Holocaust survivor says home secretary’s words on migrants are similar to those of Nazi Germany
A Holocaust survivor has told Sky News that the language used by Home Secretary Suella Braverman to describe immigrants is “very, very similar” to that used in Nazi Germany against Jewish people.
Joan Salter, 83, had confronted Ms Braverman during a meeting in her Fareham constituency in Hampshire on Friday evening, to criticise her choice of language. While the home secretary said she “shared a huge amount of concern”, she refused to apologise for her words.
Ms Salter went further on Saturday, telling Sky News: “I feel very strongly that the Holocaust ended in the death camps but it started with words, with othering the Jewish people, blaming them for all the problems in Germany, and I am afraid that the actions and words of our home secretary is very, very similar.
Joan Salter confronted Suella Braverman during a constituency meeting in Hampshire
“She needs to look into her humanity rather than dehumanising a group of people many of whom are absolutely desperate.”
Ms Salter, who has been recognised with an MBE for her work on Holocaust education, had claimed at the meeting that Ms Braverman’s rhetoric was similar to that used to justify murdering her family under the Third Reich.
Footage of the exchange, provided by the charity Freedom From Torture, shows Ms Salter saying: “I am a child survivor of the Holocaust.
“In 1943, I was forced to flee my birthplace in Belgium and went across war-torn Europe and dangerous seas until I finally was able to come to the UK in 1947.
“When I hear you using words against refugees like ‘swarms’ and an ‘invasion’, I am reminded of the language used to dehumanise and justify the murder of my family and millions of others.
“Why do you find the need to use that kind of language?”
‘I see my job as being honest’
Ms Braverman thanked Ms Salter for her question, and said she “shared a huge amount of concern and sympathy” over the “challenge” of illegal immigration, adding that her own parents were not born in Britain.
Speaking about her parents, Ms Braverman said: “They owe everything to this country and they have taught me a deep and profound love of Britain and British people. Their tolerance, their generosity, their decency, their fair play.
“That also means that we must not shy away from saying there is a problem. There is a huge problem that we have right now when it comes to illegal migration, the scale of which we have not known before.
“I won’t apologise for the language that I have used to demonstrate the scale of the problem.
“I see my job as being honest with the British people and honest for the British people.
“I’m not going to shy away from difficult truths nor am I going to conceal what is the reality that we are all watching.”
Ms Braverman added that she was “incredibly proud” of the UK’s recent immigration record but added that “we have a problem with people exploiting our generosity, breaking our laws and undermining our system”.
Ms Braverman’s answer was greeted with applause from the audience.
The Home Office response
Born Fanny Zimetbaum in Brussels in 1940 to Polish Jewish parents, Ms Salter was three months old when Belgium was invaded by the Nazis.
Following the invasion, she escaped to France with her mother and sister before being taken by the Red Cross to the US in 1943.
Ms Salter was in foster care in America until being reunited with her parents in 1947 in London, where she has lived ever since.
A statement from the Home Office said the footage of the exchange had been “heavily edited” and did not “reflect the full exchange”.
It added: “The home secretary listened carefully to the testimony. She thanked her for sharing her story.
“The home secretary also expressed her sympathy and set out why it is important to tackle illegal migration.
“Since the footage misrepresents the interaction about a sensitive area of policy, we have asked the organisation who posted the video to take it down.”
What language has Ms Braverman used?
Less than a week into her tenure as home secretary under Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, Ms Braverman referred to her job as being “about stopping the invasion on our southern coast”.
She has said that speaking about the issue is “not xenophobic or anti-immigration” but the “reality acknowledged and felt by the vast majority of the British public”.
World
Putin wasn’t at the White House, but his influence was – the moments which reveal his hold over Trump
Vladimir Putin wasn’t at the White House but his influence clearly was. At times, it dominated the room.
There were three key moments that revealed the Russian president‘s current hold over Donald Trump.
The first was in the Oval Office. Sitting alongside Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the US president told reporters: “I don’t think you need a ceasefire.”
Ukraine talks latest: Zelenskyy ‘ready to meet’ Putin after Trump summit
Vladimir Putin shaking hands with Donald Trump when they met last week. Pic: Reuters
It was a stunning illustration of Mr Trump’s about-face in his approach to peace. For the past six months, a ceasefire has been his priority, but after meeting Mr Putin in Alaska, suddenly it’s not.
