More than 830 UK health professionals & representatives from leading medical bodies have signed an open letter to Sunak expressing “grave concerns” that the Govt’s #Rwanda Plan will cause “catastrophic mental & physical harm” to people seeking safety.
PLEASE READ IT:
"As health professionals, we, the undersigned, are writing to express our grave concerns about the health implications of ongoing plans to forcibly remove individuals seeking protection in the UK to Rwanda, as set out in the ‘Migration & Economic Development Partnership’."
"Using this approach to advance hostile border policies rooted in unevidenced deterrence & externalisation objectives, despite clear documentation of the medical harm caused, is unconscionable."
"We urge you to abandon this policy immediately to ensure that the rights, safety & humanity of people seeking asylum in the UK are acknowledged and safeguarded."
"International examples of externalisation policies have led to wide-scale abuse & been found to cause catastrophic mental and physical harm."
"In 2017-18, Médecins Sans Frontières’s mental health project on #Nauru Island, where people seeking safety were detained by the Australian Govt, more than 66% of their 208 asylum seeker & refugee patients - including children - engaged in self-harm, suicidal ideation & acts."
"It is therefore unsurprising that the prospect of removal to Rwanda, which is modelled closely on the failed Australian system, has exacerbated the mental health conditions (including post-traumatic stress disorder and depression) of the men, women & age disputed children...
...who have been threatened with expulsion, triggering fear, confusion and uncertainty about their safety. It has proven increased risks of self-harm and suicide, and undermined resilience to the psychological effects of trauma."
"Subjecting people seeking sanctuary in the UK, many of whom have mental health conditions and have histories of torture, trafficking and trauma, to such an inhumane process is a matter of significant concern for the medical community."
"As health professionals, committed to alleviating suffering, we cannot turn a blind eye to the harmful effects this policy is having and will continue to have on people who are made vulnerable by restrictive border policies."
"We cannot stand behind this policy on medical, ethical and humanitarian grounds and we join lawyers, civil society, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, trade unions and many Home Office officials themselves in their condemnation of this scheme."
"We find this policy, with its inevitable toll on the mental and physical health of those subject to it, unconscionable & abhorrent."
"We urge you to abandon it in its entirety & ensure that any further reform of the asylum system leads to a strengthening, rather than a weakening, of protection & dignity for those seeking sanctuary in the UK."
The REAL reason so many asylum seekers are housed in the UK, & the backlog of asylum claims is so high, is because rather than reducing asylum costs, the @Conservatives DELIBERATELY MANUFACTURED A CRISIS, because scapegoating is their political strategy.
Truly horrific situations are happening to ordinary people – human beings, not faceless numbers. Two-yr old asylum seeker Alan Kurdi drowned in 2015. How we choose to describe them impacts on how we view people who, in another life, could very well be us.
Which ideological extreme Tory MPs are the cheerleaders for the proposed inhumane & abhorrent amendments to the Government's already cruel & barbaric 'Illegal Migration Bill'?
Ruth Wodak is a brilliant linguist who has been analysing far-right populist discourse for decades. In the context of the latest "migrant crisis" & the demonization of refugees by those on the Right, everyone would benefit from her analysis & insights.
It's depressing & speaks volumes about the abject state of our politicians & of our "news" media, that despite DECADES of debate around migration, most British people still don't even know the differences between 'migrants', 'asylum seekers', & 'refugees'.
So who is & isn't a refugee? Here's a 60 second explainer of the UN Refugee Convention & the legal definition of a refugee.
Contrary to much UK Gov, media, & far-right rhetoric, people who have committed very serious crimes are excluded from protection.
For well-evidenced facts & other information about asylum seekers & refugees, there are many excellent & unbiased online websites which avoid the pitfalls & problems of the often divisive, partisan, & highly charged political & media rhetoric which dominates the issue.
Based at the Centre on Migration, Policy & Society at the University of Oxford, the Migration Observatory @MigObs provides impartial, independent, authoritative, evidence-based analysis of data on migration & migrants in the UK.
The @Refugees Agency, UNHCR is dedicated to saving lives, protecting rights & building a better future for people forced to flee their homes, established by the UN in 1950 in the aftermath of WWII to help the millions of people who had lost their homes.
