The Angry Thread...

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Tommy on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 12:20 am

Javid confirmed last month that Jarrah was a British citizen


For the, idk, third or fourth time I’ve said it now.

The Home Secretary has confirmed it.

You might as well start arguing that the sun rises in the west.
User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Mooshie1956 on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 12:21 am

Tommy as she had gone into hiding and according to her she was wanted and had a bounty on her head (put there by ISIS), no one is supposed to know where she is, how could we possibly rescue the child?.
She has also demonstrated that she has no regard for human life, so why would her baby be any different to her.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mooshie1956/
Panny G80 12-60 Lens
Panny 100-400 Lens
Olympus 60 Macro Lens
User avatar
Mooshie1956

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Tommy on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 12:32 am

Mooshie1956 wrote:Tommy as she had gone into hiding and according to her she was wanted and had a bounty on her head (put there by ISIS), no one is supposed to know where she is, how could we possibly rescue the child?.


Well, again, numerous journalists have managed not only to find her on multiple occasions, but to write about her extensively. To film her in person, rather than by an actor or a false voice or whatever. We’re getting a tremendous amount of real-time information from someone supposed to be in hiding.

She was in a refugee camp. Hence why she wanted to come home, because it was likely that her child would (and has) die in such squalid conditions.

Mooshie1956 wrote:She has also demonstrated that she has no regard for human life, so why would her baby be any different to her.


I don’t care what the baby is to her. I don’t care if she rots in a prison cell for the rest of her days. It’s no more than she deserves. A British prison cell.

I care about what the baby is to us, not her.

But this is a weird narrative that this is taking. We couldn’t have saved the baby, so never mind? Is that what’s being said?

We might’ve failed too save the baby. True. But not only did we not even try, we didn’t even look at whether we could and how. The worst part is how the nation seems gleeful about our total lack of effort to do something about the child.
User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Brevet Cable on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 12:40 am

All irrelevant now, given that it's dead.

As for Javed saying it was British, it would appear to be another instance of him talking out of his hoop.
It wasn't born in the UK, an overseas British base or dependency, so it didn't get automatic UK Citizenship & would only have been considered for UK Citizenship if it's mother applied for it...the same mother who had previously stated that she'd renounced her UK Citizenship when she arrived in ISIL territory, and the same mother who Javed had already stripped of UK Citizenship.
If anything, it was Syrian, in the same way that one friend of mine was German ( British parents, but born in a German civilian hospital not a British Army one ) and another was Italian ( British parents, but born in an Italian hospital when his parents were visiting relatives there )
Unofficial forum brauer und winzer
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Tommy on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 12:55 am

Ohhh Brevet, man, come on mate!

I’ll say it one last time; The child was British.

I’ll even explain it -

For these purposes, there are two types of citizenship; by descent, and otherwise than by descent.

Begum was a U.K. citizen otherwise than by descent (she was born in the U.K.). She is British. She had to be. Javid couldn’t have stripped her citizenship if she didn’t have it in the first place.

For a child born outside of the U.K. to one (or both) British parent, that child is a citizen by descent.

There are different rights to someone “by descent” compared to “otherwise than by descent”.

However, if a child is born (wherever it is born in the world) to a British parent otherwise than by descent (their parents were born in the U.K.) then the parent’s citizenship passes to the child.

Shamima Begum was born in the U.K. when she gave birth she was still a citizen. The child was therefore British. The BBC state that. The Home bloody Secretary stated that, too. To argue that the child was not British is to argue against reality.

Your point about having to apply for citizenship only applies if he parent (Shamima) was citizen by descent - ie she was not born in the U.K.
User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Mooshie1956 on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 8:22 am

Tommy as if by law she is British being born here, which in turn gives her baby British citizenship, then can you answer me this.
As Her parents were both born in Bangladesh why doesn't that give her Bangladesh citizenship, which is reportedly being denied she has by Bangladesh.
I agree that it has been said by Jarvis that the baby was British, but with how Bangladesh are treating her, then to the average person in the UK the Baby can't be classed as British. Simple it can't be one rule for one but not the other.
Do I feel sorry for the baby, well that's both yes and no. I feel sorry for any child at not getting the chance of a decent life, but sometimes you just can't help them for whatever reason, as is the case here. The world is still a messed (censored) up place and the sooner we all learn to live together and help each other the better the world will be.
I do feel we are not getting the whole story in this, if she is supposed to have a price on her head and in hiding then how is it possible for all these reporters to find her and get interviews yet ISIS can't. The cynic in me feels that this is some sort of propaganda by ISIS to make the UK look bad.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mooshie1956/
Panny G80 12-60 Lens
Panny 100-400 Lens
Olympus 60 Macro Lens
User avatar
Mooshie1956

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Tommy on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 8:56 am

Mooshie1956 wrote:Tommy as if by law she is British being born here, which in turn gives her baby British citizenship, then can you answer me this.
As Her parents were both born in Bangladesh why doesn't that give her Bangladesh citizenship, which is reportedly being denied she has by Bangladesh.


