UK-born Islamic State recruit can return from Syria to challenge citizenship removal

[sungod]

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

It's really not that difficult a concept to grasp. You have a passport. That passport denotes your citizenship. All the countries of the world have reached an understanding that, ultimately, each country takes ultimate responsibility for their citizens. No matter how long you spend in Thailand, unless you have Thai citizenship, the country for which you hold citizenship assumes responsibility for you. 

OK, all understood now you had to put a different spin on it.

 

UK government have taken responsibility, they've revoked her citizenship. It's what the whole thread is about. Suggest you go back to page one and start again....duh........

[stevenl]

1 minute ago, sungod said:

OK, all understood now you had to put a different spin on it.

 

UK government have taken responsibility, they've revoked her citizenship. It's what the whole thread is about. Suggest you go back to page one and start again....duh........

Yes, and read the OP as well please, where it is stated that revoking citizenship is against the law if the person involved can not appeal the decision.

[RuamRudy]

4 minutes ago, sungod said:

OK, all understood now you had to put a different spin on it.

 

UK government have taken responsibility, they've revoked her citizenship. It's what the whole thread is about. Suggest you go back to page one and start again....duh........

Yeah... do realise that the meat of the story is below the headline, don't you?

[sungod]

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

Yes, and read the OP as well please, where it is stated that revoking citizenship is against the law if the person involved can not appeal the decision.

Fine, let her do it by video, no need to for her to step back on UK soil to do that.

[vogie]

5 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

It's really not that difficult a concept to grasp. You have a passport. That passport denotes your citizenship. All the countries of the world have reached an understanding that, ultimately, each country takes ultimate responsibility for their citizens. No matter how long you spend in Thailand, unless you have Thai citizenship, the country for which you hold citizenship assumes responsibility for you. 

Your passport will always belong to the government and can be taken off you at any time, in Begums case she was stripped of her British nationalty because she posed a threat to other citizens. It would be fair to say when her citizenship was revoked she no longer became the UKs responsibility. But she is trying to worm her back into the country and not because she loves us all, but she has realised which side of her bread is buttered.

[RuamRudy]

3 minutes ago, vogie said:

Your passport will always belong to the government and can be taken off you at any time, in Begums case she was stripped of her British nationalty because she posed a threat to other citizens. It would be fair to say when her citizenship was revoked she no longer became the UKs responsibility. But she is trying to worm her back into the country and not because she loves us all, but she has realised which side of her bread is buttered.

All that would be perfectly valid if she held the passport of another country and she had somewhere else to go. In her case, that is not an option. And, understandably, no other country would want her. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by RuamRudy

[sungod]

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Yeah... do realise that the meat of the story is below the headline, don't you?

Good to see you have made it back to the beginning, hope you do better 2nd time around!

[Smigel]

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

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.

Ms Begum is not being  returned to the UK to stand trial for any of her actions since leaving the UK to join isis. 

Apparently there are no laws currently in the UK justice system covering her actions. 

Which is why sajid javid stripped her of her citizenship in the first place, in the face of overwhelming public anger. 

Anyone with the smallest of brains, can see the writing on the wall here. 

She will be allowed to return to the UK to appeal the government decision, whereby her appeal will be upheld on the basis that it is illegal under International law to render a person stateless.

She will then no doubt sue the UK government for breaching her human rights, and in no time at all be living a very nice life, thank you very much.

Makes me so proud to be British. 

[Chomper Higgot]

20 minutes ago, Smigel said:

Ms Begum is not being  returned to the UK to stand trial for any of her actions since leaving the UK to join isis. 

Apparently there are no laws currently in the UK justice system covering her actions. 

Which is why sajid javid stripped her of her citizenship in the first place, in the face of overwhelming public anger. 

Anyone with the smallest of brains, can see the writing on the wall here. 

She will be allowed to return to the UK to appeal the government decision, whereby her appeal will be upheld on the basis that it is illegal under International law to render a person stateless.

She will then no doubt sue the UK government for breaching her human rights, and in no time at all be living a very nice life, thank you very much.

All at the expense of the British taxpayer. 

Makes me so proud to be British. 

Well if she didn’t break any UK laws good luck with arguing ‘public anger’ as a legal reason to strip her of her citizenship.

[vogie]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

You forgot to mention that she will then get job as co-presenter on Dancing on Ice, a permanent place on the cabinet and a grace-and-favour residence in Buckingham Palace. Or am I being a little far fetched?

am I being a little far fetched?  Not really RR, the way the BBC has gone she could easily end up as Director General.

