Shamima Begum Not Allowed Back. (1 Viewer)

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Does that just apply to their children who weren't born here? I thought being born in a country gave automatic citizenship? Otherwise that could potentially leave lots of people stateless, which is also illegal under international law I thought? Which takes precedence?
Legislation is quite clear on this. The child of someone not a British Citizen at birth does not automatically receive British Citizenship at birth. If given British Citizenship, they must act within British Law and in a manner that is conducive to the standards as required in the community.

As the child of immigrants she did not and does not have the automatic British Citizenship you and I have. It's the law.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
The way I read it she already had dual-nationality. If it's just that she could have it, then I can potentially see her winning an appeal.

Apparently she qualifies through parentage but doesn’t have it, has never applied for it and never been to Bangladesh in her life. That’s what I read anyway.
 

hill83

Well-Known Member
I’m Captain Leftie of Leftania. But this bint, who wilfully joined an organisation who wouldn’t hesitate to instantly kill my entire family, can absolutely fuck off.

Loads of these pricks have come back. Served their time and are now out. Pointless.
 

tommydazzle

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure I call us a Christian nation, however I agree that Christianity has had much of its muscularity reduced by enlightenment values of reason, compassion and human decency. Thank goodness for a secular society and the increase in rationality. Maybe you'll come to realise that you don't need myths to live a fulfilling and compassionate life.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

Grendel

Well-Known Member
What I’m amazed at it the liberals on here who want to invent a crime and convict her of an invented crime without a trial
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure I call us a Christian nation, however I agree that Christianity has had much of its muscularity reduced by enlightenment values of reason, compassion and human decency. Thank goodness for a secular society and the increase in rationality. Maybe you'll come to realise that you don't need myths to live a fulfilling and compassionate life.
I do realise that but choose to live a life following jesus
 

mark82

Super Moderator
I’m Captain Leftie of Leftania. But this bint, who wilfully joined an organisation who wouldn’t hesitate to instantly kill my entire family, can absolutely fuck off.

Loads of these pricks have come back. Served their time and are now out. Pointless.

Yep, can't disagree to an extent. If we could only hand out a soft sentence then maybe best to keep her at arm's length .
 

mark82

Super Moderator
What I’m amazed at it the liberals on here who want to invent a crime and convict her of an invented crime without a trial

Senior counter-terrorism officials in both the Met Police and MI6 have both come out and said she could be arrested on arrival, investigated and potentially charged (obviously pending outcome of any investigation).

To be clear, I don't want her or any like her on our streets. If running off to join a terrorist group that has killed so many in Syria and abroad isn't a crime, it damn well should be.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Legislation is quite clear on this. The child of someone not a British Citizen at birth does not automatically receive British Citizenship at birth. If given British Citizenship, they must act within British Law and in a manner that is conducive to the standards as required in the community.

As the child of immigrants she did not and does not have the automatic British Citizenship you and I have. It's the law.

But that legislation would mean potentially millions upon millions of people wouldn't have a state. Not an automatic citizen of the country you're born in. Not an automatic citizen of the countr(y/ies) your parent were born in either. So not a citizen anywhere.

Essentially what you're saying is that legally we do have a right to revoke her citizenship and make her stateless due to her actions of joining a terrorist organisation? That seems perfectly fair to me (I think it'd be fair to revoke anyones citizenship on such grounds, even if you've got parentage going back centuries) but I thought that the UN said that to do so you had to believe said person wouldn't be left stateless?

Are we using the argument that we 'believe' this girl has Bangladeshi citizenship to fulfil this criteria, even if she doesn't?

All I can see happening here is an incredibly long and costly court case.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
But that legislation would mean potentially millions upon millions of people wouldn't have a state. Not an automatic citizen of the country you're born in. Not an automatic citizen of the countr(y/ies) your parent were born in either. So not a citizen anywhere.

Essentially what you're saying is that legally we do have a right to revoke her citizenship and make her stateless due to her actions of joining a terrorist organisation? That seems perfectly fair to me (I think it'd be fair to revoke anyones citizenship on such grounds, even if you've got parentage going back centuries) but I thought that the UN said that to do so you had to believe said person wouldn't be left stateless?

Are we using the argument that we 'believe' this girl has Bangladeshi citizenship to fulfil this criteria, even if she doesn't?

All I can see happening here is an incredibly long and costly court case.
It was a friend who is trained as a lawyer making the point I’m not sure of the answer to your question sorry
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure I call us a Christian nation, however I agree that Christianity has had much of its muscularity reduced by enlightenment values of reason, compassion and human decency. Thank goodness for a secular society and the increase in rationality. Maybe you'll come to realise that you don't need myths to live a fulfilling and compassionate life.

I agree. For those who go on about 'Christian values' it's actually scientific reasoning/proof tempering the worst of these values down that has made it more forgiving (but there is still a lot of prejudice in Christianity). Before science Christianity was extremely violent and unforgiving (as were/are other religions) and Christian values can just as easily be interpreted as Jewish/Islamic values given how closely related all three religions are.

