comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangladeshi law says that a person born anywhere but with Bengali parentage can apply for citizenship before the age of 21.
She never did and was stripped of her British citizenship at 19. Because technically she could apply for Bengali.
It's a crock of chit really. She needs to be tried and sentenced as appropriate
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 14 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes they should shes brown and there brown they should take responsibility doesnt look very british too me
comment by Maula Jatt (U19849)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangladeshi law says that a person born anywhere but with Bengali parentage can apply for citizenship before the age of 21.
She never did and was stripped of her British citizenship at 19. Because technically she could apply for Bengali.
It's a crock of chit really. She needs to be tried and sentenced as appropriate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, the government are essentially saying that they are not responsible for their own citizens if they are eligible for citizenship elsewhere. It’s a nonsense.
comment by Maula Jatt (U19849)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangladeshi law says that a person born anywhere but with Bengali parentage can apply for citizenship before the age of 21.
She never did and was stripped of her British citizenship at 19. Because technically she could apply for Bengali.
It's a crock of chit really. She needs to be tried and sentenced as appropriate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've already answered this. She already had citizenship under Bangladeshi law.
Who are you all concerned for here?
The people of Bangladesh? Don't be. They will punish her properly if she ends up there.
Her? 15 or not, she knew very well what she was signing up for.
The people of Britain? Don't worry. Unless you do what she did, you aren't facing the same fate. If you are, then you deserve what you get.
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Maula Jatt (U19849)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangladeshi law says that a person born anywhere but with Bengali parentage can apply for citizenship before the age of 21.
She never did and was stripped of her British citizenship at 19. Because technically she could apply for Bengali.
It's a crock of chit really. She needs to be tried and sentenced as appropriate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, the government are essentially saying that they are not responsible for their own citizens if they are eligible for citizenship elsewhere. It’s a nonsense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not nonsense. If you can get rid, get rid. Why wouldn't you?
comment by Rdd II (U22942)
posted 34 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Maula Jatt (U19849)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangladeshi law says that a person born anywhere but with Bengali parentage can apply for citizenship before the age of 21.
She never did and was stripped of her British citizenship at 19. Because technically she could apply for Bengali.
It's a crock of chit really. She needs to be tried and sentenced as appropriate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, the government are essentially saying that they are not responsible for their own citizens if they are eligible for citizenship elsewhere. It’s a nonsense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not nonsense. If you can get rid, get rid. Why wouldn't you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
International relations, for one.
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 2 minutes ago
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s a reason this and Rwanda is popular with so many.
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 4 minutes ago
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not racist to want rid of terrorists.
If a person who hates Britain leaves to join our enemy, you don't let them back if you can avoid it.
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
Surely there are Muslim countries lining up to offer her citizenship? It was a holy war, right?
comment by Rdd II (U22942)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 4 minutes ago
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not racist to want rid of terrorists.
If a person who hates Britain leaves to join our enemy, you don't let them back if you can avoid it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did she get found guilty of being a terrorist?
comment by Rdd II (U22942)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 4 minutes ago
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not racist to want rid of terrorists.
If a person who hates Britain leaves to join our enemy, you don't let them back if you can avoid it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course you do, you get them back and then you prosecute them for it.
comment by Lorent Tolaj (U1734)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did she get found guilty of being a terrorist?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
roleplay
comment by Lorent Tolaj (U1734)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Rdd II (U22942)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 4 minutes ago
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not racist to want rid of terrorists.
If a person who hates Britain leaves to join our enemy, you don't let them back if you can avoid it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did she get found guilty of being a terrorist?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Can she play up front for UTD?
It's just a pity she didn't meet the same fate as her mates.All of this then would be rendered redundant.
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 38 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because she was raised in the UK and is our problem. Also, as of yet she hasn't been tried or found guilty of a single crime. Are you really comfortable with the government being able to strip you of your citizenship, rights, and home without due process and giving you a fair trial (or any trial)?
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why not? Follow the simple rules about not joining a terrorist organisation and you won't have a problem.
comment by Cinciwolf---A Scottish world champion and Messi the goat. (U11551)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why not? Follow the simple rules about not joining a terrorist organisation and you won't have a problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it’s a position the whole internationally community disagree with for a start. If you’re advocating a policy that both Trump and Biden castigated, surely that’s a slight indicator of why it might be more than a little daft.
comment by Cinciwolf---A Scottish world champion and Messi the goat. (U11551)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why not? Follow the simple rules about not joining a terrorist organisation and you won't have a problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s been explained to you why not. Can only lead a horse to water.
