The ISIS brides baby was an innocent in this terrible situation; the same as the other two baby’s who apparently died at the same time. The point is the ISIS brides baby was not the UKs responsibility because the ISIS bride voluntarily gave up U.K. citizenship when she left.

In an ideal world all the innocents in the terrible situation ISIS have had a big part in creating would be supported and safeguarded from risk, harm etc; but it’s simply not that easy … there are thousands of innocent baby’s caught up in the situation – where is the best place to start? With the child of ISIS murderers and those directly responsible for making a situation worse, or with a child from parents innocently caught up in the situation?

There are only tough decisions.

the ISIS brides baby was not the UKs responsibility

Your opinion. If I understand right, Javid’s decision to strip her of citizenship (and make her stateless) is being challenged in the courts. Irrespective, it’s not an academic question. A baby died in part because of political point scoring. We could and should have done the right thing.

A baby died in part because of political point scoring. We could and should have done the right thing.

No again. A baby died because its mother intentionally put it at risk.
This government, as much as disagree and dislike this government, it had as much/little responsibility for the ISIS brides baby as it did the other too babys that died that day.

What do you believe is the right thing?

To have brought the ISIS brides baby to the UK, and to have left the two babys that also died there because their parents didnt have a UK passport too?

Frankly, yes. British citizenship brings with it rights, and we have responsibilities to our citizens. The baby was an innocent British citizen.

Other nations have responsibilities to their citizens in the first instance at least.

Because we can’t help everyone, should we help no-one?

If her baby was her number one priority, she had 9 months to sort out her repatriation back to the UK.

Perhaps she risked waiting until it was born in the hope it would strengthen her position?

Not saying that there is anything positive in this situation, but perhaps better decisions by the mother could have done a lot to prevent this situation.

As horrible as the whole situation is, I think the main intention of stripping her of citizenship was (whether rightly or wrongly) making an example of her to serve as a deterrent for other British citizens with similar plans. Unfortunately this poor baby was caught up in the middle of all this mess.

I can grasp the point of the decision if it was made based on the bigger picture – essentially (at the time potentially) losing a few to save more lives, and prevent conflict in the future. However this involves totally ignoring the humanitarian and moral aspects which is very difficult, especially given the loss of the baby – unfortunately there’s no easy solution to prevent further hurt & loss to any of the people involved in the present (or future) situation – it’s just going to polarise opinion.

theotherjonv

Subscriber
British citizenship brings with it rights, and we have responsibilities to our citizens.

And citizens have responsibilities to adhere to also.

theotherjonv

Subscriber

Other nations have responsibilities to their citizens in the first instance at least.

Because we can’t help everyone, should we help no-one?

In an ideal world of unlimited resources; then I would say yes, we should help everyone regardless of where they were born and what nation they belonged to.
But .. there are limited resources; and tough decisions have to be made … so you have to prioritise – and make very difficult decisions.

So we come back to the facts that the ISIS bride being the one who had ultimate responsibility, and subsequently is the one who primarily contributed to her innocent child’s position and ultimate death.

I imagine she was advised not to raise her citizenship earlier in the pregnancy as British citizenship would only be conferred to her child when born if she still had hers. She raised it late enough that her child got citizenship before hers was removed.

No – the child’s mother contributed the most to the innocent child’s position and ultimate death.

It’s typically ignorant to ignore the facts and overlook the decisions the ISIS bride took leading up to this terrible situation.

You’re embarrassing yourself.

the ISIS bride

Why do you keep calling her this? I presume it’s an effort to dehumanise her, so that you can ignore the fact that she’s a 19 year old British citizen who has experienced horrors that most of us couldn’t imagine, and so that you can be absolved from having to show her any type of compassion or empathy? It’s pathetic quite frankly, and devalues  everything else you say on the matter. Try using her name, you might come across as a bit more human instead of a small minded bigot.

It’s a terribly sad story but no doubt just one of many deaths in that camp this week.

That girl moved to a war zone, married an ISIS fighter and lived in a Caliphate. I don’t have a great deal of sympathy for her.

I do feel sorry for the hundreds of innocent people in that camp, displaced by the fighting, which ISIS were at the heart of. She was only there due to the fact her group had been defeated and her husband captured.

My first thoughts when those three legged it to Syria were a) being abused and b) pressure for arranged marriages (the ‘long holiday’ in Bangladesh during Yr 10 at school) in addition to the usual teenage stuff. I’m sure the context was more complex than just being ideologically groomed on line but we’re unlikely ever to find out. It doesn’t seem to be playing out quite as Javid had hoped.

Like dazh, I’m pretty shocked by the levels some folk will go to de-humanise her just so that they can proclaim on an internet forum just how completely inhumane they are. It’s a strange boast fo’shure

The point is the ISIS brides baby was not the UKs responsibility because the ISIS bride voluntarily gave up U.K. citizenship when she left.