What really gets on my nerves is when someone religious says you can't have morals without faith, when the complete opposite is more likely to be true. You're doing things because your religion says so in order to get into heaven etc - you're doing what you're told and following an order, not making a moral decision.

However an atheist that decides to care about their fellow human beings (or the wider environment) without any belief in a reward/punishment and that this is the only life you have is totally making a moral decision to do so. They could just as easily chose to exploit everyone else for their own benefit, but they choose not to.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
Religion. The cause of most deaths in this world after famine. And a lot of famine is caused by the wars caused by religion.
 

pastythegreat

Well-Known Member
I'll admit to doing some stupid things as a teenager but running off to another country to join a terror organisation wasn't one of them.
Like this
cbd4764712ed49256bcc7d59090804d5.jpg


Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
I agree. For those who go on about 'Christian values' it's actually scientific reasoning/proof tempering the worst of these values down that has made it more forgiving (but there is still a lot of prejudice in Christianity). Before science Christianity was extremely violent and unforgiving (as were/are other religions) and Christian values can just as easily be interpreted as Jewish/Islamic values given how closely related all three religions are.

What really gets on my nerves is when someone religious says you can't have morals without faith, when the complete opposite is more likely to be true. You're doing things because your religion says so in order to get into heaven etc - you're doing what you're told and following an order, not making a moral decision.

However an atheist that decides to care about their fellow human beings (or the wider environment) without any belief in a reward/punishment and that this is the only life you have is totally making a moral decision to do so. They could just as easily chose to exploit everyone else for their own benefit, but they choose not to.
Completely agree. Would never say a moral life isn’t possible as an atheist or a moral life is always lived by someone with faith.
 

Nick

Administrator
She'll be given the right to live here while she appeals and might even vanish into the community

Yeah can see that happening, while there's a big fuss act all tough.

She could probably get back in easy enough anyway when the attention is off and nobody would really know.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
Yeah can see that happening, while there's a big fuss act all tough.

She could probably get back in easy enough anyway when the attention is off and nobody would really know.
I'll get her a dinghy to come back in. Then wait half way with some darts.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Find it astounding that people can talk about the Rotherham girls of the same age being groomed and no one sane says “they knew what they were doing”. But the exact same thing with this girl and it’s “fuck her she knew what was what”. The hypocrisy is ridiculous.

She’s our mess. She’s a UK citizen. You can’t just wash your hands of people and leave them to war torn countries to look after.

String her up, lock her away, throw cabbages at her for life if you want. But the attitudes here are disgraceful IMO, both from a child protection and global politics standpoint.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Find it astounding that people can talk about the Rotherham girls of the same age being groomed and no one sane says “they knew what they were doing”. But the exact same thing with this girl and it’s “fuck her she knew what was what”.
Yeah. tbf this wasn't my first reaction, especially with a lack of any kind of remorse but, thinking about it, it's a perfectly fair point to make.

Listening to her, she doesn't sound all there (in the nicest possible sense!). It's a troubling case on many, many levels.
 

Terry Gibson's perm

Well-Known Member
Find it astounding that people can talk about the Rotherham girls of the same age being groomed and no one sane says “they knew what they were doing”. But the exact same thing with this girl and it’s “fuck her she knew what was what”. The hypocrisy is ridiculous.

She’s our mess. She’s a UK citizen. You can’t just wash your hands of people and leave them to war torn countries to look after.

String her up, lock her away, throw cabbages at her for life if you want. But the attitudes here are disgraceful IMO, both from a child protection and global politics standpoint.


Was a uk citizen, she has now said she may go to Holland, if she gets back she should be allowed out tagged and on bail of a million pounds, I am assuming her family are getting legal aid which should be removed.

People are worried about children their own and not this creature who is no longer a child.
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
Find it astounding that people can talk about the Rotherham girls of the same age being groomed and no one sane says “they knew what they were doing”. But the exact same thing with this girl and it’s “fuck her she knew what was what”. The hypocrisy is ridiculous.

She’s our mess. She’s a UK citizen. You can’t just wash your hands of people and leave them to war torn countries to look after.

String her up, lock her away, throw cabbages at her for life if you want. But the attitudes here are disgraceful IMO, both from a child protection and global politics standpoint.

Did the Rotherham girls cause harm to other people? They were lured by people with alcohol, drugs and cars by people in their neighbourhood they got to know over time, then sexually abused by numerous people once they were trapped in this circle, were they not? I don't see how they can be compared?

This girl chose to leave the country on her own free will, with 2 friends, to support a terrorist organisation. She may not have physically caused harm to others but I'm sure if asked to, she would have obeyed.

To be honest I am on the fence about her coming back. I would prefer she stayed in Syria with her child taken from her and given to a loving family.

However, if brought back she could provide useful information and intelligence. But at a cost to the taxpayer.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top