[AndrewMciver]

I thought this is what the Brits wanted, for them to take control. 

 

Well your own courts have made a descision. 

 

Imagine the horror had this been decided the European court. 

[nausea]

Young girls do stupid things. I think Begum's paid pretty heavily, losing 3 babies. Obviously, if she gets back into the UK there's no way she's going to leave again. Her initial decision I can understand as just stupid idealism, her later actions are more worrying, she was up for it, morality police and all that. Now she understands her true position she wants to flee back to the land of milk and honey. I must say the decision to strip her of her nationality seems politically motivated, rather than deal with the problem, offload it. What would I do? Probably bring her back and stick her away for a long time, should the various allegations be true. Your life defined by stupid decisions made between the ages of 15 and 19. Ha! She should be dealing with predatory Mullahs, arranged marriages, and other such stuff. Making her a scapegoat for all the sins of ISIS seems a bit extreme. The responsibility for that lies at a much higher level. We're talking about an impressionable young woman here, not some high level leader.

[AndrewMciver]

48 minutes ago, sungod said:

No, what difference does that make?

 

 

She was born in the UK. Raised in the UK. Went to school in the UK. Spent her whole life in the UK up to that point. She was radicalised in the UK. Something went wrong with her in the enviroment she grew up in the UK. 

 

She is a complete idiot, a <deleted> of the highest order, and most likely dangerous. She needs to go through the justice system, and be treated like every other scum bag out there (and there have been worst than her). 

 

You can't just render people stateless according to international convention. It's up to the UK to take responsibility for dishing her to the world, and put her through the legal process. 

 

But she's brown and a muslim, so the racist xenophobes will get more worked by her than any other murderer. 

[phetphet]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If the court rules the removal of her citizenship illegal then there is no means to legally expel her.

 

And if the court rules removal was legal? Where do you think they will send her? No one will take her.

Once back, she is back for good.

Straight on social security, then likely waiting for her lawyers to start all their claims for damages against the newspapers for besmirching her reputation.

[tifino]

keep her in a Immigration Detention Camp; until (if) she wins an Appeal

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, phetphet said:

And if the court rules removal was legal? Where do you think they will send her? No one will take her.

Once back, she is back for good.

Straight on social security, then likely waiting for her lawyers to start all their claims for damages against the newspapers for besmirching her reputation.

One step at a time.

 

The courts have not yet ruled.

[bodga]

4 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Nonsense. She would NEVER be expelled/deported again from the UK. You know this.

yeah  appeal  after  appeal  after  appeal  then  try  to  get  pregnant etc etc

[nausea]

36 minutes ago, AndrewMciver said:

She was born in the UK. Raised in the UK. Went to school in the UK. Spent her whole life in the UK up to that point

Indeed, you'd be amazed at just how British some of these second generation immigrants are. I was, when I worked with them. More British than me, who come from a half Irish half English background. At least they know about cricket.

[Kadilo]

Just now, nausea said:

. At least they know about cricket.

????

[nemo38]

  

24 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

One step at a time.

 

The courts have not yet ruled.

That is a fabian solution. You know she can't be removed if she is let in. You don't have a lot of sympathy for the white British population.

  

1 hour ago, AndrewMciver said:

She was born in the UK. Raised in the UK. Went to school in the UK. Spent her whole life in the UK up to that point. She was radicalised in the UK. Something went wrong with her in the enviroment she grew up in the UK. 

 

She is a complete idiot, a <deleted> of the highest order, and most likely dangerous. She needs to go through the justice system, and be treated like every other scum bag out there (and there have been worst than her). 

 

You can't just render people stateless according to international convention. It's up to the UK to take responsibility for dishing her to the world, and put her through the legal process. 

 

But she's brown and a muslim, so the racist xenophobes will get more worked by her than any other murderer. 

She wasn't radicalised. She is following the tenets of Islam. 

 

There are towns in the UK where Muslims are the majority of citizens. Why would white British people take responsibility for the behaviour of a hostile alien group, who follow their home culture, even if they are settled in the UK?

 

There the steps which the UK can, and should, follow to repudiate international conventions. As a practical matter, they can refuse to take her back no matter what. There you will have a nice new convention of not taking back terrorists. Let her rot in a camp in the Middle East.

 

White British people should come first.

 

22 minutes ago, nausea said:

Indeed, you'd be amazed at just how British some of these second generation immigrants are. I was, when I worked with them. More British than me, who come from a half Irish half English background. At least they know about cricket.

