Sick sick world what is wrong with people

[Robspur12]

So someone leaving a moderate country to support a far right ideology in a fight against the country she fled and your problem lies with javid?
As odious as farage is I've never yet seen openly incite violence, persecute gays, Jews, Christians, women , I could go here as I'm sure you are aware.

Citizenship is a right she forfeited. something offen overlooked in the scramble to protect the individuals rights is the rights of many and how many have her kind murdered? No doubt you will object to the use of 'her kind' .

The sarcasm at the end doesn't lend strength to your point. Begum may well be a criminal but she is our country's responsibility. She was born here and raised here. The law says she cannot be stateless, so which state should she be forfeited to? This is not about whether her actions were right or not.

You should not export our responsibility especially to a Country she has no personal connection with. I am sure that Javid knew his actions would be overturned in Court, he was just dog whistling. His actions were disgusting.

The other point is if you do not take responsibility for her she will remain a security risk to this Country.

 

[Robspur12]

Isn't it down to the Syrian government to protect their own borders from those they don't want there?

Can't see how it's our responsibility.

Syria became a lawless state. It cannot police it's own people much less other countries citizens.

 

[Robspur12]

I'll take your second point first, if they commit the crime here then they are breaking our rules and it's correct that they are punished here. Don't see that as an issue and in all honesty is a distraction.
The Syrians/isis/caliphate let her into their country knowing full well why she was entering their country/state, so they are as responsible as anyone.
She made her bed, she must lie in it.
This is about laying down a marker, your actions have consequences. If we bring her back and she is tried and sentenced to 5 years in a UK jail, what's happens on release? She is reintegrated into society, possibly as a hero to some, possibly appearing on TV or publishing a book of her story.
Will she have any regrets, will she be seen as a recruitment figure, hey look at me, I stuck finger upto the West, fudge up my life and countless others, but look how great it worked out for me.
We need to show actions like these.havr the direst consequences.

So she will be no different to any other criminal who is tried, sentenced serves there time and released? That's the marker for people committing crimes and the crime she has committed is against our country not Syria. That's the first point.

The second point is even as a criminal, it doesn'tmake her any less our responsibility. The point is unless she took another country's citizenship she is still a citizen of the UK.

 

[the dza]

Isn't it down to the Syrian government to protect their own borders from those they don't want there?

Can't see how it's our responsibility.

We deport immigrants who have crossed borders we have failed to protect. Even ones here legally who then over-stay (and become illegal) are subject to deportation. Their country of origin doesn't just get to say "well, it's your problem now, they aren't a citizen of ours anymore."

It's our responsibility because they have to deport her somewhere and she's a UK citizen. In international law, you can't make someone stateless. In her case, I think the home sec tried to argue that she has Bangladeshi citizenship too, but this turned out not to be the case iirc.

I'll take your second point first, if they commit the crime here then they are breaking our rules and it's correct that they are punished here. Don't see that as an issue and in all honesty is a distraction.
The Syrians/isis/caliphate let her into their country knowing full well why she was entering their country/state, so they are as responsible as anyone.
She made her bed, she must lie in it.
This is about laying down a marker, your actions have consequences. If we bring her back and she is tried and sentenced to 5 years in a UK jail, what's happens on release? She is reintegrated into society, possibly as a hero to some, possibly appearing on TV or publishing a book of her story.
Will she have any regrets, will she be seen as a recruitment figure, hey look at me, I stuck finger upto the West, fudge up my life and countless others, but look how great it worked out for me.
We need to show actions like these.havr the direst consequences.

People who commit crimes here serve sentences here -- they are then deported back to country of origin in most cases. In cases where this doesn't happen, are you ok with that? If someone comes here, maims a few people, does 15 years, is it ok for them to stay if their country says "nope, they ain't one of us anymore so it's your problem." Also, are you suggesting that the Syrian government allowed these people into their country to join a civil war and fight against them? I don't think that's what happened. As I said to scara, we also fail to protect our borders at times, we still deport people back to where they came from.

I take your point that she should be punished harshly, as far as I'm concerned, lock her up and throw away the key. But I don't think we can wash our hands of our responsibilities internationally. And there's going to be a lot more of these cases, not just for the UK to deal with but all around Europe.