Confirmation that he now views the war through Moscow’s eyes.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Trump applauds Putin and shares ride in ‘The Beast’ last week
The second was the format itself, with Mr Trump reverting to his favoured ask-what-you-like open-ended Q&A.
In Alaska, Mr Putin wasn’t made to take any questions – most likely, because he didn’t want to. But here, Mr Zelenskyy didn’t have a choice. He was subjected to a barrage of them to see if he’d learnt his lesson from last time.
It was a further demonstration of the special status Mr Trump seems to afford to Mr Putin.
👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈
The third was their phone call. Initially, President Trump said he’d speak to the Kremlin leader after his meeting with European leaders. But it turned out to be during it.
A face-to-face meeting with seven leaders was interrupted for a phone call with one – as if Mr Trump had to check first with Mr Putin, before continuing his discussions.
We still don’t know the full details of the peace proposal that’s being drawn up, but all this strongly suggests that it’s one sketched out by Russia. The White House is providing the paper, but the Kremlin is holding the pen.
Read more:
Four key takeaways from the White House Ukraine summit
Trump has taken peace talks a distance not seen since the war began
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Trump, Zelenskyy and the suit: What happened?
For Moscow, the aim now is to keep Mr Trump on their path to peace, which is settlement first, ceasefire later.
It believes that’s the best way of securing its goals, because it has more leverage so long as the fighting continues.
👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈      
But Mr Putin will be wary that Mr Trump is pliable and can easily change his mind, depending on the last person he spoke to.
So to ensure that his sympathies aren’t swayed, and its red lines remain intact, Russia will be straining to keep its voice heard.
On Monday, for example, the Russian foreign ministry was quick to condemn recent comments from the UK government that it would be ready to send troops to help enforce any ceasefire.
It described the idea as “provocative” and “predatory”.
Moscow is trying to drown out European concerns by portraying itself as the party that wants peace the most, and Kyiv (and Europe) as the obstacle.
But while Mr Zelenskyy has agreed to a trilateral meeting, the Kremlin has not. After the phone call between Mr Putin and Mr Trump, it said the leaders discussed “raising the level of representatives” in the talks between Russia and Ukraine. No confirmation to what level.
World
Trump is playing both sides – but has taken peace talks a distance not seen since the war began
Talks between Donald Trump, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders have taken place at the White House, aimed at finding an end to the war in Ukraine.
On the agenda were US security guarantees, whether a ceasefire is required, and a potential summit between the Ukrainian president and Vladimir Putin.
Zelenskyy ready to meet Putin – follow latest
Here’s what three of our correspondents made of it all.
For Trump
For Mr Trump, the challenge to remain seen as the deal-broker is to maintain “forward momentum, through devilish detail,” Sky News’ US correspondent James Matthews says.
The US president called the Washington summit a “very good early step”, but that’s all it was, Matthews says.
Despite cordiality with Mr Zelenskyy and promising talk of a US role in security guarantees for Ukraine and discussions for meetings to come. Matthews says the obstacles remain.
“Trump has taken peace discussions to a distance not travelled since the start of the war, but it is a road navigated by a president playing both sides who have changed his mind on key priorities.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Zelenskyy, Trump and the suit
For Putin
As for Russia, Sky News’ Moscow correspondent Ivor Bennett says the aim is to keep Trump on its preferred path towards peace – a deal first, a ceasefire later.
“Moscow believes that’s the best way of securing all of its goals,” Bennett says.
But Ukraine and Europe want things the other way round, and Moscow “will be wary that Trump can be easily persuaded by the last person he spoke to”.
And so, Russia will be “trying to keep themselves heard” and “cast Kyiv as the problem, as they won’t agree to a peace deal on the Kremlin’s terms”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What’s Putin’s next move? Sky’s Ivor Bennett explains
For the UK and Europe
Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates says, for Sir Keir Starmer and Europe, the biggest success of the Washington summit was the US promise of security guarantees for Ukraine.
He adds that the “hard work starts now to actually try to figure out what these guarantees amount to”.
Sir Keir said if Vladimir Putin breaches a future peace deal, there would have to be consequences, but Coates said potentially “insoluble” issues stand in the way.
“At what point do those breaches invoke a military response, whether US guarantees would be enough to encourage European involvement in Ukraine, and whether or not you could see the UK and Europe going to war with Russia to protect Ukraine?”
Coates says “there may never be an answer that satisfies everyone involved”.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike