BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 09:45 AM

Steve, we have both, from time to time gone a bit over the top responding to trolling rather than bite our tongues.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 08:57 AM

I agree with all that, Rain Dog. Had Gary given one or two examples of the words used ("invasion" "illegals," etc.,) it would have been far harder for the Mail (and possibly others) to misrepresent his tweet, but that's Twitter (and the Mail) for you. As for being careful as to what we say and what words we use, it's my impression that there are far more attack-dogs ready to demonise people who are on the left for even the slightest ambiguity or carelessness of expression. Jeremy Corbyn gave Starmer the pretext to throw him out of the PLP by making what I thought was an anodyne and fairly inoffensive riposte to a report that had basically condemned him comprehensively. Should he have said it? Did he have the right to say it? Now ask the same questions about the Alan Sugar remarks I posted. If there's an element involved in the right to free speech that constrains some, but not others, not to speak up, I'd call that a slippery slope.

I actually think that a far bigger issue that Gary Lineker and Match Of The Day has been thrown up here. We've had a number of Tory threats to democracy since Johnson took power (Theresa May wasn't exactly innocent either), and I think we are definitely seeing another one here. The problem is that we have an opposition who are likely to be in power soon but who can't see through the stinking ideology behind the Tory outrages.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 08:19 AM

Exactly the point I was making, RD.

The BBC, impartial? Not under this bunch of wealth-grabbing, tax-dodging Tories we’re stuck with for the next eighteen months.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 08:01 AM

"I was especially amused by the bit, just over half way through, where the interviewer asks him, if Lineker had said that he supported Suella Braverman’s policy, that it’s ‘brilliant’, would he have been removed from Air for that? Davie replies, “I’m not going to get into hypotheticals”."

Well if he had tweeted in support of the policy it would have attracted little to no objections. There would have been hardly anyone calling for the BBC to remove him from the air. Might be slightly different if he said something in favour of the anti vax movement or either any view at all about trans issues. If it was just an opinion what would it matter?

I don't think it is about his tweet as such. It is about how some have seized on his tweet for their own ends, to both divert attention and also attack the BBC. Lineker was aware of that possibility but chose to ignore it. I am not sure that was the wisest move.

Nearly all of us have been in situations where we have had to bite our tongues for any number of reasons. We might think twice about how we phrase something.If he had not made the reference to Germany, would his tweet have provoked the reaction that it has?

This morning I was even thinking that the government uses terms like invasion deliberately. They know it causes a reaction rather than people looking closely at their policy.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 07:50 AM

Mail online:
?"Lineker, 62, was temporarily dropped as Match of the Day's presenter on Friday after the BBC decreed his 'Nazi' jibe tweet that compared the Home Office's immigration policy to 1930s Germany breached impartiality rules."

The "Nazi" jibe tweet:
“There is no huge influx. We take far fewer refugees than other major European countries. 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, and I’m out of order?”

No jibe, no mention of Nazis. No comparison of Home Office immigration policy to 1930s Germany. It was simply about the language used.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 07:20 AM

"It is refreshing that we are having a rational debate on this subject without the usual suspects resorting to personal insults."

With the greatest possible respect, SBS, I don't think that this sort of comment, ironically, is at all helpful in our keeping the debate civil. Firstly, it's a tediously cliched phrase, overused mainly by American contributors. Secondly, it's generally used here in order to avoid naming names, that being the far more honest (though possibly the less diplomatic) way of proceeding. Thirdly, I suspect that I'm a suspect (see what I did there?). Two alternative scenarios: "I wish the usual suspects would shut up" or, "Steve, shut up." I know which one I'd rather be on the receiving end of, being a direct sort of chap

I'll duck as I grab me coat...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 07:06 AM

Tim Davie was a Tory politician in the 1990s and is still a rock-solid Tory. For several years he was deputy chair of the Hammersmith and Fulham Conservative Association.

