Just now, stevenl said:

You're perfectly illustrating the issue here. Many people are looking at it emotionally in stead of rationally.

Where is the rationality of letting an Islamic terrorist back into the country? There are about 5k of them already here on the watch list of potential murders for their religion, we don't need another one on the list.

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

She was stripped of citizenship, so deemed to be not a British citizen, hence she could not return. But that stripping has now been deemed to have not been done in accordance to the law, so she is still a British citizen and can return. 

She can appeal the decision to strip, if upheld she will be expelled, if not upheld she can be tried in the UK. I think the latter will happen.

It's a bit like the chicken and the egg...she is not a British Citizen at present but is because it was deemed unlawful....so the initial decision stands until it is overturned hence making her not British at present

9 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

She is not people, she is an Islamic terrorist dedicated to killing, torturing and raping innocent people.

Alleged.

2 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

Where is the rationality of letting an Islamic terrorist back into the country? There are about 5k of them already here on the watch list of potential murders for their religion, we don't need another one on the list.

"Where is the rationality of letting an Islamic terrorist back into the country?"

In the law apparently.

Just now, baansgr said:

It's a bit like the chicken and the egg...she is not a British Citizen at present but is because it was deemed unlawful....so the initial decision stands until it is overturned hence making her not British at present

"It's a bit like the chicken and the egg"

No, it is not.

 

"she is not a British Citizen at present"

Not correct, she is a British citizen.

 

"so the initial decision stands until it is overturned hence making her not British at present"

No. Until her appeal gets rejected or the decision she has a right to appeal gets overturned she is a British citizen.

 

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

"Where is the rationality of letting an Islamic terrorist back into the country?"

In the law apparently.

What do you do when there are millions of them in the country already, with the law entrenching them, and anti free speech laws and conventions that stop you discussing the problem?

 

 

8 minutes ago, sanuk711 said:

I really don't think that you have seen any of the interviews that she had given to the BBC etc lemonjelly , Where she was happy about the Manchester bombing etc---that is before her lawyers took over speaking for her......

"Lass needs repatriation and de radicalizing,-Lomonjelly "  -- She was a recruiter for the jihadist group She said she was inspired to join ISIL by (**looking at) videos of fighters beheading their hostages .= She said she had been unfazed by seeing the head of a beheaded man as he was "an enemy of Islam",...WIKI

 

Sources told The Daily Telegraph that Begum served in ISIL's "morality police", and also tried to recruit other young women to join the jihadist group.^[17] She was allowed to carry a Kalashnikov rifle and earned a reputation as a strict enforcer of ISIL's laws, such as dress codes for women. Additionally, an anti-ISIL activist told The Independent that there are separate allegations of "Begum [stitching] suicide bombers into explosive vests so they could not be removed without detonating"

Blimey, if this is the case, yeah, I wouldn’t be letting her back in

TBH The present day terrorists are clever. Very clever.

Laws are made in their favour. Human rights are all for them. Many NGO's are thriving because of terrorism. They have invaded many embassies and are very influential.

Yes, everyone is innocent until proven guilty...

14 minutes ago, stevenl said:

"Where is the rationality of letting an Islamic terrorist back into the country?"

In the law apparently.

Pity it's not her sharia law then because she would be executed on arrival.

The chest thumpers aren’t going to like this, but you better be wary of any law that can strip you of your citizenship at a whim. 
 

That’s the central point here. 
 

We can debate whether the law actually applies to her. My argument is that it’s a stupid law. 
 

Now, should she be returned, tried and convicted and locked up for a bloody long time? Yes. 
 

But be very very very careful for supporting a law which can easily be extended to you for doing something that ‘the government doesn’t like’. 

3 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

Pity it's not her sharia law then because she would be executed on arrival.

Perhaps the best argument yet against a Government being given the power to strip a person of their citizenship.

 

 

Begum angered many Britons by appearing unrepentant about seeing severed heads and saying a suicide attack that killed 22 people in the English city of Manchester in 2017 was justified

...But She had pleaded to be repatriated to rejoin her family in London and said she was not a threat. ????

3 minutes ago, samran said:

The chest thumpers aren’t going to like this, but you better be wary of any law that can strip you of your citizenship at a whim. 

 

Nice theory but you see that the law is used against white people in the west whereas settled foreigners get a pass. For example, the police and government ignored Pakistani child rape gangs for decades. People complaining about child grooming have been arrested for hate speech. 

 

White people have to get used to using any rules, any pressure they can bring to bear, in their own interests just as these groups of hostile aliens have done.

 

 

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Perhaps the best argument yet against a Government being given the power to strip a person of their citizenship.

 

 

She's a non person who was dedicated to murder, rape and even went along with decapitations and burning captives in cages. This is a 'person' who named her last baby after a Muslim war lord who murdered thousands. Some people are beyond redemption and beyond the law, this evil little madam is one of them.

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Perhaps the best argument yet against a Government being given the power to strip a person of their citizenship.

 

 

If that person is a risk to other citizens of our country it is without doubt the governments responsibility without any question of doubt to remove the said persons citizenship, and there can be no doubt she was a risk.

1 minute ago, nemo38 said:

 

Nice theory but you see that the law is used against white people in the west whereas settled foreigners get a pass. For example, the police and government ignored Pakistani child rape gangs for decades. People complaining about child grooming have been arrested for hate speech. 

