‘Liberal’ Islamic leader says MPs should be ‘called out’ for having Jewish family (1 Viewer)

[Infinite Chaos]

Sorry but that is incorrect.

She left for "love" and ISIS would never accept female fighters.

People "fight" in whatever way they can. My description of her decision reflects her desire to go and marry an ISIS fighter, align with Islamic State as part of the propaganda fight (and production of baby ISIS citizens) and actually be part of the new (but short lived) Caliphate.

Also she does not have any other citizenship but British. The British claim she can get Bangladeshi, but Bangladesh has already said she can't.

She's been through a lengthy process with legal representation here in the UK.

Who is Shamima Begum and how can you lose your citizenship?

Shamima Begum lost her appeal against the government's decision to remove her British citizenship.

www.bbc.co.uk

She's lost her British citizenship I'm afraid.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

If Britain is serious about enforcing "hate speech" laws, they'd arrest this guy PDQ.

If as he claims, it already happens the other way around and muslim links are pointed out by others (see post 6) then we have to be more even handed I'm afraid.

Any case has to be squeaky clean - our hate speech laws should not be used as a mallet on all speech we don't like here.

 

[PeteEU]

People "fight" in whatever way they can. My description of her decision reflects her desire to go and marry an ISIS fighter, align with Islamic State as part of the propaganda fight (and production of baby ISIS citizens) and actually be part of the new (but short lived) Caliphate.

You did say fight.. she did not..

She's been through a lengthy process with legal representation here in the UK.

Who is Shamima Begum and how can you lose your citizenship?

Shamima Begum lost her appeal against the government's decision to remove her British citizenship.

www.bbc.co.uk

She's lost her British citizenship I'm afraid.

Yea, and we all know how fair that is.. sadly thanks to the Tories, the UK legal system has taken a piss on peoples rights.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

You did say fight.. she did not..

You know better than that.

Yea, and we all know how fair that is.. sadly thanks to the Tories, the UK legal system has taken a piss on peoples rights.

"SIAC ruled that while there was a credible suspicion that Ms Begum was a victim of trafficking and sexual exploitation, that did not stand in the way of the home secretary stripping her of British citizenship, as she had become a threat.
That decision was upheld at the Court of Appeal in February 2024.
The judges said Ms Begum "may well have been influenced and manipulated by others but still have made a calculated decision to travel to Syria and align with Islamic State"."

 

[HonestJoe]

A self-styled “tolerant” Islamic leader has come under fire for claiming that politicians should be “called out” for having Jewish family members.

Taj Hargey, a historian and imam who leads the Oxford Institute for British Islam (OIBI), said it is “important that prominent British politicians” who “blindly support Israel” should be “identified” if they have family links to the Jewish state.

He is certainly outspoken and can cross the line, though he is as often criticising other Muslims as anyone else. I do find how chopped up his quotes are here a little suspicious though, an all too common media ploy to misrepresent the intent of a statement and to remove any nuance and conditions. That is particularly notable because this is lifted directly from the Yorkshire Post (a British local newspaper), who were quoting their own interview with him but don't link that full interview in any way (indeed, I couldn't find it online at all).

I'd argue that there is a valid point here, where politicians who have relevant links to an issue, including familial links, the public should be made aware of them to allow them to temper any perceptions of personal bias. There is clearly care and balance that needs to be taken too, avoiding feeding division and impact on innocent people who just happen to have links to a politician, but I'd suggest that is all the more reason for it just to be normal for any such connections to be known. Pretty much everyone will have them one way or another, so bringing them all to the fore should actually reduce the risk of people being unduly accused of bias simply for having a coincidental connection and require any actual criticism to be based on more evidence than the simple existence of the link alone.

 

[PeteEU]

You know better than that.



"SIAC ruled that while there was a credible suspicion that Ms Begum was a victim of trafficking and sexual exploitation, that did not stand in the way of the home secretary stripping her of British citizenship, as she had become a threat.
That decision was upheld at the Court of Appeal in February 2024.
The judges said Ms Begum "may well have been influenced and manipulated by others but still have made a calculated decision to travel to Syria and align with Islamic State"."

Listen... after WW2, the British were the front runner for the principle of you can never ever make anyone stateless. That is what the British have done with Ms Begum. That is just a sad fact, and it is the Tories who have pushed this ability, despite it was them that were the champion of the principle after WW2. Why? Because Hitler made the Jews of Germany stateless and used the exact same excuses. So it is pathetic how low the once great nation of the UK has fallen under the current administration.

There is no doubt that the court system has been massively influenced by the Tory government to get to this result, after the decade of fiasco with the blind one armed Egyptian priest.

