UK Politics : Groundhog May

[Werthead]

20 hours ago, SeanF said:

The case will turn on whether she is a dual national/entitled to dual nationality.  Hundreds of dual nationals have had their British citizenship revoked by Home Secretaries over the past 15 years.

Bangladesh has said she is not a Bangladeshi citizen and they would refuse to grant her citizenship, which puts the ball firmly back in Javid's court, since she is now effectively stateless.

 

Quote

 

it is a sad story, though she has yet to show any sort of remorse for her actions from what I’ve seen she still holds most of the views that led her to joining ISIS in the first place. I doubt she will live a comfortable life in the UK

 

She was a 15-year-old groomed by a terror organisation into signing up with them. Deradicalisation programmes have been quite effective in these cases, and she has a newborn baby (who is also a British citizen) who is in some considerable danger in their current situation. Coming back to the UK and being put on trial for the crimes she's committed whilst allowing the baby to be raised safely is the more moral solution to the problem.

As more than one outlet has observed today, it is interesting to see that, in the view of certain quarters, 15-year-olds are clearly too young to vote, have sex, get married or drink, but somehow are responsible and sensible enough to listen to strangers on the internet and join murderous death cults in full knowledge of what they're doing.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Occasionally even US Twitler has to be right on something.

And on this time he is on the money. The Western states kinda have to take their citizens back. He is absolutely right on this one. And what to do with them is going to be a real a problem. Some of them very likely have participated in some heinous crimes in Iraq and Syria, which is not gonna be easy to prove back home.

Having that said, with regards to prosecution, I think that local authorities should get the first bite. Which sounds like a very convenient solution, but that's not the point. The point is, I don't like the idea of western nationals travel into the middle east to commit crimes against humanity, and then pick up and leave, protected by nationality. I am in favour of their goverments stepping in to prevent the death penalty on underaged offenders, but that's different story.

[Spockydog]

6 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Look up his voting record instead of listening to whatever momentum is pulling out of a cavity of their choice. If they are to be believed I expect him to grow horns and vanish in a cloud of sulfur.

 

Imma hold my hands up and admit that perhaps, in regards to Chuka, I might have been drinking too much of the Momentum Koolaid. I've done what you suggested, and his voting record is sound.

Doesn't mean he's not an opportunistic git though.

 

[Werthead]

Anna Soubry putting in the knife to Theresa May by accusing her of having a deep-seated, personal hatred of immigration. We kind of knew that, but interesting to see a former colleague spelling it out.

[Vaith]

Agreed that the Begum situation is completely political. But Sajid Javid knows what he is doing. The decision is a completely political one and he wins by either 1) succeeding riding the wave of popular sentiment against Begum or 2) getting overruled by the courts and being a martyr, still riding popular sentiment to deprive Begum of her citizenship.

Honestly do not know what the argument against prosecuting Begum in the UK is aside from the perpetually vapid argument that is the "taxpayers' money" horseshit. Especially considering that she has a newborn child that has a right to be raised by his grandparents in the UK.

Shamina doesn't deserve sympathy, which is why I think she shouldn't be made a figure of injustice by being made stateless, but I guess that's the situation she's in. Personally though as someone around her age who grew up in Stepney it is ... something to see her have three kids by age nineteen, and two of them die young due to the conditions they were born in, and for her to regret none of it. But that should have no bearing on whether she is made stateless or not. Also in regards to grooming, her friend's mother died of cancer and recruited Begum and her friends at 15, so I don't think she should be condemned forever.

Honestly, it's one of those things where you wonder if it would have happened had the public not been riled up after her Sky interview...

[Vaith]

My favourite take on this Independent Group thing is a joke about JK Rowling being one of their backers -- "It turns out that Hogwarts had a secret 5th, centrist house all along."

Really though, the key to seeing if they amount to anything is to see whether or not they merge with the Lib Dems, as has been talked about in previous discourse. But I wouldn't be too quick to label them as a new SDP. I don't think there's going to be much appetite for the politics of these people, and, okay, sure, you have a bloc of twenty-something anti-Brexit MPs (so much for criticising your parties for indifference and yet only splitting from them five weeks before March 29th) and then probably nothing much until they lose their seats in 2022 (or sooner)... 

