schoolgirl who joined IS but wants to come home.

[nirvana]

Why are people so pleased; if the Government thinks it is ok to render her stateless, they also think it is OK to render you stateless?  

Is nobody worried that our elected home secretary has so little regard for the law?  

She really seems a strange person to break the precedent on.   There are far worse people in our prisons.  Do we deprive them of UK citizenship too?  

And maybe, just maybe, there are still some people who believe the Conservatives have good intentions; what happens when this new power is in the hands of someone who we don't trust?  

Need to read more but may not be breaking the law and would guess that the decision makers in this case would think they are on pretty certain ground

"In January 2014, the Immigration Bill 2013–14 was introduced to extend the powers of the Home Secretary to declare certain terrorism suspects stateless. The bill was initially blocked by the House of Lords in April 2014.[105] However, the Lords reconsidered their decision in May 2014, and the bill returned to the House of Commons before being set into UK law"

[4KSuited]

Someone else has already said that they base their opinions & views on facts rather than speculation, so I’ll just repeat that for the record. We don’t know the full facts behind the decision, but we DO know that she’s married, and that her husband is of Dutch origin. We also know that she’s of Bangladeshi heritage, but that she’s never been there. In neither case is she prevented from applying for a passport under those nationalities.

We also now know that the 1981 British Nationality Act is the legal basis of her UK nationality being rescinded; where the person has dual nationality, this law has been invoked in more than 100 other cases. The source is the BBC’s website.

Nonetheless, I too am surprised at the decision, and ambivalent about the consequences.

[MintTrav]

Over 400 men and women have been allowed to return and reintegrate into society after varying amounts of questioning/deradicalisation/prosecution, but our glorious government decides to make an example of one person. Irrespective of whether the decision is wrong, it is certainly inconsistent, and that is wrong.

The best I can say about Javid is that he is an opportunist picking on an easy target.

[nirvana]

Of course that doesn't mean they are not pandering to the masses or, as Doobs points out, making a weird stand on this case versus many others they could or should have made a stand on.

[kukushkin88]

Someone else has already said that they base their opinions & views on facts rather than speculation, so I’ll just repeat that for the record. We don’t know the full facts behind the decision, but we DO know that she’s married, and that her husband is of Dutch origin. We also know that she’s of Bangladeshi heritage, but that she’s never been there. In neither case is she prevented from applying for a passport under those nationalities.

We also now know that the 1981 British Nationality Act is the legal basis of her UK nationality being rescinded; where the person has dual nationality, this law has been invoked in more than 100 other cases. The source is the BBC’s website.

Nonetheless, I too am surprised at the decision, and ambivalent about the consequences.

Thanks for the info and clarification. Stretched for time atm and taking some information second hand on trust.

[nirvana]

Someone else has already said that they base their opinions & views on facts rather than speculation, so I’ll just repeat that for the record. We don’t know the full facts behind the decision, but we DO know that she’s married, and that her husband is of Dutch origin. We also know that she’s of Bangladeshi heritage, but that she’s never been there. In neither case is she prevented from applying for a passport under those nationalities.

We also now know that the 1981 British Nationality Act is the legal basis of her UK nationality being rescinded; where the person has dual nationality, this law has been invoked in more than 100 other cases. The source is the BBC’s website.

Nonetheless, I too am surprised at the decision, and ambivalent about the consequences.

The last sentence sums up my view really - I try to find compassion but if I'm honest ambivalence is the best I can muster.

I'm obviously indifferent to mass suffering around the world in any kind of meaningful way as I stay here in my safe european home and do nothing of consequence to reduce suffering. A single radicalised, groomed, non repatriated refugee who doesn't get an easy passage back, who is being fed and watered in a camp that, to my knowledge, isn't being bombed daily isn't really going to make me lose sleep or protest the Government's stance on this.

Also don't feel so sentimental about death as many seem to - if she died over there I 'd just go and make a cup of tea I imagine and perhaps shake my head a little bit while drinking it but I wouldn't actually feel anything other than an urge to write a post that I didn't actually feel anything

[Woodsey]

Over 400 men and women have been allowed to return and reintegrate into society after varying amounts of questioning/deradicalisation/prosecution, but our glorious government decides to make an example of one person. Irrespective of whether the decision is wrong, it is certainly inconsistent, and that is wrong.

The best I can say about Javid is that he is an opportunist picking on an easy target.

We were obviously slow off the mark. Hopefully a precedent has now been set and we do the same with many of these people who have betrayed the UK. Filthy traitors need slinging out, let’s not waste money putting them in prison.

You make a good case for the renewed scrutinisation of others that have already returned and I hope the ones that deserve it get their due comeuppance for betraying the UK.

[BigAdz]

Why are people so pleased; if the Government thinks it is ok to render her stateless, they also think it is OK to render you stateless?  

Is nobody worried that our elected home secretary has so little regard for the law?  

She really seems a strange person to break the precedent on.   There are far worse people in our prisons.  Do we deprive them of UK citizenship too?  