*her mother. I can’t answer that. If she did have Bangladeshi citizenship, using the above (assuming it’s applicable - I have neither the time nor inclination to research the law around this), as she’s a citizen by descent, her Bangladeshi citizenship did not pass automatically to the child.

It’s the child’s nationality we’re debating. Not hers. And the child is British (for the, what, sixth time?).

Mooshie1956 wrote:I agree that it has been said by Jarvis that the baby was British, but with how Bangladesh are treating her, then to the average person in the UK the Baby can't be classed as British. Simple it can't be one rule for one but not the other.


“To the average person in the U.K.” - you don’t know that, even if it is correct, it just means “the average person” in the U.K. is wrong - the average person in the U.K. might believe the earth is flat, but that doesn’t make it so, but more importantly, it’s not a decision for the “average person in the U.K.” to make.

Mooshie1956 wrote:Do I feel sorry for the baby, well that's both yes and no. I feel sorry for any child at not getting the chance of a decent life, but sometimes you just can't help them for whatever reason, as is the case here.


You’ve mixed up “can’t” with “won’t”. The former is sometimes a sad truth. The latter is awful. It would have been better to have tried and failed than do what the Home Sec did.

Mooshie1956 wrote:The cynic in me feels that this is some sort of propaganda by ISIS to make the UK look bad.


Fair point, but if that’s the case, then the U.K. has just given ISIS one of its greatest recruitment tools.

Like I said guys, I know opinions are charged on this, but take away the emotion and use logic, and I still can’t properly logic myself to a position where what the Home Secretary did was the right thing on balance. I realise that I’m fighting on the lonely side of a battle.
User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby iainpeden on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 9:11 am

Tommy, are you suggesting that all the children in Syrian camps who have British mothers or fathers - and there will be many - should be repatriated?

I'd suggest we also get away seeing it as a simply British issue; the article from the New York Times (below) mentions 1400 foreign (not Syrian) nationals from 40 counties in 1 camp alone.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/04/worl ... syria.html
User avatar
iainpeden

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Tommy on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 9:38 am

Again with the absolutionism.

You’re doing exactly the same thing I told you not to do above. Stop fabricating my position by saying “in essence what you are saying is” or “are you really suggesting that...”

I’m not “essentially saying” or “suggesting” anything.

Read and respond to what I actually say if you like, but not some between-the-lines-interpretation of what you think I say.

Every time you do it, I’ll turn it back on you, here; it’s easy:

So, Iain, what you’re really saying is that you think that no British child in danger of death deserves help from the U.K.

It’s easy for me to do. I just respect you, and this situation, more than that to actually do it (other than by example).
User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Tmyers123 on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 10:14 am



It’s a bit of a tricky one this though, isn’t it? IMO, both of these arguments make sense and I genuinely don’t know which side I am on with this,

The UK has ballsed up big time by not attempting to rescue Begum’s child (and I say attempted because I have no idea how difficult it would be to actually execute that task). However, Piers’ stance is hard to argue with for me. As small minded as he can be sometimes, I genuinely do think he has a point with what he has said.

Having a child in the position she was in is downright insane, it could even be speculated that she had the child as a ploy to play on HMG’s heartstrings, making them take her back into the country with the child. However, blocking off Begum from entering the country has killed an innocent child, and anyone who says it is the offspring of an ISIS member and is therefore just as evil is just stupid. We should have done more to try and help the child, and it disgusts me that all of this has led to its death, but I’m glad we’ve shown a bit of backbone by not allowing that terrorist scum back into our country.
User avatar
Tmyers123

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Domvickery on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 10:28 am

Mooshie1956 wrote:She has also demonstrated that she has no regard for human life, so why would her baby be any different to her.


You know you’ve just put that out in the public right?
Inventor of the baguette scale
Domvickery
UKAR Staff

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby starbuck on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 10:41 am

Tommy wrote: .....I realise that I’m fighting on the lonely side of a battle.


If it makes you feel any better the self serving idiot JRM agrees with you :whistle:
starbuck

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby borismorris on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 11:02 am

Would it be beyond cynical of me to suggest that the now deceased child wasn’t hers all along, again just propaganda to highlight the barbarity of the UK?
What is reported as fact is not always the truth.


I’m in the position to know how it feels to lose a child and, despite how I feel about Ms Begums “career” choices I do feel for her as a person- on the assumption that that the reported death of her child is actual fact.

