perhaps they could call it pick on the pakk!e - (seems a bit one sided on the lineup so far) ... Im sure the dailyracistmail would be keen to jump on board as a sponsor though
Not gonna lie, I'd be all over that.Ant / Dec / Dermot O'Leary - "and after the ad break, Shamima and Nigel are performing a duet of 'Something Stupid' for the Karaoke Doubles challenge tonight - don't go anywhere!"
yeah but I think the conservatives would be spitting blood because Canada thought of it first not for any moral reasonsWhich I'd still argue is an awful decision.
The Tories would be spitting blood if Canada did that to us.
Presumably UK military transport plane if they have to bring herHow will she get back?
Why use our resources to bring terrorists back to our lands? Let them find their own way back or their family can fork out the funds. If Syria don't want her they can deport her themselves.Presumably UK military transport plane if they have to bring her
pretty sure pritti patel would sooner nuke syria than let her back in though
She wants to come home because the Caliphate was defeated, otherwise she would still be there sleeping with terrorists and producing new Jihadi warriors with them.I’d bring her back and let her serve her sentence in England. She’s British, was groomed at 15 and now wants to come home to face up to what she’s done. Everyone deserves a second chance.
well as she currently does not have a valid passport she cant get on commercial flightsWhy use our resources to bring terrorists back to our lands? Let them find their own way back or their family can fork out the funds. If Syria don't want her they can deport her themselves.
If we have to provide her safe transit, does that not go for all British criminals and terrorists in jail or elsewhere outside the UK?well as she currently does not have a valid passport she cant get on commercial flights
we would be breaking our international treaties and obligations to make her illegally enter other countries so basically we have to provide safe transit for her to attend court (as our own courts have said a fair trial can not be had without her and fair trials are pretty important right) - suspect we have plenty of military assets in and out of the area - I've been on a few transport planes there myself so it really wont be anything to bring her over and they wont be sending a plane out of its way)
Most probably there will be a cost for security etc at the court case but we pay that for all other court cases as well
and syria cant deport her under international law - she does not currently have citizenship anywhere (we stripped it and bangladesh wont grant it) hence her court case about if it was legal for the UK to strip it or not
Because the other people have citizenship somewhere so can utilise commercial routes if appealing a UK court decision and free to travel- plus they probably are not arguing a case about the legality of the UK stripping citizenship potentially in contravention of human rights... if they have committed an offence abroad they are tried and jailed there in accordance with local laws- she is not in jail and has not been charged with offences but we have stripped citizenship - she has the right to appeal that decision and the court have decided to be fait it has to happen in personIf we have to provide her safe transit, does that not go for all British criminals and terrorists in jail or elsewhere outside the UK?
I know of people sitting trial remotely or maybe I'm wrong.
you have been to Syria? business or pleasure?
Ok coolBecause the other people have citizenship somewhere so can utilise commercial routes
Remote trial is at the discretion of the court - the Uk courts in this case have decided that without being able to attend in person and make her case she will not have access to a fair trial (the UK government will probably appeal this and try for a remote trial but as it stands the court have decided that is not appropriate)
Syria / Northern Iraq - that was very much business
They did that with Bin Laden. We should give her the Napoleon treatment and put her on a remote island.I say midflight they drop her out of the cargo hold... "Ah shit, who left the door unlatched"
She wants to come home because the Caliphate was defeated, otherwise she would still be there sleeping with terrorists and producing new Jihadi warriors with them.
What if she was involved in torturing and killing of people in Syria? people talk about grooming but I have seen studies that suggest that females who join Isis are fully cognizant and aware of their decision, even more so than males. She even admits that she would never have found someone like her husband if she didn't join ISis and has shown no remorse. Even as an adult she does not regret what she did as a teen.
In the UK there have been 15 year old boys who receive full punishment for crimes and no one excuses them on the basis of their age.
Do the Yazedi's get a second chance? maybe we can send them all your town for this second chance at life.