[mormont]

13 hours ago, Werthead said:

As more than one outlet has observed today, it is interesting to see that, in the view of certain quarters, 15-year-olds are clearly too young to vote, have sex, get married or drink, but somehow are responsible and sensible enough to listen to strangers on the internet and join murderous death cults in full knowledge of what they're doing.

But only if they're brown or black.

If a white girl of the same age had been tempted abroad to be married to a terrorist, and now wanted to come home, the tabloids would be featuring daily pictures of her distraught parents and talking about our moral duty and the fate of her innocent child. Since Begum is brown, they've opted to whip up a mob against her instead. 

12 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Occasionally even US Twitler has to be right on something.

And on this time he is on the money. The Western states kinda have to take their citizens back. He is absolutely right on this one.

Of course, he meant other Western states. Not the US.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47313657

9 hours ago, Werthead said:

Anna Soubry putting in the knife to Theresa May by accusing her of having a deep-seated, personal hatred of immigration. We kind of knew that, but interesting to see a former colleague spelling it out.

Yeah. It's a case of 'you just noticed this, Anna?' It's been plain for many years. 

[BigFatCoward]

13 hours ago, Werthead said:

 

As more than one outlet has observed today, it is interesting to see that, in the view of certain quarters, 15-year-olds are clearly too young to vote, have sex, get married or drink, but somehow are responsible and sensible enough to listen to strangers on the internet and join murderous death cults in full knowledge of what they're doing.

I don't disagree with majority of what you wrote, but she is 19. She made a stupid choice as a child but she continued making it at an age where she is/should be responsible for her actions. 

5 minutes ago, mormont said:

But only if they're brown or black.

If a white girl of the same age had been tempted abroad to be married to a terrorist, and now wanted to come home, the tabloids would be featuring daily pictures of her distraught parents and talking about our moral duty and the fate of her innocent child. Since Begum is brown, they've opted to whip up a mob against her instead. 

 

Entirely guesswork. And I strongly suggest that a white girl in entirely the same circumstances would get just as much stick, if for no other reason the right wing press are more islamophobic than racist. 

[Heartofice]

18 minutes ago, mormont said:

But only if they're brown or black.

If a white girl of the same age had been tempted abroad to be married to a terrorist, and now wanted to come home, the tabloids would be featuring daily pictures of her distraught parents and talking about our moral duty and the fate of her innocent child. Since Begum is brown, they've opted to whip up a mob against her instead. 

There are cases such as the two 'White Widows' who were constantly villified in the press and treated as less than human. Their race wasn't the reason they were hated, it was their actions. 

Again this girl may have been groomed and been a relative innocent when she joined ISIS, but she is an adult now, and seemingly from everything she says, doesn't appear to have changed her mind about her actions, other than realising it might have been more dangerous than she expected. The reaction to her seems to have come about because of a cry for sympathy for her situation, but it's very hard to feel sorry for her in any real way. Possibly some form of regret or remorse could change how she is viewed. Maajid Nawas has shown real remorse and turned himself around from being an islamic extremist. 

Of course she should be allowed to return, but then be tried under British law, and her child taken into care. 

[Spockydog]

Here's a story you won't see on BBC News today.

Over 200 Jewish members and supporters of the Labour party sign a letter urging that anyone seeking an end to bigotry and racism should back Labour and Corbyn

Quote

We are Jewish members and supporters of the Labour party concerned about the current rise of reactionary ideologies, including antisemitism, in Britain and elsewhere across Europe.

We note the worrying growth of populist rightwing parties, encouraging racism, Islamophobia and antisemitism. In Britain the far right is whipping up these prejudices, a threat that requires a resolute and energetic response. But instead we have seen a disproportionate focus on antisemitism on the left, which is abhorrent but relatively rare.

We believe that the Labour party under the progressive leadership of Jeremy Corbyn is a crucial ally in the fight against bigotry and reaction. His lifetime record of campaigning for equality and human rights, including consistent support for initiatives against antisemitism, is formidable. His involvement strengthens this struggle.

 

[mormont]

2 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

I don't disagree with majority of what you wrote, but she is 19. She made a stupid choice as a child but she continued making it at an age where she is/should be responsible for her actions. 

That's...  not how these things work. And by 'these things', I mean 'radicalisation'. If you are radicalised at the age of 15, as a minor, you don't wake up on your 18th birthday and say 'oh hey I'm an adult now, better reconsider all of my beliefs and life choices from scratch'. Particularly not if you have been radicalised into believing in a society that doesn't treat you as an independent thinking adult at age 18, or any age.

