British IS schoolgirl 'wants to return home'

[SpackleFrog]

You miss the point. The statement may not be intended to come across as referencing Patel's race. But that intention isn't enough on its own. We don't live in a neutral world where we can ignore that context.

There is a difference between racist sentiment and sentiment that could be assumed to imply racism.

 

[Athos]

We can measure the dangers Patel poses to people. The idea that Begum is dangerous is just your projection. She might be dangerous, but you don't know.

I know she joined (and remained part of) a vile organisation she must have known was responsible for mass rape, enslavement, murder, and unspeakable cruelty. That, in itself, tells me she's dangerous.

 

[SpackleFrog]

I know she joined (and remained part of) a vile organisation she must have known was responsible for mass rape, enslavement, murder, and unspeakable cruelty. That, in itself, tells me she's dangerous.

Give it a rest with your conjecture dressed up as fact, please.

 

[Ax^]

You miss the point. The statement may not be intended to come across as referencing Patel's race. But that intention isn't enough on its own. We don't live in a neutral world where we can ignore that context.

would strapping her to a rocket and firing her into the sun still have the racial element

 

[Athos]

Maybe tell Bangladesh that.

I couldn't care less whether or not Bangladesh acts lawfully with regard to this particular Bangladeshi.

 

[Artaxerxes]

This is simply wrong in law. She is a Bangladeshi national, by virtue of Bangladeshi law (as set out at length earlier in the thread).

She's fucked

IV. What about De Facto Statelessness?

Although Begum may not be de jure stateless, since the laws of Bangladesh afford her citizenship, there is reason to believe she is de facto stateless due to Bangladesh’s stated refusal to recognise her as a citizen. With Bangladeshi officials stating they will refuse her entry, and that she is not and never was a citizen,[12] there is cause for concern that the UK’s deprivation of her citizenship will render her stateless in effect. She would not have access to a passport, consular protection abroad, or a country to which she could return or settle. Without many of the rights and privileges we have come to expect to go hand in hand with citizenship, an individual is stateless in effect, even if the laws state otherwise.

Bangladeshi or Stateless? A Practical Analysis of Shamima Begum’s Status

By Ryan Corbett. Legal practitioner and researcher currently based in Paris, France. Her focus is citizenship and refugee law, including how citizenship law can lead to migration issues. She has ex…

internationallaw.blog

 

[kebabking]

shame we cannot kick Patel out of the country as well she is fair more dangerous than Begum

It was Sajid Javid who revoked her British citizenship, not Priti Patel - or do they all look the same to you?

 

[Athos]

Give it a rest with your conjecture dressed up as fact, please.

No part of that was conjecture; all facts (however inconvenient you might find them).

 

[littlebabyjesus]

If she had been 21, they couldn't have done this. They've taken advantage of a technicality, and this rotten decision now places all UK citizens with Bangladeshi parents in a different category of citizenship, one that is conditional in a way that the citizenship of others is not, until they turn 21.

She didn't even know she was entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship. She isn't Bangladeshi. She is British. Any argument to the contrary is sophistry.

 

[Ax^]

It was Sajid Javid who revoked her British citizenship, not Priti Patel - or do they all look the same to you?

never said Patel revoked her citizenship and he can alsp be fired into the sun

 

[scifisam]

Law aside, I can't see how anyone can express good feelings about this outcome. She was a teenager when she left and she's had two children die already. Poor fucking stupid kid.

 

[Athos]

Law aside, I can't see how anyone can express good feelings about this outcome. She was a teenager when she left and she's had two children die already. Poor fucking stupid kid.

Three.

 

[19force8]

Reading earlier that her advocates were hanging their hopes on that she couldn't do the hearing remotely as she has no access to facilities to achieve that. Seeing her do a TV interview previously from the camp must have made that point seem a bit far fetched...

Why?

Was the tv interview by live link from the UK and lasting several days?

Because if it wasn't then it's hardly proof that there are sufficient facilities for her to be electronically present in court.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Law aside, I can't see how anyone can express good feelings about this outcome. She was a teenager when she left and she's had two children die already. Poor fucking stupid kid.

And they could only do this to her because she was a teenager when she left. That's possibly the most shameful aspect of it.

 

[SpackleFrog]

would starting her to a rocket and firing her into the sun still have the racial element

Anyone wanting to keep this one going should either answer this question or leave it

No part of that was conjecture; all facts (however inconvenient you might find them).

The phrase "must have" is fact?

Piss off you disingenuous tool.

 

[Spymaster]

If she had been 21, they couldn't have done this. They've taken advantage of a technicality ...

It's not a technicality. It's the law. Bangladeshi law.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Three.

Oh good, you're slut shaming now.

 

[Athos]

If she had been 21, they couldn't have done this. They've taken advantage of a technicality, and this rotten decision now places all UK citizens with Bangladeshi parents in a different category of citizenship, one that is conditional in a way that the citizenship of others is not, until they turn 21.

She didn't even know she was entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship. She isn't Bangladeshi. She is British. Any argument to the contrary is sophistry.

All dual citizens are in a different category than those without single citizenship (which may be a benefit or disbenefit). Those who are automatically dual Bangladeshi citizens are able renounce it.

 

[Athos]

Anyone wanting to keep this one going should either answer this question or leave it


The phrase "must have" is fact?

Piss off you disingenuous tool.

You honestly think there was any possibility that she was unaware of what IS was doing? Really? Come on, this is desperate.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

All dual citizens are in a different category than those without single citizenship (which may be a benefit or disbenefit). Those who are automatically dual Bangladeshi citizens are able renounce it.

If they know about it, which many will not. This is exactly the sophistry I'm talking about.

 

[LDC]

So far this year there's been about 20 folks murdered in that camp by gangs of IS supporting women for not following the IS 'laws' and expectations.

 

[Athos]

Oh good, you're slut shaming now.

No, you fool, I'm correcting a factual mistake (not that facts are important to you, it'd seem).

 

[Athos]

If they know about it, which many will not.

That's a fair point. Though a lot of people fall foul of laws of which they're ignorant. And, I should think many more Bangladeshis are aware of it now.

 

[Spymaster]

If they know about it, which many will not. This is exactly the sophistry I'm talking about.

Whether or not they're aware of it they can make the whole point moot by simply not travelling thousands of miles to join terrorist rape cults.

 

[scifisam]

Oh good, you're slut shaming now.

Ah, no, he was just correcting me.

Three dead kids already - yeah, she must be living in the lap of luxury.

 

[SpackleFrog]

No, you fool, I'm correcting a factual mistake (not that facts are important to you, it'd seem).

For what reason? Is it relevant or important? No. You just want to say it was three kids, actually.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Ah, no, he was just correcting me.

Three dead kids already - yeah, she must be living in the lap of luxury.

Take the point it could be innocent but he's got form.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Whether or not they're aware of it they can make the whole point moot by simply not travelling thousands of miles to join terrorist rape cults.

As if you wouldn't have joined Daesh or the Hitler youth or the Contras or whatever in the right circumstances.

Your moral superiority is vacuous.

 

[Athos]

Take the point it could be innocent but he's got form.

Form for what? You should back that up or retract and apologise. That you have to resort to this is pathetic.

 

[scifisam]

Take the point it could be innocent but he's got form.

No, definite that he was just correcting a fact.