“No one would put their children in a boat unless the sea is safer than the land”

I’ve been left in tears as I listen to the spoken word ‘Home is the barrel of a gun’.

A powerful piece, please watch its only 2 minute and 51 seconds video! (I can assure you, you won’t be disappointed)

“You have to understand, NO ONE would put their children in a boat unless the sea is safer than the land…”

(If video doesn’t work because of the ‘sign in’ nonsense, the link is available in the comments section)

Join me as I endeavour to articulate my train of thought here . . .

I was just thinking.

We live in a world where asylum seekers are referred to as ‘illegal immigrants’.

Do you even know what it means to be an asylum seeker?

As human beings, we all have a “right to asylum” if (God forbid) meeting the refugee criteria:

If persons are ‘unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well founded

fear of being persecuted for race, religion, nationality, members of a particular 

social group or political opinion’ 

they can make a case  for asylum, once the case is successful that person then becomes a refugee .    .    .

Hearing the words ‘illegal immigrants’ gives negative implications. It completely deters people from the reality that these people (like the video above describes) are facing the ‘barrel of a gun’.  The human instinct is to get as far away from that situation as possible; BUT the tragedy here is that the ‘barrel of a gun’ these ‘illegal immigrants’ are escaping, or shall I say this “swarm” is escaping (Thanks David Cameron) … is their homes.

For those of you who don’t know our very own Prime Minister (to those who are reading this in the UK ofcourse) described these asylum seekers as a “swarm” (a dehumanising term), indicating that they would “break into our country”, but that he would not allow them to. I’m just shocked at the choice of words here, “break into our country”.

Let’s get our facts straight with some diagrams:

  • First of all, the UK is NOT even accepting the MOST immigrants in the EU, it’s actually Germany.
  • The majority of these immigrants in the UK are not Asylum seekers, they are people here to work from places like China, India, Poland, Spain, France, Italy, USA, Romania, Australia and Lithuania. so to say that the migrants in Calais which David Cameron was referring to at the time could “break into our country”, could be considered an exaggeration (in my opinion). It makes these desperate people appear as threatening, fueling the social stigma on asylum seeking.

“Dirty immigrants, Asylum seekers sucking the country dry … they messed up their own countries, now they want to mess up our own” -as the lyrics in the spoken words have expressed.

  • The migrants in Calais which Mr Cameron was talking about are only 1% of those who’ve arrived in Europe this year – mainly Italy, and Greece. There isn’t any evidence to suggest huge numbers arriving to the UK. Hence, why I believe this is an exaggeration and a method of the traditional scapegoating.
  • It’s been suggested that since these migrants only make up 0.027% of Europe’s population of ‘740 million. The world’s wealthiest continent can easily handle such a comparatively small influx.’
  • The truth is, THE UK DOES NOT HAVE A REFUGEE CRISIS ‘There are countries with social infrastructure at breaking point because of the refugee crisis – but they aren’t in Europe. The most obvious example is Lebanon, which houses 1.2 million Syrian refugees within a total population of roughly 4.5 million. To put that in context, a country that is more than 100 times smaller than the EU has already taken in more than 50 times as many refugees as the EU will even consider resettling in the future. Lebanon has a refugee crisis. Europe – and, in particular, Britain – does not.’

‘One journalist we interviewed revealed how the terms (‘Asylum seekers’ and ‘illegal immigrant’) are used interchangeably: “Certainly when it comes to the idea of illegal immigrants and asylum seekers, very often they are just interchangeable terms.” This journalist described how terms are used to create scapegoats and demonise asylum seekers and other migrants into a single negative category of people’ -Newstatesman article (link is below).

So why can’t we help those whose “home is the mouth of a shark, the barrel of a gun”?







<a href=”http://www.bloglovin.com/blog/14477385/?claim=jb7692qmyjy”>Follow my blog with Bloglovin</a>




12 thoughts on ““No one would put their children in a boat unless the sea is safer than the land”

  1. Good point well made. Its been interesting watching David Cameron’s commitments to take in more refugees grow in line with public outrage – rather than with any sense of principle or moral purpose.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. heyy amal it’s sarah,
    you basically took the words right out of my mouth on this topic, couldn’t agree more… I can’t believe how openly arogant David Cameron was when he spoke about the refugees calling them a ‘swarm’, in someones mind you get the image of bugs crawling everywhere- that is what he see’s human beings just like him fleeing danger as: an inconvinience, pests. for people who are easily influenced by the media it paints a negative picture of refugees and creates more hate.


  3. I agree full heartedly, your choice of words were so effective! So many people are too ignorant on these sort of topics, we need more young individuals like you who see an issue and try and do something about it. I hope this enlightens some people


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s