Lisa Smith home.

ELM327

Brian? wrote: »

Posters on every immigration thread: “if immigrants commit crimes they should be deported”

Same posters on this thread: “Irish woman being deported shouldn’t be allowed in”


Do ye actually sit down and think about this at all?

My rationale for my viewpoint here is that she is a potential danger to our society and would have expected (see my above post) that we had recourse to protect ourself from said harm

Sardonicat

ELM327 wrote: »

Why are we stuck with our isis woman when the UK was able to revoke the citizenship of theirs?
I thought we enacted legislation allowing citizenship here to be revoked when needed?


(Genuine factual question, I'm looking to understand why a woman with isis links who is refusing to cooperate with our authorities has to remain here)

In the UK case (Begum, I think) she had dual citizenship (Bangladesh, IIRC) so by revoking her UK citizenship she was still Bangledeshi and not rendered stateless. All of this has been covered several times in thread already.

tuxy

ELM327 wrote: »

Why are we stuck with our isis woman when the UK was able to revoke the citizenship of theirs?
I thought we enacted legislation allowing citizenship here to be revoked when needed?


(Genuine factual question, I'm looking to understand why a woman with isis links who is refusing to cooperate with our authorities has to remain here)

Uk trying to offload their problems on another country, Shamima Begum has a possible claim to Bangladeshi citizenship and they are using this to remove her citizenship.

Lisa has no claim of citizenship to any other state, it is illegal for us to make her stateless.

Signore Fancy Pants

ELM327 wrote: »

Why are we stuck with our isis woman when the UK was able to revoke the citizenship of theirs?
I thought we enacted legislation allowing citizenship here to be revoked when needed?


(Genuine factual question, I'm looking to understand why a woman with isis links who is refusing to cooperate with our authorities has to remain here)

Did the UK guys have dual citizenship? Its easier and "legal" to revoke citizenship if a person has dual citizenship.

ohnonotgmail

ELM327 wrote: »

My rationale for my viewpoint here is that she is a potential danger to our society and would have expected (see my above post) that we had recourse to protect ourself from said harm

How far do you think we should go with that? deport everybody we consider a threat to society even if they have not been convicted of a crime?

tuxy

ELM327 wrote: »

My rationale for my viewpoint here is that she is a potential danger to our society and would have expected (see my above post) that we had recourse to protect ourself from said harm

Why don't we put all our dangerous criminals on flight to the middle east?
I'm sure they wouldn't protest that at all.

ELM327

Sardonicat wrote: »

In the UK case (Begum, I think) she had dual citizenship (Bangladesh, IIRC) so by revoking her UK citizenship she was still Bangledeshi and not rendered stateless. All of this has been covered several times in thread already.

tuxy wrote: »

Uk trying to offload their problems on another country, Shamima Begum has a possible claim to Bangladeshi citizenship and they are using this to remove her citizenship.

Lisa has no claim of citizenship to any other state, it is illegal for us to make her stateless.

Signore Fancy Pants wrote: »

Did the UK guys have dual citizenship? Its easier and "legal" to revoke citizenship if a person has dual citizenship.

Thanks guys, I didnt know of that difference in circumstances.
Not everything is an argument, some of us are just looking to find out the "why"

EDIT: and posts like the below are clearly unhelpful

tuxy wrote: »

Why don't we put all our dangerous criminals on flight to the middle east?
I'm sure they wouldn't protest that at all.

tuxy

ELM327 wrote: »

Thanks guys, I didnt know of that difference in circumstances.
Not everything is an argument, some of us are just looking to find out the "why"

Sorry, it's just been covered over and over again on here. But it's a long thread so I understand.

ELM327 wrote: »

EDIT: and posts like the below are clearly unhelpful

You were making the point of deporting one of our citizens to a country they have no right to be in. I just didn't follow the logic behind it.

ELM327

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

How far do you think we should go with that? deport everybody we consider a threat to society even if they have not been convicted of a crime?

Following due process, but she has already admitted to her involvement with isis - therefore the crime is already admitted.

ohnonotgmail

ELM327 wrote: »

Why are we stuck with our isis woman when the UK was able to revoke the citizenship of theirs?

Did they revoke her citizenship? they certainly said they would but did they actually follow through?

ELM327 wrote: »

I thought we enacted legislation allowing citizenship here to be revoked when needed?


(Genuine factual question, I'm looking to understand why a woman with isis links who is refusing to cooperate with our authorities has to remain here)

we haven't and nor could we. we cannot make a person stateless.

ohnonotgmail

ELM327 wrote: »

Following due process, but she has already admitted to her involvement with isis - therefore the crime is already admitted.

what crime?

tuxy

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Did they revoke her citizenship? they certainly said they would but did they actually follow through?

They did on the basis that she can claim Bangladeshi citizenship. It's a questionable decision and probably still not legal under international law. It's being appealed.

Field east

Brian? wrote: »

We do. All the time.

This is the first one I could think of off the top of my head.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord%27s_Resistance_Army

But seriously, have you ever read a history book?

What are you no about? We are talking about now - not what anybody did xxxx years ago. If we follow your apparent logic then we could be using any means possible do ‘deal ‘with each other - cherry pick the method/ implement you want to use from whichever decade/centuary

tuxy

ELM327 wrote: »

Following due process, but she has already admitted to her involvement with isis - therefore the crime is already admitted.