On the other hand I also feel that the UK has to send the strongest possible message to any would be traitors to this country. That if you turn your back on your privileged life in the UK, you should not expect to come back when it all goes belly up.
borismorris

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby borismorris on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 11:04 am

Would it be beyond cynical of me to suggest that the now deceased child wasn’t hers all along, again just propaganda to highlight the barbarity of the UK?
What is reported as fact is not always the truth.


I’m in the position to know how it feels to lose a child and, despite how I feel about Ms Begums “career” choices I do feel for her as a person- on the assumption that that the reported death of her child is actual fact.

On the other hand I also feel that the UK has to send the strongest possible message to any would be traitors to this country. That if you turn your back on your privileged life in the UK, you should not expect to come back when it all goes belly up.
borismorris

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby iainpeden on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 11:10 am

The child's life was put in danger because of the actions of his mother; both by her going into a war zone of her own accord and by her actions leading him into a situation where there was no medical capacity to support his needs.

I'll ask again: if that child deserved to be rescued, what about all the other children in the camps whose parents are British and who are also therefore British?
User avatar
iainpeden

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Domvickery on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 11:36 am

iainpeden wrote:The child's life was put in danger because of the actions of his mother; both by her going into a war zone of her own accord and by her actions leading him into a situation where there was no medical capacity to support his needs.

I'll ask again: if that child deserved to be rescued, what about all the other children in the camps whose parents are British and who are also therefore British?


Like who?

No response to Tommys post(s) either?
Inventor of the baguette scale
Domvickery
UKAR Staff

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Mooshie1956 on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 12:19 pm

Domvickery wrote:
Mooshie1956 wrote:She has also demonstrated that she has no regard for human life, so why would her baby be any different to her.


You know you’ve just put that out in the public right?


Yes, it's one person and how I feel about her. I don't think that there is anything wrong in that. My opinion could well be wrong but at least I'm allowed that opinion.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mooshie1956/
Panny G80 12-60 Lens
Panny 100-400 Lens
Olympus 60 Macro Lens
User avatar
Mooshie1956

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby iainpeden on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 12:23 pm

Domvickery wrote:
iainpeden wrote:The child's life was put in danger because of the actions of his mother; both by her going into a war zone of her own accord and by her actions leading him into a situation where there was no medical capacity to support his needs.

I'll ask again: if that child deserved to be rescued, what about all the other children in the camps whose parents are British and who are also therefore British?


Like who?

No response to Tommys post(s) either?


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659

Read down abit; there are other British children in the camps.
User avatar
iainpeden

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Domvickery on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 2:18 pm

Thanks for the link, however you've literally answered your own question by posting that link

what about all the other children in the camps whose parents are British and who are also therefore British?


He said that the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development were looking at ways to find the British children of other so-called "Islamic State brides" and get them out.


You still ignore perfectly reasoned posts & questions asked of you but insist on asking pointless questions of others
Inventor of the baguette scale
Domvickery
UKAR Staff

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Domvickery on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 2:21 pm

Mooshie1956 wrote:
Domvickery wrote:
Mooshie1956 wrote:She has also demonstrated that she has no regard for human life, so why would her baby be any different to her.


You know you’ve just put that out in the public right?


Yes, it's one person and how I feel about her. I don't think that there is anything wrong in that. My opinion could well be wrong but at least I'm allowed that opinion.


It's a child, it knew only how to cry, eat, sleep, piss & "Kris Kris Tofferson!", it did not know how to build bombs or to preach death to the west etc etc
Inventor of the baguette scale
Domvickery
UKAR Staff

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Mooshie1956 on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 2:30 pm

Domvickery wrote:
Mooshie1956 wrote:
Domvickery wrote:
Mooshie1956 wrote:She has also demonstrated that she has no regard for human life, so why would her baby be any different to her.


You know you’ve just put that out in the public right?


Yes, it's one person and how I feel about her. I don't think that there is anything wrong in that. My opinion could well be wrong but at least I'm allowed that opinion.


It's a child, it knew only how to cry, eat, sleep, piss & "Kris Kris Tofferson!", it did not know how to build bombs or to preach death to the west etc etc


Ahh I see what your looking at. I wasn't meaning the baby would be any different. I meant how she would feel towards the baby.
This is why I hate written debates my point comes across all wrong sometimes. Apologies if I caused confusion.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mooshie1956/
Panny G80 12-60 Lens
Panny 100-400 Lens
Olympus 60 Macro Lens
User avatar
Mooshie1956

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby iainpeden on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 7:41 pm

Domvickery wrote:Thanks for the link, however you've literally answered your own question by posting that link

what about all the other children in the camps whose parents are British and who are also therefore British?


He said that the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development were looking at ways to find the British children of other so-called "Islamic State brides" and get them out.