Javed's decision was wholly wrong: the Government have yet to answer why she should be stateless, or why Syria or bizzarly Bangladesh should take on the burden for a person that has nothing to do with them.If she returns to the UK to challenge the removal of UK citizenship and looses - what happens?
Bangladesh say she isnt a citizen so they wont let her get on a plane to be deported there and she has no other citizenship... I guess she has to remain here???
If she wins she can stay - if she looses I think she still has to be kept here... presumably in detention but I'm not sure i see any other outcome now
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47312207
unless we bully bangladesh into taking her (presumably by saying we will slash the aid budget and UKEF funding)
SwimHow will she get back?
Javed won't address the elephant in the room: Why should another country deal with the actions/security risks posed by a British born person?
Is Shamima Begum entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship?
By Clive Coleman, BBC legal correspondent
Lawyers have told the BBC that under Bangladesh law, a UK national born to a Bangladeshi parent is automatically a Bangladeshi citizen - a dual national - but the Bangladeshi authorities assert that's not the case for Ms Begum.
Under this "blood line" law, Bangladeshi nationality and citizenship lapse when a person reaches the age of 21, unless they make active efforts to retain it.
So, it is Ms Begum's age, 19, that is likely - in part - to have given Home Office lawyers and the home secretary reassurance there was a legal basis for stripping her of her UK citizenship.
In 2017, the government lost an appeal case brought by two British citizens of Bangladeshi origin who were stripped of their citizenship when they were abroad.
The Special Immigration Appeals Commission ruled that E3 and N3 had not tried to retain their citizenship before they reached the age of 21, and so it had automatically lapsed.
That meant that the decision to strip them of their UK citizenship had rendered them stateless.
Ms Begum's case is different. Her Bangladeshi citizenship, if established, would remain intact until she reaches 21, even if she has never visited the country or made active efforts to retain her citizenship.
it's crazy and scary stuff. Its like "yeah I did this. I joined a group who encouraged and trained a guy who blew up little girls in Manchester and it was just retaliation innit? now bring me back!"I agree everyone deserves a second chance but I too am scared by the fact that she shows zero remorse, as you say. She feels entitled to be brought back, rather than trying to show she understands her errors during an impressionable age.
Javed's decision was wholly wrong: the Government have yet to answer why she should be stateless, or why Syria or bizzarly Bangladesh should take on the burden for a person that has nothing to do with them.
'she has to be kept here' is a complete misnomer. She is a British citizen, born and documented. That should be an irrevocable status. Britain should try her in her courts and if guilty, she should be subjected to our prescribed punishment.
Yes, it will set precedent for several other cases, but so be it. Britain is at fault for allowing circumstances that people of such views to evolve in its borders, and will have to find ways to deal with it.
But its not just "bring me back" right? Its to bring her back to face full consequence of her actions as per the UK laws. It is not like, she is going to be thrown back into the society, as if nothing happened.it's crazy and scary stuff. Its like "yeah I did this. I joined a group who encouraged and trained a guy who blew up little girls in Manchester and it was just retaliation innit? now bring me back!"
actually thats tricky to know for sure - Im not sure what offences they would have admissible evidence to charge her with - presumably some stuff but im not sure if any sentence would take into account the fact she was 15?But its not just "bring me back" right? Its to bring her back to face full consequence of her actions as per the UK laws. It is not like, she is going to be thrown back into the society, as if nothing happened.
How do you think we should address this and also what would you do with Begum?it's crazy and scary stuff. Its like "yeah I did this. I joined a group who encouraged and trained a guy who blew up little girls in Manchester and it was just retaliation innit? now bring me back!"
