Kate hopkins

Discussion in 'Bulletin Board' started by redrum, Feb 15, 2019.

  1. Marlon

    Marlon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    15,735
    Likes Received:
    3,111
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    HERE.
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    i don’t think anyone’s arguing that that is the case or not .
    Whats concerning is this govts flaunting of international law , which after spending millions will more than than likely be thrown out of court .
     
  2. Tek

    Tekkytyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,619
    Likes Received:
    968
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Italy
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Like I said it was a non-political question. However you seem to ignore that and bring up the current Govts handling of it (which is expected given your political views) but which, in this instance, appears to be made without considering the following facts (but then you clearly know something the lawyers don't)...

    "Expert lawyers with experience in Bangladeshi citizenship cases have told the BBC that under Bangladesh law, a UK national like Ms Begum, if born to a Bangladeshi parent, is automatically a Bangladeshi citizen. That means that such a person would have dual nationality.

    If the person remains in the UK, their Bangladeshi citizenship remains in existence but dormant.


    Under this "blood line" law, Bangladeshi nationality and citizenship lapse when a person reaches the age of 21, unless they make efforts to activate and retain it.

    So, it is Ms Begum's age, 19, that is likely - in part - to have given Home Office lawyers and the home secretary reassurance there was a legal basis for stripping her of her UK citizenship. "
     
  3. Marlon

    Marlon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    15,735
    Likes Received:
    3,111
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    HERE.
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I’ve ignored nothing
    The coverage which you are printing as fact actually isn’t . It’s a political issue given that it’s a conservative govt s stand not cross party .
    Nothing I repeat nothing is determined at all as you keep mentioning things as fact .
    The Bangladeshis have told the BBC ! do you think that’s fact ?meanwhile in other news the Bangladeshis have refused to take her .
    And so the has the Netherlands .
    What sajid djavid has done is not 100% known if it’s correct till it’s been challenged in the courts so just because he’s been advised doesn’t yet make it legal .
    My political view has nothing to do with this so trying to point score on that is a low act but given your other views yours is more political than. Mine .
    My view on the subject is well documented on here in that others are involved and I want them apprehending and the laws of a civilised country be adhered to .
    I’ve had first hand experience of what a politcal party can stoop to when trying to skirt the law
     
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2019
  4. Tek

    Tekkytyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,619
    Likes Received:
    968
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Italy
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    It was your statement below that made me question your post as being non-political..
    "Whats concerning is this govts flaunting of international law , which after spending millions will more than than likely be thrown out of court ."

    The Home office, HS and lawyers will have taken this under advisement. Where do you have the evidence to suggest that the "Govt is flouting international law …it will cost millions.... will be more than likely be thrown out of court" ? How was that not expressing a political view? I was not points scoring merely pointing out you brought the Govt into this and made those allegations. I made no mention of Government in my first post and it was you who changed the focus, as I was merely asking about how to retrospectively reverse radicalisation .
    For the record, given the Windrush episode, TMs appalling hardline inflexible approach to deportation whilst Home Secretary, I think the Home office performance in recent years means it needs a clearout, although the CS mandarins who reside there through successive Governments probably have as much if not more responsibility for many of the injustices that have come to light. Won't happen though.
     
  5. John Peachy

    John Peachy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2011
    Messages:
    8,573
    Likes Received:
    3,215
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    DJ
    Location:
    Leeds, United Kingdom
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I wish we still had Brad. Brown has been a revelation though.
     
  6. Marlon

    Marlon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    15,735
    Likes Received:
    3,111
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    HERE.
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I mentioned the Government because it’s they who are implementing the action of trying to take away her nationality.
    I have no interests in what happens to the girl whilst she is in Syria she went there on her own accord . Posts coming from some about bleeding hearts is rubbish my concern is that others are implemented and are still on our streets and i personally want them removing and put on trial that’s well recorded on my posts .
    She will have the key to this and will eventually give them up .
    My other concern is the govt trying to make her stateless which is against the law and end up costing the taxpayer millions in legal fees plus any international sanctions .
    Of course lawyers and advisers wi be advising Djavid there’s millions to be made for fighting this in the international courts the lawyers will lap it up .
    But it will eventually come out as she can’t be made stateless end of this wo only embarrass our country imo ,
    Nothing is known it’s all speculation the only thing definitely known is she left for Syria
    Without a trial we will never know who radicalised her or not . What the security forces knew ? How she was allowed to leave the country etc etc , we learn lessons by finding out what happened .
    What if she had killed. British citizen whilst in Syria by letting her go she could get away with murder .
    I for one want to know what happened and she needs to go on trial but I think there’s some not wanting that for other reasons imo

     

Share This Page