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

Watch
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#81
Report 2 weeks ago
#81
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
Right. There is at least one city in Syria with internet access and power. It is far cheaper for us to hold a video link hearing from Damascus than to take her to the UK.

If there are concerns about the Syrian gov't ee can hold the meeting in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv or another Israeli city.
The Home Office and our security intelligence concluded she wouldn't be able to receive a fair and effective appeal from outside the UK. I'm sure they considered all options, including video link and telephone, and yet they didn't think it was possible. Unless you have some secret intelligence that our security services, govenment and courts weren't party to, then there are no legitimate grounds to complain about the assessment.
Last edited by DSilva; 2 weeks ago
0
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#82
Report 2 weeks ago
#82
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
I've not heard of Leese. Was he involved in any of Mosley's parties?
Lucky you.
Leese's speeches & writings are the worst examples of race hate and conspiracy theorist filth written in the english language that I've encountered so far.
In 1924, he was the first fascist politician to be elected in England.

In his early days as a fascist during his first marriage, Mosley did unsuccessfully seek to merge his organisation with Leese's in an attempt to bring almost all fascism in England under his own control.
But the two mutually detested each other; Leese believed that Mosley wasn't a sufficiently committed racist and Mosley knew that Leese was a foul criminal who wouldn't take the trouble to attempt to camouflage it or adopt a little bit of subtlety in terms of tactics.
Mosley realised that Leese's deranged jew hate and conspiracy theorist rantings against the upper echelons of society were uncontrollable, guaranteed to result in a 'guttersnipe jailbird' image that would only ruin his own credibility amongst supporters and financial backers.
The type of scumbag that no amount of money or high society cover-ups could keep away from a guilty verdict and a prison cell.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#83
Report 2 weeks ago
#83
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
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.
A court handing down a sentence that you disagree with is not "protecting criminals instead of victims. Generally speaking, there are too many custodial sentences handed out for offences that would be better dealt with another way - or should not be offences at all in some cases.

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 does this even mean?
If you are asking if I think that citizens of this country have certain rights (including not to be made stateless) which should be upheld by the courts, even if I personally do not agree with or approve of a person's actions, then yes. Absolutely!

The concept of removing legal protection and due process from those who don't conform to certain arbitrary, politically motivated criteria is an essential element in authoritarian dictatorship.
Or to quote Dostoyevsky “A society should be judged not by how it treats its outstanding citizens but by how it treats its criminals.”
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#84
Report 2 weeks ago
#84
(Original post by Napp)
Inference and assumption still have a role to play in the justice system. Just as if you find someone standing over a body its fair to assume they're involved.
Really? What if they had just chased off the attacker and was waiting for the authorities to arrive? What if they were a doctor who was passing? "You were in the vicinity around the time, therefore you must be guilty so some degree" is not how the legal system works.

It is fair to assume she engaged in heinous activity as a paid up member of a terror group.
Perhaps, perhaps not. However, that has no bearing on her right to due process under the legal system. Arbitrarily rendering her stateless because it was good PR for the Tories has been ruled unlawful. People need to get over it.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#85
Report 2 weeks ago
#85
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
Right. There is at least one city in Syria with internet access and power. It is far cheaper for us to hold a video link hearing from Damascus than to take her to the UK.

If there are concerns about the Syrian gov't ee can hold the meeting in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv or another Israeli city.
Hold on.
You think that it is unreasonable for a UK citizen to have a trial in the UK, and in order to resolve the issue, you would make another country, with which the person has no connection, have the trial under their jurisdiction? Are you high?
1
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#86
Report 2 weeks ago
#86
The truth is that if she was an attractive and sympathetic white girl who had got involved with some Third World revolutionary group but wanted to come home, all the frothing right-whingers would be screaming that it is an abuse of her rights to try her abroad and would be calling for her repatriation.
0
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#87
Report 2 weeks ago
#87
(Original post by QE2)
A court handing down a sentence that you disagree with is not "protecting criminals instead of victims. Generally speaking, there are too many custodial sentences handed out for offences that would be better dealt with another way - or should not be offences at all in some cases.


What does this even mean?
If you are asking if I think that citizens of this country have certain rights (including not to be made stateless) which should be upheld by the courts, even if I personally do not agree with or approve of a person's actions, then yes. Absolutely!

The concept of removing legal protection and due process from those who don't conform to certain arbitrary, politically motivated criteria is an essential element in authoritarian dictatorship.
Or to quote Dostoyevsky “A society should be judged not by how it treats its outstanding citizens but by how it treats its criminals.”
Too many custodial sentences handed out!? You’ve got to be joking me. Not enough. And let’s not get on to how judges even give out the sentences.

There was recently in York, a man charged for a count of rape. He raped a woman infront if her children, despite her children asking him to stop. He received a 15 year sentence. 15 years! And you accuse the law courts of needing to deal with things another way!? You’re completely deluded and the reason why crime and anti social behaviour is rife in this country.
(Original post by QE2)
The truth is that if she was an attractive and sympathetic white girl who had got involved with some Third World revolutionary group but wanted to come home, all the frothing right-whingers would be screaming that it is an abuse of her rights to try her abroad and would be calling for her repatriation.
This. This right here, this rhetoric is why no one takes what you say seriously. You just come off as a left wing loon.
0
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#88
Report 2 weeks ago
#88
(Original post by QE2)
Really? What if they had just chased off the attacker and was waiting for the authorities to arrive? What if they were a doctor who was passing? "You were in the vicinity around the time, therefore you must be guilty so some degree" is not how the legal system works.

