Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
yorkie1999

Also in the news

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, MattP said:

In what way do you think this could be abused?

This is something that we need to work out a solution to, we can't have a situation where people just wander across the planet to a lawless warzone to prop up murderous caliphates and then return home when they feel like it because we can't do a thing about it. I can't even imagine how the familes of those who have been murdered by groups like ISIS must feel when they see people like this just wanting to come here and "live in peace" now it's gone wrong.

What really worries me is she clearly still believes in the project from her comments, she's just lost hope in the in being successful.
 

We might be forced to do so by law, but we should be doing everything we can to avoid people like returning to live in our society. Nothing good can come from it, very bad things can though.

When the UK then decides to revoke the citizenship of anyone they simply do not like for their political views. Or when other nations then turn around and decide to do similar.  Very easy to say that would never happen, but there's a reason such international regs are in place.

 

I agree a solution has to be found, but for me what Jon and the Doc have said here is the best way - let her come back, put her in cuffs and work on getting her deprogrammed, and then get her working to do the same to others. That's much more useful to the UK in the long term than simply killing her or leaving her to her fate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, leicsmac said:

When the UK then decides to revoke the citizenship of anyone they simply do not like for their political views. Or when other nations then turn around and decide to do similar.  Very easy to say that would never happen, but there's a reason such international regs are in place.

 

I agree a solution has to be found, but for me what Jon and the Doc have said here is the best way - let her come back, put her in cuffs and work on getting her deprogrammed, and then get her working to do the same to others. That's much more useful to the UK in the long term than simply killing her or leaving her to her fate.

Do you not think the Syrian government are entitled to her first given she joined a regime attempting to overthrow it?

 

On the first point, she renounced her citizenship, not us. That's the key difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Do you not think the Syrian government are entitled to her first given she joined a regime attempting to overthrow it?

 

On the first point, she renounced her citizenship, not us. That's the key difference. 

 

Did she renounce her citizenship, though? I suspect what you're really saying is that, in your view, she's waived the moral right to British citizenship.

Here's the official site:  https://www.gov.uk/renounce-british-nationality

 

This suggests that:

- You have to apply to renounce your citizenship and your application has to be accepted (presumably not the case here);

- You have to be over 18 (only applicable for the last year);

- You must have acquired or be about to acquire another nationality (the UK doesn't recognise IS as a state - and she presumably hasn't applied to Assad for Syrian nationality, even if the UK recognises Assad)

 

Unless the UK's position has changed recently, isn't it also still the case that we don't recognise the legitimacy of the Assad regime?

In 2012, we recognised the Syrian Opposition as as legitimate representatives of Syria. Has this been reversed? As Foreign Secretary, Boris said that Assad should be allowed to stand in elections, no more, I think?

 

I'm not sure we should be either forcing a British citizen to remain abroad or handing her over to a regime there that we don't recognise.

If she comes back, I say interview and investigate her, prosecute her if appropriate, rehabilitate her if possible and certainly monitor her and all other returnees for as long as they remain potential risks.

 

From what I've read, she could face a much bigger penalty than prosecution or exclusion. Apparently, it's highly likely that her child will be taken into care if she returns - has happened with a lot of other returnees, it seems.

 

Another point, made on C4 News: can her admittedly disgusting comments in the recent interview be taken at face value? She's sat in a refugee camp surrounded by people many of whom will be other IS supporters. Even if she did regret her actions, would she be in a position to say so there? I'm not being naive. She very possibly does remain loyal to the beliefs of this vile organisation after 4 years with them - but that should be a matter for due process: proper interviewing by security forces on return, then investigation....and whatever measures are required, possibly both prosecution and rehabilitation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MattP said:

Do you not think the Syrian government are entitled to her first given she joined a regime attempting to overthrow it?

 

On the first point, she renounced her citizenship, not us. That's the key difference. 

Alf has pretty much answered this one for me.

 

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

No deal on 1st April doesn't mean no deal forever.

Forgive me for not having much confidence in a deal being agreed for a while after April 1st if they couldn't get it done before then.

 

12 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Yep, the old-style fundies tend not to have much difference no matter which Abrahamic entity they follow, though of course they'd deny it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Yep, the old-style fundies tend not to have much difference no matter which Abrahamic entity they follow, though of course they'd deny it.

