| Return to UK 22:58 - Feb 13 with 31196 views | PozuelosSideys |
Thoughts on this article? Bear in mind its BBC and probably quite sympathetic and careful in its wording.
Note the comments from the indvidual concerned where she appears to have no regrets and still feels it was the right thing to do.
Should she and others like her be free to return? Bare in mind her views and the likelyhood of her offspring being educated by her and her like..
This will be the first of many applications i would assume
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47229181 |  |
| "Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper." | | Poll: | Hattricks |
| |  |
| Return to UK on 19:23 - Feb 19 with 1972 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Return to UK on 19:23 - Feb 19 by union_jack |
Exactly this. She’ll appeal and hey presto, as you say, it will be the courts fault.
I |
Politics eh. Dirty business. |  |
| |
| Return to UK on 19:25 - Feb 19 with 1970 views | majorraglan |
I certainly don’t want her back in the U.K., but accrding to International Law it’s not possible to leave her stateless. Be nteresting to see how this plays out. I foresee an expensive litigation bill where the tax payer pays the Home Office bill and legal aid pays her/her families bill and she ends up back here in the future. |  | | |
| Return to UK on 19:25 - Feb 19 with 1965 views | Lohengrin |
| Return to UK on 19:12 - Feb 19 by Sirjohnalot |
She must have dual nationality, otherwise it’s unlawful.
Morally, I completely agree with blocking her by any means necessary, but I don’t see how it can stand up if she holds no other nationality [Post edited 19 Feb 2019 19:22]
|
Put yourself in the shoes of a Father who lost his son In Afghanistan or a Mother who waved her little girl off as she went to a pop concert.
Imagine how they must feel watching this lunacy play out. |  |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| Return to UK on 19:33 - Feb 19 with 1942 views | Pacemaker |
| Return to UK on 19:19 - Feb 19 by exiledclaseboy |
Sounds like a political move. Javid knows such a decision is unlikely to stand legally so this way he can say “well I tried, but those bloody courts eh. What you gonna do?” |
Presumably she has claimed to be a citizen of the Levante and is therefore not stateless, I wonder how the Dutch will deal with her husband presuming he is kept alive by the SDF. |  |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| Return to UK on 19:33 - Feb 19 with 1941 views | union_jack |
| Return to UK on 19:23 - Feb 19 by exiledclaseboy |
Politics eh. Dirty business. |
But they should be called out on it and shown to be doing this for political gain solely. |  |
| |
| Return to UK on 19:45 - Feb 19 with 1923 views | PozuelosSideys |
Maybe Javid is doing it just so he can say they exhausted all legal avenues, and like Clase said, political gain.He cant be seen to just shrug and not do anything in this instance.
Maybe there is something connected to her Dutch husband going on here as well.
Unlikely mind | |
| "Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper." | | Poll: | Hattricks |
| |
| Return to UK on 20:12 - Feb 19 with 1857 views | Flashberryjack |
| Return to UK on 19:25 - Feb 19 by majorraglan |
I certainly don’t want her back in the U.K., but accrding to International Law it’s not possible to leave her stateless. Be nteresting to see how this plays out. I foresee an expensive litigation bill where the tax payer pays the Home Office bill and legal aid pays her/her families bill and she ends up back here in the future. |
Wonder if the British government could legally withdraw her legal aid...if they can't, they bloody well should. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Return to UK on 20:15 - Feb 19 with 1851 views | dickythorpe |
Cardiff city to arrange a plane for her, Prince Phillip to pick her up from airport, McCann's to adopt her child and Diane Abbot to sort out timetable of all this to happen.
Edit - Ferdy. Oldjack beat me to it. [Post edited 19 Feb 2019 20:21]
|  | | |
| Return to UK on 20:16 - Feb 19 with 1851 views | swan65split |
| Return to UK on 19:12 - Feb 19 by Sirjohnalot |
She must have dual nationality, otherwise it’s unlawful.
Morally, I completely agree with blocking her by any means necessary, but I don’t see how it can stand up if she holds no other nationality [Post edited 19 Feb 2019 19:22]
|
One of the reports mentions Bangladesh. also around 100 have lost citizenship on the past |  | | |
| Return to UK on 20:19 - Feb 19 with 1844 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Return to UK on 19:25 - Feb 19 by Lohengrin |
Put yourself in the shoes of a Father who lost his son In Afghanistan or a Mother who waved her little girl off as she went to a pop concert.