It is near enough impossible to prevent radicalisation in any country. No country has the resources to track every single citizen, where they go and what they consume. most people are radicalised in private. She came from a good family, not the typical loner/outcast you here about, who just wanted a purpose. I don't think its a solveable problem. Maybe its a lack of patriotism? I know there were far more fighters who joined joined from Western Europe than America for example
Personally Id let the process play out in court - I mean thats the legal process and that must be the right thing to do... if at the end the process turns out to be useless and carries no public support you have to revisit the process but surely we have to respect the rule of law in this instanceHow do you think we should address this and also what would you do with Begum?
actually shes 20This young women was a school girl when she left and is still only 19 now,
Seems like another upper echelon PR stunt to me. I always find the timing of this stuff just cannot be coincidental - especially when her appeal is ruled out and BJ/Priti P are branded patriotic heroes.
actually shes 20
shes 21 on the 25th August (a little over 5 weeks)
this is actually quite critical in the case as she has the right to bangladesh citizenship through one of her parents provided she takes active steps to secure that citizenship (start the application process) before she is 21- she has so far failed to do so
No chances for ‘time bound’ mistakes in this case?actually shes 20
shes 21 on the 25th August (a little over 5 weeks)
this is actually quite critical in the case as she has the right to bangladesh citizenship through one of her parents provided she takes active steps to secure that citizenship (start the application process) before she is 21- she has so far failed to do so
But its not just "bring me back" right? Its to bring her back to face full consequence of her actions as per the UK laws. It is not like, she is going to be thrown back into the society, as if nothing happened.
How do you think we should address this and also what would you do with Begum?
actually shes 20
shes 21 on the 25th August (a little over 5 weeks)
this is actually quite critical in the case as she has the right to bangladesh citizenship through one of her parents provided she takes active steps to secure that citizenship (start the application process) before she is 21- she has so far failed to do so
yes though that may be difficult IF she applies - as she could appeal to the courts there as she supposedly has automatic rights provided she applies before she is 21Bangladesh have already said they would reject her application for Citizenship.
I know the home office asked ITV and BBC news to hand over all info they had on her in case they needed to build a case... but in reality actions in the middle of a warzone several years ago with likley no first hand witness in court - as Javid says in his statementIs she actually known to have committed any offences personally at this point? Beyond being part of ISIS i mean.
yes though that may be difficult IF she applies - as she could appeal to the courts there as she supposedly has automatic rights provided she applies before she is 21
If she does not then those rights lapse
Bangladesh I am sure hope she does not apply at least until after 25th August so they have a sound basis in law for rejecting
As I say i can forsee a potential stuation where if she looses her case we have bangladesh saying her rights lapsed, Uk saying she is no longer a citizen, insufficient evidence to bring charges in a Uk court and it not being possible to deport her anywhere because she has no valid citizenship and no country willing to take her - at which point i can only assume refugee status and a protection order?.. hence im sure UK want to do it remotey so in such circumstances she is Syrias problem at that point
This whole episode is not exactly a great advert for our country's loyalty to its citizens, if we're to encourage patriotism. Agree we should keep our noses out of other countries' business though.Well she said she just wants to live in peace with her baby in the UK so is no doubt more than aware they will struggle to prosecute her. She even claimed to just be a housewife. In many ways shes mocking it. I am sure the family friend Lawyer advising her is telling her all this.
1) keep our ass' out of other countries and their affairs
2) Encourage people feel more proud of being from their country of birth, more Integrated and welcome (this excludes pledging allegiance to the flag)
3) with Begum I'd leave her there and do the trial remotely. but if she can make it back herself then then she can be trialed here
I don't there is much you can do to stop radicalization to be honest as its just one of those things. Some people are susceptible, most are not. The guy who killed those people in Reading. Why did he do it? who knows?
I know the home office asked ITV and BBC news to hand over all info they had on her in case they needed to build a case... but in reality actions in the middle of a warzone several years ago with likley no first hand witness in court - as Javid says in his statement
Limitations in UK law mean only a slim chance of meaningful prossecution for acts commited in a foreign war zone
and I think hes right - once she is in the UK I see no legal way to deport her anywhere
I dont often agree with the SAJ but on those points I think hes factually correct
I agree but I also feel treason is difficult to stomach for any nation.This whole episode is not exactly a great advert for our country's loyalty to its citizens, if we're to encourage patriotism. Agree we should keep our noses out of other countries' business though.