 

[Robspur12]

We deport immigrants who have crossed borders we have failed to protect. Even ones here legally who then over-stay (and become illegal) are subject to deportation. Their country of origin doesn't just get to say "well, it's your problem now, they aren't a citizen of ours anymore."

It's our responsibility because they have to deport her somewhere and she's a UK citizen. In international law, you can't make someone stateless. In her case, I think the home sec tried to argue that she has Bangladeshi citizenship too, but this turned out not to be the case iirc.



People who commit crimes here serve sentences here -- they are then deported back to country of origin in most cases. In cases where this doesn't happen, are you ok with that? If someone comes here, maims a few people, does 15 years, is it ok for them to stay if their country says "nope, they ain't one of us anymore so it's your problem." Also, are you suggesting that the Syrian government allowed these people into their country to join a civil war and fight against them? I don't think that's what happened. As I said to scara, we also fail to protect our borders at times, we still deport people back to where they came from.

I take your point that she should be punished harshly, as far as I'm concerned, lock her up and throw away the key. But I don't think we can wash our hands of our responsibilities internationally. And there's going to be a lot more of these cases, not just for the UK to deal with but all around Europe.

Make no mistake this was a purely political decision by Javid. It's goes back to an earlier post, I often wonder when a politician will take a decision that is right rather than popular.

At least to his credit Corbyn was questioning the decision on the basis of international law rather than just getting behind it. I may not be Corbyn's biggest fan but he does seem to be a decent, well meaning guy.

 

[scaramanga]

Syria became a lawless state. It cannot police it's own people much less other countries citizens.

That doesn't sound much like our problem to me.

 

[Robspur12]

That doesn't sound much like our problem to me.

No it's not. The problem is international law. We will have fallen foul of it.

 

[Rorschach]

The David Wallace-Wells view? V interesting.

Ps @Rorschach

Don’t know if you read the book or heard it, but the guy has recently been on both the Rogan and Chris Hayes podcasts. Sobering stuff.

Cheers. I know him well and I have heard those podcasts. I have his book sitting on the desk in front of me though I haven't read it yet. I did read his article from 2017 and frankly it was like getting a slap in the face. I was on autopilot for years but that woke me up. That is part of a longer conversation which I am more than willing to have some other time

Here's a little reading on how we've managed to fudge ourselves up
https://eand.co/why-the-21st-century-is-when-humanity-matures-or-falls-apart-73fa8e480dfa

 

[scaramanga]

No it's not. The problem is international law. We will have fallen foul of it.

Well, we did it and the end result of breaking that international law appears to be nothing other than us getting our own way.

In which case I'd liken this particular law breaking to speeding or smoking weed.

 

[scaramanga]

We deport immigrants who have crossed borders we have failed to protect. Even ones here legally who then over-stay (and become illegal) are subject to deportation. Their country of origin doesn't just get to say "well, it's your problem now, they aren't a citizen of ours anymore."

It's our responsibility because they have to deport her somewhere and she's a UK citizen. In international law, you can't make someone stateless. In her case, I think the home sec tried to argue that she has Bangladeshi citizenship too, but this turned out not to be the case iirc.

Deporting people is part of controlling our borders.

Syria hasn't deported her, she was just trying to return to take advantage of a better health and social care system.

 

[elyid]

Just passing through, but interesting conversation guys.

Just to add that "international law" is a myth really. There's ultimately no means to enforce that any country abides by any rule -- it's really just a vague agreement.

In a way it's about trying to impose fair justice: however, considering she voluntarily joined a group responsible for mass murder it seems reasonable to refuse her citizenship imo.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Well, we did it and the end result of breaking that international law appears to be nothing other than us getting our own way.

In which case I'd liken this particular law breaking to speeding or smoking weed.

When we want others to follow international law and they don't is when it becomes an issue

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

Ok so I just want to say in case things came across a bit differently yesterday.

What that nutter did in New Zealand was wrong and disgusting, but I few terrorism as wrong and stupid whether it is people doing it in the name of Islam or people doing it for far right reasons. Seems like 2 sides of the same coin to me.

