She is not Bangladeshi. She has Bangladeshi heritage and in theory could apply for citizenship but the UK govt has made her stateless against UK law and international convention. Something the Justice secretary said they would not do only a few days ago and since overruled by the secretary of state.
I would say more but I couldn't do better on this than my son has in this thread...
I'm not well-versed in these matters, but in your view, what is the status of her new-born son?
I've been reading everything I can on the matter, & there is certainly a view that he is a British citizen.
What a start in life for him - born in a refugee camp, (can we begin imagine what it's like living in a refugee camp?), possibly stateless, no prospect of education. In 20 years time, some will wonder why he turns to terrorism.
And so the circle of hate continues.
So much hate in the world right now.
As I don’t know how to put words in bold - The last three lines hit the nail on the head, this case pretty much stinks of the powers that be ‘playing to the gallery’ As has been mentioned before , there’s been quite a few ( I don’t know the numbers) already returned to our shores, what’s the difference in this young ladies case? Agree with Dobie ( on this occasion 😉) she was 15, got married to a man twice her age weeks after going there, had two children who died,she’s been exploited by a vile terrorist group and our Country is apparently washing our hands of her, I can’t help but feel if this girl was White Christian exploited by the same group there’d be a public outcry ( There I said it - the elephant in the room)
We now appear to be proposing that if a husband and wife commit acts that we do not agree with, and the woman is British and the man is Dutch, we believe that the woman should be a Dutch problem because a woman married a foreign national. Really?
That is just as stupid as if the Netherlands said their citizen is our problem. I know the Home Sec wants to be PM, but even he can't be that thick
She is not Bangladeshi. She has Bangladeshi heritage and in theory could apply for citizenship but the UK govt has made her stateless against UK law and international convention. Something the Justice secretary said they would not do only a few days ago and since overruled by the secretary of state.
I would say more but I couldn't do better on this than my son has in this thread...
I'm not well-versed in these matters, but in your view, what is the status of her new-born son?
I've been reading everything I can on the matter, & there is certainly a view that he is a British citizen.
What a start in life for him - born in a refugee camp, (can we begin imagine what it's like living in a refugee camp?), possibly stateless, no prospect of education. In 20 years time, some will wonder why he turns to terrorism.
And so the circle of hate continues.
So much hate in the world right now.
Says this in a BBC news article ...don't know how informed it is :
Lord Carlile said the nationality of Ms Begum's baby was "even more complicated".
As the baby's father is believed to be Dutch, he may be entitled to Dutch nationality as well as British and "probably Bangladesh nationality".
A child born to a British parent before they are deprived of their citizenship would still be considered British.
While it would theoretically be possible for the UK to then remove citizenship from the child, officials would need to balance their rights against any potential threat they posed.
I don't have first hand information, but most of the (reasonably) credible media sources suggest she has never been to Bangladesh in her life, & does certainly not hold a Bangladesh Passport or Citizenship.
She is not Bangladeshi. She has Bangladeshi heritage and in theory could apply for citizenship but the UK govt has made her stateless against UK law and international convention. Something the Justice secretary said they would not do only a few days ago and since overruled by the secretary of state.
I would say more but I couldn't do better on this than my son has in this thread...
I'm not well-versed in these matters, but in your view, what is the status of her new-born son?
I've been reading everything I can on the matter, & there is certainly a view that he is a British citizen.
What a start in life for him - born in a refugee camp, (can we begin imagine what it's like living in a refugee camp?), possibly stateless, no prospect of education. In 20 years time, some will wonder why he turns to terrorism.
And so the circle of hate continues.
So much hate in the world right now.
Says this in a BBC news article ...don't know how informed it is :
Lord Carlile said the nationality of Ms Begum's baby was "even more complicated".
As the baby's father is believed to be Dutch, he may be entitled to Dutch nationality as well as British and "probably Bangladesh nationality".
A child born to a British parent before they are deprived of their citizenship would still be considered British.
While it would theoretically be possible for the UK to then remove citizenship from the child, officials would need to balance their rights against any potential threat they posed.
I don't have first hand information, but most of the (reasonably) credible media sources suggest she has never been to Bangladesh in her life, & does certainly not hold a Bangladesh Passport or Citizenship.
