Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC-US)   Surely the BBC knows phrasing is crucial in a headline   (bbc.com) divider line
    More: Scary, Court, Law, United Kingdom, Appellate court, Appeal, Supreme court, Supreme Court of the United States, Shamima Begum  
•       •       •

648 clicks; posted to Discussion » on 16 Jul 2020 at 6:20 PM (14 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



26 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-07-16 5:13:56 PM  
Was it changed? I don't get the joke.

Anyway Begum is an awful trash person who should be jailed, but revoking birthright citizenship is a bad precedent. Particularly as the justification -- "oh her grandma is from Bangladesh so she can just be Bangladeshi" -- creates a two-tier racial caste system in birthright citizenship. If you're white English, you're nothing but British and cannot ever have that taken away from you; if either of your parents are of foreign heritage, you're only ever provisionally British, as your citizenship can be stripped by decree without trial or right to appeal.

Britain already has a very bad habit of deporting minorities and their children "back home" to countries they have never been to in their lives, on the grounds that such and such ethnic heritage qualifies them to be citizens of those countries, even in cases where those countries say "wait what no we have no record of this person and do not want them". The Begum case adds the extra wrinkle of doing that to a born-and-raised British person from London.

And on principle that's a really really bad look for a government, particularly when "terror" and "extremism" can be so nebulously defined that police guidance documents will put Black Lives Matter symbols and Nazi symbols on the same page for identifying "potential extremist groups", and when PREVENT spends more time warning against vegans and environmentalists than against white nationalists.

But yeah Begum herself is trash so I don't want to confuse "the government shouldn't be stripping people of citizenship by decree without recourse to appeal" with anything remotely approaching support for her.
 
2020-07-16 5:57:39 PM  
You can re-arrange her name to spell "Ahem Bug Imams".  So she has that going for her.
 
2020-07-16 6:25:27 PM  

pkjun: Was it changed? I don't get the joke.


This. This right here.
 
2020-07-16 6:26:24 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: You can re-arrange her name to spell "Ahem Bug Imams".  So she has that going for her.


Or, "Ahem u big mams"
 
2020-07-16 6:34:49 PM  

Nick Nostril: Marcus Aurelius: You can re-arrange her name to spell "Ahem Bug Imams".  So she has that going for her.

Or, "Ahem u big mams"


Or "Mug a Memsahib"
 
2020-07-16 6:39:38 PM  

Nick Nostril: pkjun: Was it changed? I don't get the joke.

This. This right here.


Subby probably thinks that her name is close to "big cum" or something, and expected the BBC to magically grant her a new name or something.

Subby also probably thinks that fart jokes are highly sophisticated.

So subby may be a little slow.

Or maybe they changed it.
 
2020-07-16 6:44:15 PM  

Mikey1969: Nick Nostril: pkjun: Was it changed? I don't get the joke.

This. This right here.

Subby probably thinks that her name is close to "big cum" or something, and expected the BBC to magically grant her a new name or something.

Subby also probably thinks that fart jokes are highly sophisticated.

So subby may be a little slow.

Or maybe they changed it.


Well it WAS "BBC is hard on Begum" but then they fixed it.
 
2020-07-16 7:40:01 PM  

pkjun: Anyway Begum is an awful trash person who should be jailed, but revoking birthright citizenship is a bad precedent. Particularly as the justification -- "oh her grandma is from Bangladesh so she can just be Bangladeshi" -- creates a two-tier racial caste system in birthright citizenship. If you're white English, you're nothing but British and cannot ever have that taken away from you; if either of your parents are of foreign heritage, you're only ever provisionally British, as your citizenship can be stripped by decree without trial or right to appeal.


Jack Letts is white and born in Britain. So whether it is right or not it is not something the UK only does to "brown people".
 
2020-07-16 8:01:30 PM  

pkjun: Was it changed? I don't get the joke.

Anyway Begum is an awful trash person who should be jailed, but revoking birthright citizenship is a bad precedent. Particularly as the justification -- "oh her grandma is from Bangladesh so she can just be Bangladeshi" -- creates a two-tier racial caste system in birthright citizenship. If you're white English, you're nothing but British and cannot ever have that taken away from you; if either of your parents are of foreign heritage, you're only ever provisionally British, as your citizenship can be stripped by decree without trial or right to appeal.

Britain already has a very bad habit of deporting minorities and their children "back home" to countries they have never been to in their lives, on the grounds that such and such ethnic heritage qualifies them to be citizens of those countries, even in cases where those countries say "wait what no we have no record of this person and do not want them". The Begum case adds the extra wrinkle of doing that to a born-and-raised British person from London.

And on principle that's a really really bad look for a government, particularly when "terror" and "extremism" can be so nebulously defined that police guidance documents will put Black Lives Matter symbols and Nazi symbols on the same page for identifying "potential extremist groups", and when PREVENT spends more time warning against vegans and environmentalists than against white nationalists.

But yeah Begum herself is trash so I don't want to confuse "the government shouldn't be stripping people of citizenship by decree without recourse to appeal" with anything remotely approaching support for her.


She must be a dual citizen, as I don't believe that the UK could remove her UK citizenship under legal law otherwise.

If she is one, I am fine with her having her "secondary" citizenship removed.

If she is not a citizen of Bangladesh, the UK won't be able to send her there. Why would they want a terrorist that doesn't "belong" to them.¨

And sending her back to Syria will probably also be problematic.

Perhaps she can have a trial over Zoom?
 
2020-07-16 8:26:35 PM  

Ketchuponsteak: She must be a dual citizen, as I don't believe that the UK could remove her UK citizenship under legal law otherwise.


No, she potentially has a claim to Bangladeshi citizenship, but is not a Bangladeshi citizen.

These farks in power right now just don't care about quaint concepts like justice and the rule of law.

The UK is a banana republic monarchy.

/Was there a Fark thread about the guy running the committee on Russian interference being ejected from the Tory party because he was chosen over Chris "Failin'" Grayling?
//I missed it if there was.
 
2020-07-16 9:03:15 PM  

iron de havilland: /Was there a Fark thread about the guy running the committee on Russian interference being ejected from the Tory party because he was chosen over Chris "Failin'" Grayling?
//I missed it if there was.


There was a Fark submission about Russian interference in the election but since it revealed that Russia helped Corbyn and Labour it was contrary to Farkers insisting that the Russians helped the Tories and Brexit so it wasn't greened.
 
2020-07-16 9:10:34 PM  

Carter Pewterschmidt: iron de havilland: /Was there a Fark thread about the guy running the committee on Russian interference being ejected from the Tory party because he was chosen over Chris "Failin'" Grayling?
//I missed it if there was.

There was a Fark submission about Russian interference in the election but since it revealed that Russia helped Corbyn and Labour it was contrary to Farkers insisting that the Russians helped the Tories and Brexit so it wasn't greened.


Yes, they helped Corbyn and Labour so much that Corbyn revealed information about how they helped the Tories, who then went on to win the general election. Clearly 5D chess on Corbyn's part.

Perhaps you should read articles that you post before posting them.
 
2020-07-16 9:15:41 PM  

iron de havilland: Carter Pewterschmidt: iron de havilland: /Was there a Fark thread about the guy running the committee on Russian interference being ejected from the Tory party because he was chosen over Chris "Failin'" Grayling?
//I missed it if there was.

There was a Fark submission about Russian interference in the election but since it revealed that Russia helped Corbyn and Labour it was contrary to Farkers insisting that the Russians helped the Tories and Brexit so it wasn't greened.

Yes, they helped Corbyn and Labour so much that Corbyn revealed information about how they helped the Tories, who then went on to win the general election. Clearly 5D chess on Corbyn's part.

Perhaps you should read articles that you post before posting them.


Please quote the text in that article that backs up your claim.

Because that article says that Russian agents fed Corbyn claims that the Tories were going to screw the NHS in a trade deal with the US.
 
2020-07-16 9:18:39 PM  

Carter Pewterschmidt: Please quote the text in that article that backs up your claim.


No.

You do that.

You posted it. Explain yourself.
 
2020-07-16 9:22:08 PM  

Carter Pewterschmidt: Please quote the text in that article that backs up your claim.


