G STAR RAM Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 1 hour ago, PistoldPete said: I assume you are being ironic. our greengrocer has lots of tomatoes. Supermarket supply lines are too inflexible when their supplies are affected by weather conditions in Spain or North Africa same with eggs , supposedly to do with bird flu but actually again due to poor supply lines for the supermarkets or them being too tight to pay the higher prices. As for your other comment well that’s just trolling. Yeah I was being ironic. ariotofmyown 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoldPete Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 56 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Yeah I was being ironic. It's hard to tell sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 https://theorymatters.substack.com/p/shamima-begum-a-tragedy-for-all-concerned following reading the commission's report and other articles I have written this article. Ram-Alf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 1 hour ago, Leeds Ram said: https://theorymatters.substack.com/p/shamima-begum-a-tragedy-for-all-concerned following reading the commission's report and other articles I have written this article. Comrade 86 and GboroRam 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 1 hour ago, Leeds Ram said: https://theorymatters.substack.com/p/shamima-begum-a-tragedy-for-all-concerned following reading the commission's report and other articles I have written this article. High Treason? at war? What would you do if you were Home Secretary? Would you take her citizenship away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 (edited) 18 minutes ago, sage said: High Treason? at war? What would you do if you were Home Secretary? Would you take her citizenship away? Phillip Hammond, the former foreign secretary and usually sensible man, has suggested a charge of high treason, and yes, we were in conflict with IS. Her joining with opposing forces I believe makes her potentially guilty of that law just as Lord Haw Haw was. I believe IS made a formal declaration of war, and at the time, they held a territory that was larger than that of the United Kingdom. I'm honestly not sure what I'd do. As I said in the article, I believe taking her citizenship away represents a failure of the state in some way. Yet, if you read the immigration commission's report on the matter, it is clear that many qualified and senior people feel Begum remains a threat. The commission did not particularly dispute this fact and stated they felt Begum's defence team failed to address serious questions about her time with IS. The eyewitness accounts are pretty damning, and her frequent changes to her story make her newfound claims open to dispute. The fact that people involved with or trapped by IS are now scattered to the wind could even make a conviction at trail difficult to attain. On balance, I'd probably try to bring her back because she is effectively stateless. If she had a reasonable alternative of state residency somewhere else I'd probably stick to my guns but in reality she doesn't. Edited February 28, 2023 by Leeds Ram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 7 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said: Phillip Hammond, the former foreign secretary and usually sensible man, has suggested a charge of high treason, and yes, we were in conflict with IS. Her joining with opposing forces I believe makes her potentially guilty of that law just as Lord Haw Haw was. I believe IS made a formal declaration of war, and at the time, they held a territory that was larger than that of the United Kingdom. We were formally at war with Germany. We declared war. ISIS were a terrorist organisation who had no state recognised by other countries. I'm honestly not sure what I'd do. As I said in the article, I believe taking her citizenship away represents a failure of the state in some way. Yet, if you read the immigration commission's report on the matter, it is clear that many qualified and senior people feel Begum remains a threat. The commission did not particularly dispute this fact and stated they felt Begum's defence team failed to address serious questions about her time with IS. The eyewitness accounts are pretty damning, and her frequent changes to her story make her newfound claims open to dispute. The fact that people involved with or trapped by IS are now scattered to the wind could even make a conviction at trail difficult to attain. She should be investigated, charged and if found guilty jailed. Realistically, the only way to successfully prosecute her is in the UK. On balance, I'd probably try to bring her back because she is effectively stateless. If she had a reasonable alternative of state residency somewhere else I'd probably stick to my guns but in reality she doesn't. That is broadly similar to my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoldPete Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 5 minutes ago, sage said: She can’t be tried and jailed in this country as she was colluding with terrorists in Syria..which makes investigating her crimes rather tricky. If she is a threat, and a Judge has decided she is then she should not be allowed back in the Uk. Magicman and Ewe Ram 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 Just now, sage said: A charge of treason, I don't believe, necessitates alignment with a particular state. Rather it merely requires waging war against the crown which technically by joining IS that's precisely what Begum did. I'm not a lawyer so I don't know the likelihood of conviction would be beyond 'a reasonable doubt'. The issue which I think is substantial is the matter of security and it really does depend to what extent she is one. I'm not in the intelligence services so I don't know but their view in the judicial commission's report read as pretty damning. I think that does need to be taken into account. Yeah, it does leave a sour taste in the mouth for us to do this. Don't get me wrong, I don't really have any sympathy with her but there is something that feels wrong about leaving her to rot in a camp. As I said in my article, it's not a victory for anyone, we've all lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 27 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said: a charge of high treason, and yes, we were in conflict with IS. Her joining with opposing forces I believe makes her potentially guilty of that law just as Lord Haw Haw was. In that case technically she was a child soldier and therefore protected under international law https://childrenandarmedconflict.un.org/six-grave-violations/child-soldiers/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob The Badger Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 3 hours ago, The Last Post said: Never went over my head...your pretty naive, What if ?, There's a shed load of "what if's" As someone who is aware of these cases, As I have to go through a security check every 5 years, Name, Address, How many years I've lived at my current address, As there are people in my family who deal with some very nasty individuals/cases. Scream from the rooftops if you wish...it's of no concern of mine, The Government and the Judges have both decided she's a threat to the Nation, Now lets look at the word "Threat" it doesn't mean she will cause a terrorist act, It means there's a possible "threat" she "may" cause a terrorist act, She is one person who's sewed her own seeds and now reaping her fruits. 