British IS schoolgirl 'wants to return home'

[scifisam]

I think Athos is right here. I don't understand the confusion.

Really? He claimed the govt didn't strip people of nationality when they weren't dual nationals, and then when shown that they have, moved the goalposts to say he wasn't only talking about them doing so under this specific law. They used this law to strip citizenship. It's a misapplication of the law, but then so is stop and search that overly targets people from ethnic minorities.

If the govt have been forced to make some of those people citizens again, then that doesn't really change matters. They attempted to make people stateless, and those people happened, by pure coincidence, not to be white.

 

[Athos]

Really? He claimed the govt didn't strip people of nationality when they weren't dual nationals, and then when shown that they have, moved the goalposts to say he wasn't only talking about them doing so under this specific law.

No I haven't. I've been clear from the outset what law I was talking about i.e. the provision under which Begum was stripped of her nationality. See:

But this law doesn't discriminate on racial grounds, either on the face of it or in the way its been applied.

So it's been applied to people without dual nationality then?

No, it can't be.

It can and has been done.

They used this law to strip citizenship. It's a misapplication of the law, but then so is stop and search that overly targets people from ethnic minorities.

It's not a misapplication of the law. It's simply outside this law.

I'm quite happy to criticise the government for acting outside this law, but that's different from criticising this law on the basis that it allows them to strip sole nationality - something it explicitly forbids.


But, anyway, weren't you going to provide some evidence that the government acted unlawfully by stripping Kotey of his British citizenship?

 

[Athos]

They attempted to make people stateless, and those people happened, by pure coincidence, not to be white.

Ok, that's a slightly different issue from what the law actually allows. But, even then, do you have any evidence that the government has sought to apply this law differently on the basis of race? For instance, a failure to use it against a white person in the same circumstances where they have used it against a person of colour?

Because the simple fact that it's more often used against people of colour isn't evidence of a racist application of it, if people of colour are are over-represented in the group of people eligible for it to be used against i.e. people thought to have dual nationality who pose a threat to national security.

 

[Athos]

Essentially scifisam you're conflating the content of the law with the way in which the government has sought/purported to apply it.

But, even then, you've not provided any evidence of racism in either aspect.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a shit law that's been badly used. But racism is a bit of dead end as a means of criticising it. (Which I suspect is a reason why that hasn't been a significant element of any of the legal challenges to it.)

 

[Red Cat]

Really? He claimed the govt didn't strip people of nationality when they weren't dual nationals, and then when shown that they have, moved the goalposts to say he wasn't only talking about them doing so under this specific law. They used this law to strip citizenship. It's a misapplication of the law, but then so is stop and search that overly targets people from ethnic minorities.

If the govt have been forced to make some of those people citizens again, then that doesn't really change matters. They attempted to make people stateless, and those people happened, by pure coincidence, not to be white.

He said they hadn't done it within the provision of the law being quoted. They haven't because the law stipulates they can do this only if somebody has dual nationality as otherwise they are making someone stateless. Therefore, the action has been taken outside of the law, it's not lawful.

He hasn't moved any goalposts. If there's one area I expect Athos to have expertise he can express clearly, it's law.

 

[Spymaster]

Because the simple fact that it's more often used against people of colour isn't evidence of a racist application of it, if people of colour are are over-represented in the group of people eligible for it to be used against i.e. people thought to have dual nationality who pose a threat to national security.

The same mistake is being made by littlebabyjesus and others. The fact that the vast majority of ISIS members are “people of colour” is not proof that laws used against them are racist. Completely ridiculous.

 

[LDC]

Fair bit of assuming ethnicity is exactly the same as nationality going on by some too.

 

[dylanredefined]

In any case where she is tried and what she is tried for is a separate issue to the removal of her citizenship, which is a tool which has been and will continue to be used against the innocent unless it is opposed.

Which innocents have been deprived of citizenship?

 

[Spymaster]

Which innocents have been deprived of citizenship?

Don't hold your breath here.

 

[Spymaster]

Afaik the Kurds are not including the death penalty in their array of possible punishments.

Iraq however, have been executing them with gusto.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Fair bit of assuming ethnicity is exactly the same as nationality going on by some too.

Not from me, there isn't. I've been very careful about the way I have used the word 'ethnicity'. It's a slightly slippery concept of course, as are all concepts that aren't to be discovered 'out there' but are rather constructed 'in here'. It is not quite the same as 'race'. Ethnicity is potentially more complex than that, incorporating such things as history, language, culture, religion, and the existence of prejudice and discrimination on the basis of an assumed identity and place of common origin.

Being of Irish origin can very definitely be viewed as an ethnicity here in the UK, given the UK's history and the history of discrimination and prejudice against Irish people in Britain. There would potentially be other 'white' ethnicities to be constructed as well with their names deriving from a country of ancestry - Polish or Spanish, for example.

So seeing past skin colour, being of Bangladeshi origin is different from being of Indian origin, and can sensibly be categorised as as a separate ethnic group given the commonalities of language, culture, religion and history.

I'm more than happy to use the word 'racism' as a catch-all to refer to all discrimination by ethnicity. I think it is accurate to do so because the discrimination is of the same kind. Perhaps others object to that and think it should be restricted for use only in the 'in here'-constructed categories of race that are supposedly based on physical characteristics only. In practice, I think that restricted use is itself problematic, given that 'race' isn't just based on physical characteristics, that such things as history and culture are needed to understand it. But that would be a separate argument.

 

[Pickman's model]

Not from me, there isn't. I've been very careful about the way I have used the word 'ethnicity'. It's a slightly slippery concept of course, as are all concepts that aren't to be discovered 'out there' but are rather constructed 'in here'. It is not quite the same as 'race'. Ethnicity is potentially more complex than that, incorporating such things as history, language, culture, religion, and the existence of prejudice and discrimination on the basis of an assumed identity and place of common origin.

Being of Irish origin can very definitely be viewed as an ethnicity here in the UK, given the UK's history and the history of discrimination and prejudice against Irish people in Britain. There would potentially be other 'white' ethnicities to be constructed as well with their names deriving from a country of ancestry - Polish or Spanish, for example.

So seeing past skin colour, being of Bangladeshi origin is different from being of Indian origin, and can sensibly be categorised as as a separate ethnic group given the commonalities of language, culture, religion and history.

I'm more than happy to use the word 'racism' as a catch-all to refer to all discrimination by ethnicity. I think it is accurate to do so because the discrimination is of the same kind. Perhaps others object to that and think it should be restricted for use only in the 'in here'-constructed categories of race that are supposedly based on physical characteristics only. In practice, I think that restricted use is itself problematic, given that 'race' isn't just based on physical characteristics, that such things as history and culture are needed to understand it. But that would be a separate argument.

I am disappointed but not surprised that you think of Indian as a single ethnic group, as though nagas and makrani for examples were the same ethnicity

Bangladesh is about 98% bengali. India is much larger and far more diverse country.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Iraq however, have been executing them with gusto.

Actually they haven’t. Plenty of death sentences doled out, little or no rope action so far.

 

[maomao]

Actually they haven’t. Plenty of death sentences doled out, little or no rope action so far.

How many are there altogether? All I can find is the largest prison full of Isis prisoners has 70,000 so probably six figures overall. That's a huge death toll for anyone to contemplate whoever they are.

 

[Pickman's model]

Actually they haven’t. Plenty of death sentences doled out, little or no rope action so far.

At least rope can be used several times as compared with bullets which can only be used once

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

How many are there altogether? All I can find is the largest prison full of Isis prisoners has 70,000 so probably six figures overall. That's a huge death toll for anyone to contemplate whoever they are.

Trap door operator will have a right arm like a Man U fan.

 

[Smangus]

At least rope can be used several times as compared with bullets which can only be used once

Not sure celebrations would be quite the same with nooses thrown into the air instead of guns being fired though.

 

[Pickman's model]

Not sure celebrations would be quite the same with nooses thrown into the air instead of guns being fired though.

They would be different celebrations and fewer people would be injured by the throwing of nooses

 

[Spymaster]

How many are there altogether? All I can find is the largest prison full of Isis prisoners has 70,000 so probably six figures overall. That's a huge death toll for anyone to contemplate whoever they are.

Half of those are kids though. Take them out of the equation and it all looks perfectly doable.

 

[krtek a houby]

Which innocents have been deprived of citizenship?

Members of the Windrush generation?

 

[Spymaster]

Members of the Windrush generation?

Yep, cos that’s exactly correct context here

 

[pseudonarcissus]

Which innocents have been deprived of citizenship?

they are all innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, surely?

isn't that the sort of "British value" we should all be defending?

 

[scifisam]

He said they hadn't done it within the provision of the law being quoted. They haven't because the law stipulates they can do this only if somebody has dual nationality as otherwise they are making someone stateless. Therefore, the action has been taken outside of the law, it's not lawful.

He hasn't moved any goalposts. If there's one area I expect Athos to have expertise he can express clearly, it's law.

No - the law says that the UK govt can't strip people of their citizenship and make them stateless. The UK govt has, however, done just that. It's the same as convicting someone for murder without sufficient evidence.

 

[krtek a houby]

Yep, cos that’s exactly correct context here

British citizens until the arbiters and hostile environmentalists decide otherwise.

 

[dylanredefined]

Members of the Windrush generation?

They weren't deported for being terrorists.
Just staggeringly bureaucratic nonsense and stupidity which is hard to differentiate from pure evil

they are all innocent until proven guilty is a court of law, surely?

isn't that the sort of "British value" we should all be defending?

Bit hard to have a fair trial of a terrorist whose in a hostile foreign country.

 

[Athos]

No - the law says that the UK govt can't strip people of their citizenship and make them stateless. The UK govt has, however, done just that. It's the same as convicting someone for murder without sufficient evidence.

And how is the fact that the government sometimes acts unlawfully evidence that a particular law is racist and/or allows the government to make people stateless?

Also, are you going to provide some evidence to support your claim that the government acted unlawfully in stripping Kotey of his British citizenship?

 

[pseudonarcissus]

Bit hard to have a fair trial of an alleged terrorist whose in a hostile foreign country.

Fixed that for you. I think all the Supreme Court is trying to do is ensure the principle comes above logistics.

 

[bimble]

Half of those are kids though. Take them out of the equation and it all looks perfectly doable.

What would you do with the thousands of children in these ISIS camps, if you were the boss of the world?
I just read that Sweden France & Germany have taken some orphaned kids from the camps, the offspring of dead fighters from those countries presumably, but won't take any with living mothers. Apart from that the only known repatriations of women & children have been done by Russia, Kosovo, Kazakhstan Uzbekistan and Macedonia, thats it (?). Thousands of kids growing up in that environment isn't just a humanitarian issue its got to be a security one too. half of them are under 5 years old apparently.

https://cgpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/CGP-Children-of-ISIS-June-2020.pdf

 

[Red Cat]

No - the law says that the UK govt can't strip people of their citizenship and make them stateless. The UK govt has, however, done just that. It's the same as convicting someone for murder without sufficient evidence.

The first sentence is exactly what I said. As did Athos. Therefore, the UK govt has broken the law, not used the law to do this, as you were claiming.

 

[xenon]

They should make it illegal to break the law.