clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Has she been left stateless though? I'm fairly sure that wasn't the case though I may well be wrong.
Even if you decide she is legally responsible she should be tried here. She was radicalisedand/or groomed here and was a British citizen. Why should any other country have to deal with this?
This was a populist political decision and I am surprised at the outcome of the appeal. Making someone stateless has to be illegal.
Leaving people like her stateless in a camp in Syria is likely to create a breading ground for more radicalised groups. By playing to populism at home we are storing up problems for the future.
But we do treat children differently especially in terms of grooming and sexual exploitation that’s my point and is my only point esbGive over. Half the people on this thread are inferring she has diminished responsibility. There's a thirst to get her back in the UK and give her a ticking off, at most. It's absolutely clear as day, and anyone with half a brain cell can see it. It doesn't matter if someone says openly 'let her off', or makes it out using a variety of semantics. Most people aren't stupid. The rage isn't about the justice system, it's about being on the losing side of the decision. There are some people (many found on this off topic chat), who are so soft they hide behind pretending to be 'compassionate', and in the process think they can take the side of an evil piece of shit unchallenged.
Shimima Begum joined a terrorist organisation. If you want to play being compassionate, have a think about those poor blokes in orange jump suits on their knees, about to have their heads cut off. Many of which were volunteers trying to help others. She was complicit in that.
Even when I have said that should she have been 18, there would have been another excuse, my immediate post was met with... Another excuse: 'She might start a new terrorist movement'. Well, five minutes ago you were pleading that she was showing remorse, and we should let her back in. Which is it then? No answer obviously, because it is just any excuse you can grab, the age being the current most convenient one.
The authorities have made their decision, and it is absolutely the correct one. Shame on you.
I believe so but don't know for sure. I thought Bangladesh said she wasn't born there and indeed has never been there, so I can see why they would conclude she is our problem rather than theirs.Has she been left stateless though? I'm fairly sure that wasn't the case though I may well be wrong.
yes, the uk say she has bangladeshi citizenship, bangladesh say she doesn'tHas she been left stateless though? I'm fairly sure that wasn't the case though I may well be wrong.
yes, the uk say she has bangladeshi citizenship, bangladesh say she doesn't
I believe so but don't know for sure. I thought Bangladesh said she wasn't born there and indeed has never been there, so I can see why they would conclude she is our problem rather than theirs.
it's not a court case, it's the immigration tribunial which are often overturned by law courts which is likely to happen hereRight, I thought that's what this court case was meant to sort out.
it's not a court case, it's the immigration tribunial which are often overturned by law courts which is likely to happen here
but in any case no uk court can force bangladesh to give citizenship to a person
Canada didn't say Letts was not a Canadian citizen though and had played a part in his case.They couldn’t force to give Jack Letts Canadian citizenship could they?
Canada didn't say Letts was not a Canadian citizen though and had played a part in his case.
This is very different to this case where we say she is a citizen of another country but that country says she isn't.
You probably should research the brief before you make stupid comments Grenners
There’s an awful lot of projection here (ranging from a thirst for clemency, to rage, to fake compassion, to….sympathies with terrorists?) but ultimately I think she should face justice, like any other British person. As unpalatable to you as they may be, the arguments being made in her defence by her lawyers are part of that process. If the case is as much of a slam dunk as you believe it to be then you have little to fear from that. Washing our hands of the situation instead is a strange way of holding an accused terrorist to account.
I don’t see any outcome as being a winner or a loser for me personally - I don’t care if she spends her life in prison or gets fully acquitted, as long as justice properly runs its course. So I’m not sure why you’re framing this as something where people are just sore about being on one side or another - I don’t see why this has to be a tribal thing. It’s just the overall principle of stripping someone of their citizenship in this way which sits uneasily with me.
As a supporter of a terrorist organisation yourself I'd say your take on this isn't really going to persuade anyone.At 15 that is grooming, she was a child.
This is weird flex even for someone like you
For anyone who may be taken in by Grenners uneducated attempt at a "gotcha"
Jack Letts was a British/Canadian dual citizenship. Before the UK removed his UK citizenship Canada happily admitted he had CA citizenship.
