I’d like to know how much this succession of stunts is costing us all? This Rwanda farce must be into the billions by now with all the legal fees etc
A “bargain” when compared to HS2 😳
She needs the air miles; nothing more to it than that...
If it impresses her that much, she could just go and live there?
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1637112105022246912?t=UVpnSC6u-eS8thkF1EOaAA&s=19
Odd that Tories are so opposed to paying for public housing in the UK but so keen to pay for it in Rwanda.
Did Suella have time to pop in on PM Kagame and ask him how his militia's war in the Democratic Republic of Congo is going? 800,000 people have fled their homes since last March, but that's probably not relevant to anything else that's happening in the world...
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2023/mar/14/trail-of-war-crimes-left-by-drc-rebel-group-as-recent-attacks-leave-300000-displaced
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/02/06/dr-congo-atrocities-rwanda-backed-m23-rebels
Well this is definitely a caption competition…
Am I the only one that thinks she looks like Wallace?
In this picture from the Mirror she looks like a Pygmy Tarsier
Suella looks like a Pygmy Tarsier from Indonesia
https://twitter.com/natgeo/status/1180096587646803968?s=46&t=qvPR6lBfBXtAWZ-6beFWyA
She’s going to regret that pose,
https://twitter.com/thumbsuk/status/1637427965964300288?s=61&t=27Xz8oI3pGlaNEQvowJBcg
I came to post that picture, it's going to run for years that one.
She looks like one of my Trolls.
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/SKDX1Tvz/20230319-182933.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/SKDX1Tvz/20230319-182933.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
She’s going to regret that pose
This is my favourite so far
https://twitter.com/mrnathannelson/status/1637421219124224000?s=46&t=1lK7Dw1b6RqGJyvufO-trQ
Too much?
[URL= https://images2.imgbox.com/3d/7c/8jVIWuaN_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://images2.imgbox.com/3d/7c/8jVIWuaN_o.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
Too much? Yes IMO.
That pose reminds me of this
She needs a custom belt buckle to really let her personality shine through.
tjagain
Full Member
Too much? Yes IMO.
I'm going to wait and see what Gary Lineker thinks.
She needs a custom belt buckle to really let her personality shine through.
[url= https://i.ibb.co/fHxWBBR/Frka-So-CXw-AEmbbk.pn g" target="_blank">https://i.ibb.co/fHxWBBR/Frka-So-CXw-AEmbbk.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
This is better.
[url= https://i.ibb.co/0nJXykw/skynews-manston-migrants-centre-5957527.pn g" target="_blank">https://i.ibb.co/0nJXykw/skynews-manston-migrants-centre-5957527.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/priti-patel-sue-suella-braverman-asylum-b2303833.html
"After being informed she would be blamed for the overcrowding problem, Ms Patel phoned cabinet secretary Simon Case and said if claims weren’t retracted she would start legal action for defamation, according to the Mail on Sunday."
Oh dear.
Well played
I'm pretty sure she doesn't cast
a shadow you know.
mattyfez & tj - no, not too much.
It starts with the words and then progresses from there.
Maybe and I have said in the past these Tories are veering towards facism but I find it hard to see humour in the holocaust. Its just my opinion. giving her an SS badge fair enough
Humour isn't always about laugh out loud funny. Sometimes it's just the best tool for holding a mirror up to society.
What mattyfez posted didn't get me roflmao. My response was more, "ha, yeah, Erm worrying bit of foreshadowing actually."
Not hilarious but I really useful point to make that hasn't diminished my perception of the horror of the Holocaust or it's perpetrators.
It does serve to highlight just how easily society could be lead down that path again.
Surely the single most offensive thing anyone could do to the memory of those who suffered directly and indirectly is to let it happen again.
I agree. Its just something about using the holocaust in this way seems distasteful to me but the use of other images of human suffering does not? Is the holocaust a special case?
I'm conflicted about it. I guess because of the huge emotional impact actually vising Auschwitz had on me.
It's 9ne of, if not the, most 3xtrem3 events of the last 100 years. I get why there's a mixed bag of responses and why some would rather it remain a personal contemplation issue.
Obviously, I'm in the camp that thinks it should remain in the public consciousness but having said that, I'd hate for it to be over used and normalised.
Its just something about using the holocaust in this way seems distasteful to me but the use of other images of human suffering does not? Is the holocaust a special case?
I'm more worried that a sense of solemnity coupled with notions of politeness stops people drawing such parallels when they present themselves.
Is it 'funny'? Probably not, but is it apt? Unfortunately it is.
There's a visible kernel of fascist ideology in the Tory party, the more it goes unchallenged or ignored the bolder they become and the more they push their narratives...
I'm looking forward to this week's crop of 'Suella laughs at...' memes...
Funny peculiar rather than funny ha-ha.
Humour isn’t always about laugh out loud funny.
So in what non-laughing out loud way is posting a picture of Auschwitz funny?
And if you think the Rwanda policy is comparable to the mass murder of 1.1 million people at Auschwitz how do you explain that it looks possible the European Court of Human Rights might be lifting its ban on the deportation flights?
Mr lynch ,the way I see this playing out is this…
Prisons are expensive, so why not ship our prisoners out to Rwanda? To keep them from being home sick they can earn their keep in farms or factories.
This will be such a success that the cops will be instructed to find as many slaves to keep mr moggs factories profitable. All this far from the view of human rights .
A very slippery slope . The tories are born to hate. That includes you, me and anyone who doesn’t play golf.
The perpetrators of this need to be shown for what they are..fascist scum.
Prisons are expensive, so why not ship our prisoners out to Rwanda?
What are you talking about? If it happens the people that will be sent to Rwanda would not otherwise be in prison.
And the Rwanda policy has absolutely nothing to do with saving money. It is in fact be ridiculously, and unjustifiably, expensive.
You can't just make stuff up to suit your narrative.
Well I guess you can, but it won't help to win people over when it is obviously nonsense.
To keep them from being home sick they can earn their keep in farms or factories.
I've been to Rwanda, spent 3 weeks working on a project on Lake Kivu.
The people are very friendly and it felt quite safe, not like some other African countries.
However it is absolutely poverty stricken, the vast majority have absolutely nothing. They scratch a living out of very poor land.
The idea that refugees would be able to "earn their keep" is ludicrous. Their is no real industry and the farming is mostly subsidence.
What I'm about to ask may sound factitious but it's not meant that way, I don't know the answer and I'm genuinely interested.
Given that the holocaust was avoidable, with the benefit of hindsight, who should have done what, when and in response to what, when and who for the most effective and efficient avoidance of what happened?
I know Hollywood has had an idea or two but if there was a properly researched documentary, I'd be very interested in seeing it.
I read somewhere, some years ago now, that towards the end of WW2 the Allies knew exactly where the camps were and which railways were being used to ship prisoners into them. They considered the situation and made a decision not to bomb the railway lines or the ovens at the camps. I don't know what the basis was for the decision they chose, but it was certainly decided.
Avoidable? I do not see how.. German regime was in full control of the country. Who could have stopped it?
I know Hollywood has had an idea or two but if there was a properly researched documentary, I’d be very interested in seeing it
Ken Burns has done a multi part documentary about America's reaction to the persecution of the Jews of Germany, in the 1930's and it makes for uncomfortable viewing. Essentially he claims that the State Dept. did all they could to reduce and block immigration of Jewish refugees and the case is pretty strong.
They considered the situation and made a decision not to bomb the railway lines or the ovens at the camps. I don’t know what the basis was for the decision they chose, but it was certainly decided.
The railways probably could have been targeted, but there wasn’t the technology to land bombs just on the ovens back then. You’d have to sign up to wiping out a good number of inmates too as you carpet bombed the area
Yeah the allies had no real capability to do "precision bombing" there were plans I think, to both to try to destroy them (heavy bombing) and try to some sort of raid to open them up to allow mass escapes (mosquitos) but both rejected as unworkable. It was thought the best way to liberate them was to concentrate the effort on defeating the Nazis militarily.