Ms Begum was born in London as an UK citizen. That right has been taken away from her, and if they can do it to her, then they can do it to anyone and that is the fundamental problem. Rishi Sunak can have his citizenship taken away from him.. why? Because his parents are immigrants.. from Kenya and Tanzania, so he could "most likely" get citizenship there.. Or maybe Pakistan since thats where his gramps comes from.. regardless, because there is a "maybe" involved, the present UK rules means he can have his citizenship removed. Good to know eh?

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Ms Begum was born in London as an UK citizen. That right has been taken away from her, and if they can do it to her, then they can do it to anyone and that is the fundamental problem. Rishi Sunak can have his citizenship taken away from him.. why? Because his parents are immigrants.. from Kenya and Tanzania, so he could "most likely" get citizenship there.. Or maybe Pakistan since thats where his gramps comes from.. regardless, because there is a "maybe" involved, the present UK rules means he can have his citizenship removed.

You know Begum ran off to the Caliphate? We're not talking of her running off to Manchester or Devon to have kids but a whole separate enemy state.

It doesn't exist now but she clearly intended to become a citizen of that state if it had continued.

If Sunak or anyone else (white / black / green etc etc) had run off to dclare loyalty and intention to have babies in support of a brand new state then they have made their choices in life clear. Or do you not think she is responsible for those choices?

Worse still - do you think she's only responsible of any enemy state she ran off to join and have children for if that state survives and continues?

 

[PeteEU]

You know Begum ran off to the Caliphate? We're not talking of her running off to Manchester or Devon to have kids but a whole separate enemy state.

And so what? Was that illegal.. hell is that even illegal now? And if it is illegal, is removal of her citizenship the punishment? Show me the law.

It doesn't exist now but she clearly intended to become a citizen of that state if it had continued.

And you know this how? Plus you are allowed to have dual citizenship in the UK.

If Sunak or anyone else (white / black / green etc etc) had run off to dclare loyalty and intention to have babies in support of a brand new state then they have made their choices in life clear. Or do you not think she is responsible for those choices?

Oh she is responsible for sure.. but then make a law that makes such acts illegal. Dont make shit up after the fact, and use "band aid" legislation that can and WILL be abused. Just because it is against Muslims right now, it could just as easily be against Jews, Irishmen or whoever the government of the day dont like.. Labour members maybe?

Worse still - do you think she's only responsible of any enemy state she ran off to join and have children for if that state survives and continues?

Frankly I could care less about her.. it is the freaking principle and the slippery slope problem. That you do not understand this is kinda shocking.

The UK government, instead of putting in legislation to tackle such things within the human rights legislation that they forced on the world.. the UK governments (Labour and Tory) have gone out of their way take a "short cut" and each time if screws them. Thatcher started it with Northern Irish homosexuals, and Blair and Cameron/Boris both ****ed up against the blind one armed Egyptian. This is another example of failed legislative planing. It is basically up to the government of the day, of who deserves to be treated this way and THAT is a problem and a slippery slope.

Not even your former traitors that helped the Soviets, lost their freaking citizenship. Oh yea, they were white Christians.... forgot about that. They went to jail. They broke a law.. what law has she broken where the punishment is becoming stateless?

 

[Infinite Chaos]

And so what? Was that illegal.. hell is that even illegal now? And if it is illegal, is removal of her citizenship the punishment? Show me the law.

I've linked the legal process in the BBC article. I don't remember a "law" but powers were invested in the Home Secretary.

And you know this how? Plus you are allowed to have dual citizenship in the UK.

Know that she went off to join the Caliphate? You seriously asking that?

but then make a law that makes such acts illegal. Dont make shit up after the fact

You'd complain if a law was made after the fact.

 

[Borg Refinery]

He is certainly outspoken and can cross the line, though he is as often criticising other Muslims as anyone else. I do find how chopped up his quotes are here a little suspicious though, an all too common media ploy to misrepresent the intent of a statement and to remove any nuance and conditions. That is particularly notable because this is lifted directly from the Yorkshire Post (a British local newspaper), who were quoting their own interview with him but don't link that full interview in any way (indeed, I couldn't find it online at all).

Seems to be the common MO of many here

I usually skip straight past their threads

 

[samiam5211]

This is sufficient grounds for his removal. He is calling for violence.

He would be better suited for life in Qatar or Iran.

Where did he call for violence?

 

[ColdHardTruth]

Where did he call for violence?

He is trying to out the family members of other politicians. There is no reason to do so other than to make them targets of the anti-Israel cabal.

 

[samiam5211]

He is trying to out the family members of other politicians. There is no reason to do so other than to make them targets of the anti-Israel cabal.

Where did he call for violence?

 

[Rumpel]

You should stop.

Israel didn't start that war.

Israel didnt