Shamima Begum is not the only British jihadi bride to have been stripped of her citizenship. According to the Sunday Times, Sisters Reema and Zara Iqbal, from east London's Canning Town, who are married to two Portuguese jihadis have also had their British citizenship removed. The sisters are reportedly members of an all-female terror cell of five women who travelled from their homes in east London to Syria with their jihadi husbands in 2013.
I'm sure several members here will be eager to sign this online petition for the Christchurch terrorist to be stripped of his Australian citizenship and, instead, be sent to Britain owing to his family's ancestry. https://www.change.org/p/scott-morrison-revoke-brenton-tarrant-australian-citizenship
If you want to sign it @porkie, feel free. However I am certain that our Australian / New Zealand chums are well capable of handling the situation themselves. Do they still have the death sentence down under?
That option should only be exercised by Australian citizens; a signatory by any other country's national would be guilty of attempting to interfere in another country's domestic affairs.
No, neither Australia nor New Zealand have the death penalty (unfortunately). But it does exist under Sharia Law.
Hallelujah! That's exactly what I've been saying about the UK with regards to our own terrorist problem. Tell that to ol' Nige! https://www.scotsman.com/news/polit...or-lobbying-foreign-governments-1-4889246/amp
If by "Nige" you mean Nigel Farage and you're referring to him lobbying EU leaders to vote against a future Article 50 extension request by Britain and you're claiming that such intervention is tantamount to interfering with another co8untry's domestic affairs, then you'd be mistaken. Farage is British therefore entitled to lobby on Britain's behalf - or rather the majority of the electorate who voted to leave the EU. But I suppose you would have us believe that lobbying EU leaders by Labour and Lib-Dem politicians and former politicians, including Vince Cable and Tony Blair, as well as business leaders doesn't count as interference whereas Farage's does. However we are delving into politics and such is frowned upon in the public areas of this site.
Thank goodness games of football, etc, aren't replayed again and again because the losers won't accept the result.
Even the world cup finals are played again after a fixed period of time. But not, as you rightly point out, due to bad losers refusing to accept the fact that they lost the match.
True-ish. However, Olympic medals are frequently redistributed upon evidence of cheating, and results of football matches are often overturned for similar reasons.
In this topsy-turvey world where a single septuagenarian former brave solder faces prosecution for murder whilst trying to keep the peace in Northern Ireland and yet all those he was protecting civilians against - the IRA terrorists who bombed and killed many civilians - are granted immunity from prosecution (thanks to Blair), Shamina Begum will be welcomed back to this country, rehoused and put on benefits, compensated for the loss of her children and given a CBE. Think I'm exaggerating? I suggest that is what would likely happen were Corbyn ever to become Prime Minister.
She may well receive state benefits, but much of the rest is slight exaggeration. If the girl truly has lost 3 babies whilst still a teenager, she likely does need counselling. I probably hope more than you that Corbyn never becomes PM. There is a terrible void in British politics where incapable people hold positions of influence on both the right and left of the spectrum. Former British soldiers who have gone beyond the instructions given to them by their leaders should not be immune from prosecution. However, I genuinely don't know enough about the Bloody Sunday incidents to see whether it's justified here. My instincts tell me to bury the whole thing given how divisive it is on both sides. But if some soldiers did go OTT, there may not be a choice. Bringing it up in the Shamima Begum case is a bit of whatabouttery as the two are completely different scenarios.
Why must you politicise this thread? Anyone who CPS believes may be guilty of murder should be tried in court No one has yet suggested this of this young women We as a country should always support the rule of law
It is not the Crown Prosecution Service that is prosecuting the former soldier. But I do agree with you that those who commit crimes should be tried. So why aren't those Republicans known to have murdered innocent victims both on the island of Ireland and on the mainland and are still alive, such as Patrick Magee, being prosecuted? Not to do so defies the laws of justice and insults those directly affected by Republican terrorist violence and those close to them. This has particular resonance for me as a relative was horrifically maimed (and subsequently died a few months later) when a Provisional IRA truck bomb exploded outside the Baltic Exchange in April 1992. If, in the (currently) unlikely event Ms Begum is permitted to return to this country, she will be thoroughly investigated and could face charges under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and possibly for treason. There is a case to be made for the Death Penalty to be re-introduced for those guilty of acts of terrorism: at least those convicted will have have had due process, something that is denied to those they maim and murder.