My personal favourite is “Education not indoctrination”.

 

I'm hoping to borrow it for a protest against the existence of faith schools. 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/02/2019 at 07:55, Jon the Hat said:

What do we think about the ISIS girl who wants to come back home?

As far as I can see, she remains a British citizen, and hence has the right to enter the UK.  She should then be arrested and tried for any relevant crimes, taking into account that she was a child when she left.

Was it not made lawful to strip people of their citizenship, so with that in mind I'm not sure she has any rights whatsover to enter the UK if we decide to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

I'm not sure if those protesters are coming from the right place, lol, but a bit weird to have gender and sexuality classes at a primary school innit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

I'm not sure if those protesters are coming from the right place, lol, but a bit weird to have gender and sexuality classes at a primary school innit?

Not really, it's more about teaching tolerance. You can't teach someone to be a sexuality they aren't, although some religions do try...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Not really, it's more about teaching tolerance. You can't teach someone to be a sexuality they aren't, although some religions do try...

Fair enough.  I was just thinking that gender studies is hardly a classical subject, wasnt thinking about it from a brainwashing perspective or ought like that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Babylon said:

Was it not made lawful to strip people of their citizenship, so with that in mind I'm not sure she has any rights whatsover to enter the UK if we decide to do that.

Under international law countries may not strip subjects of their citizenship if it will render them stateless. So citizenship can be stripped as long as the subject remains a citizen of another state. This therefore only applies to people with dual citizenship. We had exactly this discussion in Australia recently regarding returning jihadis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Under international law countries may not strip subjects of their citizenship if it will render them stateless. So citizenship can be stripped as long as the subject remains a citizen of another state. This therefore only applies to people with dual citizenship. We had exactly this discussion in Australia recently regarding returning jihadis.

What if both states want to strip them of citizenship? They’d have to rush to get the paperwork in first. I’d hope we don’t have Rudkin in charge of the fax machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They just interviewed one of the kids protesting about the climate on the radio.

 

Presenter: what would you say to the government who are saying that you’re missing out on extremely important school time and potentially damaging your education?

Kid: Well, what would be the point of becoming highly educated if the government aren’t going to bother listening to highly educated people?

 

:cheers:

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

The kids have all gone on strike in protest at our changing climate, next they'll be refusing their parents to take them home in their 4x4's, or maybe not... 

Very true, double barrelled names galore...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Under international law countries may not strip subjects of their citizenship if it will render them stateless. So citizenship can be stripped as long as the subject remains a citizen of another state. This therefore only applies to people with dual citizenship. We had exactly this discussion in Australia recently regarding returning jihadis.

Apparently... In 2014, the power was extended from covering just dual nationals to those who “there were reasonable grounds to consider that they could be eligible for another nationality”.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Status Quo for now.

 

The UK has struck a deal with the US to preserve £12.8bn of trade after Brexit.

The mutual recognition agreement replicates the current deal between the EU and US on technical standards for exported goods.

US President Donald Trump said the "very good trading relationship" between the countries had been "strengthened further".

And International Trade Secretary Liam Fox said it would allow firms to "keep trading as freely as they do today".

 

On Monday, the UK signed a "continuity agreement" to preserve the terms of the EU's free trade deal with Switzerland, covering some 15,000 British exporters and £32bn in trade.

It has signed similar agreements with Chile, the Faroe Islands and the Eastern and Southern Africa bloc.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47251643

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, davieG said:

Status Quo for now.

 

The UK has struck a deal with the US to preserve £12.8bn of trade after Brexit.

The mutual recognition agreement replicates the current deal between the EU and US on technical standards for exported goods.

US President Donald Trump said the "very good trading relationship" between the countries had been "strengthened further".

And International Trade Secretary Liam Fox said it would allow firms to "keep trading as freely as they do today".

 

On Monday, the UK signed a "continuity agreement" to preserve the terms of the EU's free trade deal with Switzerland, covering some 15,000 British exporters and £32bn in trade.

It has signed similar agreements with Chile, the Faroe Islands and the Eastern and Southern Africa bloc.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47251643

We'll sign one with germany soon, then the knives will come out in europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...