This is very different from the UK trying to tell another Sovereign country that a person is their citizen even after that country has denied this and given the reasons (which are that people born to Bangladeshi parents are entitled to dual citizenship but this needs to be applied for and there has not ever been an application in this case.
So any talk of Jack Letts is moot.
i have, it's just not my fault you can't read.can you answer my question please
Generally agreeing with your post. The judgement thinks she was trafficked, fwiwWas she groomed? Or is just now using that excuse? How do you actually make the differentiation there?
Where have I been dismissive of her actions?You can dress it up as whatever you want, there's too many people that are sympathetic towards her, and that is what it comes down to. At least have the balls to admit it, because you wouldn't fool most people in society with the take you are bringing here.
It is a concern that one can be so dismissive of her actions, but in the same breath feel 'uneasy' about her losing citizenship. You then say you wouldn't care if she was fully acquitted. Are you uncomfortable to talk about her crimes perhaps? It would be easier not to, wouldn't it? I haven't seen almost anything on this thread coming from the direction that you are, where there is any mention of what she's done. Just outrage at the fact we've kicked her out the country permanently. You would honestly think she had nicked some sweets from the shop the way some of you go on.
Bang on about projection all you want, your angle is clear as day, and it's shameful.
I've never supported terrorists, you on the other hand have had posts on here deleted for racismAs a supporter of a terrorist organisation yourself I'd say your take on this isn't really going to persuade anyone.
i have, it's just not my fault you can't read.
One more time in Crayon for you
The UK didn't force Canada to give Jack Letts Canadian citizenship as Canada were not and never did deny that he had CA citizenship.
So if you question is "They couldn’t force to give Jack Letts Canadian citizenship could they?" then they didn't try to as prior to when the UK removed Letts citizenship in 2019 Canada had already granted him citizenship.
It's not hard to understand Grenners.
I literally don’t know 1 person who lapped it up, doesn’t think Blair is a war criminal and found his bizarre appointment by the UN as a piece envoy for the region anything other than a piss take. Regardless of their politics. If anything in my experience it’s one of the few things that people in this country are united on.I remember lots of marches against Iraq. Are you sure you can say that was 'lapped up' as it were?!?
I don't disagree with you about Blair and Cameron btw, for clarity. We are where we are though, and the removal of citizenship I do find a little disquieting, I must admit.
I literally don’t know 1 person who lapped it up, doesn’t think Blair is a war criminal and found his bizarre appointment by the UN as a piece envoy for the region anything other than a piss take. Regardless of their politics. If anything in my experience it’s one of the few things that people in this country are united on.
You support the IRA. You had your avatar as Gerry Adams, your hero. I used the word "taig" which you squealed over and it was deleted. But you support the IRA which puts you in a slightly different league when it comes to this kind of topic.I've never supported terrorists, you on the other hand have had posts on here deleted for racism
The CA government admitting Letts was a CA citizen in 2018 and trying to get him released and he should face "Canadian" justice, dated 2018I don’t think you answered my question have you?
was the Ira bomber Paul O Connor groomed?
Cry more, you are a proven racist and a bit of joke on this page.You support the IRA. You had your avatar as Gerry Adams, your hero. I used the word "taig" which you squealed over and it was deleted. But you support the IRA which puts you in a different league .
You're in no place to judge anyone's opinion about this woman given your support for a murderous organisation.
Cry more, you are a proven racist and a bit of joke on this page.
You're in no place to judge anything you vile old racist weirdo. I maybe many things but I'm not a racist like you and you'll always be a weirdo old racist.
What's that? ADM is a proven racist and a coward.
ADM is clearly drunk
I did you thick c**t and no amount of deflection is going to make you look any better.
I've answered your question and you can deflect all you want
I should listen to this fellow poster
View attachment 28492
Speaks the IRA supporter.Cry more, you are a proven racist and a bit of joke on this page.
You're in no place to judge anything you vile old racist weirdo. I maybe many things but I'm not a racist like you and you'll always be a weirdo old racist.
What's that? ADM is a proven racist and a coward.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?