Current Affairs Bethnal Green Three

[peteblue]

If there is a legal basis pete I’m absolutely fine with it , i’m Not fine with Javid doing it on a whim to garner support and attention whilst knowing it’ll very probably be reversed. By the time it’s been through the courts it’ll have cost us thousands and Javid can repeat the line we don’t talk about individual cases and he’ll have made his political captital .

two dual national Bangladeshi’s won their appeals against citizen stripping on the basis suspicion isn’t enough so we need evidence , if we’ve got evidence id happily see her in a court and also rather than the soft touch we’re perceived we’re actual considered the most draconian when it comes to citizenship stripping and that’s before this case which takes it to a whole new level .

I agree, of course it has to be legal......

 

[bol-uk]

Did you join a terrorist organisation or knife somebody?

My guess is no.

Carried knives for years, attacked coppers, many violent crimes theft drugs affray, endless stuff, far more than this girl I assure you.

 

[bol-uk]

That’s fine, and dare I say it even Christian, but it is really about risk. If the authorities believe she poses any kind of risk to the U.K. then she should be excluded......

This is the crux of it Pete, you cannot exclude her from her country, that is the law. Risk or no risk she is a Brit.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Dunno, we are talking about one of hundreds of people who left the country to join a terrorist organisation that we are at war with returning to our country.
I would consider this a big risk as if you let one in, you have no grounds to prevent others. They turned traitor on the UK and now want back in because it didn't go how they wanted.

What dangers are you thinking of that's worse than several hundred enemies of democracy and more specifically our country being allowed residence back on our shores?

 

[Harryflashman]

I agree, of course it has to be legal......

Im just not convinced this is pete , I think this “she’s Bangladeshi “ stuff is a smokescreen. She’s never applied for it so the basis of revoking her British citizenship seems tenuous at best .

 

[BlueToff]

Carried knives for years, attacked coppers, many violent crimes theft drugs affray, endless stuff, far more than this girl I assure you.

Then tbh mate, you should have been locked up, in my opinion. I'm sure you'd agree.

If then after you've served your time you'd changed your ways - which I'm sure you have anyway! - then yeh, second chance is fair play.

I suppose the crux comes with this case that she actively chose to join a terrorist group. I am fully behind her coming back here if she stands trial for what she's done. Whether there'd be the evidence to convict her, I suppose that's the issue. In my opinion, joining IS -- or any terrorist group - should have severe consequences. Maybe not life, but a long-term sentence. Just like knifing somebody should.

 

[peteblue]

Im just not convinced this is pete , I think this “she’s Bangladeshi “ stuff is a smokescreen. She’s never applied for it so the basis of revoking her British citizenship seems tenuous at best .

I think I read somewhere that citizenship is sometimes conferred automatically, I think it may have been Belgium, so no need to even apply.....this may be similar, but our Legal people will know.....

 

[peteblue]

This is the crux of it Pete, you cannot exclude her from her country, that is the law. Risk or no risk she is a Brit.

But the child isn’t....

 

[ToffeeTim]

Carried knives for years, attacked coppers, many violent crimes theft drugs affray, endless stuff, far more than this girl I assure you.

No offence, but if this is even kind of true then you should have spent some time inside.

 

[Old Blue 2]

It's normally applied to serious crimes or repeated offenders so maybe not as far reaching as this, but it's not a power we should want, especially given the ruling today in the Court of Appeal that effectively allows a political policy to pass through parliament without parliamentary decision or judicial review.

The UK government slowly eroding people's freedoms bit by bit.

That has always been the case. Invoked on rare occasions, but it is there. It's called an 'Order in Council', and was used by Thatcher to strip workers at GCHQ of the right to be members of a Trade Union in the 1980s. They were basically told 'Quit the union, or be sacked'. Some refused and were sacked. The argument was that by being a member of a Trade Union in GCHQ they were a threat to the security of the country! They were less of a threat to the country than Philby, Burgess, et al had been.

 

[Harryflashman]

I think I read somewhere that citizenship is sometimes conferred automatically, I think it may have been Belgium, so no need to even apply.....this may be similar, but our Legal people will know.....

You’d hope so but various countries operate different rules , some prevent dual citizenship for example . From reports Bangladesh apparently require you to apply for it & she hasn’t . I’m not an expert of Bangladeshi law but they’ve had various lawyers explaining that very point on the radio since the story broke . That’s my point or rather concern on political ambition trumping legal precedent or even just the law .

 

[Jebus_lives]

That has always been the case. Invoked on rare occasions, but it is there. It's called an 'Order in Council', and was used by Thatcher to strip workers at GCHQ of the right to be members of a Trade Union in the 1980s. They were basically told 'Quit the union, or be sacked'. Some refused and were sacked. The argument was that by being a member of a Trade Union in GCHQ they were a threat to the security of the country! They were less of a threat to the country than Philby, Burgess, et al had been.

An order in council is given on the advice of the privy council.

The clue is in the name.

 

[Old Blue 2]

An order in council is given on the advice of the privy council.

The clue is in the name.

It's the same thing though, JEBUS. It is a method of circumventing the political process, and that's what Thatcher did. I was on the Merseyside Committee of the union at the time, and we got the 'inside track' of all that was going on far more than the general public. It was an unmitigated attack on ordinary trade union members, with no foundation in fact whatsoever.

 

[bol-uk]

No offence, but if this is even kind of true then you should have spent some time inside.

I was sent to jail. It got out on appeal. Basically the probation service spent years with me, they knew my upbringing and that I was a victim of circumstance, hence my second chance belief.
I think she also should be given an opportunity to start again.

 

[bol-uk]

Then tbh mate, you should have been locked up, in my opinion. I'm sure you'd agree.

If then after you've served your time you'd changed your ways - which I'm sure you have anyway! - then yeh, second chance is fair play.

I suppose the crux comes with this case that she actively chose to join a terrorist group. I am fully behind her coming back here if she stands trial for what she's done. Whether there'd be the evidence to convict her, I suppose that's the issue. In my opinion, joining IS -- or any terrorist group - should have severe consequences. Maybe not life, but a long-term sentence. Just like knifing somebody should.

I was locked up as I just replied to another post. I got VERY lucky and freed on appeal.
The rest is history!