Greek coastguard threw migrants over board
Discussion
Article on BBC this morning
BBC News - Greek coastguard threw migrants overboard to their deaths, witnesses say
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0vv717yvpeo
BBC News - Greek coastguard threw migrants overboard to their deaths, witnesses say
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0vv717yvpeo
Just read the article and it’s absolutely appalling if true (and it sounds like it is, based on the senior officer’s comments).
As a keen sailor I strongly believe that roles like Coast guard should be a calling, rather than just a job. For an officer to behave like has been described (whether under orders or not) is beyond the pale.
As a keen sailor I strongly believe that roles like Coast guard should be a calling, rather than just a job. For an officer to behave like has been described (whether under orders or not) is beyond the pale.
If it's true then it's the logical conclusion of the anti-migrant rhetoric regarding the illegal boats.
I'm sure the right wingers in this country will absolutely love it and hope that we do the same in the vain hope that it stops people from trying. Reform UK could even use it as a slogan saying 'we'll do it too'.
Shocking stuff and shows just how we don't consider 'other' people as people when the pot has been stirred up enough to make us forget our humanity.
I'm sure the right wingers in this country will absolutely love it and hope that we do the same in the vain hope that it stops people from trying. Reform UK could even use it as a slogan saying 'we'll do it too'.
Shocking stuff and shows just how we don't consider 'other' people as people when the pot has been stirred up enough to make us forget our humanity.
F1GTRUeno said:
If it's true then it's the logical conclusion of the anti-migrant rhetoric regarding the illegal boats.
I'm sure the right wingers in this country will absolutely love it and hope that we do the same in the vain hope that it stops people from trying. Reform UK could even use it as a slogan saying 'we'll do it too'.
Shocking stuff and shows just how we don't consider 'other' people as people when the pot has been stirred up enough to make us forget our humanity.
I would hope you were joking "right wingers will love it". We are talking about murder.I'm sure the right wingers in this country will absolutely love it and hope that we do the same in the vain hope that it stops people from trying. Reform UK could even use it as a slogan saying 'we'll do it too'.
Shocking stuff and shows just how we don't consider 'other' people as people when the pot has been stirred up enough to make us forget our humanity.
Gecko1978 said:
I would hope you were joking "right wingers will love it". We are talking about murder.
"Right wingers will love it" is a very unfair and generic sweeping statement... BUT... sadly there are more than a few people in this country who would say they have no problem with this sort of action.I'm not trolling.
Whip enough people into a frenzy and they'll go along with murder, we've seen it happen before in history, reducing people to less than rodents and showing zero empathy and humanity.
There's no shortage of right wing Farage idolising w
kers that would love nothing more than to see boats sank as a method of stopping the boats - they openly say it even at least some of the time it's without actually thinking of what it means when they do, I've heard it enough from plenty of sources, my dad being one of them.
The combo of the media, the politicians, social media and echo chambers getting a rise out of people is too powerful.
Whip enough people into a frenzy and they'll go along with murder, we've seen it happen before in history, reducing people to less than rodents and showing zero empathy and humanity.
There's no shortage of right wing Farage idolising w
kers that would love nothing more than to see boats sank as a method of stopping the boats - they openly say it even at least some of the time it's without actually thinking of what it means when they do, I've heard it enough from plenty of sources, my dad being one of them.The combo of the media, the politicians, social media and echo chambers getting a rise out of people is too powerful.
valiant said:
No, I think he said to let them drown.
When people in power are saying this what do you think the mouthbreathers will be saying?Disastrous said:
Just read the article and it’s absolutely appalling if true (and it sounds like it is, based on the senior officer’s comments).
As a keen sailor I strongly believe that roles like Coast guard should be a calling, rather than just a job. For an officer to behave like has been described (whether under orders or not) is beyond the pale.
Clearly you know much more about them than me but a recent TV series about coast guards spent much more time on law enforcement issues than the more touch-feely life saving stuff. That's just an observation and not a comment on the case in the news. And it might have been to make the clear distinction that they are not the same thing as RNLI who have their own great TV programme already. As a keen sailor I strongly believe that roles like Coast guard should be a calling, rather than just a job. For an officer to behave like has been described (whether under orders or not) is beyond the pale.
I like to think I am right small C conservative. I don't want small boats with people coming to the UK and not being able to stop them boggles the mind.
However killing people is not something I would cheer. I wonder how Australia do it. Iirc they pay a small island to stop the boats.
But no I dount many are clapping going thats a good start.
However killing people is not something I would cheer. I wonder how Australia do it. Iirc they pay a small island to stop the boats.
But no I dount many are clapping going thats a good start.
The UK is rather unusual in not having its Coastguard directly perform lifesaving duties, and that Coastguard not being a paramilitary service.