You need to read this, Mooman:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Reduction_of_Statelessness

The British government has made her stateless, she did not do it voluntarily. She falls into the category of “involuntary loss” and the British government failed to observe an important clause

[l]aws for the renunciation of a nationality shall be conditional upon a person’s acquisition or possession of another nationality

She doesn’t possess another nationality and hasn’t made any attempt to aquire one even if eligible.

dazh

Subscriber
the ISIS bride

Why do you keep calling her this? I presume it’s an effort to dehumanise her, so that you can ignore the fact that she’s a 19 year old British citizen who has experienced horrors that most of us couldn’t imagine, and so that you can be absolved from having to show her any type of compassion or empathy? It’s pathetic quite frankly, and devalues everything else you say on the matter. Try using her name, you might come across as a bit more human instead of a small minded bigot.

and here come the Brexit thread loons …

she’s a 19 year old British citizen who has experienced horrors that most of us couldn’t imagine,

And who is fault is that exactly?…

I feel sorry for the baby, we should have taken it back for sure (I also think we should have taken her back if we legally had to as I’ve already said), but I do feel it’s not the uks responsibility to facilitate her return. If she had managed to get here herself then so be it. As has already been pointed out though, even if she hadn’t had her citizenship revoked it’s highly likely shed still be there anyway, it’s not as if she’s able to just jump in a taxi and hotfoot it to the airport for a flight home.

Let’s not pretend that the primary reason for the death is anything other than the mother’s however. She must have known fine well that popping out kids in a war zone was frankly a stupid thing to do yet she did it regardless, for reasons that certainly didn’t have the kids interests in mind.

I’m also pretty sure I read that she had said she wouldn’t let the kid return without her. Whether true or not I don’t know.

 popping out kids

Stay classy

they were talking about this on r4 this morning and the point was made that this is a Islamic Jihadi recruiters dream scenario…. see they don’t care about you and they care even less about your children. if you sow the seed :/

she’s a 19 year old British citizen who has experienced horrors that most of us couldn’t imagine

And publicly stated that those horrors “didn’t faze me at all”

She must have known fine well that popping out kids in a war zone was frankly a stupid thing to do yet she did it regardless

I know bloody silly girl, she really should have had a chat with the Caliphate’s family planning clinic to see what contraceptives were available to her.

and here come the Brexit thread loons

Looks like it already has brought them out.

I for one think that Sajid Javid is a real patriot and is keeping this country safe. This is the kind of action we need. I mean sure, you bring one baby in, next thing you know it brings all it’s relatives, sets up terrorist cells, and implements Sharia law. I mean, surely a baby is old enough to account for it’s own personal decisions right? PLUS Sajid is not just a patriot, I know for a fact his penis is massive, I mean look at him:

Humongous see! I’ve gone all weak at the knees.

evil ****

She must have known fine well that popping out kids in a war zone was frankly a stupid thing to do yet she did it regardless

Assuming, of course, that she had much choice in the matter. How far do you reckon “not tonight love, I have a headache” would have got her in that sort of environment?

the point was made that this is a Islamic Jihadi recruiters dream scenario…. see they don’t care about you and they care even less about your children.

Indeed. Exactly what I said a dozen pages back.

Incidentally, on the subject of citizenship,

I thought that citizenship was dependant on where you were born – so a child born in the UK to say Polish parents would be a British citizen. Is that not the case, have I misunderstood? And if it is, why was the child in question still considered British and not Syrian?

Incidentally, on the subject of citizenship,

I thought that citizenship was dependant on where you were born – so a child born in the UK to say Polish parents would be a British citizen. Is that not the case, have I misunderstood? And if it is, why was the child in question still considered British and not Syrian?

I thought that too, but apparently neither the UK nor Syria grant citizenship purely by birth:

https://www.indexmundi.com/syria/citizenship.html

https://www.gov.uk/types-of-british-nationality/british-citizenship

He would have had Dutch citizenship via his Dad and Uk citizenship via his Mum but in the absence of volunteers willing to deliver him to Holland or the Uk his citizenships were/are a moot point.

Incidentally, on the subject of citizenship,

Yep, as oob says, neither country confers citizenship by dint of your birth within their borders. Interestingly, the last country in the EU (IIRC) to stop doing so was Ireland in ’04 – a bit of scaremongering about birth-citizenship-tourism on the back of the Celtic Tiger helped that one along. Although it was packaged up in the amendment to allow UK citizens born in N.I. to also have Irish citizenship if they wanted (again, IIRC).

The child would be British as it was born to a British mother. She had her citizenship revoked after his birth.

It is highly unlikely that the life of the child would have been saved if the Home Secretary had not acted to revoke her citizenship as no action had been initiated to repatriate her. She had not actively sought out repatriation – the whole issue arose when a Times journalist ran into her while doing a piece in the refugee camp.

I don’t get why any of these muslims are bleating about this on social media – according to their religion the child was an innocent and so went straight to paradise – which is surely better than a stint down here with the life he would have had?