1.Yes, Take a look at Charles Salvador(ex Bronson) we're pretty good at making someone toe the Government line. 2.No I wouldn't, Like the many 1000s of Channel hoppers who we feed and keep warm, She'll be our responsibility I'm naive? And yet you think because the Government won't to revoke citizenship that makes it ok. And you clearly missed my point because it's not about what's legally, I never said anything about that. If every country stripped people of citizenship because they posed a threat wtf would they all go? The Home Secretary has the power to bang somebody up who poses a national threat indefinitely. So do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 23 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said: 1. I'm naive? And yet you think because the Government won't to revoke citizenship that makes it ok. 2. And you clearly missed my point because it's not about what's legally, I never said anything about that. 3. If every country stripped people of citizenship because they posed a threat wtf would they all go? 4. The Home Secretary has the power to bang somebody up who poses a national threat indefinitely. So do that. 1. The Government are there to protect the public, If or "what if" she should return she'd be hailed a heroin by some and a serious threat by others, 2. I didn't miss your point, The whole point of your initial post was assumption or what ifs...you know...the stuff where people like to put a scenario in as a counter argument. 3. They'd stay in the Country where their initial withdrawal was cancelled, Then up to that Country to decide where to send them 4. The home secretary can be challenged "what if" that was to happen and she was set free, Remember the London Bridge terror attack. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50594810 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said: In that case technically she was a child soldier and therefore protected under international law https://childrenandarmedconflict.un.org/six-grave-violations/child-soldiers/ This is where it gets complicated as she was with the organisation until she was 19 so am unsure as to whether she would be granted immunity from prosecution. I've not read the convention you're referring to in 8 years so I honestly don't know if she would be protected by it. I guess it'd depend upon a) how you define IS b) if her continued willing membership post-18 makes her legally culpable and c) how you define criminal responsibility alongside said convention and D) If that grants her immunity from being prosecuted under our anti-terror laws or not. Edited February 28, 2023 by Leeds Ram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoldPete Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 21 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said: This is where it gets complicated as she was with the organisation until she was 19 so am unsure as to whether she would be granted immunity from prosecution. I've not read the convention you're referring to in 8 years so I honestly don't know if she would be protected by it. I guess it'd depend upon a) how you define IS b) if her continued willing membership post-18 makes her legally culpable and c) how you define criminal responsibility alongside said convention and D) If that grants her immunity from being prosecuted under our anti-terror laws or not. I don’t know answer to any of those questions . But a judge has decided it’s legal and proper not to allow her into the country. I don’t really have any reason to question that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob The Badger Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 3 hours ago, The Last Post said: 1. The Government are there to protect the public, If or "what if" she should return she'd be hailed a heroin by some and a serious threat by others, 2. I didn't miss your point, The whole point of your initial post was assumption or what ifs...you know...the stuff where people like to put a scenario in as a counter argument. 3. They'd stay in the Country where their initial withdrawal was cancelled, Then up to that Country to decide where to send them 4. The home secretary can be challenged "what if" that was to happen and she was set free, Remember the London Bridge terror attack. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50594810 I feel like I'm being punked. How can you remove a persons citizen without basing it on what ifs? What if we don't? What if we allow her home? What if she becomes a martyr? It's up to the country they're in when we withdraw their citizenship argument is ludicrous. How can we impose our criminals on other countries without being fine if they do it to us ffs? Did you see the legal age to marry in this country went up yesterday to 18? Do you know why? Because certain Asian countries told us to put our house in order regarding child marriage before we lectured them on allowing it because we were being hypocritical. We'd be raging hypocrites stripping our own citizens and leaving other countries to figure it out if we weren't prepared to deal with their trash too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob The Badger Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 3 hours ago, The Last Post said: 1. The Government are there to protect the public, If or "what if" she should return she'd be hailed a heroin by some and a serious threat by others, 2. I didn't miss your point, The whole point of your initial post was assumption or what ifs...you know...the stuff where people like to put a scenario in as a counter argument. 3. They'd stay in the Country where their initial withdrawal was cancelled, Then up to that Country to decide where to send them 4. The home secretary can be challenged "what if" that was to happen and she was set free, Remember the London Bridge terror attack. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50594810 I'm truly incredulous at this. Our Military exists because of what ifs. Our entire foreign policy is based around what ifs. All planning for anything takes into account what ifs. You have to be winding me up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 8 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said: Did you see the legal age to marry in this country went up yesterday to 18? Do you know why? Because certain Asian countries told us to put our house in order regarding child marriage before we lectured them on allowing it because we were being hypocritical. We'd be raging hypocrites stripping our own citizens and leaving other countries to figure it out if we weren't prepared to deal with their trash too. Wow that's a curve ball, It was to stop parents taking their children to foreign lands to get married...ir forced, How can the British Government stop families taking their Children abroad...here's an idea...take their passports off them. Sailed through Parliament yesterday...Next. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61228240 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted February 28, 2023 Share Posted February 28, 2023 16 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said: I'm truly incredulous at this. Our Military exists because of what ifs. Our entire foreign policy is based around what ifs. All planning for anything takes into account what ifs. You have to be winding me up. You started the "what ifs" with the French woman ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ariotofmyown Posted March 1, 2023 Share Posted March 1, 2023 10 hours ago, The Last Post said: You started the "what ifs" with the French woman ? The what ifs were basically the same as the actual situation being discussed. Just the countries switched round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted March 1, 2023 Share Posted March 1, 2023 1 hour ago, ariotofmyown said: The what ifs were basically the same as the actual situation being discussed. Just the countries switched round. Thanks, A debate where opinions are divided by so many ☺️ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account.
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now