HM Coastguard is a coordinator of SAR services but does not have its own sea-going assets. And it has no role in border or maritime security - this is done to varying degrees by Border Force, the Police, the Environment Agency and the Royal Navy.
Most other countries have their coastguards as either a paramilitary service or part of their navy and their prime day-to-day job is maritime security and border protection, plus sometimes also doing customs enforcement and fishery protection. SAR and lifesaving is usually a secondary role, mostly on the basis that the people, ships and aircraft are already there and so are best placed to render aid.
An advantage of the UK way is that the roles, mission and ethos are very clear. The RNLI is there to save life and render aid - no other considerations enter it. If the people they fish out the water are engaged in an illegal act or are undocumented migrants, that's not their call to make - they relevant agency gets involved later.
A true coastguard has a slightly mixed role where an unidentified boat full of undocumented migrants represents a professional 'target' and a border security threat to those on a coastguard cutter or helicopter...right up to the moment where the boat starts sinking or it turns out the occupants are dying of hypothermia or dehydration, when it suddenly turns into a humanitarian mission.
Now, this doesn't remotely excuse or justify the actions of the Hellenic CG (if they happened as reported) - not only should basic humanity say that, but there is a standing requirement to render aid at sea that overrides other missions and requirements (other than risk to your own ship and crew).
But I can see how the attitudes that would allow a crew to do such an act as being festered/fostered in a organisation that has a protective/enforcement role. "Protect the border/stop the hoards" is a mindset that's much more likely to take hold in a paramilitary CG than a lifesaving organisation like the RNLI. No one is going to join the latter because they want to stop migrants and asylum seekers reaching their coast, but that's a reasonable motivation for someone joining a typical CG and once that mindset gets tougher and more extreme as the crisis wears on you could reach the stage of institutional approval and groupthink that would end with what was alleged.
On the point of people in the UK approving of the supposed actions of the Hellenic CG - I'm afraid there is definitely a non-zero percentage of the public who would, at least, express the sentiment that this was 'on the right lines' or 'wish we could get away with that' even if they draw short of actually supporting it.
Remember that one of Nineteen Eighty-Four's main themes was how dehumanisation and othering could get populations to support things they would never support if they felt they were happening to 'real people' - the scene near the beginning where a cinema of people whoop with joy watching a newsreel of migrants being gunned down by helicopters at sea is chillingly prophetic in this context.
HM Coastguard is a coordinator of SAR services but does not have its own sea-going assets. And it has no role in border or maritime security - this is done to varying degrees by Border Force, the Police, the Environment Agency and the Royal Navy.
Most other countries have their coastguards as either a paramilitary service or part of their navy and their prime day-to-day job is maritime security and border protection, plus sometimes also doing customs enforcement and fishery protection. SAR and lifesaving is usually a secondary role, mostly on the basis that the people, ships and aircraft are already there and so are best placed to render aid.
An advantage of the UK way is that the roles, mission and ethos are very clear. The RNLI is there to save life and render aid - no other considerations enter it. If the people they fish out the water are engaged in an illegal act or are undocumented migrants, that's not their call to make - they relevant agency gets involved later.
A true coastguard has a slightly mixed role where an unidentified boat full of undocumented migrants represents a professional 'target' and a border security threat to those on a coastguard cutter or helicopter...right up to the moment where the boat starts sinking or it turns out the occupants are dying of hypothermia or dehydration, when it suddenly turns into a humanitarian mission.
Now, this doesn't remotely excuse or justify the actions of the Hellenic CG (if they happened as reported) - not only should basic humanity say that, but there is a standing requirement to render aid at sea that overrides other missions and requirements (other than risk to your own ship and crew).
But I can see how the attitudes that would allow a crew to do such an act as being festered/fostered in a organisation that has a protective/enforcement role. "Protect the border/stop the hoards" is a mindset that's much more likely to take hold in a paramilitary CG than a lifesaving organisation like the RNLI. No one is going to join the latter because they want to stop migrants and asylum seekers reaching their coast, but that's a reasonable motivation for someone joining a typical CG and once that mindset gets tougher and more extreme as the crisis wears on you could reach the stage of institutional approval and groupthink that would end with what was alleged.
On the point of people in the UK approving of the supposed actions of the Hellenic CG - I'm afraid there is definitely a non-zero percentage of the public who would, at least, express the sentiment that this was 'on the right lines' or 'wish we could get away with that' even if they draw short of actually supporting it.
Remember that one of Nineteen Eighty-Four's main themes was how dehumanisation and othering could get populations to support things they would never support if they felt they were happening to 'real people' - the scene near the beginning where a cinema of people whoop with joy watching a newsreel of migrants being gunned down by helicopters at sea is chillingly prophetic in this context.
Gecko1978 said:
I don't want small boats with people
President Merkin said:
You could start by calling them people & not small boats. Do you see now how dehumanising works?
He does call them people. Small boats with people in them, presumably. As opposed to small people with boats in them.
