If you're a victim of a crime abroad then you would at first try to engage with an embassy there for support. Of course, this becomes more difficult if the country isn't recognised so has no embassy and the crime you are a victim of looks like for all intents and purposes you were actively involved in. Not excluding being in a conflict against the very nation you now desire to protect you.
There you go with your fucking facts and well reasoned arguments again...
Speaking as an ultra-lefty, I've known one or two people who were NF/BM types when they were teenagers. They turned out all right in the end. Some people change, some people get worse. That's life. I don't know the situation with Begum, whether she's gone against her grooming or whether she continues to be an islamist monster, that remains to be seen. You give the impression that you make your big sweeping statements merely to support your wish to see her hanged by an Iraqi court. Fine, but let's make it clear that that's your focus here.
No idea what she says in 2022. I'd be interested to hear if she has changed.
She's now saying she didn't make a free choice; that she was manipulated by grooming.
If it happened, yes she'd have been a British citizen in the UK. But, even if it did, that wouldn't necessarily render the HS's decision unlawful - a groomed person can still represent a risk to national security. Essentially, to succeed in this appeal (on that ground - it's one of a few*) she'll have to show that the possibility of grooming was a relevant factor that the HS unreasonably failed to take into account - quite a high bar.
You are talking directly to lefties telling you this is not the case. I personally know people who were fascist or fash-adjacent in their youth and changed their minds. There are certainly some lefties knocking around who haven't clocked the need to leave a path open for people to come back from that stuff, but leave wanking on about universals to the Mail eh?
I agree with you on 'British justice' point (subjext to the caveat that somebody needs to deliver justice - she can't stay in limbo), and that people are just making shit up about her being a victim (versus willing participant) with no real clue what happened.
You are signally failing to show how double standards are being applied.
Alternatively you could say "Many posters here think she was groomed aged 15 by a death cult and persuaded to get on a plane. When she later became disillusioned, publicly rejected the death cult and asked to come back, the government used a loophole of her technically being Bangladeshi (even though she'd never even visited the country) to strip her of a lifelong citizenship in her country of origin. Which might or might not be legal, but was definitely an immoral consequence of a local moral panic."
Back it up or stop presenting your suppositions as facts, please.
Genuine question, what other court is proposing to give her a hearing?
Leaving aside the absence of any evidence that she was persuaded to do anything, and the fact that her purported disillusionment seemed to coincide with her capture, I'm not sure how you can assert that the HS's use of this legal tool/'loophole' was "definitely an immoral consequence of a local moral panic". For all you (or any of us) know, it might have been informed entirely by proper consideration of relevant intelligence, the content of which we know nothing about. You may be right, but, at the moment, it's pure speculation.
Yes. Please point to where these hypocritical lefties declared an unwillingness to consider the cases of repentant former white male fascists who had been groomed at a young age.
Has Iraq shown any interest in doing so?