In 2019 Alan Sugar, superstar for almost two decades of his "Apprentice" show on the BBC, tweeted a mocked-up photo of Jeremy Corbyn and Hitler sitting in a car together. Around the same time, there was a huge front-page photo of him in the Sun, pointing to the camera with the banner headline "Corbyn, you're fired."

In an article, Sugar said that “backing Boris Johnson is the only was Britain can escape its Brexit quagmire”. He said that Jeremy Corbyn “is clueless on how the economy works” and added “his £1.2 trillion spending splurge is complete madness”, despite the party’s manifesto being the only one fully costed and approved by more than 160 of the country’s most prominent economists.

Was he sanctioned or suspended? What do you think?

His henchwoman on the Apprentice, Karren Brady, is a Tory peer in the House of Lords. She has addressed a Tory party conference and was a supporter of Osborne's austerity politics. Sugar's male sidekick, Claude Littner, openly endorsed the Tories in the 2019 election.

Anyone care to defend any of this on the grounds of "impartiality," or would "double standards" be a better starting point?

There are plenty of other examples of this sort thing that make Gary Lineker look like a fluffy cuddly kitten.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 06:31 AM

Interesting interview with Tim Davie here, where he roundly defends the ‘impartiality’ of the BBC. All very amusing, bullshitting stuff.

I was especially amused by the bit, just over half way through, where the interviewer asks him, if Lineker had said that he supported Suella Braverman’s policy, that it’s ‘brilliant’, would he have been removed from Air for that? Davie replies, “I’m not going to get into hypotheticals”.

Of course you’re not, Tim, of course you’re not. :-(

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 05:47 AM

p.s. It is refreshing that we are having a rational debate on this subject without the usual suspects resorting to personal insults.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 05:45 AM

I did elaborate on my post just as mudcat went down yesterday. Unfortunately I can't now remember what I wrote. My other post was highlighting incidents where individuals and groups of individuals were historically sanctioned for dissenting or speaking against state rhetoric. I am not defending the right to hate speech and there are plenty of articles on the freedom of speech vs hate speech paradox to explain why.

In this matter Lineker made a factual observation of the nature of speech used by ministers and a comparison to narrative used in Nazi Germany in the 30s and 40s against a section of humanity. If said government takes umbridge over this, it is their problem. It is not our duty as individuals to defend the government, but we can if we choose to. If anything, the upper echelons of the BBC have breached impartiality by, seemingly under pressure from the tory party, sanctioning a person for stating a personal opinion which include facts that show the government in a bad light. In effect the BBC are attempting to censor history... bit like what Orwell was writing about.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 05:29 AM

Roger Bolton from The Guardian last Thursday.

"I agree with Gary Lineker on refugees. But he should delete his tweet, for the sake of the BBC"


Roger Bolton

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 05:13 AM

I doubt Lineker will be forced to do anything. He is the one who might have to choose what he wants to do. He might want to consider how his choices affect the BBC.

i have little to no interest in what Lineker thinks about anything. I am not on twitter and I have never searched to see what he is saying on twitter. I am only made aware of what he has posted when it ends up as so called 'news'.

In the last few days we have heard lots about the BBC and Lineker's tweet. We have heard next to nothing about the government's boat policy and very little about the UK/French (or is that EU) agreement on how to deal with the "boat' problem. Who does that suit best?

For years we have seen people arriving here by either hiding in vehicles or taking risky boat trips. When they came by vehicle there was less to see. Once the boat arrivals became the norm the images became more stark. The government has had years to deal with it but it still continues. There are no easy solutions but a cynic might say that it suits the government for the 'problem' to continue, especially with an election coming up.