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf---A Scottish world champion and Messi the goat. (U11551)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why not? Follow the simple rules about not joining a terrorist organisation and you won't have a problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s been explained to you why not. Can only lead a horse to water.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But yet she has been blocked from coming back using laws in place.
Notwithstanding the potential implications for Ms Begum, this presents an interesting legal argument as to whether Britain's actions are legal in stripping her citizenship.
Having briefly looked at the facts this is my understanding, but is in no way a legal definition. Ms Begum was permitted by Bangladeshi law to apply for Bangladeshi citizenship at any time up to her 21st birthday by virtue of one of her parents being born in Bangladesh at which point she would had gained Bangladeshi citizenship, but lost her British citizenship.
Britain's position appears to be that as they stripped Ms Begum of British citizenship prior to her 21st birthday she became a Bangladeshi citizen by default, thereby not becoming stateless, this position is rejected by Bangladesh and my guess is they would not permit her entry to the country, so is she actually stateless? dunno is my answer
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Citizenship?
Is that a basic human right? Dunno, I only know bits of the UN charter.
Wiki says "Citizenship is an allegiance of person to a state. Each state determines the conditions under which it will recognize persons as its citizens, and the conditions under which that status will be withdrawn."
Just wiki, right?
However, feels like citizenship, like most things in life, is both a privilege and a responsibility?
Sign in if you want to comment
Shamima Begum
Page 15 of 32
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangladeshi law says that a person born anywhere but with Bengali parentage can apply for citizenship before the age of 21.
She never did and was stripped of her British citizenship at 19. Because technically she could apply for Bengali.
It's a crock of chit really. She needs to be tried and sentenced as appropriate
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 14 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes they should shes brown and there brown they should take responsibility doesnt look very british too me
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Maula Jatt (U19849)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangladeshi law says that a person born anywhere but with Bengali parentage can apply for citizenship before the age of 21.
She never did and was stripped of her British citizenship at 19. Because technically she could apply for Bengali.
It's a crock of chit really. She needs to be tried and sentenced as appropriate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, the government are essentially saying that they are not responsible for their own citizens if they are eligible for citizenship elsewhere. It’s a nonsense.
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Maula Jatt (U19849)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangladeshi law says that a person born anywhere but with Bengali parentage can apply for citizenship before the age of 21.
She never did and was stripped of her British citizenship at 19. Because technically she could apply for Bengali.
It's a crock of chit really. She needs to be tried and sentenced as appropriate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've already answered this. She already had citizenship under Bangladeshi law.
posted on 22/2/23
Who are you all concerned for here?
The people of Bangladesh? Don't be. They will punish her properly if she ends up there.
Her? 15 or not, she knew very well what she was signing up for.
The people of Britain? Don't worry. Unless you do what she did, you aren't facing the same fate. If you are, then you deserve what you get.
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Maula Jatt (U19849)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangladeshi law says that a person born anywhere but with Bengali parentage can apply for citizenship before the age of 21.
She never did and was stripped of her British citizenship at 19. Because technically she could apply for Bengali.
It's a crock of chit really. She needs to be tried and sentenced as appropriate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, the government are essentially saying that they are not responsible for their own citizens if they are eligible for citizenship elsewhere. It’s a nonsense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not nonsense. If you can get rid, get rid. Why wouldn't you?
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Rdd II (U22942)
posted 34 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Maula Jatt (U19849)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Yeah Bangladesh shouldn’t bear any responsibility for Begum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangladeshi law says that a person born anywhere but with Bengali parentage can apply for citizenship before the age of 21.
She never did and was stripped of her British citizenship at 19. Because technically she could apply for Bengali.
It's a crock of chit really. She needs to be tried and sentenced as appropriate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, the government are essentially saying that they are not responsible for their own citizens if they are eligible for citizenship elsewhere. It’s a nonsense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not nonsense. If you can get rid, get rid. Why wouldn't you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
International relations, for one.
posted on 22/2/23
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 2 minutes ago
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s a reason this and Rwanda is popular with so many.