Finding random examples that may, or may not, fit the premise doesnt tend to work in such cases... especially the example you just gave.
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#89
Report 2 weeks ago
#89
Just create a new law
3
reply
LiberOfLondon
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#90
Report 2 weeks ago
#90
(Original post by DSilva)
The Home Office and our security intelligence concluded she wouldn't be able to receive a fair and effective appeal from outside the UK.
Why so?
(Original post by QE2)
Hold on.
You think that it is unreasonable for a UK citizen to have a trial in the UK, and in order to resolve the issue, you would make another country, with which the person has no connection, have the trial under their jurisdiction? Are you high?
What I'm saying is that we can hold the citizenship tribunal from a UK embassy or consulate in the region rather than having to pay a lot of money to transfer her back here
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#91
Report 2 weeks ago
#91
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
Why so?

What I'm saying is that we can hold the citizenship tribunal from a UK embassy or consulate in the region rather than having to pay a lot of money to transfer her back here
We'd have to ask the Home Office, who have conducted their own assessment and decided she could not have a fair and effective appeal from her current location.

On your second point, there is currently no functional British embassy/consulate in Syria. In order to use our embassy in any other country's we would have to get that country's permission to take her into that country in the first place.
1
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#92
Report 2 weeks ago
#92
(Original post by paul514)
Just create a new law
Thoroughly in support of this.
1
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#93
Report 2 weeks ago
#93
(Original post by DSilva)
We'd have to ask the Home Office, who have conducted their own assessment and decided she could not have a fair and effective appeal from her current location.

On your second point, there is currently no functional British embassy/consulate in Syria. In order to use our embassy in any other country's we would have to get that country's permission to take her into that country in the first place.
Ah im sure Ankara should be fine with it. With their lengthy history of aiding and abetting terrorists in Syria, including this one.
1
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#94
Report 2 weeks ago
#94
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
Too many custodial sentences handed out!? You’ve got to be joking me. Not enough. And let’s not get on to how judges even give out the sentences.
The law has only just changed so that people aren't imprisoned for not having a TV licence ffs!
Presumably you think they should still be.

There was recently in York, a man charged for a count of rape. He raped a woman infront if her children, despite her children asking him to stop. He received a 15 year sentence. 15 years! And you accuse the law courts of needing to deal with things another way!?
Sentencing someone to 16 years in prison for rape is not "protecting criminals instead of victims", by any stretch of the imagination. Really have no idea why you think it is.
You do realise that sentencing guidelines for a single case of rape by a single offender starts at 5 years?

You’re completely deluded and the reason why crime and anti social behaviour is rife in this country.
I'm the reason why crime and anti social behaviour is rife in this country? I think you credit me with too much influence.

This. This right here, this rhetoric is why no one takes what you say seriously. You just come off as a left wing loon.
Being voted 2nd Best Debater on TSR seems to contradict you.

And if my argument is so clearly flawed and irrational, you will be able to explain why. Off you go...
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#95
Report 2 weeks ago
#95
(Original post by Napp)
Finding random examples that may, or may not, fit the premise doesnt tend to work in such cases... especially the example you just gave.
Er, what?
You made a claim. I showed why your claim was flawed. That is all.
Providing examples that demonstrate why a generalisation doesn't hold is exactly how it works.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#96
Report 2 weeks ago
#96
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
What I'm saying is that we can hold the citizenship tribunal from a UK embassy or consulate in the region rather than having to pay a lot of money to transfer her back here
How much is a flight from Damascus to Heathrow, compared to arranging transport, staffing and conducting a hearing in the embassy in Tel Aviv?
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#97
Report 2 weeks ago
#97
(Original post by londonmyst)
Leese's speeches
This made me think of those American peanut butter and chocolate sweets.
2
reply
TCA2b
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#98
Report 2 weeks ago
#98
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
This. This right here, this rhetoric is why no one takes what you say seriously. You just come off as a left wing loon.
Indeed.
0
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#99
Report 2 weeks ago
#99
(Original post by QE2)
Er, what?
You made a claim. I showed why your claim was flawed. That is all.
Providing examples that demonstrate why a generalisation doesn't hold is exactly how it works.
You gave a fallacious straw man, nothing more.
0
reply
TheMandalorian
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#100
Report 2 weeks ago
#100
(Original post by paul514)
Just create a new law
That’s now how it works. You can’t just create random new laws based on heightened emotion rather than sound reasoning. Any bill that would argue for making people stateless for joining terrorist organisations would be doomed to fail. It probably wouldn’t even reach a second reading stage.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What are you most likely to do if you don't get the grades you were expecting?

Go through Clearing (35)
42.17%
Take autumn exams (29)
34.94%
Look for a job (2)
2.41%
Consider an apprenticeship (3)
3.61%
Take a year out (11)
13.25%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (3)
3.61%

Watched Threads

View All