Lineker might want to consider how his actions will affect the BBC. I happen to think that if you take the Beeb's shilling (or is that our shilling) you have some responsibility to try and avoid damaging the BBC. His tweet did not cause that damage. The damage is caused by the reaction to the tweet. He was aware of that from past experience but he chose to post anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 01:41 AM

So are you suggesting if Lineker did get forced to issue an apology it should be that there were better analogies than the 30s in Germany, including the Mosley 'blackshirts' in Britain in the 30s, the McCarthy blacklists of innocents accused of being unAmerican, and Soviet Occupied Czechoslovakia? And, of course, quite a number of organisations currently banned in the UK for hate speech?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 11 Mar 23 - 04:06 AM

What is happening now is that the government are putting pressure on the BBC to blacklist those who do not toe the government line - parallels to the US folk movement vs the HUAC. Also read Milan Kundera re: what happened when those in Soviet Occupied Czechoslovakia spoke out of line.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 11 Mar 23 - 03:53 AM

I have never watched MOTD because of my oft-proclaimed lack of interest in sport, but it is interesting to see there is talk of the Premier League players also refusing to take part in post-match interviews.

It all brings to mind how Ratner demolished his jewellery company with a single ill-judged quip. The BBC looks close to demolishing one of its core products in a meeting lasting minutes.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 11 Mar 23 - 03:49 AM

Calling out extremist rhetoric is not becoming a mouthpiece for the extreme left (or the extreme right), but a voice for human decency. We al know what happens when media refuses to challange the state, not just in Nazi occupied, but also Soviet occupied countries. Visit Eastern European countries and their are enough museums that show what happened.

In terms of the tweet, to highlighting similarities between the current government's language and the language used by the Nazi's in Germany is not spouting an opinion but reporting fact, and it is none of the BBC's business if holding a mirror up to what ministers say reveal their dangerous narrative. We must never let governments dictate what can and can't be reported, even if the government in power doesn't like it and shows them up for what they are.

If the tories have faith in their policies, then it is up to them to put forward coherent counter-arguments to the contrary, not force dissenters and whistleblowers into silence.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 11 Mar 23 - 03:30 AM

The other thing that crosses my mind is that this seems like one of those confected ‘distraction’ issues which the Tory government and their lackeys in the press and media are so keen to leap on when something else is happening that they don’t want Joe Public to notice.

Wonder what they’re up to on the quiet?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 11 Mar 23 - 03:26 AM

”Well I would have to disagree with you there. I think it is safe to say that he did criticise the policy.”

OK, let’s accept that he did. The fact remains that his comments were made on his private Twitter account, as a private individual. He did not make them as a BBC employee on his BBC Twitter a/c. Are you saying, as the BBC appear to be, that anyone connected with the BBC is not allowed to have personal opinions, or to express those opinions on their own, personal SM account(s)?

If so, to a simple soul like me, that sounds dangerously close to censorship.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 11 Mar 23 - 02:58 AM

Well I would have to disagree with you there. I think it is safe to say that he did criticise the policy. He is not alone there.

The BBC are between a rock and a hard place on this one. Lineker knew that before he tweeted what he did. I said before that I doubt if he is that concerned about losing his job. It is not something that the BBC can threaten him with.

UK parties tend to support the BBC when they are not in power. They are less keen on it once they gain power.

I don't get the sense that the majority of the UK were that bothered by Lineker's tweet, even if they did not agree with it. Tory spin doctors probably welcomed it. We live in an age were it is getting harder and harder to have a serious debate about anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 11 Mar 23 - 02:33 AM

”Richard Ayre, former controller of editorial policy at the BBC, who also served as a member of the regulator Ofcom's content board, said the corporation had "no choice" but to take action against Lineker after his tweets criticising the government's asylum policy.”

Lineker didn’t ‘criticise the government’s asylum policy’, he criticised some of the language being used by the proponents of that policy. Not the same thing, not the same thing at all.

And his tweet was made on his personal Twitter account, not his BBC one. He spoke as a private individual, not in the BBC’s name. Nit-picking defenders of the indefensible please take careful note.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 09:22 PM

The BBC is required, by its charter, to provide impartial news/views.

Mr Walker's crisps avoided that requirement!