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 4 minutes ago
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not racist to want rid of terrorists.
If a person who hates Britain leaves to join our enemy, you don't let them back if you can avoid it.
posted on 22/2/23
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
posted on 22/2/23
Surely there are Muslim countries lining up to offer her citizenship? It was a holy war, right?
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Rdd II (U22942)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 4 minutes ago
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not racist to want rid of terrorists.
If a person who hates Britain leaves to join our enemy, you don't let them back if you can avoid it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did she get found guilty of being a terrorist?
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Rdd II (U22942)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 4 minutes ago
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not racist to want rid of terrorists.
If a person who hates Britain leaves to join our enemy, you don't let them back if you can avoid it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course you do, you get them back and then you prosecute them for it.
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Lorent Tolaj (U1734)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did she get found guilty of being a terrorist?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
roleplay
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Lorent Tolaj (U1734)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Rdd II (U22942)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 4 minutes ago
She should be tried by England, noone else.
She's a UK citizen or are people here really saying that anyone who doesn't have British parents should be deported out of the country to their parents place of home if they commit terrorism etc?
Bit racist really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not racist to want rid of terrorists.
If a person who hates Britain leaves to join our enemy, you don't let them back if you can avoid it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did she get found guilty of being a terrorist?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Can she play up front for UTD?
posted on 22/2/23
It's just a pity she didn't meet the same fate as her mates.All of this then would be rendered redundant.
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 38 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because she was raised in the UK and is our problem. Also, as of yet she hasn't been tried or found guilty of a single crime. Are you really comfortable with the government being able to strip you of your citizenship, rights, and home without due process and giving you a fair trial (or any trial)?
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why not? Follow the simple rules about not joining a terrorist organisation and you won't have a problem.
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Cinciwolf---A Scottish world champion and Messi the goat. (U11551)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why not? Follow the simple rules about not joining a terrorist organisation and you won't have a problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it’s a position the whole internationally community disagree with for a start. If you’re advocating a policy that both Trump and Biden castigated, surely that’s a slight indicator of why it might be more than a little daft.
posted on 22/2/23
comment by Cinciwolf---A Scottish world champion and Messi the goat. (U11551)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why not? Follow the simple rules about not joining a terrorist organisation and you won't have a problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s been explained to you why not. Can only lead a horse to water.
posted on 23/2/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf---A Scottish world champion and Messi the goat. (U11551)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why not? Follow the simple rules about not joining a terrorist organisation and you won't have a problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s been explained to you why not. Can only lead a horse to water.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But yet she has been blocked from coming back using laws in place.
posted on 23/2/23
Notwithstanding the potential implications for Ms Begum, this presents an interesting legal argument as to whether Britain's actions are legal in stripping her citizenship.
Having briefly looked at the facts this is my understanding, but is in no way a legal definition. Ms Begum was permitted by Bangladeshi law to apply for Bangladeshi citizenship at any time up to her 21st birthday by virtue of one of her parents being born in Bangladesh at which point she would had gained Bangladeshi citizenship, but lost her British citizenship.
Britain's position appears to be that as they stripped Ms Begum of British citizenship prior to her 21st birthday she became a Bangladeshi citizen by default, thereby not becoming stateless, this position is rejected by Bangladesh and my guess is they would not permit her entry to the country, so is she actually stateless? dunno is my answer
posted on 23/2/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 42 minutes ago
I might be wrong but are folk not coming at this from the wrong place? Did the UK not warn UK citizens that they risked having their citizenship revoked by doing what Begum did?
So age aside, bangladesh sideshow aside, whether she killed or conspired to kill folk or not aside...after having ignored the warnings and suffering the consequences why should UK be absorbing the costs of prosecution and likely lifetime incarceration?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should that matter? If the government have warned that they are going to strip someone of their basic human rights doesn’t mean they should still do it because the person ignored them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Citizenship?
Is that a basic human right? Dunno, I only know bits of the UN charter.
Wiki says "Citizenship is an allegiance of person to a state. Each state determines the conditions under which it will recognize persons as its citizens, and the conditions under which that status will be withdrawn."
Just wiki, right?
However, feels like citizenship, like most things in life, is both a privilege and a responsibility?
Page 15 of 32
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20