Reminds me of the great Lenny Henry line when the Conservatives were offering free flights back to where people came from:-
Well I am certainly no expert on citizenship rights either Tikay and if a law lord who specialised in terrorism legislation says "it's complicated" then I am definitely not qualified.
My personal preference would have been for mother and child to be allowed to return and for her to be assessed properly and an informed decision made by experts as to whether she is a victim or a criminal and treated appropriately.
Even if the baby does not qualify for UK citizenship then he clearly is a refugee and I would hope that seeing as he has family in the UK he would be allowed to settle here.
IMO If the mother consented the baby should be allowed in the UK as a citizen or refugee. Whether the mother would agree, or if that is seen as still being too much of a risk to Mr Javed's political ambitions we can only wait and see.
I think that's an excellent summary @phantom66, & I think it largely reflects my view.
I can see all sides of it, & I get that consensus is impossible, but the hate & finger pointing - especially by the Media of all people, who don't exactly have clean hands - appals me.
Newspapers are quick to accuse others of bullying, but today's newspaper headlines are exactly that.
Just spotted this MP's statement from pmq's and then checked it against how he's voted previously ..interesting ?
Tory MP Philip Hollobone says he would like to commend the "swift action" of ministers in stripping UK citizenship from Shamima Begum, who joined the Islamic State group in Syria aged 15.
However, he says that 900 British nationals have joined IS, and only 40 have been prosecuted.
He asks whether the prime minister will "revisit" the provisions of the Treason Act to ensure those returning receive "suitable and just punishment".
Theresa May says that those who have gone to Syria could potentially pose a security threat.
Those coming back, she says, should be in "no doubt" that they will be "questioned, investigated and potentially prosecuted".
and >>>
All votes about military action against ISIL (Daesh): On 2 Dec 2015: Philip Hollobone voted to decline to authorise UK military action in Syria. Show vote On 2 Dec 2015: Philip Hollobone voted against UK airstrikes against ISIL in Syria Show vote
We now appear to be proposing that if a husband and wife commit acts that we do not agree with, and the woman is British and the man is Dutch, we believe that the woman should be a Dutch problem because a woman married a foreign national. Really?
That is just as stupid as if the Netherlands said their citizen is our problem. I know the Home Sec wants to be PM, but even he can't be that thick
Very surprised at someone who as a former barrister and solicitor thinks being a member of a terrorist group is an act we dont agree with, not an 'alleged 'criminal act. You seem very anti the Home Secretary, and seem to be able to read his mind. I understand you think everyone is far right that does not agree with your views, but guess what we dont care what you think.
https://youtu.be/xD4TwJwBhTI Religiously she is ok with beheading. Thought it would be ok to post this youtube clip so we can see a variety of different interesting points of view.
Not often I disagree with you RM and as you know I respect everyones right to an opinion ...but seriously ...how is her radicalisation through this whole process as a very young girl , not an issue ? She was a pawn , and imo her solicitor Akunjee is more of a danger to our society than she is . If we were talking about a victim of child abuse here , who expressed worrying opinions about a range of subjects , we would all quite rightly be blaming the grooming and indoctrination as a result , personally I'm struggling to see the difference here .
Not often I disagree with you RM and as you know I respect everyones right to an opinion ...but seriously ...how is her radicalisation through this whole process as a very young girl , not an issue ? She was a pawn , and imo her solicitor Akunjee is more of a danger to our society than she is . If we were talking about a victim of child abuse here , who expressed worrying opinions about a range of subjects , we would all quite rightly be blaming the grooming and indoctrination as a result , personally I'm struggling to see the difference here .
Good afternoon Dobie, my views have mellowed on this subject after corresponding with Tom, but i believe she is a danger to the British public, and would be torn apart if she was involved in any terrorist act if she was allowed back into our Country, and we had said as we are a moral society we had to let her back in. I am a bit puzzled why Tikay thinks this is a topic for debate on a forum, essexphil answered for him but havent heard from himself yet (chat ban expected) . Would like to know if a LEE RIGBY thread was raised ? As the Home Secretary said his first concern is the British public, and i respect his brave decision.
