FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Shamima Begum cannot return to UK, Supreme Court rules
Shamima Begum cannot return to UK, Supreme Court rules
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56209007 Shamima Begum cannot return to UK, Supreme Court rules. " She can still carry on her appeal about her nationality from there it just means she can’t come here and be put up in a nice comfy flat while doing it  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good,glad about that " Why? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good,glad about that Why?" So what do you think Lionel? SHould she be allowed back or not (I'm asking for your opinion). I'm glad she can't come back. However, derived and however she got there she now must bear that cross of her own decisions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good,glad about that Why? So what do you think Lionel? SHould she be allowed back or not (I'm asking for your opinion). I'm glad she can't come back. However, derived and however she got there she now must bear that cross of her own decisions. " She above She committed a crime..come back and face the consequences of your actions. They have let others back in. This is just palming the problem onto someone else. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country. "She is in a war torn country now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country.
She is in a war torn country now."Yes an has no citizenship, so if brought back she would still be a non citizen and so could not then be re deported. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good,glad about that Why?" "made her bed" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good,glad about that Why? So what do you think Lionel? SHould she be allowed back or not (I'm asking for your opinion). I'm glad she can't come back. However, derived and however she got there she now must bear that cross of her own decisions. She above She committed a crime..come back and face the consequences of your actions. They have let others back in. This is just palming the problem onto someone else." Crime? Do expand, what was it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"She has Pakistan nationality and wasn't her husband Dutch she could be eligible there too. " Exactly 2 safe havens and she chooses neither of them, why is that   | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good,glad about that Why? So what do you think Lionel? SHould she be allowed back or not (I'm asking for your opinion). I'm glad she can't come back. However, derived and however she got there she now must bear that cross of her own decisions. She above She committed a crime..come back and face the consequences of your actions. They have let others back in. This is just palming the problem onto someone else. Crime? Do expand, what was it?" Don't quite understand the question, exactly what crimes she's accused of would depend on what jurisdiction she was tried in. But British equivalents would be: supporting and funding terrorism (she took money with her), spreading racial hatred, incitement to commit violence etc etc etc | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country.
She is in a war torn country now."only fucking you would want her back man get a grip she’s scum let her fucking rot where she is fuck her | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's a difficult one. Ultimately she was only 15 years old when she was groomed and made her decision, albeit a monumentally fucking stupid one. If we were talking about a 15 year old girl who was groomed sexually, no one would be taking the "she made her bed" line. She was born and raised in the UK, she is British, deserves her day in court and (most likely) deserves to do time in prison. This is one of those situations where doing the right thing is also doing the difficult thing." why is it she was groomed ? do people not have a right to there way of thinking and beliefs just because there different from ours if she had been 16/17/18 would she of still not been entitled to her beliefs | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good,glad about that Why? So what do you think Lionel? SHould she be allowed back or not (I'm asking for your opinion). I'm glad she can't come back. However, derived and however she got there she now must bear that cross of her own decisions. She above She committed a crime..come back and face the consequences of your actions. They have let others back in. This is just palming the problem onto someone else. Crime? Do expand, what was it?" What was what? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country.
She is in a war torn country now.only fucking you would want her back man get a grip she’s scum let her fucking rot where she is fuck her "Probably something thing to do with facing justice. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country.
She is in a war torn country now.only fucking you would want her back man get a grip she’s scum let her fucking rot where she is fuck her
Probably something thing to do with facing justice."her punishment should be to let her rot where she is like I said fuck her what would you like to do Lionel give her a cuddle counciling a few months in jail then watched for a few yrs ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country.
She is in a war torn country now.only fucking you would want her back man get a grip she’s scum let her fucking rot where she is fuck her
Probably something thing to do with facing justice.her punishment should be to let her rot where she is like I said fuck her what would you like to do Lionel give her a cuddle counciling a few months in jail then watched for a few yrs ?"Standard. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country.
She is in a war torn country now.only fucking you would want her back man get a grip she’s scum let her fucking rot where she is fuck her
Probably something thing to do with facing justice.her punishment should be to let her rot where she is like I said fuck her what would you like to do Lionel give her a cuddle counciling a few months in jail then watched for a few yrs ?
Standard. "standard fucking answer from you was it a difficult question to ask you what you would like to happen you ask questions every day but I’m fucked if I ever see you answer one your a bottler mate | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"why is it she was groomed ? do people not have a right to there way of thinking and beliefs just because there different from ours if she had been 16/17/18 would she of still not been entitled to her beliefs " We don't know for certain if she was groomed, we don't know for certain that she wasn't trafficked, we don't know for certain if she an utter psychopath that would behead someone without remorse. There is a way to find out though: bring her home (like it or not, it is her home) and let the authorities deal with the situation within the full extent of the law. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . " We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country.
She is in a war torn country now.only fucking you would want her back man get a grip she’s scum let her fucking rot where she is fuck her
Probably something thing to do with facing justice.her punishment should be to let her rot where she is like I said fuck her what would you like to do Lionel give her a cuddle counciling a few months in jail then watched for a few yrs ?
Standard. standard fucking answer from you was it a difficult question to ask you what you would like to happen you ask questions every day but I’m fucked if I ever see you answer one your a bottler mate "She broke the law. The standard practice for that Is to stand before a court and face your actions. But apparently that doesnt apply so I'm I'm presuming we will start stripping the citizenship of people without a trial. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. " More reason not to waste any more time or money then. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"why is it she was groomed ? do people not have a right to there way of thinking and beliefs just because there different from ours if she had been 16/17/18 would she of still not been entitled to her beliefs We don't know for certain if she was groomed, we don't know for certain that she wasn't trafficked, we don't know for certain if she an utter psychopath that would behead someone without remorse. There is a way to find out though: bring her home (like it or not, it is her home) and let the authorities deal with the situation within the full extent of the law." great take a risk that she beheads someone and waste tax payers money or accept she made her bed and let her die init | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country.
She is in a war torn country now.only fucking you would want her back man get a grip she’s scum let her fucking rot where she is fuck her
Probably something thing to do with facing justice.her punishment should be to let her rot where she is like I said fuck her what would you like to do Lionel give her a cuddle counciling a few months in jail then watched for a few yrs ?
Standard. standard fucking answer from you was it a difficult question to ask you what you would like to happen you ask questions every day but I’m fucked if I ever see you answer one your a bottler mate " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. " Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country.
She is in a war torn country now.only fucking you would want her back man get a grip she’s scum let her fucking rot where she is fuck her
Probably something thing to do with facing justice.her punishment should be to let her rot where she is like I said fuck her what would you like to do Lionel give her a cuddle counciling a few months in jail then watched for a few yrs ?
Standard. standard fucking answer from you was it a difficult question to ask you what you would like to happen you ask questions every day but I’m fucked if I ever see you answer one your a bottler mate
She broke the law.
The standard practice for that Is to stand before a court and face your actions.
But apparently that doesnt apply so I'm I'm presuming we will start stripping the citizenship of people without a trial."fuck me I asked for your thoughts not how the justice system works lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If they did let her back the U.K. would not be able to get rid of her again because her defence would argue the human rights of sending her back to a war torn country.
