 A row over a deportation flight to Jamaica has reopened wounds from the Windrush scandal. The flight which left this Wednesday was intended to transport up to 50 Jamaican nationals, but after interventions from lawyers, all but 13 were granted a reprieve. The original plans for deportation were controversial because they included many people who'd lived in Britain most of their lives. This is obviously huge comparisons here with the Windrush scandal, people who got deported to Jamaica, who'd lived in Britain all their lives, knew nothing about Jamaica but were treated as second-class citizens. It made headlines, so this planned flight on Wednesday made headlines when 82 black public figures including Naomi Campbell and David Olasoga wrote an open letter calling on airlines not to acquiesce to HOMOS or acquiesce with HOMOFIS plans. Today pretty patelle hit back at that letter, partly in anger that all but 13 people had won a reprieve in the courts, not by direct action in the courts. The Daily Mail splashed this morning with the HOMOFIS, attacking those who had signed that letter. Pretty patelle fury as stars insult to Windrush victims. And we can see some of her quotes in the Daily Mail. The Windrush scandal is a stain on our country's history, said the HOMO Secretary. That generation made an enormous contribution to our country and were wronged by successive governments to see ill-informed Labour politicians and do-gooding celebrities attempting to conflate the victims of Windrush with these vile criminals set for deportation is not only misjudged and upsetting but deeply offensive. So you can see there she's using this tactic, all those people who got the reprieve from being deported, these are not people who deserve rights, these are not people who like those good migrants in the Windrush scandal were let down by our government system, our HOMOFIS, these are completely different, these are vile criminals. Now we'll go in a moment to a letter in direct response to this from Pretty Patelle because there are actually lots of people very much involved in the original Windrush scandal who signed that letter. So Pretty Patelle saying this is offensive to the Windrush is itself very much ridiculous. I don't want to go through some of the facts of the matter, first of all. So in terms of calling these all vile criminals, now it is the case as far as I understand that everyone on this flight had got a criminal record and that was why they were being deported even if they had right to remain in this country until they had committed a crime. But vile criminals is not just, that's very different from saying these are people with a criminal record. You're using highly emotive language to try and make out that these are dangerous people. Now working out what each of the people who were due to be on this flight have committed is quite difficult. The HOMOFIS tend to just emphasize the really bad crimes and none, no others. But I've got a couple of quotes from newspapers which make it slightly more clear even if it will remain somewhat ambiguous. So this is from the Times. According to the HOMOFIS, the 13 on the flight had combined sentences of more than 100 years including three who were convicted of murder and another of manslaughter while others had been sentenced for crimes such as grooming, drug dealing, burglary and robbery. The department is yet to provide any more detail on why others were left off the flight before it departed. So you can see that these aren't all, burglary isn't a violent crime, for example drug dealing isn't a violent crime. And then you can see the same, well we're not going to provide details on the other cases. So you're constantly seeing here politicians, pretty patel Tories and their sort of supporters in the media really emphasizing the fact that some of these people have done terrible crimes and then lumping everyone else in with them. It's an ambiguity that's helpful for them. The Guardian write up was a bit more informative. We can go to this. Patel referred to those targeted for deportation as rapists and murderers. But Jacqueline McKenzie, a solicitor at McKenzie Butte and Pope who has worked on Windrush cases said not all of them were very serious offenders. And the original list of names for proposed deportation had included many people who had been in the UK since childhood and whose offenses were less serious. When you learn a bit more about their backgrounds there are examples of people who are victims of grooming, people who have been in care, people with very disaffected lives and I think we need to factor that into the debate, she said. So these aren't necessarily all vile, dangerous criminals. Many of these are people with complicated lives who haven't necessarily committed serious crimes. And this legal argument obviously had merit because many of the people who got reprieved from that flight, often at the last minute, was because the Home Office was forced to acknowledge that they might have been victims of modern slavery. So these are people who can't really be held responsible for the crimes they committed because they were doing so against their own will or against their own volition. There is also another point to raise here is that even if even if these people had on an individual level committed crimes and committed very bad crimes, violent crimes, that doesn't necessarily mean it's an open and shut case when it comes to the morality of all of this. One argument, which I think is very strong, is that this is subjecting people to double jeopardy. Why do these people, because they were born somewhere else, get punished twice instead of once? If you were born in Britain, you only get punished once. When you get out, you get to live your usual life. If you were born in Jamaica, you get punished twice. You have to go to prison and then you get deported. The other issue though is who they leave behind. So one of the challenges to the deportation was based on the right to family life. So it was people whose parents were due to be deported saying that this will deprive them of a right to live with their father or to know their father. There was again in the Guardian evidence of sort of how harrowing some of this is. So the Guardian has seen a letter and drawing from a 10-year-old boy addressed to a judge he hoped would remove his father from the flight. The boy wrote, people are making decisions about my dad. When they grew up, they probably had a dad. The decisions they make mean I won't have a dad with me. As I said, signatures of the original letter have kicked back at Preeti Patel. She's trying to make out, are all of these people that are defending these vile criminals on this plane, they're just lovies, they're just lefties, they've got nothing to do with the Windrush scandal and they shouldn't even say the word Windrush scandal. It's offensive for them to connect this deportation of criminals and the Windrush scandal which was, which subjected innocent people to injustices. Now that doesn't really work when both groups are the same. So the people who were caught up in the Windrush scandal are the same people signing this letter. The signatures to the letter to Preeti Patel included Natalie Barnes whose mother Paulette Wilson was wrongly detained and threatened with deportation and Anthony Bryan who was wrongly held for five weeks before being booked onto a flight to Jamaica despite not having been there in more than 50 years. So Bryan said, you can't trust the Home Office to do the