I recommend visiting the @freemovementlaw website, founded (& edited) by barrister @ColinYeo1 in 2007, which gives accessible & well informed updates, commentary, & advice on UK immigration & asylum law, as well as offering the Govt practical solutions.
Our news & politics media is failing the British people in its fundamental role of informing people about reality. Voters need to much better understand the nature & techniques of the @Conservatives' cynical, divisive, & misleading 'performative politics':
"Foreigners" DO NOT claim £1BILLION/month in benefits.
This disgusting anti-migrant dogwhistle by shameless liar and former Head of Policy Exchange, Neil O'Brien MP, is just one of several recent dispicable divisive Telegraph front page lies.
WTAF @IpsoNews? @HoCStandards?
The claims that the UK spends £1bn/month "on UC benefits for overseas nationals" (O'Brien) and "Foreigners claim £1bn a month in benefits" (Telegraph) are revealed to be lies in the article: the£1bn relates to "Benefits claims by HOUSEHOLDS with AT LEAST ONE FOREIGN NATIONAL."
The Telegraph claims that (unnamed) "experts suggested the increase reflected a SURGE in the number of asylum seekers being granted refugee status and in net migration."
To evaluate/make sense of this sensational unsourced claim, additional context is needed (but not provided).
Chase Herro, co-founder of Trump’s main crypto venture, World Liberty Financial, on crypto:
“You can literally sell shit in a can, wrapped in piss, covered in human skin, for a billion dollars if the story’s right, because people will buy it.”
Despite crypto being bullshit, & memecoins being consciously bullshit, many – especially angry young gullible men – still invest: 42% of men & 17% of women aged 18-29 have invested in, traded or used crypto (2024 Pew Research), compared to only 11% of men & 5% of women over 50.
“It’s no accident that memecoins are such a phenomenon among young people who have grown immensely frustrated with a financial system that, I think it’s fair to say, has failed them” - Sander Lutz, the first crypto-focused White House correspondent.
🧵In January, Farage said Musk was justified in calling Starmer complicit in failures to prosecute grooming gangs: “In 2008 Keir Starmer had just been appointed as DPP & there was a case brought before them of alleged mass rape of young girls that did not lead to a prosecution.”
The allegation that Starmer was complicit in failures to prosecute grooming gangs is often repeated. But how true is it?
Two Facebook posts, originally appearing in April/May 2020, claimed Starmer told police when he was working for the CPS not to pursue cases against Muslim men accused of rape due to fears it would stir up anti-Islamic sentiment.
In 2022 the posts and allegations saw a resurgence online with hundreds of new shares. They said: “From 2004 onwards the director of public prosecutions told the police not to prosecute Muslim rape gangs to prevent ‘Islamophobia’.
Decades of research shows that parroting or appeasing the far-right simply legitimises their framing, and further normalises illiberal exclusionary discourse and politics.
Starmer's speech is more evidence that the far-right has been mainstreamed.
Cas Mudde, a Dutch political scientist who focuses on political extremism and populism in Europe and the US, is, imho, one of the most important voices on the Left today.
Allow me to briefly summarise some of his work.
In a 2023 lecture, Mudde emphasizes the importance of precise terminology in discussing the far-right, distinguishing between extreme right (anti-democracy) and radical right (accepts elections but rejects liberal democratic principles like minority rights and rule of law).
He argues we're in a "fourth wave" of postwar far-right politics, characterized by the mainstreaming & normalization of the far-right - what Linguist Prof Ruth Wodak in a related concept refers to as the 'shameless normalization of far-right discourse'.
After eight years as US President, on Janury 17, 1961, Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, former supreme commander of the Allied forces in western Europe during WWII, warned us about the the growing "military-industrial complex" (and Trump2.0) in his prescient farewell address.
Before looking at that speech, some context for those unfamiliar with Eisenhower, the 34th US president, serving from 1953 to 1961.
During WWII, he was Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in Europe and achieved the five-star rank as General of the Army.
Eisenhower planned & supervised two consequential WWII military campaigns: Operation Torch in the North Africa campaign in 1942–43 & the 1944 Normandy invasion.
The right-wing of the Republican Party clashed with him more often than the Democrats did during his first term.