Not often I disagree with you RM and as you know I respect everyones right to an opinion ...but seriously ...how is her radicalisation through this whole process as a very young girl , not an issue ? She was a pawn , and imo her solicitor Akunjee is more of a danger to our society than she is . If we were talking about a victim of child abuse here , who expressed worrying opinions about a range of subjects , we would all quite rightly be blaming the grooming and indoctrination as a result , personally I'm struggling to see the difference here .
Good afternoon Dobie, my views have mellowed on this subject after corresponding with Tom, but i believe she is a danger to the British public, and would be torn apart if she was involved in any terrorist act if she was allowed back into our Country, and we had said as we are a moral society we had to let her back in. I am a bit puzzled why Tikay thinks this is a topic for debate on a forum, essexphil answered for him but havent heard from himself yet (chat ban expected) . Would like to know if a LEE RIGBY thread was raised ? As the Home Secretary said his first concern is the British public, and i respect his brave decision.
Afternoon RM ...firstly absolutely no reason for anyone to get chat ban , yourself and everyone else is putting forward their views devoid of insults . I don't know how we can properly evaluate if she is a threat to our country , without properly evaluating her with trained professionals in a one to one setting, and if she was let into this country , ( even if it was on a temp assessment basis ) , that would give them a chance to work that out ...surely you can't do that remotely ? My main concern with all of this , is imo she is a victim and we don't seem to be doing anything to help her and her child resurrect their lives to some sort of normality .
Also bearing in mind how closely she would be monitored , whilst being evalued , how big a threat could she be ? ...If you were able to do a 10 mile radius search ( thankfully not ) , of Violent criminals , murderers, sex offenders who already live in our neighbourhoods , what would that turn up ? ...short term threat from her would I suggest be non existent for the duration of a proper assessment at least .
There are 2 very different issues here. Whether or not she should be prosecuted by the UK is an interesting question, and one that should elicit almost every type of opinion. The bit that annoys me is that we wish to remove someone's right to being British without a trial and without that person having a separate nationality. I would rather she was monitored and rehabilitated-I fully understand people wanting her to be prosecuted/be denied a passport etc. Trying to lumber her on to a 3rd world country (Bangladesh) against their will where she is likely to end up as a terrorist seems the worst of both worlds. Want to bet that an ISIS supporting country will offer nationality to all such people?
There are 2 very different issues here. Whether or not she should be prosecuted by the UK is an interesting question, and one that should elicit almost every type of opinion. The bit that annoys me is that we wish to remove someone's right to being British without a trial and without that person having a separate nationality. I would rather she was monitored and rehabilitated-I fully understand people wanting her to be prosecuted/be denied a passport etc. Trying to lumber her on to a 3rd world country (Bangladesh) against their will where she is likely to end up as a terrorist seems the worst of both worlds. Want to bet that an ISIS supporting country will offer nationality to all such people?
Prosecuted for being a child victim ? sorry , don't understand that viewpoint , whoever might hold it .
There are 2 very different issues here. Whether or not she should be prosecuted by the UK is an interesting question, and one that should elicit almost every type of opinion. The bit that annoys me is that we wish to remove someone's right to being British without a trial and without that person having a separate nationality. I would rather she was monitored and rehabilitated-I fully understand people wanting her to be prosecuted/be denied a passport etc. Trying to lumber her on to a 3rd world country (Bangladesh) against their will where she is likely to end up as a terrorist seems the worst of both worlds. Want to bet that an ISIS supporting country will offer nationality to all such people?
Prosecuted for being a child victim ? sorry , don't understand that viewpoint , whoever might hold it .
There are 2 very different issues here. Whether or not she should be prosecuted by the UK is an interesting question, and one that should elicit almost every type of opinion. The bit that annoys me is that we wish to remove someone's right to being British without a trial and without that person having a separate nationality. I would rather she was monitored and rehabilitated-I fully understand people wanting her to be prosecuted/be denied a passport etc. Trying to lumber her on to a 3rd world country (Bangladesh) against their will where she is likely to end up as a terrorist seems the worst of both worlds. Want to bet that an ISIS supporting country will offer nationality to all such people?
Prosecuted for being a child victim ? sorry , don't understand that viewpoint , whoever might hold it .
Just spotted this MP's statement from pmq's and then checked it against how he's voted previously ..interesting ?
Tory MP Philip Hollobone says he would like to commend the "swift action" of ministers in stripping UK citizenship from Shamima Begum, who joined the Islamic State group in Syria aged 15.