 

 

[CG1 Blue]

9 hours ago, webfact said:

"Fairness and justice must, on the facts of this case, outweigh the national security concerns,"

This is why the UK will always be under threat from IS and the like. Fairness to criminals and terrorists outweighs the safety of our citizens. Ridiculous. 

[bodga]

5 minutes ago, Kadilo said:

????

Yeah but ask them who  Buddy  Holly is for 10  bonus  points.

[AndrewMciver]

12 minutes ago, phetphet said:

And if the court rules removal was legal? Where do you think they will send her? No one will take her.

Once back, she is back for good.

Straight on social security, then likely waiting for her lawyers to start all their claims for damages against the newspapers for besmirching her reputation.

 

She goes through the legal process like all criminals and idiots go through. If you believe the legal system is craap then that's a seperate matter. If you believe the legal system is soft then that's your beef. 

 

Any victims/parents/family directly or indirectly caused by her deserve justice. 

 

Pretending she isn't British is a nonsense. You had a new home secretary, who is a muslim, playing hard to pretend he wasn't one of 'those muslims', pandering to the xenophobes who doubted him.

 

Children don't grow up to become nut jobs, something went wrong in the system, and it's up to the system to deal with her. Be it (my option) lock her up or rehabilitation. 

 

 

 

 

[nemo38]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

More canned Islamophobia.

"Islamophobia" is just a rhetorical trick to block a discussion about a conflict of interest between white Europeans and Muslim settlers.

 

Criticism of Muslims isn't something that happens in isolation from their terrorism, welfare dependency (80% of Bangladeshi women and 50% of Bangladeshi men are on the old), crime, and their rapidly rising population.

[AndrewMciver]

10 minutes ago, nemo38 said:

  

There are towns in the UK where Muslims are the majority of citizens. Why would white British people take responsibility for the behaviour of a hostile alien group, who follow their home culture, even if they are settled in the UK?

 

 

 

I went to Sunderland, Tyne and Wear for a few months. Full of white people. Most were all on 'the sick' literally everyone on benefits, single mothers actively looking to have children so they can claim more benefits and a home, they loved a bit of shop lifting, hooliganism at the football, getting drunk daily on cheap cider, plenty of violence. A hint of xenophobia in the air, which was bizarre as there was barely any multiculturalism. But most were friendly and just got on with it. 

 

I went to Birmingham once too. Very multicultural. Some areas were a strong black majority. Very rough and scary at times. But some amazing food, and some of the funniest, charastmatic people you'll ever meet. 

 

I was in a jewish neighbourhood in Tottenham too. People very insulated, very quiet. It was nice to see, albeit boring. The community you could tell were very close, and it was nice to witness that sense of family. 

 

I went to Southall once too. It was like stepping foot in India. Signs were in Indian too! Amazing colours, suits, clothing, stalls, and amazing food ! 

 

WELCOME TO A MULTICULTURAL SOCIETY. You get idiots in every city, in every society. Xenophobia is pathetic. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by AndrewMciver

[thequietman]

8 hours ago, simon43 said:

I read just now that she actually got legal aid to appeal her case at the UK Court of Appeal.  Quite how she managed to get this aid when no longer a British citizen is beyond me......

Seems she has other sources of income. Pulled this off her social media page. ????

[stevenl]

26 minutes ago, phetphet said:

And if the court rules removal was legal? Where do you think they will send her? No one will take her.

Once back, she is back for good.

Straight on social security, then likely waiting for her lawyers to start all their claims for damages against the newspapers for besmirching her reputation.

That is an impossible scenario. If no one will take her apparently removal was not legal.

[Sujo]

34 minutes ago, nemo38 said:

  

That is a fabian solution. You know she can't be removed if she is let in. You don't have a lot of sympathy for the white British population.

 

White British people should come first.

 

 

 

Wow. No hiding from those thoughts.

[Sujo]

37 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

This is why the UK will always be under threat from IS and the like. Fairness to criminals and terrorists outweighs the safety of our citizens. Ridiculous. 

She is also one of our citizens.

[nemo38]

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

She is also one of our citizens.

 

I don't care, and, increasingly, other British people don't care. I don't accept her citizenship. It is a fraud.

 

We want our government to look after us, not hostile alien groups who use our law to subvert our society.

 

She can always slip back into Bangladesh, or some other Muslim country. Where do we have to run off to?