Suella Braverman - sacked as Home Secretary (p394)

It’s the media narrative that gets all the hate on the crossing!

They could come from a different angle ! Saying we going to have possessing offices and buildings in France and England we going to process them as quick as we can because this country need young healthy mend and woman to come here wanting to work to make this country much greater! We don’t want them risking there lives on the channel crossings, so all young motivated immigrants are welcome!
 
I'd say the bigotry and the racism present in the thread are more disgraceful than a few cuss words.
To paraphrase the old saying;
’sticks and stones - and fire-bombs- may break my bones, but names will never hurt me’.
I haven’t heard of many people who want a fair and sensible immigration policy and some humanity to be shown, hurling incendiary devices around.
 
To paraphrase the old saying;
’sticks and stones - and fire-bombs- may break my bones, but names will never hurt me’.
I haven’t heard of many people who want a fair and sensible immigration policy and some humanity to be shown, hurling incendiary devices around.

Me neither, and yet some people seem to find more violence in the idea of someone correctly calling Braverman a c*nt than they do in Suella Braverman's actions. Pre-school levels of emotional intelligence.
 
Me neither, and yet some people seem to find more violence in the idea of someone correctly calling Braverman a c*nt than they do in Suella Braverman's actions. Pre-school levels of emotional intelligence.
Absolutely, but assuming we ideally want the racists (on here and in general) to see our point of view and change theirs calling them cunts, nonces, nazis etc may not be the best way to achieve this - just as calling people stupid, racist etc didn't convert them from leavers to remainers. I'm not saying abuse isn't deserved, just that it probably doesn't achieve anything except shutting down discussion and entrenching views. People will just hunker down in their bunkers and quietly do their thing in the ballot box - hey presto a Tory landslide and brexit, or in this case maybe a narrow Tory win and repatriations.

I'm not naive enough to think we can convert all the bigots to libertarian values, but even a few could tip the scales of a narrow vote from a couple of % one way to the other.
 
How about the fact that he stigmatises them as being illegal entrants to the country based on nothing more substantial than that they are foreign?

By the way, if you are being persecuted by (say) the Afghan government, if they see you queuing up at the British Embassy in Kabul, do you think the persecution would reduce, increase or stay the same?

Has he ever said he has issue with immigration as a concept? If so then yeah racist otherwise he’s just a twat who is using smoke and mirrors to deflect.

Regarding the second question. Interesting one that. You’d have to conclude it wouldn’t reduce the risk but what is the alternative? No immigration process whatsoever and we just tell them to pitch up at the airport and we’ll keep sending planes to ferry them to the UK? That seems wholly unworkable as a standard operating procedure given hostile governments would never allow it and would require military intervention - possible on an ad-hoc basis where genocide or all at war is occurring but it will have a very short time of operation (such as the evacuation from Kabul - ignoring how that didn’t work for some/many trying to flee as that’s a problem of implementation not concept). Anyone routinely fleeing some level of persecution based on religion or sexual orientation etc will likely flee under their own steam as they do today…once they present at first safe country then the UK should have a means to allow them to apply for asylum here via the consulate - additionally they can seek refuge in their local British embassy presuming their local government isn’t hostile. Those who want to come for economic reasons can apply at their local embassy/consulate.

There is no perfect solution to the problem - only choices. We choose to make it difficult to arrive here - we choose to then spend huge amounts of time, effort and money on removing those who take the difficult route. In short we are dealing with the consequence not the cause. If we brought in a fairer system then removing those who don’t qualify to live here would be much simpler to implement given they would have exhausted all legal routes before opting on the only one left to them which would be an illegal route.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.