She is in a war torn country now.only fucking you would want her back man get a grip she’s scum let her fucking rot where she is fuck her
Probably something thing to do with facing justice.her punishment should be to let her rot where she is like I said fuck her what would you like to do Lionel give her a cuddle counciling a few months in jail then watched for a few yrs ?
Standard. standard fucking answer from you was it a difficult question to ask you what you would like to happen you ask questions every day but I’m fucked if I ever see you answer one your a bottler mate
She broke the law.
The standard practice for that Is to stand before a court and face your actions.
But apparently that doesnt apply so I'm I'm presuming we will start stripping the citizenship of people without a trial.fuck me I asked for your thoughts not how the justice system works lol"If someone breaks the law they should be tried in court. Obviously that only applies in certain cases. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. " No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK." I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. " Glad you Agree | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law?" I could say it twice or you could just read it again. She did not break the Law and was . . . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law? I could say it twice or you could just read it again. She did not break the Law and was . . . " I thought the whole point of bringing her back was to have her tried in court? Her solicitor said she accepts she has to face justice. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law? I could say it twice or you could just read it again. She did not break the Law and was . . . I thought the whole point of bringing her back was to have her tried in court? Her solicitor said she accepts she has to face justice. " When Begum left the UK, police said she had committed no offences and would not be treated as a terrorist. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law? I could say it twice or you could just read it again. She did not break the Law and was . . . I thought the whole point of bringing her back was to have her tried in court? Her solicitor said she accepts she has to face justice. " No. She wanted her citizenship back so she could come back here to live. The case is ONLY about that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law? I could say it twice or you could just read it again. She did not break the Law and was . . . I thought the whole point of bringing her back was to have her tried in court? Her solicitor said she accepts she has to face justice. No. She wanted her citizenship back so she could come back here to live. The case is ONLY about that." So I guess the question put to the court was does she deserve to have her citizenship back. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law? I could say it twice or you could just read it again. She did not break the Law and was . . . I thought the whole point of bringing her back was to have her tried in court? Her solicitor said she accepts she has to face justice. No. She wanted her citizenship back so she could come back here to live. The case is ONLY about that." I thought there were issues about the legality of the home secretary talking her citizenship away? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The independent Jucidicary have spoken. Thats enough for me, but her lack of contrition is not helping any case she may have. " Would showing remorse help? She must have seen some horrific things. Wasmt it being argued that she become desensitizated to it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law? I could say it twice or you could just read it again. She did not break the Law and was . . . I thought the whole point of bringing her back was to have her tried in court? Her solicitor said she accepts she has to face justice. No. She wanted her citizenship back so she could come back here to live. The case is ONLY about that. So I guess the question put to the court was does she deserve to have her citizenship back. " Just that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law? I could say it twice or you could just read it again. She did not break the Law and was . . . I thought the whole point of bringing her back was to have her tried in court? Her solicitor said she accepts she has to face justice. No. She wanted her citizenship back so she could come back here to live. The case is ONLY about that. I thought there were issues about the legality of the home secretary talking her citizenship away?" And found not to have acted outside those powers. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/10/lawyer-for-uk-isis-woman-shamima-begum-says-police-building-criminal-case 1St paragraph. And read a piece which said She broke the 2000 terrorism act? Dunno Got too much of a headache to argue but I thought the whole point of bringing her back, was she could be held responsible for her actions? Suppose there is a deeper issue about how you deal with radicalisation but Its certainly not easy. Education maybe? Not sure simply locking up people is going to solve it." So are we believing her lawyer over the police? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/10/lawyer-for-uk-isis-woman-shamima-begum-says-police-building-criminal-case 1St paragraph. And read a piece which said She broke the 2000 terrorism act? Dunno Got too much of a headache to argue but I thought the whole point of bringing her back, was she could be held responsible for her actions? Suppose there is a deeper issue about how you deal with radicalisation but Its certainly not easy. Education maybe? Not sure simply locking up people is going to solve it. So are we believing her lawyer over the police?" Eh? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/10/lawyer-for-uk-isis-woman-shamima-begum-says-police-building-criminal-case 1St paragraph. And read a piece which said She broke the 2000 terrorism act? Dunno Got too much of a headache to argue but I thought the whole point of bringing her back, was she could be held responsible for her actions? Suppose there is a deeper issue about how you deal with radicalisation but Its certainly not easy. Education maybe? Not sure simply locking up people is going to solve it. So are we believing her lawyer over the police? Eh?" The first paragraph you point out is what her lawyer said. The police have said she broke no laws. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done." Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/10/lawyer-for-uk-isis-woman-shamima-begum-says-police-building-criminal-case 1St paragraph. And read a piece which said She broke the 2000 terrorism act? Dunno Got too much of a headache to argue but I thought the whole point of bringing her back, was she could be held responsible for her actions? Suppose there is a deeper issue about how you deal with radicalisation but Its certainly not easy. Education maybe? Not sure simply locking up people is going to solve it. So are we believing her lawyer over the police? Eh? The first paragraph you point out is what her lawyer said. The police have said she broke no laws." Well I guess the plod are right. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different." I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done." Point out the 'hatred' ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him " I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Point out the 'hatred' ?" https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/27/uk-shooting-range-uses-shamima-begum-image-for-targets | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/10/lawyer-for-uk-isis-woman-shamima-begum-says-police-building-criminal-case 1St paragraph. And read a piece which said She broke the 2000 terrorism act? Dunno Got too much of a headache to argue but I thought the whole point of bringing her back, was she could be held responsible for her actions? Suppose there is a deeper issue about how you deal with radicalisation but Its certainly not easy. Education maybe? Not sure simply locking up people is going to solve it. So are we believing her lawyer over the police? Eh? The first paragraph you point out is what her lawyer said. The police have said she broke no laws. Well I guess the plod are right." Nope. The Judiciary are right. The Police can present anything they like. Only the Judiciary can make it found or lost. Learn how your Legal System works. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight" Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/10/lawyer-for-uk-isis-woman-shamima-begum-says-police-building-criminal-case 1St paragraph. And read a piece which said She broke the 2000 terrorism act? Dunno Got too much of a headache to argue but I thought the whole point of bringing her back, was she could be held responsible for her actions? Suppose there is a deeper issue about how you deal with radicalisation but Its certainly not easy. Education maybe? Not sure simply locking up people is going to solve it. So are we believing her lawyer over the police? Eh? The first paragraph you point out is what her lawyer said. The police have said she broke no laws. Well I guess the plod are right. Nope. The Judiciary are right. The Police can present anything they like. Only the Judiciary can make it found or lost. Learn how your Legal System works." Ok | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Point out the 'hatred' ? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/27/uk-shooting-range-uses-shamima-begum-image-for-targets" Now go tell the Guardian that they whipped up hatred. And see what happens next. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people." Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Point out the 'hatred' ? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/27/uk-shooting-range-uses-shamima-begum-image-for-targets Now go tell the Guardian that they whipped up hatred. And see what happens next. " Eh? Again | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. " It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Point out the 'hatred' ? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/27/uk-shooting-range-uses-shamima-begum-image-for-targets Now go tell the Guardian that they whipped up hatred. And see what happens next. Eh? Again " S You k ow what is being said you said. the media whipped up hatred. Your words. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Point out the 'hatred' ? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/27/uk-shooting-range-uses-shamima-begum-image-for-targets Now go tell the Guardian that they whipped up hatred. And see what happens next. Eh? Again S You k ow what is being said you said. the media whipped up hatred. Your words. " I'm lost The guardian are whipping up hatred for running the story? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here?" According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here?" Since 2016 120 have been stripped of UK citizenship. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When you read the background her school highlighted grooming and social services didn’t tell the parents. Passports could have been withheld. She supported the anarchy and destruction of hospitals along with stopping nurses and female doctors and then wondered why her children died when they were ill. Karma for her but tragic for the children. I have mixed view firstly that she’s guilty as sin and shown no remorse but that’s only what the papers tell me. Is that true? Secondly I don’t like one minister dictating law as he sees it. I don’t want her or any of the supporters of ISIS back and setting an example is probably a good thing to show others, however it is a dangerous path to let a minister decide guilt or not. " Its murky to say the least There is an argument to say she was groomed. What was she 15,? Defenitley no easy answers but uncomfortable questions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Point out the 'hatred' ? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/27/uk-shooting-range-uses-shamima-begum-image-for-targets Now go tell the Guardian that they whipped up hatred. And see what happens next. Eh? Again S You k ow what is being said you said. the media whipped up hatred. Your words. I'm lost The guardian are whipping up hatred for running the story?" You said the media were whipping up hatred and when asked to show it, you showed a guardian article. It's really not rocket science | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Point out the 'hatred' ? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/27/uk-shooting-range-uses-shamima-begum-image-for-targets Now go tell the Guardian that they whipped up hatred. And see what happens next. Eh? Again S You k ow what is being said you said. the media whipped up hatred. Your words. I'm lost The guardian are whipping up hatred for running the story?" You said: media are whipping up hatred then posted a link to the Guardian. Fair for me to say and think it must be one of media outlets who is doing. And don't say 'Huh?' again. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Point out the 'hatred' ? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/27/uk-shooting-range-uses-shamima-begum-image-for-targets Now go tell the Guardian that they whipped up hatred. And see what happens next. Eh? Again S You k ow what is being said you said. the media whipped up hatred. Your words. I'm lost The guardian are whipping up hatred for running the story? You said the media were whipping up hatred and when asked to show it, you showed a guardian article. It's really not rocket science "Snap lol. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If I am being honest I have zero sympathy for her, she has shown no remorse for her actions. I hope she is punished to the fullest extent of the law for her crimes. But. Revoking her citizenship is a slippery slope and a 2 way street. What happens the next time an immigrant in the UK commits a horrible crime, and their home country says "Nah we don't want them back." This is door that is currently being opened. Our prisons are full of the lowest forms of life: rapists, murderers etc yet they all have one thing in common: they were allowed their due process. Due process is one of the cornerstones of a civilised society, remove it and you have an authoritarian state. I have zero doubt that she is a criminal, but she's a British criminal. Bring her home, put her in custody and put her on trial." She didn't commit any crimes in this country. If she did she would be brought back and prosecuted. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences." Fair enough I thought She was the 1st hence all the hoopla. I don't think 1 person has said there shouldmt be consequences have they? Isnt 15 under the age of being tried as an adult? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences. Fair enough I thought She was the 1st hence all the hoopla. I don't think 1 person has said there shouldmt be consequences have they? Isnt 15 under the age of being tried as an adult?" Well the consequences are that she lost her citizenship. She isn't being tried full stop. When will you listen? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Point out the 'hatred' ? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/27/uk-shooting-range-uses-shamima-begum-image-for-targets Now go tell the Guardian that they whipped up hatred. And see what happens next. Eh? Again S You k ow what is being said you said. the media whipped up hatred. Your words. I'm lost The guardian are whipping up hatred for running the story? You said: media are whipping up hatred then posted a link to the Guardian. Fair for me to say and think it must be one of media outlets who is doing. And don't say 'Huh?' again. " The guardian printed a story about a 15 year old girl having her face used as target price. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences. Fair enough I thought She was the 1st hence all the hoopla. I don't think 1 person has said there shouldmt be consequences have they? Isnt 15 under the age of being tried as an adult? Well the consequences are that she lost her citizenship. She isn't being tried full stop. When will you listen?" Time of The month? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences. Fair enough I thought She was the 1st hence all the hoopla. I don't think 1 person has said there shouldmt be consequences have they? Isnt 15 under the age of being tried as an adult? Well the consequences are that she lost her citizenship. She isn't being tried full stop. When will you listen? Time of The month?" That’s a bit misogynist Lionel | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences. Fair enough I thought She was the 1st hence all the hoopla. I don't think 1 person has said there shouldmt be consequences have they? Isnt 15 under the age of being tried as an adult? Well the consequences are that she lost her citizenship. She isn't being tried full stop. When will you listen? Time of The month?" Lost the argument so have to resort to petty school ground tactics 
BTW, thanks for being a misogynist | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You said: media are whipping up hatred then posted a link to the Guardian " Again. You must have meant them. I'll get another 'er what?' From you. But you know what us being said. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back" No you will not. I forever see you up in arms about what people say. Yet you continue with remarks that are as bad as others. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You said: media are whipping up hatred then posted a link to the Guardian Again. You must have meant them. I'll get another 'er what?' From you. But you know what us being said." Because I don't know what you are saying Are you implying the guardian is whipping up hatred for running the story? You dont think there has been no particular campaign against her? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back" Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back No you will not. I forever see you up in arms about what people say. Yet you continue with remarks that are as bad as others." 
Rightio
When an apology just isnt enough. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. " Ive took it back | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back No you will not. I forever see you up in arms about what people say. Yet you continue with remarks that are as bad as others.
Rightio
When an apology just isnt enough."It isn't when you do it on numerous occasions. Just last week you asked me 'you ok hun?' It can stay there and people can make there own minds up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back " But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back No you will not. I forever see you up in arms about what people say. Yet you continue with remarks that are as bad as others.
Rightio
When an apology just isnt enough.
It isn't when you do it on numerous occasions.
Just last week you asked me 'you ok hun?'