That’s why ISIS and the other fundamental islamist groups have no issue killing children.

being religious and slightly upset over the fact a friend has died is somwhat ok, but also a bit selfish to say they should stay down here with you rather than get a shortcut to paradise.

it all seems a bit hyprocritical – are they saying that they don’t really believe in god and heaven ?

It is highly unlikely that the life of the child would have been saved if the Home Secretary had not acted to revoke her citizenship

…and we know this for a fact because the Baby didn’t get out of Syria in spite of being a citizen of the Netherlands via his father, and the mother had Dutch citizenship via two routes: As sole carer of the child *and* as the wife of a Dutch National. Plus he was a citizen of the Uk. If citizenship of a European Nation was the route to survival he wouldn’t be dead. Citizenship wasn’t the problem. The lack of anyone willing to go and fetch him to the UK or Holland was the problem and/or perhaps he wasn’t free to leave the camp.

I’ve yet to be convinced Britain is much worse than other nations on repatriation of Isis volunteers. The UK has taken ~400 back and there are three where we’re really dragging our heels: The two surviving “beatles” and Shamima Begum. Are other countries repatriating theirs any faster than us or in greater numbers?

Incidentally, on the subject of citizenship,

I thought that citizenship was dependant on where you were born – so a child born in the UK to say Polish parents would be a British citizen. Is that not the case, have I misunderstood?

Depends. In 1992, at least, the child’s citizenship depended on the nationality or settled status of the mother.

Depends. In 1992, at least, the child’s citizenship depended on the nationality or settled status of the mother.

As shown in the link above, in Syria it’s the father who counts in the first instance, not the mother.

…and we know this for a fact because the Baby didn’t get out of Syria in spite of being a citizen of the Netherlands via his father, and the mother had Dutch citizenship via two routes: As sole carer of the child *and* as the wife of a Dutch National. If citizenship of a European Nation was the route to survival he wouldn’t be dead. Citizenship wasn’t the problem. The lack of anyone willing to go and fetch him was the problem and/or perhaps he wasn’t free to leave the camp.

Missing several points, I think. First is that the mother did not have Dutch citizenship or Bangladeshi citizenship. She may or may not have been eligible for them, but did not apply for them and hence did not have them.

Second is that as British citizens the mother and child should have been given such help as was feasible. Whether that would have been sufficient to save his/their lives we will never know – the situation was pre-empted by “Power Stance” Javid.

Missing several points, I think. First is that the mother did not have Dutch citizenship or Bangladeshi citizenship. She may or may not have been eligible for them, but did not apply for them and hence did not have them.

I can’t cite a source but I’m pretty sure as sole carer you get to travel with your child to Holland. Ie there was nothing to stop them both going to Holland. But does it matter? The Baby was a Dutch and UK citizen. Even if the UK didn’t step up to the plate Holland did. So we have a ‘control’ country who (presumably) behaved perfectly correctly in your opinion and the Baby is still dead. Or did Holland also fail to act appropriately to which leads us to:

the mother and child should have been given such help as was feasible. Whether that would have been sufficient to save his/their lives we will never know

Can you be a bit more specific about what help your suggesting? Should Holland and/or the Uk have used military force to get them out? Or send someone in a Taxi? Or are you just saying that *if* you or I had gone and taken the baby in to Turkey to an airport they should paid for the ticket from Turkey? I’m not saying you’re wrong, I just want to understand what action European countries should be taking to retrieve Isis volunteers and their children so I can judge for myself how practical it is.

I think people have made this a complicated issue.

The answer is simple really they have lost the war so they must accept all terms dictate to them regardless.

As for this young lady be thankful at least she is still alive while many other innocence people parished when they imposed their ideology on others.

They reap what they sow.

I just want to understand what action European countries should be taking to retrieve Isis volunteers and their children so I can judge for myself how practical it is.

We aren’t in a position to say, I think. The journo found her, so maybe (speculating) she could have been smuggled out in a car and across the Turkish border. But even if that had been feasible, what would have been the point if she had pitched up at the Embassy just to be told that Big Saj had locked the door? We (via our representative) abrogated our responsibilities; we can’t fully absolve ourselves from what followed.

We (via our representative) abrogated our responsibilities; we can’t fully absolve ourselves from what followed.

I think we can, because we have a control country: Holland. We can say with certainty that a European Country behaving correctly WRT to its citizens couldn’t save the baby.

So whatever the UK has got wrong, it didn’t lead to the baby’s death.

I’d say that lets us totally off the hook in terms of culpability for the death of the baby.

(…and you can’t suggest anything that would have helped, anyway.)

They reap what they sow

Bye bye civilization…

https://www.euronews.com/2019/03/07/what-is-europe-s-approach-to-repatriating-isis-members-euronews-answers

This all works out perfectly for Javid

as you can see by many of the comments on social media, an element of the country are actively celebrating the death of this baby,

so Javid has cemented his claim nicely in the forthcoming leadership elections.

I’d say that lets us totally off the hook in terms of culpability for the death of the baby.

Well if that’s enough for you to feel good about yourself, go for it!