Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

ISI Fighter Shamima Begum Not allowed to return to the UK

Options
24567…24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,445 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    Be right back wrote: »
    I don't think they want her either.

    Stick her in a deep hole then.


  • Options
    #33
    Tyson Red Sadness
    Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Tyson Red Sadness


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    Bangladesh can take this piece of human garbage.

    Why should Bangladesh take her?

    She has never been there nor ever had a Bangladeshi passport.


  • Options
    #34
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,445 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Why should Bangladesh take her?

    She has never been there nor ever had a Bangladeshi passport.

    Why should the UK take her back?


  • Options
    #35
    washman3
    Registered Users Posts: 3,646 ✭✭✭washman3


    E mac wrote: »
    Yup agree Germans did the same post WW2 'funnily enough' every one interviewed about working at a concentration camp was a low level didn't have a clue what was going on employee..


    Worth remembering that this line/excuse was totally disregarded at the Nuremberg trials, and rightly so.
    Each and every one of them knew exactly what they were doing.:mad:


  • Options
    #36
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 8,119 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    Be right back wrote: »
    What happened to the girls she travelled there with?


    One of them is Dead, afaik.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,445 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Shamima Begum is a British citizen.

    Her British citizenship had been revoked. She is not a British citizen.


  • Options
    #38
    Tyson Red Sadness
    Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Tyson Red Sadness


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    Why should the UK take her back?

    Because she is a British citizen and that is where she grew up.

    She is of no responsibility to any other country.

    It is illegal for British citizens to be made stateless, ergo she has to go back to Britain.


    This is tremendously simple stuff. The law is in no way iffy on this.


  • Options
    #39
    Tyson Red Sadness
    Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Tyson Red Sadness


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    Her British citizenship had been revoked. She is not a British citizen.

    Not possible.

    It is illegal for Britain to make a citizen stateless.


  • Options
    #40
    theguzman
    Registered Users Posts: 2,081 ✭✭✭theguzman


    As a British Citizen she has the right to live and reside in Ireland, I wonder if she has tried our own shower of muppets, I'm sure they would send the Govt jet for her, mutter something about inclusivity and the Good Friday Agreement etc.


  • Options
    #41
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,445 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Not possible.

    It is illegal for Britain to make a citizen stateless.

    Keep telling yourself that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,639 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Beasty wrote: »

    That appeal will progress, possibly with her attending via video link, and if she wins it there may be a new debate over whether a UK citizen can be denied entry into the country
    I don't think it is the case that the appeal will progress.


    She is entitled to take a full part in her own defence, but not to the point where it causes safety concerns, so the most likely outcome is that her appeal against the order removing her citizenship will be paused until it is possible for her to play a full role in her own defence without causing safety issues...which may be never.


    From the judgement:
    The appropriate response to the problem in the present case is for the appeal to be stayed until Ms Begum is in a position to play an effective part in it without the safety of the public being compromised. That is not a perfect solution, as it is not known how long it may be before that is possible.


  • Options
    #43
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 3,689 ✭ [Deleted User]


    washman3 wrote: »
    Worth remembering that this line/excuse was totally disregarded at the Nuremberg trials, and rightly so.
    Each and every one of them knew exactly what they were doing.:mad:

    Well that's exactly how the US treated them. :o


  • Options
    #44
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    theguzman wrote: »
    As a British Citizen she has the right to live and reside in Ireland, I wonder if she has tried our own shower of muppets, I'm sure they would send the Govt jet for her, mutter something about inclusivity and the Good Friday Agreement etc.
    Oh i'd say she'd be welcomed with open arms


  • Options
    #45
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Shamima Begum is a British citizen.

    Was.


  • Options
    #46
    Tyson Red Sadness
    Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Tyson Red Sadness


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    Keep telling yourself that.

    You're the one thinking with your arse.

    You've offered nothing to the thread other than hysterical flatulence.


  • Options
    #47
    Tyson Red Sadness
    Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Tyson Red Sadness


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Was.

    Wrong.


  • Options
    #48
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    She’s only 21 and already buried 3 children. Beggars belief.


  • Options
    #49
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Wrong.

    Wrong.

    Wow, that was easy.


  • Options
    #50
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    whatever about their management of other scenarios, the UK got this one spot on.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56209007

    we should learn from them and never have allowed Lisa Smyth to return here.

    Islamic terrorism has no place in europe.


    nope their management of it was a complete failure that only delays the inevitable, as in her eventual return to britain, which will happen in the end whether britain wants it or not.
    lets be honest, it was politically motivated nonsense by a home secretry who was trying to appeal to people who don't even recognise him as british because of the color of his skin.
    lisa smith would have been returning here anyway eventually, it was better it be at our own hands then her either being deported or even worse escaping the camps and getting in here and us not detecting her.
    islamic terrorism has no place anywhere the same as any other sort of terrorism.
    biko wrote: »
    I'm glad it worked out like it did. Unlike some other countries UK and Denmark are sending out a strong message that if you leave the country to join such a horrendous terror sect you are not welcome back.


    they may think they are sending out such a message but they aren't.
    the only message they are sending out is that they will dump their citizens on other countries when it is politically expedient to do so, and even if that may breach international law they won't and don't care.
    punisher5112 wrote: »
    The UK rarely gets it right but that lunatic is best kept out and as far away from the hard working decent citizens.

