This is the issue, she’s Bangladesh’s problem, not the UK’s. If Bangladesh had revoked her citizenship first she would be able to come back but they didn’t.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Yeah
The relationship she has with her husband also confuses me. When he talks of her it sounds like he was actually in love with her, and from the stuff she recounts it sounds like they both liked each other. There's some controlling aspects but eh... idk
Horrible to think of the age difference though
I think Javid was spot on when he said intelligence has shown what she’s capable of, I suspect those that are privy to it know this is the right decision…Some people are just born bad they don’t need excuses to do what they do, but put the onus on others.
I don't think I agree with that but I think she has been fundamentally damaged at some point in her formative years and I don't trust anyone who'd be responsible in the UK for her rehabilitation to be competent enough to do the job properly.
Yeh and the fact she also describes sex as being grape (iirc?) In earlier episodes. He seems as awful as you would imagine and has a totally different view of what happened to her. Tbh I imagine he has ptsd from being in prison (not excusing it at all) but God knows what he might have made her do
I would imagine the public isn’t privy to everything she’s done. Heck even the Muslims on my timeline are glad she’s not allowed back here yet, saying she’s dangerous.
As we covered a couple of weeks ago, that's a consequence of the government's decision to change the appeal process to make it 'non-suspensive' i.e you don't get to keep your citizenship while the appeal is heard (as was previously the case). That means making legal aid available to non-citizens unless of course you're happy to have a Home Secretary hold the power to deprive someone of their citizenship without due process or possibly worse, that it is only available to someone with huge amounts of money.
She's guilty of such horrors but can't be prosecuted? bull. Political pandering.
That could be to protect her family from vigilante attacks
She also may not have done anything, that's the general problem with the lack of transparency and Minister discretion when it comes to these things
Its very clear in the judgement I posted earlier, there are 2 versions. One of which contains information provided to SIAC from the security services. The published version (albeit long and fairly complex) doesn't include that information.
I don't get this either, so he has proof but it somehow can't be done? I get the argument that they have no evidence etc but he is saying he has it so..?
It depends if it puts their undercover agents /security operations at risk, why would they sacrifice those agents for the sake of one ( apparent) terrorist?
It can take years to infiltrate these regimes.
Anyone that thinks the government should be able to remove a person's citizen and not give them the ability to appeal (including the legal aid to do so) needs to give their head a wobble.
It starts with people like Shamima Begum, an unlikeable easy target, and could end up being any one of us.
For those of us that have dual nationality it's setting a dangerous precedent. She's a British problem whether we like it or not. The British exceptionalism that thinks it should be Bangladesh's problem is insane.
---
---
It starts with people like Shamima Begum, an unlikeable easy target, and could end up being any one of us.
For those of us that have dual nationality it's setting a dangerous precedent. She's a British problem whether we like it or not. The British exceptionalism that thinks it should be Bangladesh's problem is insane.
---
It sounds an awful lot like the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction if you ask me...
---
She was 15 when they got married and could not consent. So she was grape.
100% this, not jn favour of her at all but a government should never be able to remove a citizen's citizenship . Especially with this government who are taking away our rights to so many things, protests etc
Only if you put yourself in that predicament in the first place,they need a reason to revoke your citizenship .
The government make the laws they can break the laws ,there’s nothing set in stone .
I bleeping despise her! She's smug and sanctimonious. That doesn't stop her being a British problem.
The US has taken all of its jihadis back. Do you think they're roaming the streets? No. We need to have processes in place to actually deal with this stuff rather than acting like it's not our problem and trying to foist it onto someone else. Bangladesh has it's own problems to deal with.
---
Who's to say what that reason is though? That 'reason' could be anything whoever is the Home Secretary of the week wants. They'll just say its top secret and be done with it.
I really don't understand why it is though or why so many people seem to be scared of her. What possible threat could she pose now?
- Status