It can stay there and people can make there own minds up."Shrugs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. " What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by" I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. " Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks " Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. " Yep you chose to say silent over that | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that" Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When you read the background her school highlighted grooming and social services didn’t tell the parents. Passports could have been withheld. She supported the anarchy and destruction of hospitals along with stopping nurses and female doctors and then wondered why her children died when they were ill. Karma for her but tragic for the children. I have mixed view firstly that she’s guilty as sin and shown no remorse but that’s only what the papers tell me. Is that true? Secondly I don’t like one minister dictating law as he sees it. I don’t want her or any of the supporters of ISIS back and setting an example is probably a good thing to show others, however it is a dangerous path to let a minister decide guilt or not. " a more dangerous path is letting her back and making her a hero to the other loonies who follow isis I know everyone wants to be seen as a just person but come on she’s a terrorrist ffs if anyone was honest would you want the bitch living next door to you ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When you read the background her school highlighted grooming and social services didn’t tell the parents. Passports could have been withheld. She supported the anarchy and destruction of hospitals along with stopping nurses and female doctors and then wondered why her children died when they were ill. Karma for her but tragic for the children. I have mixed view firstly that she’s guilty as sin and shown no remorse but that’s only what the papers tell me. Is that true? Secondly I don’t like one minister dictating law as he sees it. I don’t want her or any of the supporters of ISIS back and setting an example is probably a good thing to show others, however it is a dangerous path to let a minister decide guilt or not. Its murky to say the least There is an argument to say she was groomed. What was she 15,? Defenitley no easy answers but uncomfortable questions." I wouldn't mind if all potential terrorists we're treated the same but they aren't. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences. Fair enough I thought She was the 1st hence all the hoopla. I don't think 1 person has said there shouldmt be consequences have they? Isnt 15 under the age of being tried as an adult? Well the consequences are that she lost her citizenship. She isn't being tried full stop. When will you listen?" Actually she can be tried in this country under our law. The law sees it this way. Generally, an offence will only be triable in the jurisdiction in which the offence takes place, unless there is a specific provision to ground jurisdiction, for instance where specific statutes enable the UK to exercise extra-territorial jurisdiction: For example Terrorism (ss. 59, 62-63 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and s.17 of the Terrorism Act 2006, and as amended by the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019); So we can bring her back for trial under aiding and abetting acts of terrorism | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. " Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When you read the background her school highlighted grooming and social services didn’t tell the parents. Passports could have been withheld. She supported the anarchy and destruction of hospitals along with stopping nurses and female doctors and then wondered why her children died when they were ill. Karma for her but tragic for the children. I have mixed view firstly that she’s guilty as sin and shown no remorse but that’s only what the papers tell me. Is that true? Secondly I don’t like one minister dictating law as he sees it. I don’t want her or any of the supporters of ISIS back and setting an example is probably a good thing to show others, however it is a dangerous path to let a minister decide guilt or not. a more dangerous path is letting her back and making her a hero to the other loonies who follow isis I know everyone wants to be seen as a just person but come on she’s a terrorrist ffs if anyone was honest would you want the bitch living next door to you ?" The bitch Yep no hate mongering at here No siree bob | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When you read the background her school highlighted grooming and social services didn’t tell the parents. Passports could have been withheld. She supported the anarchy and destruction of hospitals along with stopping nurses and female doctors and then wondered why her children died when they were ill. Karma for her but tragic for the children. I have mixed view firstly that she’s guilty as sin and shown no remorse but that’s only what the papers tell me. Is that true? Secondly I don’t like one minister dictating law as he sees it. I don’t want her or any of the supporters of ISIS back and setting an example is probably a good thing to show others, however it is a dangerous path to let a minister decide guilt or not. Its murky to say the least There is an argument to say she was groomed. What was she 15,? Defenitley no easy answers but uncomfortable questions. I wouldn't mind if all potential terrorists we're treated the same but they aren't. " Depends what you mean by potential? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences. Fair enough I thought She was the 1st hence all the hoopla. I don't think 1 person has said there shouldmt be consequences have they? Isnt 15 under the age of being tried as an adult? Well the consequences are that she lost her citizenship. She isn't being tried full stop. When will you listen? Actually she can be tried in this country under our law. The law sees it this way. Generally, an offence will only be triable in the jurisdiction in which the offence takes place, unless there is a specific provision to ground jurisdiction, for instance where specific statutes enable the UK to exercise extra-territorial jurisdiction: For example Terrorism (ss. 59, 62-63 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and s.17 of the Terrorism Act 2006, and as amended by the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019); So we can bring her back for trial under aiding and abetting acts of terrorism " I'm confused Can she be tried in a court of law for terrorism offences? Yes or no? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class "Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal. Crack on. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When you read the background her school highlighted grooming and social services didn’t tell the parents. Passports could have been withheld. She supported the anarchy and destruction of hospitals along with stopping nurses and female doctors and then wondered why her children died when they were ill. Karma for her but tragic for the children. I have mixed view firstly that she’s guilty as sin and shown no remorse but that’s only what the papers tell me. Is that true? Secondly I don’t like one minister dictating law as he sees it. I don’t want her or any of the supporters of ISIS back and setting an example is probably a good thing to show others, however it is a dangerous path to let a minister decide guilt or not. a more dangerous path is letting her back and making her a hero to the other loonies who follow isis I know everyone wants to be seen as a just person but come on she’s a terrorrist ffs if anyone was honest would you want the bitch living next door to you ? The bitch Yep no hate mongering at here No siree bob" what you want me not to say my true feelings Lionel like you asked you what you thought you spun the legality that’s it you call Boris every day on here so shhhhh mate to me she is a bitch a lowlife be a man and for once tell me how do you feel about her not your usual bs tho your true feelings ? You keep saying your not sticking up for her then stick up for her lo | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on. "And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch" Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence. Comsistency folks. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When you read the background her school highlighted grooming and social services didn’t tell the parents. Passports could have been withheld. She supported the anarchy and destruction of hospitals along with stopping nurses and female doctors and then wondered why her children died when they were ill. Karma for her but tragic for the children. I have mixed view firstly that she’s guilty as sin and shown no remorse but that’s only what the papers tell me. Is that true? Secondly I don’t like one minister dictating law as he sees it. I don’t want her or any of the supporters of ISIS back and setting an example is probably a good thing to show others, however it is a dangerous path to let a minister decide guilt or not. a more dangerous path is letting her back and making her a hero to the other loonies who follow isis I know everyone wants to be seen as a just person but come on she’s a terrorrist ffs if anyone was honest would you want the bitch living next door to you ? The bitch Yep no hate mongering at here No siree bobwhat you want me not to say my true feelings Lionel like you asked you what you thought you spun the legality that’s it you call Boris every day on here so shhhhh mate to me she is a bitch a lowlife be a man and for once tell me how do you feel about her not your usual bs tho your true feelings ? You keep saying your not sticking up for her then stick up for her lo" Please point out..even 1 sentence..when I've 'Stuck up for her' Go.on | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on.
And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch"
Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence.
Comsistency folks.
"Yup horrible comment about her. And I get that you need to seek to minimise and perhaps divert your sexist attitude. Perhaps let’s not take up anymore time on this post with this exchange. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on.
And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch"
Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence.
Comsistency folks.
"are you pissed mate have you zero idea of the names you’ve called Boris trump farage and most Tory mps ffs I’ll ask you again what are your true feelings on her and not the pc bullshit most hide behind howay I know it’s hard for you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on.
And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch"
Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence.
Comsistency folks.
Yup horrible comment about her. And I get that you need to seek to minimise and perhaps divert your sexist attitude.
Perhaps let’s not take up anymore time on this post with this exchange.
"Which you and the little pitchfork mob chose to completely ignore But yeah..let's.move on | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on.
And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch"
Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence.
Comsistency folks.
are you pissed mate have you zero idea of the names you’ve called Boris trump farage and most Tory mps ffs I’ll ask you again what are your true feelings on her and not the pc bullshit most hide behind howay I know it’s hard for you "Lols What pc bullshit? So I'm now a misogynist and a pc er. I'll try it once more. In simple terms Where.. have I 'stuck up for her' Just 1 sentence will do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on.
And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch"
Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence.
Comsistency folks.
are you pissed mate have you zero idea of the names you’ve called Boris trump farage and most Tory mps ffs I’ll ask you again what are your true feelings on her and not the pc bullshit most hide behind howay I know it’s hard for you
Lols
What pc bullshit?