And seriously, you do this and get butthurt on getting called out for sealioning?
 
2020-07-16 9:24:25 PM  
Anyway, that's enough time for you being off ignore. I bet you're going to post something about how I mocked Liz Truss 3 years ago next.

I don't farking care.

Bye bye.
 
2020-07-16 9:33:27 PM  

Some Junkie Cosmonaut: Mikey1969: Nick Nostril: pkjun: Was it changed? I don't get the joke.

This. This right here.

Subby probably thinks that her name is close to "big cum" or something, and expected the BBC to magically grant her a new name or something.

Subby also probably thinks that fart jokes are highly sophisticated.

So subby may be a little slow.

Or maybe they changed it.

Well it WAS "BBC is hard on Begum" but then they fixed it.


This is why I prefer when news sites include their title in the post slug - makes it a little harder for them to hide their tracks when they change the title.
 
2020-07-16 9:47:04 PM  

iron de havilland: Anyway, that's enough time for you being off ignore. I bet you're going to post something about how I mocked Liz Truss 3 years ago next.

I don't farking care.

Bye bye.


Funny how you always get pissed off and put me on ignore every time I ask you to back up something you said and you can't.
 
2020-07-16 9:51:00 PM  

iron de havilland: Anyway, that's enough time for you being off ignore. I bet you're going to post something about how I mocked Liz Truss 3 years ago next.

I don't farking care.

Bye bye.


And you didn't "mock" Liz Truss. You claimed a video of her was the justice minister talking about farming, when she was actually the farming minister at the time, making your comment totally meaningless. You then doubled down on it and refused to admit you got it wrong.

Just like claiming the Tories had nothing to do with the NI peace process, when they started it and did most of the work, and your claim that the SNP didn't lie in their campaign, they "just made promises that turned out to not be possible"....
 
2020-07-16 11:04:08 PM  

Enigmamf: Some Junkie Cosmonaut: Mikey1969: Nick Nostril: pkjun: Was it changed? I don't get the joke.

This. This right here.

Subby probably thinks that her name is close to "big cum" or something, and expected the BBC to magically grant her a new name or something.

Subby also probably thinks that fart jokes are highly sophisticated.

So subby may be a little slow.

Or maybe they changed it.

Well it WAS "BBC is hard on Begum" but then they fixed it.

This is why I prefer when news sites include their title in the post slug - makes it a little harder for them to hide their tracks when they change the title.


I don't disagree - but I really have no idea if they changed it, or subby's been smoking chloroquinine or something.  It was just the first "What the hell joke would even work with this story?" idea that came to mind.
 
2020-07-17 8:49:20 AM  

iron de havilland: Ketchuponsteak: She must be a dual citizen, as I don't believe that the UK could remove her UK citizenship under legal law otherwise.

No, she potentially has a claim to Bangladeshi citizenship, but is not a Bangladeshi citizen.

These farks in power right now just don't care about quaint concepts like justice and the rule of law.

The UK is a banana republic monarchy.

/Was there a Fark thread about the guy running the committee on Russian interference being ejected from the Tory party because he was chosen over Chris "Failin'" Grayling?
//I missed it if there was.


In that case the UK would be in violation of international law.

The UK has signed and ratified that they can't make people stateless. If I were Bangladesh, I wouldn't be to keen on issuing any to a terrorist anyway, no matter what "claim" she has.
 
2020-07-17 9:31:23 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: In that case the UK would be in violation of international law.

The UK has signed and ratified that they can't make people stateless. If I were Bangladesh, I wouldn't be to keen on issuing any to a terrorist anyway, no matter what "claim" she has.


If she has citizenship in Bangladesh but refused to honour it then wouldn't that mean they would be leaving her stateless?
 
2020-07-17 10:05:33 AM  

Carter Pewterschmidt: Ketchuponsteak: In that case the UK would be in violation of international law.

The UK has signed and ratified that they can't make people stateless. If I were Bangladesh, I wouldn't be to keen on issuing any to a terrorist anyway, no matter what "claim" she has.

If she has citizenship in Bangladesh but refused to honour it then wouldn't that mean they would be leaving her stateless?


You, mean if they refuse to honour her "right" to citizenship?