Imagine how they must feel watching this lunacy play out. |
Don’t you think that the reason we theoretically at least send our kids to die in Afghanistan is to uphold the rule of law, the rights of our citizens to rely on the proper implementation of that law and that part of the ‘way of life’ we are fighting to protect is taking responsibility for our actions and the actions of our citizens?
I have zero interest in whether this woman gets back to Britain safely (although her child is innocent in all of this). I have zero desire to see us risk a single hair on the head of another British citizen to go and get her. But she is British. We have to accept her if she gets to Britain. And we have to put her through our legal process and, if necessary, lock her up for the rest of her days while removing her child from her care.
We don’t have the right to remove citizenship, relying on a tenuous link to Bangladesh. Why on earth should they have to deal with her simply because Javid wants to be the leader of the Tory party? What on Earth are we actually ever fighting for in the first place if our values mean so little to us that we cast them aside so easily?
I assume by the way that anyone that applauds this decision will refrain in future from ever using the words ‘send them back to where they came from’ when some atrocity or crime happens here. | | | |
| Return to UK on 20:35 - Feb 19 with 1779 views | sherpajacob |
| Return to UK on 20:19 - Feb 19 by londonlisa2001 |
Don’t you think that the reason we theoretically at least send our kids to die in Afghanistan is to uphold the rule of law, the rights of our citizens to rely on the proper implementation of that law and that part of the ‘way of life’ we are fighting to protect is taking responsibility for our actions and the actions of our citizens?
I have zero interest in whether this woman gets back to Britain safely (although her child is innocent in all of this). I have zero desire to see us risk a single hair on the head of another British citizen to go and get her. But she is British. We have to accept her if she gets to Britain. And we have to put her through our legal process and, if necessary, lock her up for the rest of her days while removing her child from her care.
We don’t have the right to remove citizenship, relying on a tenuous link to Bangladesh. Why on earth should they have to deal with her simply because Javid wants to be the leader of the Tory party? What on Earth are we actually ever fighting for in the first place if our values mean so little to us that we cast them aside so easily?
I assume by the way that anyone that applauds this decision will refrain in future from ever using the words ‘send them back to where they came from’ when some atrocity or crime happens here. |
Absolutely this. If we ignore the rule of law to appease a baying mob, we are no better than a failed state or dictatorship. We will have become what ISIS accuse us of.
An independent judiciary is fundamental to our way of life.
Those willing to give up liberties to protect freedoms will end up with neither. |  |
| |
| Return to UK on 20:36 - Feb 19 with 1774 views | Flashberryjack |
| Return to UK on 20:19 - Feb 19 by londonlisa2001 |
Don’t you think that the reason we theoretically at least send our kids to die in Afghanistan is to uphold the rule of law, the rights of our citizens to rely on the proper implementation of that law and that part of the ‘way of life’ we are fighting to protect is taking responsibility for our actions and the actions of our citizens?
I have zero interest in whether this woman gets back to Britain safely (although her child is innocent in all of this). I have zero desire to see us risk a single hair on the head of another British citizen to go and get her. But she is British. We have to accept her if she gets to Britain. And we have to put her through our legal process and, if necessary, lock her up for the rest of her days while removing her child from her care.
We don’t have the right to remove citizenship, relying on a tenuous link to Bangladesh. Why on earth should they have to deal with her simply because Javid wants to be the leader of the Tory party? What on Earth are we actually ever fighting for in the first place if our values mean so little to us that we cast them aside so easily?
I assume by the way that anyone that applauds this decision will refrain in future from ever using the words ‘send them back to where they came from’ when some atrocity or crime happens here. |
Rather a long post for someone that has zero interest.
But hey ! she'll be back in good old blighty soon enough, no matter what we say or think. | |
| |
| Return to UK on 20:37 - Feb 19 with 1769 views | londonlisa2001 |
She has a potential right to Bangladeshi citizenship because of her mother.
However she is British, has a British passport (not Bangladeshi according to reports), and it appears, has never even visited Bangladesh in her life.
Why the hell should they have to deal with this?
We should deal with our responsibilities properly. If she gets back here, we should put her on trial and, if found guilty, should put her in prison. For ever if that’s what’s appropriate. | | | |
| Return to UK on 20:43 - Feb 19 with 1746 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Return to UK on 20:36 - Feb 19 by Flashberryjack |
Rather a long post for someone that has zero interest.
But hey ! she'll be back in good old blighty soon enough, no matter what we say or think. |
If only you could read.
I have zero interest in helping her get here and zero interest in whether she makes it safely without our help.