So I'm now a misogynist and a pc er.
I'll try it once more.
In simple terms
Where.. have I 'stuck up for her'
Just 1 sentence will do."waste of time I ask you a question you fail to answer then ask me one typical Lionel lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on.
And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch"
Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence.
Comsistency folks.
are you pissed mate have you zero idea of the names you’ve called Boris trump farage and most Tory mps ffs I’ll ask you again what are your true feelings on her and not the pc bullshit most hide behind howay I know it’s hard for you
Lols
What pc bullshit?
So I'm now a misogynist and a pc er.
I'll try it once more.
In simple terms
Where.. have I 'stuck up for her'
Just 1 sentence will do.waste of time I ask you a question you fail to answer then ask me one typical Lionel lol"Glad we got that created up | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on.
And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch"
Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence.
Comsistency folks.
are you pissed mate have you zero idea of the names you’ve called Boris trump farage and most Tory mps ffs I’ll ask you again what are your true feelings on her and not the pc bullshit most hide behind howay I know it’s hard for you
Lols
What pc bullshit?
So I'm now a misogynist and a pc er.
I'll try it once more.
In simple terms
Where.. have I 'stuck up for her'
Just 1 sentence will do.waste of time I ask you a question you fail to answer then ask me one typical Lionel lol
Glad we got that created up
"im just going to swerve you from now on you are totally a waste of time | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on.
And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch"
Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence.
Comsistency folks.
are you pissed mate have you zero idea of the names you’ve called Boris trump farage and most Tory mps ffs I’ll ask you again what are your true feelings on her and not the pc bullshit most hide behind howay I know it’s hard for you
Lols
What pc bullshit?
So I'm now a misogynist and a pc er.
I'll try it once more.
In simple terms
Where.. have I 'stuck up for her'
Just 1 sentence will do.waste of time I ask you a question you fail to answer then ask me one typical Lionel lol"you only just realized | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on.
And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch"
Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence.
Comsistency folks.
are you pissed mate have you zero idea of the names you’ve called Boris trump farage and most Tory mps ffs I’ll ask you again what are your true feelings on her and not the pc bullshit most hide behind howay I know it’s hard for you
Lols
What pc bullshit?
So I'm now a misogynist and a pc er.
I'll try it once more.
In simple terms
Where.. have I 'stuck up for her'
Just 1 sentence will do.waste of time I ask you a question you fail to answer then ask me one typical Lionel lol
Glad we got that created up
im just going to swerve you from now on you are totally a waste of time "What are you òn about? I've said at least 3 times she should come and be tried in court What else do you want me to say? You consistently ask questions.. get an anser you are not happy with and say the question hasn't been answered. Yet in your eyes that is somehow standing up for her and being pc | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is I'll take that back Take it way back to the 80’s where it belongs. Ive took it back But the fact is you held that opinion in the first place and felt comfortable to say it. And you being on a site like this. What about being on a site like this? Once again people picking and choosing what to get offended by I’m not offended. I just think you often say some things that indicate worrying opinions that belong in the past. Yet you are quite happy with borderline racist remarks Nope and two wrongs don’t make a right. Yep you chose to say silent over that Maybe I am not omnipresent on the forum and logged on and saw your abhorrent comment when I was catching up on the days events. Abhorrent Ha ha ha ha Well done 1St class
Wasn’t great mate. Bit of a dinosaur thing to say. Seems you think it’s not a big deal.
Crack on.
And a girl barely out her terms Is branded a ",bitch"
Which could be termed slightly sexist,yet the angry mob are strangely silence.
Comsistency folks.
are you pissed mate have you zero idea of the names you’ve called Boris trump farage and most Tory mps ffs I’ll ask you again what are your true feelings on her and not the pc bullshit most hide behind howay I know it’s hard for you
Lols
What pc bullshit?
So I'm now a misogynist and a pc er.
I'll try it once more.
In simple terms
Where.. have I 'stuck up for her'
Just 1 sentence will do.waste of time I ask you a question you fail to answer then ask me one typical Lionel lolyou only just realized "costa you would think I’d know better be now like I could but a wall after talking to him swear to fucking god I asked what his feelings are about her he gives same old bullshit about court lol if she was a tory he’d of given his true feelings that’s for sure | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"She was a enforcer in the Isil moral police. She not innocent at all. She gave her right to be a citizen. Plain and simple." No one said she was innocent So everyone who breaks the law should lose their citizenship? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"She was a enforcer in the Isil moral police. She not innocent at all. She gave her right to be a citizen. Plain and simple. No one said she was innocent So everyone who breaks the law should lose their citizenship?" If I joined and committed atrocious acts like that I would hope my country wouldn't allow me back. She denounced morals by accepting and participating in those acts. She can stay there. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No one said she was innocent So everyone who breaks the law should lose their citizenship?" Not even close to being the same thing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. " that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers ." I’m not being rude, but I don’t understand any of that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"She was a enforcer in the Isil moral police. She not innocent at all. She gave her right to be a citizen. Plain and simple. No one said she was innocent So everyone who breaks the law should lose their citizenship? If I joined and committed atrocious acts like that I would hope my country wouldn't allow me back. She denounced morals by accepting and participating in those acts. She can stay there." So to clarify.. if you join a terrorist organisation..you lose your citizenship? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers ." That was just a noise | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers ." think you’ve watched to many Hollywood action films | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences. Fair enough I thought She was the 1st hence all the hoopla. I don't think 1 person has said there shouldmt be consequences have they? Isnt 15 under the age of being tried as an adult? Well the consequences are that she lost her citizenship. She isn't being tried full stop. When will you listen? Actually she can be tried in this country under our law. The law sees it this way. Generally, an offence will only be triable in the jurisdiction in which the offence takes place, unless there is a specific provision to ground jurisdiction, for instance where specific statutes enable the UK to exercise extra-territorial jurisdiction: For example Terrorism (ss. 59, 62-63 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and s.17 of the Terrorism Act 2006, and as amended by the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019); So we can bring her back for trial under aiding and abetting acts of terrorism I'm confused Can she be tried in a court of law for terrorism offences? Yes or no?" They can lay charges but whether they want to or can prove it is the question. Finding her innocent would be a very very bad outcome. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences. Fair enough I thought She was the 1st hence all the hoopla. I don't think 1 person has said there shouldmt be consequences have they? Isnt 15 under the age of being tried as an adult? Well the consequences are that she lost her citizenship. She isn't being tried full stop. When will you listen? Actually she can be tried in this country under our law. The law sees it this way. Generally, an offence will only be triable in the jurisdiction in which the offence takes place, unless there is a specific provision to ground jurisdiction, for instance where specific statutes enable the UK to exercise extra-territorial jurisdiction: For example Terrorism (ss. 59, 62-63 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and s.17 of the Terrorism Act 2006, and as amended by the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019); So we can bring her back for trial under aiding and abetting acts of terrorism I'm confused Can she be tried in a court of law for terrorism offences? Yes or no? They can lay charges but whether they want to or can prove it is the question. Finding her innocent would be a very very bad outcome. " Which completely contradicts what the little self righteous brigade said earlier? From what I (mis)understand she could have been brought back to face terrorism charges,but she her citizenship has been revoked,the legalities have surrendered this. Obvs if you are not a brotish citizen, you camt be tried in a court of law. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Try and do this one more time for those who just will not get the oh so simple and clear message. She has NOT broken the Law in the UK. The Judiciary are not seeking to charge her with any crime. The Home secretary has the power to remove citizenship from individuals for the following reasons: - It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless. - The person obtained citizenship through fraud. - Their actions could harm UK interests, and they can claim citizenship elsewhere. Ms Begum was stripped of her citizenship *for the public good reason*. She challenged the legality of this in a UK court (that was paid for under Legal Aid.) She lost that case. She then appealed that Judgement in the Supreme Court of Justice in the UK. She lost that Appeal. _______________ What can be taken from this. 1. The Home Secretary applied UK precisely and fairly. 2. The was given leave to challenge that decision. 4. The UK paid for her legal council. 5. The UK paid for her Appeal. 6. The Judges in both Courts lower and upper accept that she is not Stateless. 7. She lost twice. Done." Still an excellent summation | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Try and do this one more time for those who just will not get the oh so simple and clear message. She has NOT broken the Law in the UK. The Judiciary are not seeking to charge her with any crime. The Home secretary has the power to remove citizenship from individuals for the following reasons: - It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless. - The person obtained citizenship through fraud. - Their actions could harm UK interests, and they can claim citizenship elsewhere. Ms Begum was stripped of her citizenship *for the public good reason*. She challenged the legality of this in a UK court (that was paid for under Legal Aid.) She lost that case. She then appealed that Judgement in the Supreme Court of Justice in the UK. She lost that Appeal. _______________ What can be taken from this. 1. The Home Secretary applied UK precisely and fairly. 2. The was given leave to challenge that decision. 4. The UK paid for her legal council. 5. The UK paid for her Appeal. 6. The Judges in both Courts lower and upper accept that she is not Stateless. 7. She lost twice. Done." you can tell some people all day and night they will only read what they want to you’ve wrote it plain and simple countless times if you only had a pound for every time you did that eh lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers . I’m not being rude, but I don’t understand any of that. " quite simple terrorist don't play by the rules about time we stopped playing by the rules.put simply they kill we kill there entire family end of day no innocent they will all have taken some of the pie. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Try and do this one more time for those who just will not get the oh so simple and clear message. She has NOT broken the Law in the UK. The Judiciary are not seeking to charge her with any crime. The Home secretary has the power to remove citizenship from individuals for the following reasons: - It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless. - The person obtained citizenship through fraud. - Their actions could harm UK interests, and they can claim citizenship elsewhere. Ms Begum was stripped of her citizenship *for the public good reason*. She challenged the legality of this in a UK court (that was paid for under Legal Aid.) She lost that case. She then appealed that Judgement in the Supreme Court of Justice in the UK. She lost that Appeal. _______________ What can be taken from this. 1. The Home Secretary applied UK precisely and fairly. 2. The was given leave to challenge that decision. 4. The UK paid for her legal council. 5. The UK paid for her Appeal. 6. The Judges in both Courts lower and upper accept that she is not Stateless. 7. She lost twice. Done.you can tell some people all day and night they will only read what they want to you’ve wrote it plain and simple countless times if you only had a pound for every time you did that eh lol" It shouldn't be so hard lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Try and do this one more time for those who just will not get the oh so simple and clear message. She has NOT broken the Law in the UK. The Judiciary are not seeking to charge her with any crime. The Home secretary has the power to remove citizenship from individuals for the following reasons: - It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless. - The person obtained citizenship through fraud. - Their actions could harm UK interests, and they can claim citizenship elsewhere. Ms Begum was stripped of her citizenship *for the public good reason*. She challenged the legality of this in a UK court (that was paid for under Legal Aid.) She lost that case. She then appealed that Judgement in the Supreme Court of Justice in the UK. She lost that Appeal. _______________ What can be taken from this. 1. The Home Secretary applied UK precisely and fairly. 2. The was given leave to challenge that decision. 4. The UK paid for her legal council. 5. The UK paid for her Appeal. 6. The Judges in both Courts lower and upper accept that she is not Stateless. 7. She lost twice. Done. Still an excellent summation " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers . I’m not being rude, but I don’t understand any of that. quite simple terrorist don't play by the rules about time we stopped playing by the rules.put simply they kill we kill there entire family end of day no innocent they will all have taken some of the pie." So we should act as terrorists do? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers . I’m not being rude, but I don’t understand any of that. quite simple terrorist don't play by the rules about time we stopped playing by the rules.put simply they kill we kill there entire family end of day no innocent they will all have taken some of the pie." but then that makes us as bad as them then ? We are supposed to be civilised aren’t we mind we should look at what we/us the British have done over the years | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers . I’m not being rude, but I don’t understand any of that. quite simple terrorist don't play by the rules about time we stopped playing by the rules.put simply they kill we kill there entire family end of day no innocent they will all have taken some of the pie. So we should act as terrorists do?" yes israel don't mess why should we stick to rules. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Try and do this one more time for those who just will not get the oh so simple and clear message. She has NOT broken the Law in the UK. The Judiciary are not seeking to charge her with any crime. The Home secretary has the power to remove citizenship from individuals for the following reasons: - It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless. - The person obtained citizenship through fraud. - Their actions could harm UK interests, and they can claim citizenship elsewhere. Ms Begum was stripped of her citizenship *for the public good reason*. She challenged the legality of this in a UK court (that was paid for under Legal Aid.) She lost that case. She then appealed that Judgement in the Supreme Court of Justice in the UK. She lost that Appeal. _______________ What can be taken from this. 1. The Home Secretary applied UK precisely and fairly. 2. The was given leave to challenge that decision. 4. The UK paid for her legal council. 5. The UK paid for her Appeal. 6. The Judges in both Courts lower and upper accept that she is not Stateless. 7. She lost twice. Done." Excellent summary. Hopefully it will answer the questions and statements from some. Seems as we have paid for all this legal action we have been more than fair and probably more than some other countries would have done | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers . I’m not being rude, but I don’t understand any of that. quite simple terrorist don't play by the rules about time we stopped playing by the rules.put simply they kill we kill there entire family end of day no innocent they will all have taken some of the pie. So we should act as terrorists do?yes israel don't mess why should we stick to rules." You realise there is such a thing as international law? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers . I’m not being rude, but I don’t understand any of that. quite simple terrorist don't play by the rules about time we stopped playing by the rules.put simply they kill we kill there entire family end of day no innocent they will all have taken some of the pie. but then that makes us as bad as them then ? We are supposed to be civilised aren’t we mind we should look at what we/us the British have done over the years " and that's what they pray on us been civilized . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" and that's what they pray on us been civilized ." --------------------------------------- And WOW haven't the UK been civilized in this case? --------------------------------------- She has NOT broken the Law in the UK. The Judiciary are not seeking to charge her with any crime. The Home secretary has the power to remove citizenship from individuals for the following reasons: - It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless. - The person obtained citizenship through fraud. - Their actions could harm UK interests, and they can claim citizenship elsewhere. Ms Begum was stripped of her citizenship *for the public good reason*. She challenged the legality of this in a UK court (that was paid for under Legal Aid.) She lost that case. She then appealed that Judgement in the Supreme Court of Justice in the UK. She lost that Appeal. _______________ What can be taken from this. 1. The Home Secretary applied UK precisely and fairly. 2. She was given leave to challenge that decision. 4. The UK paid for her legal council. 5. The UK paid for her Appeal. 6. She lost twice. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers . I’m not being rude, but I don’t understand any of that. quite simple terrorist don't play by the rules about time we stopped playing by the rules.put simply they kill we kill there entire family end of day no innocent they will all have taken some of the pie." Ok John Wick  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers . I’m not being rude, but I don’t understand any of that. quite simple terrorist don't play by the rules about time we stopped playing by the rules.put simply they kill we kill there entire family end of day no innocent they will all have taken some of the pie. So we should act as terrorists do?yes israel don't mess why should we stick to rules. You realise there is such a thing as international law?" yes I do but do terrorist give a shite no. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I've been gone for a few hours. It would appear some still cannot read. SHE IS NOT BEING TRIED FOR BREAKING THE LAW. It can't be any clearer" No she is not being charged but she can be and that could take place in the U.K. Under jurisdiction It’s known as “Active personality” (i.e. the accused may be prosecuted in the country of the nationality of the offender); The charges are transferred to the U.K. The government don’t want that trial as it’s too hard to prove. So keep her out of the country is their best option. They save face and keep up the tough appearance. I’m not defending her as I don’t know any facts only what is published in the papers which are surprisingly untrustworthy when it comes to Muslim jingoism! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I've been gone for a few hours. It would appear some still cannot read. SHE IS NOT BEING TRIED FOR BREAKING THE LAW. It can't be any clearer No she is not being charged but she can be and that could take place in the U.K. Under jurisdiction It’s known as “Active personality” (i.e. the accused may be prosecuted in the country of the nationality of the offender); The charges are transferred to the U.K. The government don’t want that trial as it’s too hard to prove. So keep her out of the country is their best option. They save face and keep up the tough appearance. I’m not defending her as I don’t know any facts only what is published in the papers which are surprisingly untrustworthy when it comes to Muslim jingoism! " I'd give up mate. They are right and if you dont agree you are incapable of reading. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I've been gone for a few hours. It would appear some still cannot read. SHE IS NOT BEING TRIED FOR BREAKING THE LAW. It can't be any clearer No she is not being charged but she can be and that could take place in the U.K. Under jurisdiction It’s known as “Active personality” (i.e. the accused may be prosecuted in the country of the nationality of the offender); The charges are transferred to the U.K. The government don’t want that trial as it’s too hard to prove. So keep her out of the country is their best option. They save face and keep up the tough appearance. I’m not defending her as I don’t know any facts only what is published in the papers which are surprisingly untrustworthy when it comes to Muslim jingoism! " I haven't said they can't charge and try her. But the fact remains that this hearing was about her citizenship. And that's the only reason for it. I'm not even sure how her being tried under the terrorism act came into it. The police have said she broke no laws in the UK. I'll be honest, I'd be pissed if we brought her back to try her. Let the country where any crimes may have taken place deal with it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why should the tax payer have to fund a court case and potential prison costs ? She wanted out , she got her wish . We have paid her Legal Aid thus far. Because a civilised country gives people legal representation. that's are problem we are to civilized about time we got dirty they kill one of ares we kill ten of them they kill ten we wipe a town out when captured torture for answers then kill them and humiliate and destroy there bodies no justice no lawyers . I’m not being rude, but I don’t understand any of that. quite simple terrorist don't play by the rules about time we stopped playing by the rules.put simply they kill we kill there entire family end of day no innocent they will all have taken some of the pie. So we should act as terrorists do?yes israel don't mess why should we stick to rules. You realise there is such a thing as international law? yes I do but do terrorist give a shite no." So you’re of the view we should just wholesale murder our enemies because it’s what they’d do to us? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I've been gone for a few hours. It would appear some still cannot read. SHE IS NOT BEING TRIED FOR BREAKING THE LAW. It can't be any clearer No she is not being charged but she can be and that could take place in the U.K. Under jurisdiction It’s known as “Active personality” (i.e. the accused may be prosecuted in the country of the nationality of the offender); The charges are transferred to the U.K. The government don’t want that trial as it’s too hard to prove. So keep her out of the country is their best option. They save face and keep up the tough appearance. I’m not defending her as I don’t know any facts only what is published in the papers which are surprisingly untrustworthy when it comes to Muslim jingoism! I'd give up mate. They are right and if you dont agree you are incapable of reading. " Yes actually. Those saying that she is only seeking to secure her UK citizenship (and lost) are totally right. 100%. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I've been gone for a few hours. It would appear some still cannot read. SHE IS NOT BEING TRIED FOR BREAKING THE LAW. It can't be any clearer No she is not being charged but she can be and that could take place in the U.K. Under jurisdiction It’s known as “Active personality” (i.e. the accused may be prosecuted in the country of the nationality of the offender); The charges are transferred to the U.K. The government don’t want that trial as it’s too hard to prove. So keep her out of the country is their best option. They save face and keep up the tough appearance. I’m not defending her as I don’t know any facts only what is published in the papers which are surprisingly untrustworthy when it comes to Muslim jingoism! I'd give up mate. They are right and if you dont agree you are incapable of reading. " You've already wanted her tried for a crime she hasn't committed, questioned whether the home sec broke the law, made misogynistic comments, made claims about papers you couldn't back. All in one thread. I'd say you're well out of your depth on this one and it's you who said give up | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I've been gone for a few hours. It would appear some still cannot read. SHE IS NOT BEING TRIED FOR BREAKING THE LAW. It can't be any clearer No she is not being charged but she can be and that could take place in the U.K. Under jurisdiction It’s known as “Active personality” (i.e. the accused may be prosecuted in the country of the nationality of the offender); The charges are transferred to the U.K. The government don’t want that trial as it’s too hard to prove. So keep her out of the country is their best option. They save face and keep up the tough appearance. I’m not defending her as I don’t know any facts only what is published in the papers which are surprisingly untrustworthy when it comes to Muslim jingoism! I'd give up mate. They are right and if you dont agree you are incapable of reading. You've already wanted her tried for a crime she hasn't committed, questioned whether the home sec broke the law, made misogynistic comments, made claims about papers you couldn't back. All in one thread. I'd say you're well out of your depth on this one and it's you who said give up "Plural comments? Pray tell what others I made? What crimes did I want her committed for that she didmt make? You mean when I made the claim about newspapers stirring up hatred then posted a link showing 15 year old girls have being used for target practice? I'm assuming you are also happy with others making derogatory remarks but not me | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I've been gone for a few hours. It would appear some still cannot read. SHE IS NOT BEING TRIED FOR BREAKING THE LAW. It can't be any clearer No she is not being charged but she can be and that could take place in the U.K. Under jurisdiction It’s known as “Active personality” (i.e. the accused may be prosecuted in the country of the nationality of the offender); The charges are transferred to the U.K. The government don’t want that trial as it’s too hard to prove. So keep her out of the country is their best option. They save face and keep up the tough appearance. I’m not defending her as I don’t know any facts only what is published in the papers which are surprisingly untrustworthy when it comes to Muslim jingoism! I'd give up mate. They are right and if you dont agree you are incapable of reading. You've already wanted her tried for a crime she hasn't committed, questioned whether the home sec broke the law, made misogynistic comments, made claims about papers you couldn't back. All in one thread. I'd say you're well out of your depth on this one and it's you who said give up "Considering you have previous for making stuff up I never said.. thus should be good. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I've been gone for a few hours. It would appear some still cannot read. SHE IS NOT BEING TRIED FOR BREAKING THE LAW. It can't be any clearer No she is not being charged but she can be and that could take place in the U.K. Under jurisdiction It’s known as “Active personality” (i.e. the accused may be prosecuted in the country of the nationality of the offender); The charges are transferred to the U.K. The government don’t want that trial as it’s too hard to prove. So keep her out of the country is their best option. They save face and keep up the tough appearance. I’m not defending her as I don’t know any facts only what is published in the papers which are surprisingly untrustworthy when it comes to Muslim jingoism! I'd give up mate. They are right and if you dont agree you are incapable of reading. You've already wanted her tried for a crime she hasn't committed, questioned whether the home sec broke the law, made misogynistic comments, made claims about papers you couldn't back. All in one thread. I'd say you're well out of your depth on this one and it's you who said give up
Plural comments?