And maybe, just maybe, there are still some people who believe the Conservatives have good intentions; what happens when this new power is in the hands of someone who we don't trust?  

Having made such a contemptible mess of Brexit, they need to pander to the far right more than ever. This is ideal for that.

It’s a truly extraordinary decision, if she doesn’t get interviewed in the camp by The Times, she in all likelihood comes home with a minimum of fuss. Now she’ll be the first ever to have their nationality rescinded. My first assumption was that she’d be coming home to face charges/potential incarceration. Seems like a very good chance she hasn’t broken a law of any consequence though. This government has done some extraordinary things, loads of it against the grain of so much of the progress of the last 75 years.

A couple of my mates are proper Labourites, and one even admits to voting Liberal, but they seem quite pleased to hear this too. Not just us Hitler Youth Kush....

I for one am very happy. As Mantis says, I have no great design to align myself to terrorists, so I feel quite calm about it.

The reality is we should have done more sooner, and changed the law long ago. I'm just glad for once Tommy common sense has prevailed. IMHOOC

[Woodsey]

You mentioned the T word, now you’re fucked Adzy 

[MANTIS01]

Yo propaganda is a common tool in a war

So sure it's inconsistent and sure without all the publicity rah de rah but that's the very point

Now this is a well publicised case we can use it to our advantage by promoting this harsh lesson to millions of observers, hey look folks we don't high-five traitors who join evil terror groups

The desired effect is a big deterrent to many other potential crazies and many innocent lives saved.

Sorry that the looney lefties want to ditch this valuable propaganda and all it's benefits so the human rights of the individual terrorist are protected but hey ho.

[kukushkin88]

Why are people so pleased; if the Government thinks it is ok to render her stateless, they also think it is OK to render you stateless?  

Is nobody worried that our elected home secretary has so little regard for the law?  

She really seems a strange person to break the precedent on.   There are far worse people in our prisons.  Do we deprive them of UK citizenship too?  

And maybe, just maybe, there are still some people who believe the Conservatives have good intentions; what happens when this new power is in the hands of someone who we don't trust?  

Having made such a contemptible mess of Brexit, they need to pander to the far right more than ever. This is ideal for that.

It’s a truly extraordinary decision, if she doesn’t get interviewed in the camp by The Times, she in all likelihood comes home with a minimum of fuss. Now she’ll be the first ever to have their nationality rescinded. My first assumption was that she’d be coming home to face charges/potential incarceration. Seems like a very good chance she hasn’t broken a law of any consequence though. This government has done some extraordinary things, loads of it against the grain of so much of the progress of the last 75 years.

A couple of my mates are proper Labourites, and one even admits to voting Liberal, but they seem quite pleased to hear this too. Not just us Hitler Youth Kush....

I for one am very happy. As Mantis says, I have no great design to align myself to terrorists, so I feel quite calm about it.

The reality is we should have done more sooner, and changed the law long ago. I'm just glad for once Tommy common sense has prevailed. IMHOOC

You seem to misunderstand every single post. They (the government) are pandering to the far right, that doesn’t mean you are far right. It also doesn’t mean people with largely respectable political views won’t also think it’s good idea, hopefully only a small number of them though.

[Doobs]

Why are people so pleased; if the Government thinks it is ok to render her stateless, they also think it is OK to render you stateless?  

Is nobody worried that our elected home secretary has so little regard for the law?  

She really seems a strange person to break the precedent on.   There are far worse people in our prisons.  Do we deprive them of UK citizenship too?  

And maybe, just maybe, there are still some people who believe the Conservatives have good intentions; what happens when this new power is in the hands of someone who we don't trust?  

Need to read more but may not be breaking the law and would guess that the decision makers in this case would think they are on pretty certain ground

"In January 2014, the Immigration Bill 2013–14 was introduced to extend the powers of the Home Secretary to declare certain terrorism suspects stateless. The bill was initially blocked by the House of Lords in April 2014.[105] However, the Lords reconsidered their decision in May 2014, and the bill returned to the House of Commons before being set into UK law"

Since then several have had their UK citizenship revoked.   But until today, they were all dual nationals.   I am not saying I agree with those either, just in case people read it that way.

Rendering someone stateless breaks international law.

Just add for those who think you have to be a terrorist for the home secretary to revoke your citizenship:

What happens if the next home secretary is Jeremy Corbyn; who does he see as enemies of the state?  

What happens if the next coalition includes Sinn Fein, and as part of the power sharing agreement, they get home secretary.  

These are not far fetched, "what could happen in 50 years time?" type scenarios.

[MANTIS01]

Funny that not wanting traitor terrorists milling around our society is far right politics now, lolz

[Juperjiper]

Glad she didn’t pretend to have regrets and get back in to the country

[kukushkin88]

Funny that not wanting traitor terrorists milling around our society is far right politics now, lolz

It nearly goes without saying but nobody said that and I doubt anyone thinks it.