BBC Charter

If the BBC becomes a mouthpiece for the extreme left (or the extreme right) then it is failing in its charter requirements, and its public funding is called into question.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 08:41 PM

We're talking about the establishment vs. us, SPB. When you consider the right-wing hegemony at the top of the Beeb, plus the demonisation of the BBC by this government, it isn't hard to see where all this is going: the Beeb's voice eviscerated, the corporation chopped into bits, British culture destroyed. Nobody there in high places to fight back. Why would lackeys bother to fight back?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 08:28 PM

Sorry, that was posted by accident before I had the chance to check it out and comment on bits of it. I got it from the BBC news website. I suppose the main thing in the extract is the rather beige response from Labour. Oh well.

I note that the following bigwigs have all come out in support of Gary: Emily Maitlis, Jon Sopel, Tim Farron, Nicola Sturgeon and ( wait for it...) Jeremy Clarkson.

What a bloody mess. Oh, by the way, Tim Davie, the BBC Director General, is a true-blue Tory who makes no mystery of his right-wing predilections. That's on top of the chairman, a donor to the Tory Party and the facilitator of a massive loan to Boris Johnson. Well who'd have thought it. No wonder they don't like Gary. As for me, I won't be watching the farce that will masquerade as Match Of The Day. Unless, of course, Gary is at the helm. I've seen it more than suggested...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 08:26 PM

So basically Ayre is saying that if you work for the BBC you are not allowed to call out what borders on neo-naziism? Maybe he is hoping to get a job working for the daily mail

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 07:30 PM

Richard Ayre, former controller of editorial policy at the BBC, who also served as a member of the regulator Ofcom's content board, said the corporation had "no choice" but to take action against Lineker after his tweets criticising the government's asylum policy.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's PM programme, he said: "I think it was inevitable. He [Lineker] has the letters BBC written across his forehead and yet he's plunged right into the most controversial story of the day."
He said BBC Director General Tim Davie had "clearly tried" to reach an agreement with Lineker but failed, adding: "It's inevitable now that having in effect not sacked him but removed him temporarily at least, the BBC will now come under a torrent of criticism saying it's acting under the government's behest."
A Labour source told the BBC that the corporation should "rethink their decision".
It said: "The BBC's cowardly decision to take Gary Lineker off air is an assault on free speech in the face of political pressure.
"Tory politicians lobbying to get people sacked for disagreeing with government policies should be laughed at, not pandered to. The BBC should rethink their decision."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 04:31 PM

So they're going to do MOTD without presenters. Just show the footie clips. Well that is not Match of the Day, is it. Idiots.

From Jeremy Corbyn on Twitter:

Well done
@GaryLineker
for standing up for refugees.

Well done
@IanWright
for showing the meaning of solidarity.

Now, let's mobilise against a politics of cruelty, and defeat this inhumane, illegal & immoral legislation.

One of those incredibly decent people I was talking about. Would he (unlike Starmer) have said the same had he still been leader? Of course he would!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 03:57 PM

Micah has come out in support, as has Gary Neville (though he doesn't do MOTD), as has the wonderful Alex Scott and Mark Chapman, who does the Sunday MOTD. Well done Beeb for kowtowing to the Tory hard right and shitting in your own bed. At least I can watch Liverpool demolishing Bournemouth at lunchtime tomorrow on BT Sport. Dunno what the Beeb will do about MOTD tomorrow, but it's going to take some bloody imagination I should think. I think I'd better start a boycott (though I imagine it's already been done...)

I know some of you buggers don't appreciate footie in the same way as me, and all power to your elbows for that. But fer chrissake there's a principle at stake here...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 03:03 PM

Does anyone know if there’s any truth in the rumour that tomorrow night’s ‘Match of the Day’ is to be hosted by Laura Kuenssberg and Fiona Bruce? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 01:43 PM

And well done Alan Shearer! Now come on, Micah...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 01:36 PM

The BBC needs to bloody grow a pair. So does Starmer. A couple of Labour terms would seal the Beeb's safety. Yours sincerely, Steve, up here in cloud cuckoo land.