I certainly don’t have zero interest in politicians paying fast and loose with our liberties, values and rights in order to further their own ambition. | | | |
| Return to UK on 20:48 - Feb 19 with 1738 views | Wingstandwood |
| Return to UK on 20:36 - Feb 19 by Flashberryjack |
Rather a long post for someone that has zero interest.
But hey ! she'll be back in good old blighty soon enough, no matter what we say or think. |
Back in blighty soon enough?
If she has the same navigational skills has the (not a spoof, 100% fact) family that went on holiday to Turkey and ended up joining ISIS by mistake? She could end up lost and pop up absolutely anywhere?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brit-family-isis-holiday-syria-14010238 |  |
| |
| Return to UK on 21:04 - Feb 19 with 1682 views | JACKMANANDBOY |
After 4 years they discover they have joined ISIS rather than have a holiday in Turkey I guess the beheadings and bombing were overlooked for four years as the ice cream and swimming pool were so good. |  |
| |
| Return to UK on 21:10 - Feb 19 with 1659 views | Wingstandwood |
| Return to UK on 21:04 - Feb 19 by JACKMANANDBOY |
After 4 years they discover they have joined ISIS rather than have a holiday in Turkey I guess the beheadings and bombing were overlooked for four years as the ice cream and swimming pool were so good. |
Yep! Must have looked a bit "out of the loop" and not quite up with the latest trend? You know walking around Raqqa carrying bucket and spades when other likewise dressed ladies belonging to ISIS Hisbah were carrying Kalashnikovs.
 | |
| |
| Return to UK on 21:13 - Feb 19 with 1646 views | Flashberryjack |
| Return to UK on 20:43 - Feb 19 by londonlisa2001 |
If only you could read.
I have zero interest in helping her get here and zero interest in whether she makes it safely without our help.
I certainly don’t have zero interest in politicians paying fast and loose with our liberties, values and rights in order to further their own ambition. |
If only could read what is actually written, instead trying to twist it into something else. | |
| |
| Return to UK on 21:19 - Feb 19 with 1627 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Return to UK on 21:13 - Feb 19 by Flashberryjack |
If only could read what is actually written, instead trying to twist it into something else. |
I did read what you posted.
Haven’t tried to twist anything.
You implied (stated actually, but I’m being nice) that I’d said I had zero interest in any of it. I was correcting you. | | | |
| Return to UK on 21:19 - Feb 19 with 1623 views | AnotherJohn |
It looks as though Javid did in fact have something up his sleeve, but I am not sure if we have the full legal reasoning behind this move yet. The rule of law means complying with the relevant legislation. I'm fairly sure that the same people who complain about this move would also complain about a move to revoke the citizenship of a naturalised British citizen who is not a dual national under the British Nationality Act s40(4A) (as amended), which would be lawful but controversial. We'll see what emerges soon enough. The Guardian and Indy will witter on about international treaties whatever happens. | | | |
| Return to UK on 21:32 - Feb 19 with 1589 views | Lohengrin |
| Return to UK on 20:19 - Feb 19 by londonlisa2001 |
Don’t you think that the reason we theoretically at least send our kids to die in Afghanistan is to uphold the rule of law, the rights of our citizens to rely on the proper implementation of that law and that part of the ‘way of life’ we are fighting to protect is taking responsibility for our actions and the actions of our citizens?
I have zero interest in whether this woman gets back to Britain safely (although her child is innocent in all of this). I have zero desire to see us risk a single hair on the head of another British citizen to go and get her. But she is British. We have to accept her if she gets to Britain. And we have to put her through our legal process and, if necessary, lock her up for the rest of her days while removing her child from her care.
We don’t have the right to remove citizenship, relying on a tenuous link to Bangladesh. Why on earth should they have to deal with her simply because Javid wants to be the leader of the Tory party? What on Earth are we actually ever fighting for in the first place if our values mean so little to us that we cast them aside so easily?
I assume by the way that anyone that applauds this decision will refrain in future from ever using the words ‘send them back to where they came from’ when some atrocity or crime happens here. |
I’ll tell you exactly what I think as succinctly as I possibly can, love. If barring the way to that thing and others like it means your commute to work of a morning or your ability to go and watch a show or have a meal up West is that much safer then I am delighted. That’s a result.
That’s from the gut, heart and head. I don’t really think there’s much more to be said. | |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| Return to UK on 21:46 - Feb 19 with 1547 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
Wonderful news. Hopefully she finds her way to Bangladesh very soon where Islamic terrorists like her have been trying to assassinate their PM for quite some time. I wonder what her fate would be there? |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
