in is a bad idea then we shall simply have to disagree.

I'm aware everyone is welcome at Bob's house from previous experience:-)

 

[west didsblue]

Seems to be quite a few on here that are proof that Braverman’s contemptible rhetoric works.

 

[rabby]

It doesn’t matter if it leads to the same point nobody can know , well obviously it would matter , but for this discussion it doesn’t.
What was said and done in 1930 Germany was very bad, what is being said and done in the the UK now is very bad. In 1930 it led to far worse things, it probably won’t here and nobody is really saying it will but it doesn’t make what the government is doing and saying any better. Better to point it out now though and stop it than take any risks however slight, is it not.

Good post, although I would take out the word probably,it most definitely won't happen here.
For all our faults we are a fairly tolerant country.

 

[west didsblue]

Good post, although I would take out the word probably,it most definitely won't happen here.
For all our faults we are a fairly tolerant country.

It is highly unlikely that it will ever happen in this country but it’s sad that government ministers are prepared to use the same sort of rhetoric that led to it in Germany just for short term populist reasons.

 

[hilts]

I’ve just posted 2 links to lists of the most densely populated places and there’s nowhere in the UK on either. Taking the country as a whole we’re quite densely populated compared to many but the impact of being densely populated can only be felt locally and even the most densely populated areas in this country are nowhere near the higher density areas around the world. That’s why it’s a red herring. No need to be so sensitive about someone disagreeing with your point.

A fine point if one thinks highly populated areas are the goal or even an okay thing.

The argument seems to be an increased population may make areas more dense but other places are worse so what's the problem.

What a tremendous outlook. The kind of short sighted fuckwittery politicians usually get pelters for.


I say you sir, yes you, can you stop shitting in this river please I fish here.

Do you realise that other rivers have more sewage in?

Really? Well I may as well take a dump while I'm here.

It is not a sin to admit some things come with negatives. A hole won't open up. Your 'side' will not have lost. Grown ups understand this.