It seems that the Daily Telegraph is the main anti-BBC yappy dog. On the side of the farming lobby and the grousemoor boys. Kill off the birds and insects, why not. Ruinously degrade tens of thousands of acres of upland so that a few entitled men wearing very stupid pants can shoot at birds that are five times as intelligent as they are. No problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 12:56 PM

Well it seems that Lineker is not too bothered about keeping his BBC job.

I am not sure about Paolo Di Canio being the new presenter of Match of the Day.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 12:50 PM

What's going on in this country, John, is the rapid erosion of democracy, and we are not hearing the voice of protest from the opposition. Trump is likely to be the next US president and I'm still not convinced that the Tories are a lost cause. Just imagine... Or let's stop imagining and bloody wake up...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 12:45 PM

The BBC is running scared of the right-wing farming/ landowner lobby, the battle troops of the Tories. Farmers, among the biggest environmental vandals on earth.

Ian Wright is refusing to do Match Of The Day tomorrow in solidarity with Gary Lineker. Let's have lots more protesting voices from the decent people we still have in the country. Come on, Micah Richards and Alan Shearer...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 12:02 PM

And now the BBC is refusing to show an episode of Sir David Attenborough’s new series on British wildlife because of ‘fears of a Right Wing backlash’. Dear Dog in Heaven, WTF is going on in our country?

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/mar/10/david-attenborough-bbc-wild-isles-episode-rightwing-backlash-fears

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 11:43 AM

The BBC have announced that Gary Lineker is to ‘step back from presenting Match of the Day, until agreement is reached on SM use’.

He tweeted his comment on his private, personal Twitter a/c, nothing to do with the BBC or Match of the Day. What more proof do we need that the BBC is the Tories’ mouthpiece, and that the top-brass are the Tories’ puppets?

It stinks.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 09:25 AM

Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance: Herself it was who listened to the wireless programme ("Antisocial": Radio 4, 12:00 GMT today), and summarised it at me, fortissimo. By the time I got there, the discussion had moved on.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 08:21 AM

MaJoC are you sure about that?

The radio was on but i was not really listening to it. I did look up the story though.

From the BBC

Police speak to child about death threats after Quran damaged at Wakefieldschool

"Police said they had investigated a report of a "malicious communications offence". A force spokesperson added: "A suspect was identified, who was also a child, and they were given words of advice by an officer."

The force added they recorded the damage done to the religious text as a "hate incident" but officers were satisfied "no criminal offences were committed"."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 08:03 AM

Am I the only one who perceives a delicious, whilst at the same time vomit-inducing, irony in seeing and hearing past immigrants, or at least the progeny of past immigrants, at the top of government - Fishy Sunak, Cruella Braverman, cone-head ‘Honest Jim’ Cleverley, et al - railing against those who wish to immigrate to the UK currently, and trying to justify their racism by claiming ‘it’s what the people (of the UK) want, and expect of us’?

What a f**king bunch of A-holes.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 07:53 AM

”Refugees" are replaced by "asylum seekers" (so, rather than running away from something awful, they're coming here to get something). "Illegal immigrants:" well I was born a human being, just like every one of those people in the boats. I might have done a few illegal things (my speeding points have just expired, actually), but I'm not an illegal person. No-one could ever have helped being born, with the possible exception of Jesus, so we can't be illegal people. OK, we could use those expressions carelessly, but we should beware of allowing them to become embedded. "Criminal gangs" is a form of words I won't use, mainly because I won't talk Tory talk, but also because it's a woolly way of describing people I know nothing about (and neither does Sue Ellen Braverman). I notice that the Patels and Bravermen of this world steer away (hypocritically) of referring to "foreigners." I wonder why. Then there's those three-word slogans. I suppose the Tories think that the gullible British public can't cope with more than three words at a time. So it has to be "Take back control!" or "Get brexit done!" or "Stop the boats!"