Was good how after the summer when we had a lot of attacks from people doing it in the name of Islam how most in this country said it was people with mental health issues and we needed to engage with Muslims so they could feel more comfortable talking to authorities.

Seems that whenever the is an attack from someone who comes from the other end it is time to start slagging off right wing politicians rather then show the same calmness.

I dont think this country is getting more right wing, I think UKIP being wiped out at the last election and Labour nearly winning prove this. What is happening is that sad pathetic losers often isolated freaks on the internet get crazy ideas and commit heinous acts. I guess the way the world is going we will always have this, just like we will always have psycho freaks committing attacks in the misguided name of religion.

We need more surveillance and deterrents so I would be for an increase in prison numbers so that we can put people that start to show troubling behaviour online(not custard tight wearing) in prisons.

Hope that unlike that summer when we had all the attacks in Europe the are no copycats. In some ways yes I am to the right, yet I also will be voting for Corbyn, want the railways re nationalise and would vote Green if they were not so wildy pro EU and also if Lucas would sell one of her 5 houses the absolute bell end that she is.

 

[scaramanga]

When we want others to follow international law and they don't is when it becomes an issue

Then we tell them the rules apply to them.

 

[Robspur12]

Just passing through, but interesting conversation guys.

Just to add that "international law" is a myth really. There's ultimately no means to enforce that any country abides by any rule -- it's really just a vague agreement.

In a way it's about trying to impose fair justice: however, considering she voluntarily joined a group responsible for mass murder it seems reasonable to refuse her citizenship imo.

I agree if she was a foreigner/citizen of another country trying to come and live in this country. Unfortunately she is a citizen of our country and does not have another country to go to. In those circumstances we must take responsibility for her. The biggest risk to this country is from the fanatics disappearing then reappearing to terrorise us. Even Trump gets that.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

Then we tell them the rules apply to them.

We are usually the only ones who follow the rules. Would be funny if we were showing some balls and not letting her back in. I thought the was something about her having nationality with another country?

Seems to me it is often the liberal luvvies who want us to follow laws that will hurt us as a country all the time.

 

[SteveAWOL]

Ok so I just want to say in case things came across a bit differently yesterday.

What that nutter did in New Zealand was wrong and disgusting, but I few terrorism as wrong and stupid whether it is people doing it in the name of Islam or people doing it for far right reasons. Seems like 2 sides of the same coin to me.

Was good how after the summer when we had a lot of attacks from people doing it in the name of Islam how most in this country said it was people with mental health issues and we needed to engage with Muslims so they could feel more comfortable talking to authorities.

Seems that whenever the is an attack from someone who comes from the other end it is time to start slagging off right wing politicians rather then show the same calmness.

I dont think this country is getting more right wing, I think UKIP being wiped out at the last election and Labour nearly winning prove this. What is happening is that sad pathetic losers often isolated freaks on the internet get crazy ideas and commit heinous acts. I guess the way the world is going we will always have this, just like we will always have psycho freaks committing attacks in the misguided name of religion.

We need more surveillance and deterrents so I would be for an increase in prison numbers so that we can put people that start to show troubling behaviour online(not custard tight wearing) in prisons.

Hope that unlike that summer when we had all the attacks in Europe the are no copycats. In some ways yes I am to the right, yet I also will be voting for Corbyn, want the railways re nationalise and would vote Green if they were not so wildy pro EU and also if Lucas would sell one of her 5 houses the absolute bell end that she is.

Already one copycat attack and what with all the swingeing cuts to mental health services and policing during this decade of austerity I fear it won’t be the last.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/03/17/stabbing-far-right-terror-incident-police-say-8918062/

 

[r-u-s-x]

Then we tell them the rules apply to them.

That's not how it works once we ignore the rules there are no rules.

 

[scaramanga]

That's not how it works once we ignore the rules there are no rules.

Actually the way it's always worked is that those with the biggest guns do what the fudge they like and everyone else does what they say. We might kid ourselves but that's the reality of it.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Actually the way it's always worked is that those with the biggest guns do what the fudge they like and everyone else does what they say. We might kid ourselves but that's the reality of it.

Yes of course and they were the biggest drivers of setting up international law as its the easiest way to control the other countries. Throw it away / ignore it and it becomes harder to do our job.