    Probably end up here like many others though.


    why should the civilians of syria have to put up with her and other foreign fighters?
    she can be kept away from the decent hard working people of britain by, you know, being locked up there.
    if she does end up here then the irish government should absolutely deport her to britain with imediot effect.
    theguzman wrote: »
    A Brexit Bonus if you will, even if Ireland decided to do similar to Lisa Smith etc. then the EU Court of Human Rights would just overrule any similar scenario here.


    and quite rightly so.
    because 2 can play that game, and if we wanted to deport a citizen of another country back there who had irish citizenship or had even the ability to gain it, theoretically that country could strip them of their citizenship so they wouldn't have to take them back.
    that's a situation which cannot be allowed at any cost and i'm sure britain will find this out.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #51
    CtevenSrowder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,909 ✭✭✭CtevenSrowder


    Odhinn wrote: »
    A rather harsh view, given that she was but 15 years when she went off.

    She was 15 when she traveled halfway across the World to join an international terrorist organization, that was well documented as to being committing atrocities at the time. This wasn't some silly teenage mistake.

    You make it sound like she drank a naggin to quick and got sick on her parents carpet.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,445 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    You're the one thinking with your arse.

    You've offered nothing to the thread other than hysterical flatulence.

    Wrong.


  • Options
    #53
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Rodin wrote: »
    The Brits were right to get independence from the European courts.

    Meanwhile in Irish courts today, despite a judge admitting to having the power to give a life sentence, a judge gave less to a man convicted of raping a 6 month old. He even suspended part of the sentence. I have no words....


    that's an irish courts decision and issue.
    if we left the european courts and even the european union which are both separate organisations, this would have still happened.
    for what it's worth iagree it was a disgraceful decision that he didn't get life.
    jam_mac_jam wrote: »
    I'm sure the girls that were taken as slaves by ISIS were all over age.


    they wouldn't have been, but that doesn't change the fact that a number of those who went to fight for isis were children themselves, children who were groomed online, which is very serious and would be taken seriously in other situations of grooming.
    they were also allowed to slip out of britain with no questioning or anything because britain doesn't bother to control it's borders as it would have to pay people.
    suicide_circus wrote: »
    Thats a little simplistic to be fair, if she went to join a white supremacist group would you think the same? She joined a group whose cruelty and murderousness was on a scale rarely seen.


    i would think the same yes.
    countries don't get to dump their citizens on other countries.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #54
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    Bangladesh can take this piece of human garbage.


    they can't and they won't as she is not from Bangladesh but from britain.
    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    Why should the UK take her back?


    well, because, you know, she belongs to them.
    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    Her British citizenship had been revoked. She is not a British citizen.

    she is still a british citizen dispite the revokation of her british citizenship, as it is quite likely an illegal revokation given the country britain has been trying to palm her off on has said she is not one of their citizens, and dispite the issues of that country they would not lie and would be best placed to know who is and isn't one of their citizens.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #55
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,445 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    end of the road wrote: »
    they can't and they won't as she is not from Bangladesh but from britain.




    well, because, you know, she belongs to them.



    she is still a british citizen dispite the revokation of her british citizenship, as it is quite likely an illegal revokation given the country britain has been trying to palm her off on has said she is not one of their citizens, and dispite the issues of that country they would not lie and would be best placed to know who is and isn't one of their citizens.

    She belongs to ISIS now. Not Britain.


  • Options
    #56
    Tyson Red Sadness
    Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Tyson Red Sadness


    end of the road wrote: »
    nope their management of it was a complete failure that only delays the inevitable, as in her eventual return to britain, which will happen in the end whether britain wants it or not.
    lets be honest, it was politically motivated nonsense by a home secretry who was trying to appeal to people who don't even recognise him as british because of the color of his skin.
    lisa smith would have been returning here anyway eventually, it was better it be at our own hands then her either being deported or even worse escaping the camps and getting in here and us not detecting her.
    islamic terrorism has no place anywhere the same as any other sort of terrorism.




    they may think they are sending out such a message but they aren't.
    the only message they are sending out is that they will dump their citizens on other countries when it is politically expedient to do so, and even if that may breach international law they won't and don't care.




    why should the civilians of syria have to put up with her and other foreign fighters?
    she can be kept away from the decent hard working people of britain by, you know, being locked up there.
    if she does end up here then the irish government should absolutely deport her to britain with imediot effect.




    and quite rightly so.
    because 2 can play that game, and if we wanted to deport a citizen of another country back there who had irish citizenship or had even the ability to gain it, theoretically that country could strip them of their citizenship so they wouldn't have to take them back.
    that's a situation which cannot be allowed at any cost and i'm sure britain will find this out.


    At last, a post based in reality.

    Well said.


  • Options
    #57
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,445 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    At last, a post based in reality.

    Well said.

    As far from reality as you can get.


  • Options
    #58
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    My heart says to not let her back. She burned her bridges, knew what she was doing, and showed no remorse whatsoever.

    But, my head says different. We are all collectively safer with her in the UK in prison. Rather than out in no mans land, resentful, and doing god knows what. I’d worry that the next time we see her she is in London with a suicide bomb strapped to her


  • Options
    #59
    alchemist33
    Registered Users Posts: 10,969 ✭✭✭✭alchemist33


    Still no answer as to why Bangladesh should take her? I'm really curious


  • Options
    #60
    SouthWesterly
    Registered Users Posts: 6,805 ✭✭✭SouthWesterly


    I'm of the opinion that at 15 she can't be held responsible for her actions. Show me a 15 year old that's not impressionable.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Do the people supporting this also believe we should have to keep foreign terrorists who end up here if their countries decide they dont want them back?


Advertisement