Amen to all of that.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 07:43 AM

I think I have answered that one Rain Dog. A good start would be to ensure fast and efficient processing of applications.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 07:35 AM

Just heard on the wireless:

An autistic Muslim lad takes a Koran into school on a dare. The lad who scuffed up the Koran gets a criminal record, which will follow him around (and affect his job prospects) for life; those who issued death threats get councelling.

England seems to be going back to the mindset of the 18th Century, where property was more valued than life.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 07:35 AM

Imagine that you are the Home Secretary. How would you deal with the situation?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 07:10 AM

Cruella really is a nasty piece of shit. Her latest '100 Million are coming here' aimed at winding up the gammons and racists that voted for brexit is rubustly refuted by Full Fact. An organisation I recommend everyone has bookmarked on their browsers.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics -
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 06:11 AM

In the early 1980s I bought a small paperback book called In A Dark Time (published in an era in which the dread of a potential nuclear war was palpable, but the book's still highly relevant today). The book was one of snippets, quotes and poems. One chapter was called "Words." It showed how the words we choose to use can be instruments of manipulation. In the present context, the repetition of certain words and phrases by politicians are often attempts to manipulate. Some are just annoying: if I hear Starmer et al. burbling on about how the Tories have only "sticking plaster" solutions, well I have this big box of ping-pong balls to chuck at the telly... but some are more insidious. "Refugees" are replaced by "asylum seekers" (so, rather than running away from something awful, they're coming here to get something). "Illegal immigrants:" well I was born a human being, just like every one of those people in the boats. I might have done a few illegal things (my speeding points have just expired, actually), but I'm not an illegal person. No-one could ever have helped being born, with the possible exception of Jesus, so we can't be illegal people. OK, we could use those expressions carelessly, but we should beware of allowing them to become embedded. "Criminal gangs" is a form of words I won't use, mainly because I won't talk Tory talk, but also because it's a woolly way of describing people I know nothing about (and neither does Sue Ellen Braverman). I notice that the Patels and Bravermen of this world steer away (hypocritically) of referring to "foreigners." I wonder why. Then there's those three-word slogans. I suppose the Tories think that the gullible British public can't cope with more than three words at a time. So it has to be "Take back control!" or "Get brexit done!" or "Stop the boats!"

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 05:42 AM

Documents, Rain Dog? And what documents do you suppose refugees in overcrowded small boats might have? Suppose they did have documents. Would you care to tell us how that might help the situation?

I should like to robustly defend Gary Lineker on a couple of fronts. First, he is not a political correspondent, a Newsnight interviewer or a newsreader. As far as I'm concerned, he is as fully entitled to exercise free speech to as everyone else. Of course, using our right to free speech exposes us all to potential praise, ridicule or condemnation, which is as it should be if we do believe in free speech. But these scurrilous attempts to have him gagged, reprimanded or sacked for saying something outside of the BBC and unconnected with football, or remarks that his comments are "unacceptable," are simply confected Tory outrage. Second, you don't have to agree with him, though if you examine his comment about thirties Germany a bit more closely there are plenty of parallels, particularly with regard to the demonising of people who "don't fit." That regime also found ways of denying citizenship (ring a bell?) and getting certain sections of people in his country characterised as non-persons. All of that pandered to a population that was easily manipulated, after years of privation and the global depression, into finding someone to blame. Ring any more bells? What he was saying was meant as a warning as to how things could go if we don't wake up. Entirely valid, in my view, though no-one's saying you have to agree in part or whole, and his language was calm and measured (he didn't inflame matters by using the words "Nazi" or "Hitler," for example).

Finally, there's the gobsmacking hypocrisy of his Tory critics who will do anything to besmirch anyone seen as a bit leftie, or, of course, the BBC. The hallowed Tory-donor chairman of the Beeb was a political appointment, made by the man for whom the said appointee had just fixed up an eight hundred grand loan. Mudcat is a family show, folks, so mild swearwords only, please...