2 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

Entirely guesswork.

No. A reasonable claim based on the entire publication history of the newspapers involved. 

Are you claiming that there's no reason, other than 'guesswork', to say the coverage of this issue has been influenced by racism? Because if so, that's unbelievably naive. So is pretending that Islamophobia can be in any way separated from racism. 

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, mormont said:

But only if they're brown or black.

If a white girl of the same age had been tempted abroad to be married to a terrorist, and now wanted to come home, the tabloids would be featuring daily pictures of her distraught parents and talking about our moral duty and the fate of her innocent child. Since Begum is brown, they've opted to whip up a mob against her instead. 

 

I'm pretty sure a white girl who had married, say, a member of the IRA or Red Brigades or Khmer Rouge , at the height of their terror, and then justified their actions in newspaper interviews, would have got it in the neck from the tabloids.

15 minutes ago, mormont said:

 

Are you claiming that there's no reason, other than 'guesswork', to say the coverage of this issue has been influenced by racism? Because if so, that's unbelievably naive. So is pretending that Islamophobia can be in any way separated from racism. 

Why is IS so hated?  Largely because of its theatrical cruelty.  Burning people alive, or drowning them en masse, and then posting the footage on social media.  People like Shamina Begum who justify their behaviour are therefore hated.

[SeanF]

12 hours ago, Vaith said:

Agreed that the Begum situation is completely political. But Sajid Javid knows what he is doing. The decision is a completely political one and he wins by either 1) succeeding riding the wave of popular sentiment against Begum or 2) getting overruled by the courts and being a martyr, still riding popular sentiment to deprive Begum of her citizenship.

Honestly do not know what the argument against prosecuting Begum in the UK is aside from the perpetually vapid argument that is the "taxpayers' money" horseshit. Especially considering that she has a newborn child that has a right to be raised by his grandparents in the UK.

Shamina doesn't deserve sympathy, which is why I think she shouldn't be made a figure of injustice by being made stateless, but I guess that's the situation she's in. Personally though as someone around her age who grew up in Stepney it is ... something to see her have three kids by age nineteen, and two of them die young due to the conditions they were born in, and for her to regret none of it. But that should have no bearing on whether she is made stateless or not. Also in regards to grooming, her friend's mother died of cancer and recruited Begum and her friends at 15, so I don't think she should be condemned forever.

Honestly, it's one of those things where you wonder if it would have happened had the public not been riled up after her Sky interview...

It may well be purely political.  Or the Home Secretary may have information that suggests this woman would be a public danger on her return to this country.  Even if the latter, on balance, I don't think it would fair to dump this problem case on Bangladesh.

[BigFatCoward]

5 minutes ago, mormont said:

That's...  not how these things work. And by 'these things', I mean 'radicalisation'. If you are radicalised at the age of 15, as a minor, you don't wake up on your 18th birthday and say 'oh hey I'm an adult now, better reconsider all of my beliefs and life choices from scratch'. Particularly not if you have been radicalised into believing in a society that doesn't treat you as an independent thinking adult at age 18, or any age.

No. A reasonable claim based on the entire publication history of the newspapers involved. 

Are you claiming that there's no reason, other than 'guesswork', to say the coverage of this issue has been influenced by racism? Because if so, that's unbelievably naive. So is pretending that Islamophobia can be in any way separated from racism. 

I never suggested she would suddenly come to realise she wanted to take a different life path, i said she continued supporting abhorrent actions and beleifs long past the age where she was a naive child into adulthood, therefore there are consequences for this.  Do I beleive she should lose  her citizenship? No.  Do I beleive she should go to prison upon her return and then be monitored for the rest of her life?  Absolutely.

There is no reason other than guesswork, because there is no like situation to compare it to.  although as stated above, Samantha Lewthwaite got absolutely smashed in the press, because of her actions and her religion, she was white. 

I'm not naive, but you are coming across as paranoid (since you are throwing around baseless insults i assume they are allowed), sometimes the press just report the news because its 'news', there doesn't always have to be an agenda. 

I never said islamophobia was seperate from racism, now you are just making stuff up.

 

[mormont]

4 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

I never suggested she would suddenly come to realise she wanted to take a different life path, i said she continued supporting abhorrent actions and beleifs long past the age where she was a naive child into adulthood, therefore there are consequences for this. 