However, he says that 900 British nationals have joined IS, and only 40 have been prosecuted.
He asks whether the prime minister will "revisit" the provisions of the Treason Act to ensure those returning receive "suitable and just punishment".
Theresa May says that those who have gone to Syria could potentially pose a security threat.
Those coming back, she says, should be in "no doubt" that they will be "questioned, investigated and potentially prosecuted".
and >>>
All votes about military action against ISIL (Daesh): On 2 Dec 2015: Philip Hollobone voted to decline to authorise UK military action in Syria. Show vote On 2 Dec 2015: Philip Hollobone voted against UK airstrikes against ISIL in Syria Show vote
I was really hoping someone would comment on this . In my opinion you can't be against fighting a war with a radical organisation , but for punishing the victims .
Comments
As has been mentioned before , there’s been quite a few ( I don’t know the numbers) already returned to our shores, what’s the difference in this young ladies case?
Agree with Dobie ( on this occasion 😉) she was 15, got married to a man twice her age weeks after going there, had two children who died,she’s been exploited by a vile terrorist group and our Country is apparently washing our hands of her, I can’t help but feel if this girl was White Christian exploited by the same group there’d be a public outcry ( There I said it - the elephant in the room)
We now appear to be proposing that if a husband and wife commit acts that we do not agree with, and the woman is British and the man is Dutch, we believe that the woman should be a Dutch problem because a woman married a foreign national. Really?
That is just as stupid as if the Netherlands said their citizen is our problem. I know the Home Sec wants to be PM, but even he can't be that thick
"There's no airport in Dudley"
I can see all sides of it, & I get that consensus is impossible, but the hate & finger pointing - especially by the Media of all people, who don't exactly have clean hands - appals me.
Newspapers are quick to accuse others of bullying, but today's newspaper headlines are exactly that.
Tory MP Philip Hollobone says he would like to commend the "swift action" of ministers in stripping UK citizenship from Shamima Begum, who joined the Islamic State group in Syria aged 15.
However, he says that 900 British nationals have joined IS, and only 40 have been prosecuted.
He asks whether the prime minister will "revisit" the provisions of the Treason Act to ensure those returning receive "suitable and just punishment".
Theresa May says that those who have gone to Syria could potentially pose a security threat.
Those coming back, she says, should be in "no doubt" that they will be "questioned, investigated and potentially prosecuted".
and >>>
All votes about military action against ISIL (Daesh):
On 2 Dec 2015:
Philip Hollobone voted to decline to authorise UK military action in Syria. Show vote
On 2 Dec 2015:
Philip Hollobone voted against UK airstrikes against ISIL in Syria Show vote
Very surprised at someone who as a former barrister and solicitor thinks being a member of a terrorist group is an act we dont agree with, not an 'alleged 'criminal act.
You seem very anti the Home Secretary, and seem to be able to read his mind.
I understand you think everyone is far right that does not agree with your views, but guess what we dont care what you think.
And yours.
Religiously she is ok with beheading.
Thought it would be ok to post this youtube clip so we can see a variety of different interesting points of view.
I am a bit puzzled why Tikay thinks this is a topic for debate on a forum, essexphil answered for him but havent heard from himself yet (chat ban expected) .
Would like to know if a LEE RIGBY thread was raised ?
As the Home Secretary said his first concern is the British public, and i respect his brave decision.
I don't know how we can properly evaluate if she is a threat to our country , without properly evaluating her with trained professionals in a one to one setting, and if she was let into this country , ( even if it was on a temp assessment basis ) , that would give them a chance to work that out ...surely you can't do that remotely ?
My main concern with all of this , is imo she is a victim and we don't seem to be doing anything to help her and her child resurrect their lives to some sort of normality .
Whether or not she should be prosecuted by the UK is an interesting question, and one that should elicit almost every type of opinion.
The bit that annoys me is that we wish to remove someone's right to being British without a trial and without that person having a separate nationality. I would rather she was monitored and rehabilitated-I fully understand people wanting her to be prosecuted/be denied a passport etc.
Trying to lumber her on to a 3rd world country (Bangladesh) against their will where she is likely to end up as a terrorist seems the worst of both worlds. Want to bet that an ISIS supporting country will offer nationality to all such people?