Zetec-S said:
Gecko1978 said:
I would hope you were joking "right wingers will love it". We are talking about murder.
"Right wingers will love it" is a very unfair and generic sweeping statement... BUT... sadly there are more than a few people in this country who would say they have no problem with this sort of action.Now not everyone is in favour of unchecked immigration but eschewing state sanctioned murder is quite the leap, maybe they should get to pull the trigger and then get to pull the bodies/body parts from the water ? I suspect that they may change their tune upon pulling a dead toddler or maybe just a headless torso from the water.
Anyone on here think like that ? I always think that at some point, the boot may be on the other foot, just because you feel secure in the UK now, you never know what will happen, however unlikely it may be you or your family needing help, I suspect you may be a bit upset that people in your destination country think blowing your kids out of the water is a reasonable thing to do.
If this is true, thats a massive shame on Greece, one thing venting s
te on FaceBook, but actually condemning people to drown ffs ?I was aware of pushbacks being a thing for years. The Greeks can be a no nonsense lot.
But progressing to outright murder is incredibly chilling. Far beyond even the awful "we had no mandate to act" trick they pulled with the trawler full of people that sank in front of them, or the french "let's blast across in front of the dingy and then go "oh look it just tipped over by itself".
I can sort of see the argument that if you extrapolate an anti immigration policy far enough: when does push come to shove? Didn't Spain kill a few people in north Africa who were trying to climb into one of their enclaves last year? And I recall one of the Easter European countries matches families into the middle of the forest and abandons them.
A decent level of analysis and understanding is needed about immigration, Europe wide if not across all developed nations.
Which is why it is so depressing to see idiots above labelling any and every "right wing" person as supporters of murder. It is very clumsy - almost childlike language, that has helped keep the debate rooted in the "shallow end" of discussion for decades.
The same for posters jumping in about dehumanising people, without even bothering to comprehend what has been written.
For what it's worth, there is no easy answer to the geopolitical issue. The EU tried pouring cash into turkey and Africa to stop movements at source, but like water finding it's own level: people in the west are hugely better off than the majority (even the ones who feel they're struggling) and so migration is only going to increase - especially if the predictions about climate change hitting poorer countries moreso come true.
I am mixing up immigration and asylum somewhat (the greek victims were trying to claim asylum I understand from the article ) but ultimately the problem is the disfunctional countries that people are leaving: either inability to generate opportunity for their population, or just treating them badly.
The answer to this article is quite simple - investigate and prosecute anyone who has committed murder, as well as the command structure that condones it.
But progressing to outright murder is incredibly chilling. Far beyond even the awful "we had no mandate to act" trick they pulled with the trawler full of people that sank in front of them, or the french "let's blast across in front of the dingy and then go "oh look it just tipped over by itself".
I can sort of see the argument that if you extrapolate an anti immigration policy far enough: when does push come to shove? Didn't Spain kill a few people in north Africa who were trying to climb into one of their enclaves last year? And I recall one of the Easter European countries matches families into the middle of the forest and abandons them.
A decent level of analysis and understanding is needed about immigration, Europe wide if not across all developed nations.
Which is why it is so depressing to see idiots above labelling any and every "right wing" person as supporters of murder. It is very clumsy - almost childlike language, that has helped keep the debate rooted in the "shallow end" of discussion for decades.
The same for posters jumping in about dehumanising people, without even bothering to comprehend what has been written.
For what it's worth, there is no easy answer to the geopolitical issue. The EU tried pouring cash into turkey and Africa to stop movements at source, but like water finding it's own level: people in the west are hugely better off than the majority (even the ones who feel they're struggling) and so migration is only going to increase - especially if the predictions about climate change hitting poorer countries moreso come true.
I am mixing up immigration and asylum somewhat (the greek victims were trying to claim asylum I understand from the article ) but ultimately the problem is the disfunctional countries that people are leaving: either inability to generate opportunity for their population, or just treating them badly.
The answer to this article is quite simple - investigate and prosecute anyone who has committed murder, as well as the command structure that condones it.
Maybe people haven't been following but Greece has been following similar policies, at sea and on its land borders, since at least the 1990s. I suspect that similar tactics were is use long before that, with the pre-74 regimes being even more severe.
Actually killing people seems like an escalation, but the wider system of pushback is informal policy that has the tacit approval of the state. How effective the policy is is an open question, though its persistence suggest it is on some level; tens, if not hundreds, of thousands are subject to the measures each year, but we have no way of knowing how many are just churned, and succeed in a later attempt.
Actually killing people seems like an escalation, but the wider system of pushback is informal policy that has the tacit approval of the state. How effective the policy is is an open question, though its persistence suggest it is on some level; tens, if not hundreds, of thousands are subject to the measures each year, but we have no way of knowing how many are just churned, and succeed in a later attempt.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff