Javid has totally fucked this one. She should have been brought back to Britain and prosecuted, and the poor baby handed over to the care of her family. But no let's use them as a political football.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
British schoolgirl that left to join ISIS in 2015 says she has no regrets but wants to return home to the UK
- Thread starter AcademicSaucer
- Start date
I don't even think it's that complex. I think it's just posturing by an absolute cunt of a home secretary. As someone else has said this is what ring wing rags are screaming for.
It's not even about what the government think they're allowed to do.
It's down to Javid scoring points for a future leadership bid, this girl has had her rights stripped away purely for the personal gain of one individual.
I empathize with this, in the individual case don't really give a shit about her wellbeing. Her child's sure.
Buuuuuut making someone stateless shouldn't be a thing, a nation shouldn't be able to exile someone with no place to go.
I'm curious as to what the public opinion will look like now Corbyn's said something. The twitter replies I saw were about as vitriolic as expected, but I hope people's view nationally is more nuanced.
Revoking citizenship and being made stateless without even a trial. That's a serious slippery slope, and I'm not convinced it's justified here either.
Where is Theresa May on this now? Has she weighed in?
2014: Home Secretary Theresa May has said that the UK will not remove citizenship from IS fighters born in the UK as "it is illegal for any country to make its citizens stateless". But the UK government does have the power to remove citizenship from people either naturalised in the UK or those with dual citizenship if it believes their activities to be "seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the UK". The law says that the Home Secretary should have a "reasonable belief" that those being stripped of their nationality will not become stateless.
I've seen and heard people in the UK also say the same and use her line of reasoning.
Edit - To add more detail I remember studying for a medschool exam the next day. People in the library were saying it's fair retaliation moments after the news broke. It was disgusting to hear.
Last edited:
Corbyn will once again be labelled a terrorist sympathiser but his completly correct.
This county has already readmitted women from Syria. Ffs when British citizens were going to Libya to fight Gaddafi once again they all came back no problem so spare me 'this young girl is too much of a risk for society' nonsense.
Bring her and the baby home
This county has already readmitted women from Syria. Ffs when British citizens were going to Libya to fight Gaddafi once again they all came back no problem so spare me 'this young girl is too much of a risk for society' nonsense.
Bring her and the baby home
Seen a lot of islamaphobic tweets and "jokes" on twitter as a result of all this.
Only guaranteed outcome of it all, given the media coverage, is a rise in islamaphobia- should she return or not.
In my opinion - she was radicalized in the UK, as a UK citizen. She is our problem and we can't strip her of her nationality and just expect Bangladesh to accept her.
Now the question of whether the UK should take active steps to bring her back, given her attitude to it all is another debate. If she was to be deported back to the UK, we shouldn't block entry. As Corbyn said - she need to answer for a lot. She is our mess to fix.
Only guaranteed outcome of it all, given the media coverage, is a rise in islamaphobia- should she return or not.
In my opinion - she was radicalized in the UK, as a UK citizen. She is our problem and we can't strip her of her nationality and just expect Bangladesh to accept her.
Now the question of whether the UK should take active steps to bring her back, given her attitude to it all is another debate. If she was to be deported back to the UK, we shouldn't block entry. As Corbyn said - she need to answer for a lot. She is our mess to fix.
Looks like the Kurds are doing our work for us, they don't want the responsibility.
One theory I do subscribe to, is that they would never do this to a white christian terrorist or mass killer.
Allah's will has brought them to this situation so let us see if his same will shall bring them from it.
I think they should be prosecuted in their respective countries of citizenship - I understand the mentality about wanting to leave them behind, but I think doing so could cause more harm as they could end up returning to those same terrorist groups. Also, criminals who have committed similar acts of terrorism domestically (such as mass shootings) always had the privilege to be prosecuted in their own countries, and these should be no different. But it's a difficult discussion nonetheless.
If someone came to Britian, supported some kind of terrorist group or activity there, wouldn't they be tried and sentenced in Britian? If she traveled to Syria and apparently supported a terrorist organization that took so many lives, why is she not being tried and sentenced there first?
My heart bleeds.
...wait, no it doesn't. Are we s'posed to be sympathetic towards him because he's a white guy?
Salman Abedi was brought back into the country after going to fight for ISIS, then he went on years later to carry out the Manchester attack.
Males pose a much higher risk of terrorism than females, but that's not to say just because you're female you cannot radicalise or even carry out an attack.
But in terms of optics in this topic of course the majority would be saying something different if it was the terrorist above. Whether that is a flawed way to look at this is debatable.
Also "just deradicalise someone" is a challenge
https://news.sky.com/story/warning-as-hundreds-of-jailed-terrorists-back-on-uk-streets-10639848
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/09/terrorism-do-deradicalisation-camps-work
Especially as prison tends to be a place of radicalisation
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32194671
Last edited:
This thread is bonkers.
If you leave your country to join a fucking terrorist organization, that has recently killed many of your compatriots on home soil, then you should lose citizenship. God this site sometimes...
If you leave your country to join a fucking terrorist organization, that has recently killed many of your compatriots on home soil, then you should lose citizenship. God this site sometimes...
I feel the same way too.
They joined the enemy, expressed no regrets and wants to come back? Gtfo.
How many IRA members had their citizenship revoked to render them stateless, and without trial?
So many reasons you're wrong. It's against her human rights. She should be prosecuted. Her baby did nothing wrong and is now dead because she was in a refugee camp. Blah blah taking responsibility etc.
She was in a refugee camp because she joined ISIS. I agree she has rights and should be given a proper trial, but I don't think the UK should be responsible for bringing her back.
Exactly. If she wants to come back, she should be financially responsible and at her own risk. Handcuffs waiting at Heathrow obviously.
Fuck I'm so angry - 3x child neglect should be added onto the terrorism charges.
All governments should enact a law that joining any organization that's been labelled a terrorist organization is treason and punishable by life in prison.
Then bring them back.
Then bring them back.
I am no fan of hers at all, but it's shocking to me to see the people rabidly seeking her citizenship be revoked to render her stateless without a trial. Until some amendment to the UK law in 2014 that was illegal, they could only revoke citizenship if it wouldn't render the person stateless. Now they can say, "National security!", without presenting any evidence or having a trial, and the person is out. Can people not see the scary slippery slope there?
She was groomed as a child. Tell me about it, this thread is full of absolute turgid takes, including yours.
And the baby is dead because of the British government pandering to those kind of takes too
This whole story is depressing, a new low in a few years of lows for the UK
I keep seeing people say this, and have yet to see any evidence she was meaningfully "groomed" by anyone other than herself.
The baby is dead because of her no one else.
It's a sad story but she didn't even show any kind of remorse for her actions.
I wish there was some way we could of just taken the baby but the fault lies with her and no one else.
No sorry. The British government chose not to follow international law (or their own moral responsibilities) and repatriate her and the baby, they chose not to.
