IS Bride can return to U.K. to challenge removal of british citizenship

Aside from running off to join a prescribed court, none of them can realistically be proved though..

No. She chose to join a jihadist group and to fight against Britain, she doesn't get to come back here when she wants.

Let the Kurds try her for war crimes IMHO.

It's not coming back here 'when she wants'.

It's the courts deciding that if the state is going to deprive someone of their liberties or citizenship, that said individual should be given the right to a fair trial. It's fundamental to the magna carta.

One of the great things about Britain is our belief in the rule of law, that the executive's decisions must be lawful and that everyone has the right to a fair trial. It's alarming how people that claim to love Britain, oppose those principles.

No. She chose to join a jihadist group and to fight against Britain, she doesn't get to come back here when she wants.

Let the Kurds try her for war crimes IMHO.

When that law protects criminals instead of victims, which ours does most of the time then there is something seriously wrong. I should add, it's also what the left tell themselves to try to justify all of the crime that goes on in this country. "It's fine, they'll face the full force of the law!" The full force being a cookie and hug, or maybe even, the comfy chair!

Will Brexit make the poor poorer by the way? Seems to have all gone quiet on that front. Perfectly happy giving your opinion and calling me a bigot until your caught out then you go quiet, funny that.

When that law protects criminals instead of victims, which ours does most of the time then there is something seriously wrong. I should add, it's also what the left tell themselves to try to justify all of the crime that goes on in this country. "It's fine, they'll face the full force of the law!" The full force being a cookie and hug, or maybe even, the comfy chair!

Will Brexit make the poor poorer by the way? Seems to have all gone quiet on that front. Perfectly happy giving your opinion and calling me a bigot until your caught out then you go quiet, funny that.

It's not coming back here 'when she wants'.

It's the courts deciding that if the state is going to deprive someone of their liberties or citizenship, that said individual should be given the right to a fair trial. It's fundamental to the magna carta.

One of the great things about Britain is our belief in the rule of law, that the executive's decisions must be lawful and that everyone has the right to a fair trial. It's alarming how people that claim to love Britain, oppose those principles.

It's pretty obvious that she joined IS and supported jihadism. Why should someone who fights against Britain hold British citizenship?

"Ms Begum took legal action against the Home Office, claiming the government's decision was unlawful because it rendered her stateless and exposed her to a real risk of death or inhuman and degrading treatment"

This is my favorite bit. Didn't care too much about death and inhuman treatment of innocent people by ISIS.

Strange that we should afford her human rights when she was part of the ISIS morality police who, I assume, didn’t afford anyone human rights.


And we’re the racist country.

What I cannot understand is why we don't have sufficiently robust legal systems to try and convict her for treason? That is what she is guilty of.

Even as short a time ago as the end of the second world war, a man, William Joyce, was convicted of treason and executed. The death penalty for treason long outlived that for murder, I believe.

That execution is now controversial, and as I understand it, the treason laws are no longer considered fit for purpose.

Well how about Boris updates them then?

In this country, everyone has the right to a fair trial, no matter what they have done or are alleged to have done. It's an inalianble right.

I think that's a great thing.

The law doesn't "protect criminals instead of victims" at all. Quite ridiculous to claim it does.
What it does do is protect the rights of individuals, whether they are criminals, victims, or just under suspicion.
I understand that some people think that anyone who strays from their own definition of what is allowable should lose all rights to fair trial, protection, humane treatment, etc, but thankfully the law disagrees. However, we know that there are democratically elected leaders who would happily remove the courts' ability to hold government to account - our own included.

I don't deny the right to a fair trial. I question some of the sentences that are given out as a result of these trials. Some of the punishments given out for crime committed in this country are just bizarre, absolutely bizarre. This woman, and many many others to which the floodgates have just opened to went and voluntarily joined an organisation which purpose is to see the destruction of the west. These judges are absolutely bonkers for overturning the decision, they've completely lost the plot.

Notice you're still avoiding the question. I'm just going to assume that you're admitting through your silence that Brexit will indeed make the poor poorer. Glad we've sorted that out.


Consistently, time after time ridiculous sentences are given for crimes that deserve an awful lot more. The criminal justice system in this country due to various reasons including lack of funding does appear to benefit the criminals if you are a law abiding citizen. That is why we see constant reoffending by the same old people, because they know they'll get a piss poor sentence handed out.

In this specific case, apart from money grabbing lawyers, I cannot see literally anyone saying that she should be allowed back in this country. I am absolutely certain that you are not saying that we should allow a former member of islamic state to set up shop here, are you?

What decision do you think the judges have overturned? They haven't granted her citizenship, they have merely stated that for the purposes of a fair trial, she needs to be able to enter the UK.

The courts role is to uphold the law. What legal error do you think they've made?

Do you support capital punishment?
Or the introduction of new laws along the lines of the repealed Treachery Act?

Lord Haw Haw was Irish, born in the USA and dishonestly obtained a British passport through fraudulent conduct.
A vicious habitual criminal and noisy racist scumbag that even Mosley didn't mourn, it is arguable whether the treason allegation was made in good faith and whether Haw Haw should have been tried for treason by another nation.

They could quite easily establish a video link.


To quote Sajid Javid, "the judgements and precedents set in this case could bind the hands of the government in managing past and future cases." Here we go, they'll all be wanting back in now after turning their backs on the UK.

He is also quite correct in what he's said regarding her staying here. Once she's back in, she'll be extremely difficult to get rid of.