But the reasons that she continued to do those things past the age of 18 cannot be separated from what happened to her as a naive child of 15. It's just not realistic to pretend that they can. To make that claim, you need there to be some inciting event that could have sparked a change. No such event has happened - yet. Although a programme of de-radicalisation, back in the UK, could very well be that event. 

4 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Do I beleive she should lose  her citizenship? No.  Do I beleive she should go to prison upon her return and then be monitored for the rest of her life?  Absolutely.

She should absolutely face the consequences for any crimes we can prove she has committed, we can agree on that. 

4 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

I'm not naive, but you are coming across as paranoid (since you are throwing around baseless insults i assume they are allowed), sometimes the press just report the news because its 'news', there doesn't always have to be an agenda. 

It's one or the other. Either you're not naive, or the Express, the Mail etc. don't have a racist agenda. Both can't be true. And a look at any of the headlines on this shows you which it is.

Put aside what Begum has done, if you like. The lack of any sympathy or concern in the coverage of issues around her baby and her family is telling. The tabloids clearly don't give a hoot about them, their welfare or their feelings. 

4 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

I never said islamophobia was seperate from racism, now you are just making stuff up.

You are, or certainly appear to be, saying that there's Islamophobia in the coverage but not racism. That implies they are separable. 

[Heartofice]

31 minutes ago, mormont said:

Put aside what Begum has done, if you like. The lack of any sympathy or concern in the coverage of issues around her baby and her family is telling. The tabloids clearly don't give a hoot about them, their welfare or their feelings. 

There is almost always a general lack of sympathy in the press for terrorists. It plays well with the public. Also I think your sympathy for her is based on how you view her situation, depending on how much she is a victim of grooming, how much her decisions were her own or how much personal responsibility she has for her actions. 

As a 18 year old woman she has to now accept that some of the things she has done are  wrong. Unfortunately right now she has not repented for anything. Her only regret is having stayed in Syria as long as she did, but she stated she doesn't regret going, nor does she really seem to have an issue with beheadings or many of the atrocities of ISIS. She would garner a lot more sympathy had she said she was tricked into believing a bunch of lies, but now sees the error of her ways. Her entire approach to her return has been pretty naive and badly played, and the reaction the press is giving her is precisely due to that.

[john]

Continuing to hold abhorrent views isn’t a crime.  She joined a terrorist organisation when she was 15.  She left it, in Syria, not long after becoming an adult and is now a refugee.  Her culpability in British courts seems pretty low.

However, I do agree that she handled her press badly if she wanted to come home. She comes across as a dummy more than an evil person.

Regardless, the notion that terrorists can’t be British, or European, or American per today is ridiculous. Nations should support their citizens through good and ill.

[mormont]

56 minutes ago, john said:

Nations should support their citizens through good and ill.

I would add that they should take responsibility for their citizens, good or bad. This business of stripping citizenship isn't a punishment, isn't a judgement, it's a way of avoiding responsibility.

[Vaith]

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

It may well be purely political.  Or the Home Secretary may have information that suggests this woman would be a public danger on her return to this country.  Even if the latter, on balance, I don't think it would fair to dump this problem case on Bangladesh.

Dump her on a country where she's never lived, versus one where she was born and raised in? Not sure how this makes sense.

From what I can tell this would be no different than stripping a British national of their citizenship if they had an Irish grandparent, since I believe a similar right to citizenship applies -- but obviously things are going to be different once you are in the position of someone like Shamima Begum. Bangladesh has expressly said that she is not a citizen.

I'm skeptical to think that there's some security concern so great that Begum cannot return in the same vein as many other IS fighters have already done to the UK and strikes me as a pretty big coincidence if this decision independently happened after doing an interview with Sky. 

In my opinion, the Home Secretary does not have the benefit of the doubt with several individuals having been made stateless in the past 15 or so years and especially since May took office as Home Secretary in 2010.

Even if you believe Begum is a fully abhorrent criminal whose grooming at 15 cannot be excused the day she turns 18, it's somewhat irrelevant on whether this should mean she should be stripped of her citizenship, as, like I said before, a criminal should not be made the victim of injustice.

[Heartofice]

One of the reasons Javid is so keen to revoke her citizenship is because she would probably not get much sentencing from the courts and would be seen to have ‘gotten away with it’

This is all about publicity anyway.