Pray tell what others I made?
What crimes did I want her committed for that she didmt make?
You mean when I made the claim about newspapers stirring up hatred then posted a link showing 15 year old girls have being used for target practice?
I'm assuming you are also happy with others making derogatory remarks but not me
"All of that happened, it's all there to read. No one else made the comments towards me so I couldn't care less what they said. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good,glad about that Why? So what do you think Lionel? SHould she be allowed back or not (I'm asking for your opinion). I'm glad she can't come back. However, derived and however she got there she now must bear that cross of her own decisions. She above She committed a crime..come back and face the consequences of your actions. They have let others back in. This is just palming the problem onto someone else." No crime committed | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I've been gone for a few hours. It would appear some still cannot read. SHE IS NOT BEING TRIED FOR BREAKING THE LAW. It can't be any clearer No she is not being charged but she can be and that could take place in the U.K. Under jurisdiction It’s known as “Active personality” (i.e. the accused may be prosecuted in the country of the nationality of the offender); The charges are transferred to the U.K. The government don’t want that trial as it’s too hard to prove. So keep her out of the country is their best option. They save face and keep up the tough appearance. I’m not defending her as I don’t know any facts only what is published in the papers which are surprisingly untrustworthy when it comes to Muslim jingoism! I'd give up mate. They are right and if you dont agree you are incapable of reading. You've already wanted her tried for a crime she hasn't committed, questioned whether the home sec broke the law, made misogynistic comments, made claims about papers you couldn't back. All in one thread. I'd say you're well out of your depth on this one and it's you who said give up
Plural comments?
Pray tell what others I made?
What crimes did I want her committed for that she didmt make?
You mean when I made the claim about newspapers stirring up hatred then posted a link showing 15 year old girls have being used for target practice?
I'm assuming you are also happy with others making derogatory remarks but not me
All of that happened, it's all there to read.
No one else made the comments towards me so I couldn't care less what they said."Course you couldnt You are only get offended by what I say | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law? I could say it twice or you could just read it again. She did not break the Law and was . . . I thought the whole point of bringing her back was to have her tried in court? Her solicitor said she accepts she has to face justice. No. She wanted her citizenship back so she could come back here to live. The case is ONLY about that. I thought there were issues about the legality of the home secretary talking her citizenship away?" No issues, home sec was found to have acted within the law | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done." Couldn't back this up | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" She broke the law. No. Actually she didn't break the Law. And she was told that if she returned to the UK she would not be tried for any offence. She lost her citizenship to 'protect UK Citizens'. As is the right of the Home to do. This case is ONLY about her citizenship of the UK. I thought joining a terrorist organisation was against the law? I could say it twice or you could just read it again. She did not break the Law and was . . . I thought the whole point of bringing her back was to have her tried in court? Her solicitor said she accepts she has to face justice. No. She wanted her citizenship back so she could come back here to live. The case is ONLY about that. I thought there were issues about the legality of the home secretary talking her citizenship away? No issues, home sec was found to have acted within the law" Was the home secretaries actions investigated? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do feel it's bit strange how the media can whip up hatred over 1 person. I'm not defending what she has done but she was still a young girl when she went over there and hasn't she lost her 3 kids,? Others have done much worse the brother of the Manchester bombing for example, but there is a particular level of ire directed at her. I remember a caller on 5 live saying her and her unborn child should be executed. Again..not defending what she has done. Said brother was arrested and prosecuted. Completely different. I meant the reaction in the media I'm guessing She had a few more column inches than him I'm guessing she has but maybe that's to do with the fact that she's trying to fight it so keeping it in the spotlight Maybe Maybe the media just like to focus on certain people. Maybe they do but you can't deny the fact that she keeps it relevant by trying to fight it. It's a controversial case. Unless I'm mistaken no one has had their citizen ship stripped before. Whatever you think of her,this Is her home. Arent her family still here? According to a very quick search, she isn't the first person to lose citizenship. Her family may well be here but she chose to leave and join a terrorist organisation. Say she was a kid all you like but 15 year olds know consequences. Fair enough I thought She was the 1st hence all the hoopla. I don't think 1 person has said there shouldmt be consequences have they? Isnt 15 under the age of being tried as an adult? Well the consequences are that she lost her citizenship. She isn't being tried full stop. When will you listen? Time of The month?" Misogynistic. Now tell me again that I've made it all up | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Was the home secretaries actions investigated? " _______________________________ The Judges in all courts found that: 1. The Home Secretary applied UK precisely and fairly. !!!! THIS BIT HERE LIONEL !!!! ________________________________ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I've been gone for a few hours. It would appear some still cannot read. SHE IS NOT BEING TRIED FOR BREAKING THE LAW. It can't be any clearer No she is not being charged but she can be and that could take place in the U.K. Under jurisdiction It’s known as “Active personality” (i.e. the accused may be prosecuted in the country of the nationality of the offender); The charges are transferred to the U.K. The government don’t want that trial as it’s too hard to prove. So keep her out of the country is their best option. They save face and keep up the tough appearance. I’m not defending her as I don’t know any facts only what is published in the papers which are surprisingly untrustworthy when it comes to Muslim jingoism! I haven't said they can't charge and try her. But the fact remains that this hearing was about her citizenship. And that's the only reason for it. I'm not even sure how her being tried under the terrorism act came into it. The police have said she broke no laws in the UK. I'll be honest, I'd be pissed if we brought her back to try her. Let the country where any crimes may have taken place deal with it." Yes we agree but her rescinded citizenship was for what reason? A crime in another country which is unproven . It’s not guilty unless proven, by our laws, so in the interests of the rights of U.K. citizens there must be proven accusations or the home secretary is given power beyond his intelligence. Again I’m not defending her I’m questioning the actions of the Home Secretary . If a country like Iran imprisoned a U.K. woman without evidence we would be screaming they should follow the law and have a fair trial before imposing any punishment. Boris will get her extra time but that’s another argument . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