(However, I'm having to internalise some slightly more vicious swearwords when I contemplate the utterly toothless response of Labour to all this. I'm still weeping and I'm still a member. I'm questioning my own sanity here...)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 05:28 AM

"Cleverly opposes Essex immigration centre as he urges French to do more
Foreign secretary says former RAF base in his constituency is unsuitable as he enters Paris talks about stopping Channel boats"

While the Illegal Immigration Bill is morally foul, it is also completely impractical. Braverman tells us more immigrations centres will be built. Expect every Tory MP to agree with Cleverly: Yes, of course, but not in my constituency."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 05:17 AM

The policy will only prevent those who come over in boats from seeking asylum and ensuring that people are in a safe environment until their asylum claim is assessed.

All the government policy will do is ensure that people arriving will be more likely to fall into the hands of organised criminals, people smugglers, modern slavery, and sexual exploitation.

the numbers will most likely still be their, but will not exist in any official capacity, so the tories will wave the numbers around and claim how successful their policy is.

Of course those who are actively seeking asylum and granted refugee status will be those who will be blamed from any increase in the crime rate through organised gangs who exploit undocumented arrivals that slip below the system.

This makes me wonder where the torys' 'dark money' comes from.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 04:47 AM

It’s Tory gaslighting and the start of 2024 electioneering - nothing more, nothing less - to impress the DM, DE, Scum, and Torygraph readers.

I’m just waiting for the ‘Anti-semitism’ horse-shit to begin - then we’ll know the Tory Election Campaign has begun in earnest.

Anybody else see cone-head ‘Honest Jim’ Cleverley bullshitting as usual on BBC Breakfast this morning? Made me want to vomit.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 04:00 AM

Dealing quickly and efficiently with asylum applications would be a good start. Instead this government prefer to turn those seeking asylum into scapegoats for their own ineptitude.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 10 Mar 23 - 03:52 AM

You have people trying to enter this country by crossing the Channel in small boats. I think that we can all agree that this is not a safe thing to do.

It appears that those arriving this way are paying criminal gangs for their passage. I think we can agree that this is not a good thing.

It is reported that some of those arriving this way do not have any documentation with them. Why is that?

They set off from France. How did they get to France? Have they already claimed refugee status in another EU country?

It was reported last month that there were 160,000 people here in the UK awaiting for their refugee status to be denied or confirmed. No doubt that will include most of the over 40,000 who arrived by boat last year. It also seems that the majority of those 160,000 will eventually be allowed to remain in the UK.

I can understand why people want to come to the UK. For all we might moan about it, this is still a good country to come to. I think that most would agree that we have to have some sort of control over who is allowed to enter and for how long they can stay. The rest of the world operates in much the same way.

How then do we deal with it? I have said before that I don't think I could do a job that decided who stays and who goes.

Iive in Dover. I know people who work for Border Force and people who work for refugee charities. I know people who volunteer for the RNLI. In fact the current situation has brought jobs to this part of the South East.

Now we have the latest so called solution from the Tories. I will be surprised if it makes much difference. We shall wait and see. I don't have a 'solution'. I cannot say that i have seen any sensible answer so far.

The end of last year I went for a walk on the seafront. It was the morning after a boat sank in the channel and there were fears many lives had been lost. The pier and part of the seafront had been closed by the authorities. They had been expecting to bring in the bodies of those that had drowned. As it turned out, there were fewer casualties than expected.

As I walked back I noticed a guy with his child in a pushchair, out for a walk. He had not been able to walk along the closed pier so he headed in the direction from where i had just come. I stopped him and pointed out that area was also closed. He asked me why and I told him what I thought the reason was. He had not heard the news. He thanked me and we both went on our way.

The guy was not from the UK. As I walked away I felt a bit guilty. There was the two of us, 3 if you include his child, out for a walk on a cold, sunny morning, while out there in the channel people were searching for the bodies of some poor souls.

I still don't know the best way to 'deal' with it.