 

White people have to get used to using any rules, any pressure they can bring to bear, in their own interests just as these groups of hostile aliens have done.

 

 

I know in your conspiracy riddled world this all makes sense, but I can’t see how the (real) cover up of pedos by the establishment in all walks of life has anything to do with citizenship laws. 

2 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

She's a non person who was dedicated to murder, rape and even went along with decapitations and burning captives in cages. This is a 'person' who named her last baby after a Muslim war lord who murdered thousands. Some people are beyond redemption and beyond the law, this evil little madam is one of them.

It may all be true, but I’d advocate locking her up and throwing away the key back on UK soil. 

Off topic troll post removed

2 minutes ago, lemonjelly said:

Blimey, if this is the case, yeah, I wouldn’t be letting her back in

Thanks lemonjelly.....after quite a while on here --your one of the very few who would have a come back...................

8 minutes ago, nemo38 said:

 

Nice theory but you see that the law is used against white people in the west whereas settled foreigners get a pass. For example, the police and government ignored Pakistani child rape gangs for decades. People complaining about child grooming have been arrested for hate speech. 

 

White people have to get used to using any rules, any pressure they can bring to bear, in their own interests just as these groups of hostile aliens have done.

 

 

Straight out  of the far right 'white grievance' song book

6 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

She's a non person who was dedicated to murder, rape and even went along with decapitations and burning captives in cages. This is a 'person' who named her last baby after a Muslim war lord who murdered thousands. Some people are beyond redemption and beyond the law, this evil little madam is one of them.

The fact you need to label her a ‘non person’ (itself a blatant fallacy) is an indication of how weak your arguments are.

 

She’s a person and has rights under the law.

 

Moreover, it is not her actions which are being examined by the courts, it’s the actions of the British Government.

 

 

 

 

 

9 minutes ago, vogie said:

If that person is a risk to other citizens of our country it is without doubt the governments responsibility without any question of doubt to remove the said persons citizenship, and there can be no doubt she was a risk.

OK let’s follow that logic.

 

Should rapists and murderers have their citizenship removed, how about drunk drivers or people who park on the brow of a hill.

 

All present a real danger.

 

Or how about dealing with crimes in the criminal justice system before open courts of law?!

 

 

5 hours ago, tribalfusion001 said:

There are some normal people, but plenty of freaks who are scared of their own shadow.

Oh, the irony.

2 minutes ago, nemo38 said:

 

Muslim paedophile rape gangs are an imported problem. Stripping them of their citizenship and repatriating their communities would make the UK a more peaceful, prosperous, and happy place.

 

That is the connection with citizenship laws explained for you.

 

What is it that Muslim people in the UK do that we can't do for ourselves? We have curry recipes on the internet now. They are a problem for us and we don't need them.

Full on and off topic Islamophobia.

 

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Full on and off topic Islamophobia.

 

Phrase invented by the Muslim brotherhood to deflect from criticism of Islam. Fear of Islam is not irrational but entirely normal and understandable. As the prophet is quoted in the hadith of Bukari- 'I was made victorious with terror' something too many followers take to heart, like this woman did.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

OK let’s follow that logic.

 

Should rapists and murderers have their citizenship removed, how about drunk drivers or people who park on the brow of a hill.

 

All present a real danger.

 

Or how about dealing with crimes in the criminal justice system before open courts of law?!

 

 

Should rapists and murderers have their citizenship removed, how about drunk drivers or people who park on the brow of a hill.

 

"Rapists and murderers" Most definately, "drunk drivers" maybe. Park on the brow of a hill, I think a good repremand would suffice. Are you comparing bad parking to a terrorist like Begum?

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

OK let’s follow that logic.

 

Should rapists and murderers have their citizenship removed, how about drunk drivers or people who park on the brow of a hill.

 

All present a real danger.

 

Or how about dealing with crimes in the criminal justice system before open courts of law?!

 

 

We should take the opportunity of ejecting or excluding dangerous criminals where it arises.

 

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Full on and off topic Islamophobia.

 

 

Islam is a religion which aims at world conquest. Putting "phobia" after Islam is a rhetorical trick to shut down discussion. 

36 minutes ago, lemonjelly said:

Blimey, if this is the case, yeah, I wouldn’t be letting her back in

Whatever way you view the person, it is known detention centres in Iraq are not necessarily secure, practice torture, corruption  and non compliance to the rule of law. There is a risk the person could get back into the community and rejoin  an Islamist terror group as has previously occurred with other detainees. Personally I am of the POV that UK should not go down the path of matching cruelty with cruelty as it's a zero sum game. IMO it would be safer for the world in general to return this person to the UK for trial and when found guilty ultra secure detention. If needs be HMG can update anti terror legislation for assessment prior to any release date and if found to be an ongoing threat not to be released.

1 minute ago, vogie said:

Should rapists and murderers have their citizenship removed, how about drunk drivers or people who park on the brow of a hill.

 

"Rapists and murderers" Most definately, "drunk drivers" maybe. Park on the brow of a hill, I think a good repremand would suffice. Are you comparing bad parking to a terrorist like Begum?

No, I’m pointing out the logical conclusion of the emotive argument you made.

 

2 minutes ago, nemo38 said:

 

We should take the opportunity of ejecting or excluding dangerous criminals where it arises.

 

 

To where do you propose that they are exiled?