You still ignore perfectly reasoned posts & questions asked of you but insist on asking pointless questions of others


In an attempt to move on from the vitriol this discussion has engendered over the last few days I will attempt to make clear my thoughts.
First of all the origin of ISIS/ISIL/IS in its various iterations can be traced back to about 1999. The regime/organisation has stated that it wishes to kill everybody who does not subscribe to their particular understand of the Quran.
Attacks which can be attributed to ISIS include London knife attacks, the Paris nightclub atrocity, vehicle attacks on Germany and France and the Brussels Airport bomb in Belgium which have resulted in the loss of hundreds of lives. The organisation has been responsible for the murder of aid workers and journalists, using social media to champion its cause through terror. In an attempt to destroy all culture which does not fit their own ideology the ancient city of Palmyra was bulldozed and its curator beheaded. They have also been responsible for genocide of a group in Kurdish Syria whose name I cannot recall but do know of the murder and rape of members of that group.
Anybody who decided to join that regime cannot in this day of instant news through TV, the internet and social media have been unaware of its aims and operating methods. Consequently they turned their back on western culture and justice and its protections.
To move to the Begum case:
She left this country with a stolen passport and had sufficient information to make her way, via Turkey, to an ISIS enclave in Syria; therefore how she, or anybody else, could argue that she was a child and didn’t know what she was getting into is beyond me. To me a child should not marry and should not bear children – she has, apparently done both of her own volition; a situation which appears normal in the regime she has chosen.
Personally, I believe that the child who died was hers and it is a personal tragedy for her and him that he did not survive.
However I also believe that she put both herself and him in the situation where she is in a refugee camp with minimal food (apparently she lost her food ration card) and no effective health care. In addition he will not have been the only child to die that day in that camp due to malnutrition or the lack of healthcare.
The argument appears to have been put that Britain had a responsibility to repatriate the child. It appears that the government has at least looked at the situation and has decided that such an attempt would be too dangerous. We have to listen to that argument and ask the question “How many lives lost would the rescue of the baby justify?; I have never served in the military and can only imagine the anguish of the families left behind in such a situation. That’s the practical argument.
On the moral side I also argue against such a rescue attempt. The child was a victim of his parents’ decision, they have the moral duty to protect him, and the other two who died, but acted in such a way as to put him into immediate danger. The state has a duty to protect its citizens but it cannot protect all its citizens who make stupid, even evil, decisions, especially at the cost of the lives of others.
This is also not purely a British problem. The child would also have had Dutch citizenship. I haven’t been able to find any discussion on this on Dutch websites so can’t comment if there is a similar hand wringing in the Netherlands. However, according to the article in The New York Times mentioned 1400 non-Syrian refugees from 40 countries in one camp alone. Whether it is best to imprison the people who joined ISIS where they are or return them to their home nations in an attempt to deradicalize or gain intelligence is a moot point but one thing for sure, the west hasn’t heard the last of these terrorists who espouse a horrifically corrupted version of Islam.
User avatar
iainpeden

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby CJS on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 10:04 pm

Very well said Iain, and I kinda think it's difficult to see how this isn't just a rational, common sense response.

Of course it's tragic that a child has died (it doesn't need the 'innocent' adjective applying - that's surely a given), no-one has questioned that. But to leap on to any kind of notion that we as a country should somehow have rescued this one is - I think - misguided.

Obviously - I mean obviously - if it had been easy, safe, practical, possible (how would you take a child from its mother without proving she was incapable of being a parent? Does membership of a banned terrorist group actually mean she wasn't able to raise a child safely and give it what it needed? I'm not judging either way, just putting it out there) then the child would have been saved I am sure. But it wasn't, so tragically for this baby, it wasn't.

Why are we so up in arms about this particular child? Because it was British? Does that mean it somehow deserved our help more? I mean, really?

I don't know exactly what my point is, but something about what I've been reading on here over the past few days has made me increasingly angry.
"Forewarned is forearmed"
How do you know I didn't?
User avatar
CJS

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby Brevet Cable on Mon 11 Mar 2019, 4:21 pm

Tommy wrote:Ohhh Brevet, man, come on mate!

Yep, my mistake, just checked & it looks to have changed in 2002....as you can guess, my friends are considerably older than that. :oops:
Unofficial forum brauer und winzer
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: The Angry Thread...

Postby toom317 on Wed 13 Mar 2019, 1:15 pm

The current loud mouthed gobshyte, du jour, who keeps shouting in the background of the news reports live from outside the houses of parliament. STFU, you're not changing anyones mind. And while we're on the subject, where are all those protesters getting the time from, to protest there. Haven't you all got jobs/lifes?
"Nice pics mate" comments only! No criticism please.

Equipment: Camera, Lens, Goretex Y fronts.
User avatar
toom317
UKAR Supporter

PreviousNext

Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: pbeardmore, XX377 and 18 guests