How can she have any such right, if she's born in the UK, and has an UK citizenship.

Maybe Bangladeshi law is such that she has that inherent right, but regardless, I'd say the UK is the one that would render her stateless, if her UK one is her only citizenship.


In my opinion, I think a nation ought to deal with their own citizens, even if they're terrorists, and dealing with them means locking them up.
 
2020-07-17 10:47:51 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: You, mean if they refuse to honour her "right" to citizenship?

How can she have any such right, if she's born in the UK, and has an UK citizenship.

Maybe Bangladeshi law is such that she has that inherent right, but regardless, I'd say the UK is the one that would render her stateless, if her UK one is her only citizenship.


I am British and born in Canada but when I applied for my Irish passport it was an absolute right. My mother was born in NI so that was it. I didn't have to apply for Irish citizenship, or get approved or anything, I just applied for an Irish passport and that was it. For all they knew I had never set foot in Ireland in my entire life but I already had citizenship.

Ketchuponsteak: In my opinion, I think a nation ought to deal with their own citizens, even if they're terrorists, and dealing with them means locking them up.


I generally agree, but when she, and Jihadi Jack, chose to leave the UK to fight against the UK then I can't say I'm that upset they have been told to stay out. This is vastly different to the Windrush scandal where people came here and lived here legally for decades in good faith and then were told they couldn't stay.

If she was genuinely repentant I'd offer her a deal. Come back and talk to kids at schools around the country telling them that joining ISIS was a stupid idea and that she's glad to be back in a democratic, free, country with human rights and that these kids shouldn't fall for any extremist propaganda.
 
2020-07-17 11:32:05 AM  
Carter Pewterschmidt:

I generally agree, but when she, and Jihadi Jack, chose to leave the UK to fight against the UK then I can't say I'm that upset they have been told to stay out. This is vastly different to the Windrush scandal where people came here and lived here legally for decades in good faith and then were told they couldn't stay.

If she was genuinely repentant I'd offer her a deal. Come back and talk to kids at schools around the country telling them that joining ISIS was a stupid idea and that she's glad to be back in a democratic, free, country with human rights and that these kids shouldn't fall for any extremist propaganda.


What I meant when by dealing with your own citizens, I didn't mean out of concern for the citizen. But because you shouldn't make some other nation deal with your citizens.

If it was only out of concern for her, then perhaps I'd feel different. But now Syria has this terrorist there, that the UK could otherwise take of their hands.

Maybe it would also be a violation of her human rights to ship her to Bangladesh, I'm not really up to speed on that nation. But not every Muslim regime welcomes ISIS terrorists with open arms.
 
2020-07-17 11:56:28 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: What I meant when by dealing with your own citizens, I didn't mean out of concern for the citizen. But because you shouldn't make some other nation deal with your citizens.

If it was only out of concern for her, then perhaps I'd feel different. But now Syria has this terrorist there, that the UK could otherwise take of their hands.

Maybe it would also be a violation of her human rights to ship her to Bangladesh, I'm not really up to speed on that nation. But not every Muslim regime welcomes ISIS terrorists with open arms.


Valid points. I'm not exactly supporting this policy, just saying that I'm not exactly terribly sad that this has happened to these specific people either. But what's the alternative? What they can prove she did would probably mean a few months in jail and then let out back on to the streets, which if she still supports her views isn't something I'd be happy about. Indefinite internment? Because that worked so well in Northern Ireland....

The bottom line is by choosing to leave the UK and fight for a terrorist group against the UK and British citizens you have by default voided your British citizenship. Americans can automatically surrender their citizenship by joining another countries military or by committing treason.
You will no longer be an American citizen if you voluntarily give up (renounce) your U.S. citizenship.
You might lose your U.S. citizenship in specific cases, including if you:
Run for public office in a foreign country (under certain conditions)
Enter military service in a foreign country (under certain conditions)
Apply for citizenship in a foreign country with the intention of giving up U.S. citizenship
Commit an act of treason against the United States


It seems fair. You can't reject a country and fight against it and then if things go badly for you suddenly want to come back and demand the protection and rights of that country. You made your choice.
 
Displayed 26 of 26 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.