Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

British IS schoolgirl 'wants to return home'

... else anyone with dual citizenship, however theoretical, can be exiled from the uk for quite undefined reasons ...

If you call travelling to another country to join a genocidal cult whose sworn aim is to destroy your country and others, whilst raping and murdering their way across the Middle East "undefined", I suppose you have a point.
 
If you call travelling to another country to join a genocidal cult whose sworn aim is to destroy your country and others whilst raping their way across the Middle East "undefined", I suppose you have a point.
Yeah if that was what the law was, fine, but it's not. It just says "if its for the public good and you wont be stateless". Plenty of people i'm sure they'd quite like to remove and dump elsewhere who could be squeezed into that completely vague principle.
 
If you call travelling to another country to join a genocidal cult whose sworn aim is to destroy your country and others, whilst raping and murdering their way across the Middle East "undefined", I suppose you have a point.

Could also apply to illegal invasions of certain Middle East countries with participants claiming that a god was on their side...
 
Yeah if that was what the law was, fine, but it's not. It just says "if its for the public good and you wont be stateless". Plenty of people i'm sure they'd quite like to remove and dump elsewhere who could be squeezed into that completely vague principle.
And it's worse than that. It creates a precedent that every single person born in the UK to Bangladeshi parents is also potentially a Bangladeshi citizen (up to the age of 21 only, iirc), whether they want to be or not, whether they have ever expressed any interest in it or not (Begum hasn't), or indeed, whether or not they even know this is the case in Bangladeshi law (why would they), and can have their British citizenship taken away from them on that basis. It instantly creates a group of thousands of second-class citizens.

But hey, Begum's a cunt so anything the UK govt does to her is ok. Arbitrary use of power is ok. :facepalm:
 
Last edited:
Yeah if that was what the law was, fine, but it's not. It just says "if its for the public good and you wont be stateless". Plenty of people i'm sure they'd quite like to remove and dump elsewhere who could be squeezed into that completely vague principle.

You're saying this more clearly and concisely than anyone else on this thread. :)
 
Are you pissed? Poor taste quip that. And I expect those people who's mothers and sisters and friends have been held as sex slaves might find it even more so. Go and have a watch some of the testimonials from Yazidi women.
poor taste or indeed no taste at all is something at the heart of the urban experience
 
How's she meant to get back? Isn't the border from Syria to Turkey closed? Can't imagine Turkey will welcome her...although Brits don't need a visa anymore. Although she's not got a passport to enter with...
 
Are you pissed? Poor taste quip that. And I expect those people whose mothers and sisters and friends have been held as sex slaves might find it even more so. Go and have a watch some of the testimonials from Yazidi women.

no but if I wanted to hear from revenge porn fantasists and capital punishment cheerleading I would be visiting less enlightened Internet forums


it’s called moral consistency
 
And it's worse than that. It creates a precedent that every single person born in the UK to Bangladeshi parents is also potentially a Bangladeshi citizen (up to the age of 21 only, iirc), whether they want to be or not, whether they have ever expressed any interest in it or not (Begum hasn't), and can have their British citizenship taken away from them on that basis. It instantly creates a group of thousands of second-class citizens.
Don't think it creates a precedent, exactly. However absurd it may be, the way UK law already sees it is that anyone born in the UK with a Bangladeshi parent automatically has Bangladeshi citizenship at birth.

Begun has no chance on this, it seems, and there is already a preliminary UK judgment that she is Bangadeshi. Although if she comes back to the UK, the prospect of her being made de facto stateless by the government and then being made a refugee on account of her statelessness does show how stupid the law is.

The real legal question is about whether it is rational to deem her a security risk, rather than her nationality.
 
Yeah if that was what the law was, fine, but it's not. It just says "if its for the public good and you wont be stateless". Plenty of people i'm sure they'd quite like to remove and dump elsewhere who could be squeezed into that completely vague principle.

Well this might hold water if you were able to provide other examples of dual nationals being 'unjustly' stripped of their British citizenship. Last time this came up no one was able to provide a single example. The massive majority of those of us with dual nationality manage to retain them by not joining ISIS.
 
Whatever your views are on her it was obvious that she would end up back in the UK at some point (unless she met with an unfortunate accident in the camp). Legally it always looked like a dumb decision from a faux hard man playing at being tough. Playing to the crowd instead of just getting on doing sensible and effective government, the same shit that has thousands needlessly die and more to come.
 
Don't think it creates a precedent, exactly. However absurd it may be, the way UK law already sees it is that anyone born in the UK with a Bangladeshi parent automatically has Bangladeshi citizenship at birth.
It creates a precedent in that this is the first time this disgusting piece of sophistry has actually been successfully used, if it is successful. There were previous cases of men over the age of 21 who argued against it successfully in court on the basis of being over 21, but this particular bit of cunty law hasn't actually been tested properly wrt someone under 21 before Begum. Sometimes important principles need to be defended in cases involving the very worst people. If reasonable law only applies to 'reasonable' people, we're in a very dangerous place.
 
"A mistake" is a very mild way of describing joining a bunch of bloodthirsty religious maniac murderers.

There's little more problematic than youthful idealism, is there?

Anyway, as I have said earlier in tthere are peope who have killed, tortured and maimed in the various combatant groups in Northern Ireland freely walking the streets and participating in public life and that doesn't seem to be too problematic. Are Protestant Catholic and Cof E maniac murderers somehow different?
 
Back
Top Bottom