right thing. We need everyone to get involved in campaigning. He said he had been upset by Patel's comments adding, I'm still waiting for the Home Office to do right by me. So other Windrush victims who had signed the original letter are quoted as calling Patel's statement deeply insulting and patronizing. Very understandable, these people signing a letter. Our experiences show us that what you are doing to these people is unjust when she's saying to even connect it to your experience as a self-offensive. They're their experiences. Very odd, well not odd because it's very clear what's going on. This is very much a politically calculated move from Preeti Patel. I want to move on the conversation slightly to the media because obviously you might think it's morally objectionable how Preeti Patel is behaving. I certainly do. But she is able to get away with it because of how many people in the mainstream media completely reflect her views and completely reinforce the prejudices that Preeti Patel is trying to establish in our minds when she talks about these people as violent murderers and rapists. This was Nick Ferrari on LBC this morning. Also later in the show, you remember we spoke a couple of days ago about those Jamaican nationals, the rapists, pedophiles and murderers. Don't worry, the lawyers there have had their say aided by some celebrities and a lot of Labour politicians. Many of them now currently reside in this country are unlikely to be deported. So probably we'll be freed. So that's great work by various celebrities. I would tell you Tandy Newton is one of them. Naomi Campbell got involved as well and various others. So fairly soon there could be a Jamaican rapist or pedophile coming to a street near you. That's coming up later in the show. Very soon there could be a Jamaican rapist or pedophile living on your road. I mean, this is exactly the same as Donald Trump saying Mexicans are rapists. I mean, Nick Ferrari for one, as I've just explained, not all of these people or not even the majority of these people are rapists or pedophiles or murderers. It's the extreme cases which is being used as a reason to dehumanize everyone involved or everyone who the Home Office wants to deport at the same time. Even if they were, even if this was a plane full of 50 rapists and pedophiles, which it wasn't, then to say there will soon be Jamaican pedophiles and rapists living on your road. I mean, that's almost incitement. I mean, it's exactly the same as when Donald Trump says they're coming over the wall, they're rapists. And then everyone rightly, liberals in this country said you cannot say or suggest that Mexicans as a category are rapists because then that will incite abuse against Mexican people and it will build up prejudice. And for Nick Ferrari to be able to say that on an off-com regulated radio station, LBC, all of the politicians go on it. And he is saying that you might have a Jamaican rapist or pedophile living on your road. Aaron, I wanna go to you for comment on that. We've talked about Nick Ferrari before, but I mean, this is one of the most obscene things I've heard from his show. Yeah, it was just disgusting, wasn't it? I mean, wow. And like I say, people go on to his show. You know, he talks to Kirstam every week. You know, these are the kinds of platforms which people view as a legitimate, credible mainstream. You know, you would never dream of saying something like that, not an awed eye. And it was undoubtedly my view a racist thing to say. I think let's just get a few things cleared up. I think anybody who has been arrested for a drugs offense shouldn't be deported. I just think that's patently obvious, particularly if they have a child here, you've served your time, you know, you've paid your debt, you can do what you like, right? And by the way, Nick Ferrari walks past people all the time who've committed crimes and they've gone through the criminal justice system. He just doesn't know about it. What he's asking for is these particular people, like you say, Michael, to be punished twice. So they go to prison or have probation or they have a suspended sentence and they get deported to have a country where they've been since they were children, as well as being ripped away from their family. So a drugs offense, I just, I don't think it's stupid. I think it's outrageous that someone on a drugs offense with children's country could be deported. Then we go into the more serious charges. Man slaughter, we don't know the circumstances and murder. Now that accounted for four people. I've approximately 50 people, right? That four people out of 50. And yet Nick Ferrari has the temerity to basically say that the 50 people on that plane were all murderers and rapists and pedophiles. Somebody, the claim is made regarding grooming, clearly it's disgusting, but pedophilia again is quite a significant thing to say on a radio station that broadcasts on an FM frequency. And I thought it was just a really, really disgusting thing to say. I mean, you know, it just seems really old to me that, well, by the way, Nick Ferrari, people think because Nick Ferrari is kind of an old white dude, he's like some working glass dude. No, Nick Ferrari's dad was in the media industry. He brought his son into the media industry. I believe his first gig in the media was actually with the son on the bizarre column in the 80s. I think that's the case. And he went to a private school. So he's somebody who's enjoyed a really nice life. He's lived on Easy Street, you know? He enters the industry, his dad had a foot in, he's gone to a nice school, he's had all the opportunities available to somebody with his privilege. And he's saying that 50 men who are being deported, many I think, with absolutely no justification at all, all pedophiles and rapists, I think he should apologize for it. And I think it's high time actually, people started calling it out. You know, he in particular is getting away with far too much of this. He said something very similar to Afua Hirsh on Sky. You know, he has a significant problem with people of color, particularly black people. Let's talk about that, right? Is it really acceptable for a journalist on broadcast media, on the radio, to be saying these things, to be misrepresenting people, black people like this so frequently? I don't think it is. It's time he started talking about it. I know I write about sort of a repeat offensive of how he talks about people of color and specifically black people, because that occasion with Afua Hirsh, which we also showed on this show, that was him saying, well, why do you live here then? Why do you stay here when she was complaining about one aspect of British politics? So he does seem to be someone who thinks that if you are a black person, your right to remain here is conditional. So with Afua Hirsh, it was if you even complain about the political system, you lose your right, just to see being here. And when it comes to the people on this plane, he's very willing, as you say, to tar them all as rapists and pedophiles. And not only that, he's willing to then basically tar, I think he's targeting most Jamaican men as that. If you're saying a Jamaican pedo or rapist might move on your street, that's really encouraging people when they see a Jamaican person on their street to ask, is he a pedo or a rapist? I think that's really obvious, really clear, and that's why it's completely irresponsible, objectionable and disgusting to say these kind of things on a national radio station.