What due process is there to deport someone to a country they are not a citizen of?

Boggles

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Did they revoke her citizenship? they certainly said they would but did they actually follow through?

They did I think, it's been challenged through the courts at the moment.

It was done for the sole purpose to make a certain person look "tough" to strengthen their PM bid. It failed spectacularly.

Meanwhile this delightful lady is still a UK Citizen.

ohnonotgmail

Sardonicat wrote: »

In the UK case (Begum, I think) she had dual citizenship (Bangladesh, IIRC) so by revoking her UK citizenship she was still Bangledeshi and not rendered stateless. All of this has been covered several times in thread already.

begum did not have bangladeshi citizenship. SHe was possibly entitled to claim it but the bangladeshi government said she was not entitled to it.

ohnonotgmail

Field east wrote: »

What are you no about? We are talking about now - not what anybody did xxxx years ago. If we follow your apparent logic then we could be using any means possible do ‘deal ‘with each other - cherry pick the method/ implement you want to use from whichever decade/centuary

The LRA are still active.

Brian?

ELM327 wrote: »

Why are we stuck with our isis woman when the UK was able to revoke the citizenship of theirs?
I thought we enacted legislation allowing citizenship here to be revoked when needed?


(Genuine factual question, I'm looking to understand why a woman with isis links who is refusing to cooperate with our authorities has to remain here)

Ireland and the UK are different countries with different laws.

The one person I know who’s British citizenship was removed: she had dual Bangladeshi and British citizenship so removing her British citizenship didn’t leave her stateless. This is currently being challenged and likely will be over turned.

tuxy

Can we make it clear that Lisa has no claim to citizenship of either Turkey or Syria and neither does her child.

ohnonotgmail

tuxy wrote: »

Can we make it clear that Lisa has no claim to citizenship of either Turkey or Syria and neither does her child.

And she is also not a citizen of IS because IS was never a recognised state.

Sardonicat

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

begum did not have bangladeshi citizenship. SHe was possibly entitled to claim it but the bangladeshi government said she was not entitled to it.

Ah, OK. But the reason the UK was using for legally revoking her UK citizenship was her recourse to dual nationality, though. If she doesn't actually have it, they can't do it. My point being that Lisa doesn't have dual nationality so we can't try that method to revoke her Irish citizenship. I have no idea if what the UK did re Begum was legal or not, just that that was the reason they tried to use

Patrick2010

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what crime?

When she went to join IS they were in the process of invading large areas of Syria and Iraq, slaughtering all around them, postincg beheading videos on a daily basis.
As well as that they carried out mass murder in Europe, Bataclan, Nice etc.
Also murders of Irish citizens in Tunisia and Turkey. Despite what her lawyer says everyone knows Lisa was well aware of all their activities and wanted to be a part of this invading caliphate until it was stopped. Even then she stuck it out to the bitter end with the rest of the real hard core.


What crime to charge her with?, member of a terrorist organisation that admitted the killing of Irish citizens?

ohnonotgmail

Patrick2010 wrote: »

When she went to join IS they were in the process of invading large areas of Syria and Iraq, slaughtering all around them, postincg beheading videos on a daily basis.
As well as that they carried out mass murder in Europe, Bataclan, Nice etc.
Also murders of Irish citizens in Tunisia and Turkey. Despite what her lawyer says everyone knows Lisa was well aware of all their activities and wanted to be a part of this invading caliphate until it was stopped. Even then she stuck it out to the bitter end with the rest of the real hard core.


What crime to charge her with?, member of a terrorist organisation that admitted the killing of Irish citizens?

ISIS was not a proscribed organisation at the time she joined. They would have to prove that she took part in terrorist activities directly. that will be very difficult to prove.

tuxy

tuxy wrote: »

Can we make it clear that Lisa has no claim to citizenship of either Turkey or Syria and neither does her child.

Hypothetical

If Irish laws didn’t automatically give Irish citizenship to children not born in the country (let’s just say their rules are the same as Syria so citizenship comes from father) and Syria didn’t give automatic citizenship, where would that leave a child?

ohnonotgmail

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Hypothetical

If Irish laws didn’t automatically give Irish citizenship to children not born in the country (let’s just say their rules are the same as Syria so citizenship comes from father) and Syria didn’t give automatic citizenship, where would that leave a child?

If the rules are the same as syria then the child would have the citizenship of the father. or maybe i am misunderstanding you.

tuxy

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Hypothetical

If Irish laws didn’t automatically give Irish citizenship to children not born in the country (let’s just say their rules are the same as Syria so citizenship comes from father) and Syria didn’t give automatic citizenship, where would that leave a child?

That would have left us in a situation where we could have refused to allow the child to enter the country but Turkey would have still forced us to take Lisa back. I don't really see any benefit to that. You can be sure the UN would have applied pressure for us to take the child on humanitarian grounds.

nthclare

I wonder did she burn her passport too like the rest of those cruel vile warriors...

How did she get here without a passport ?

Who's to say she's not going to buy a knife and go postal on people in a shopping que or walking the streets with another jihadist...

Narcissism and Jihadism are a dangerous mix

She has no remorse whatsoever.

Whether you're a Pagan, Atheist, Shia Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Yazidi, Sufi Muslim, Alawite Muslim, Agnostic, Buddhist, Satanist..

Her gang considers you a Kaffir, yes a Kaffir

They'll shoot you in the head, slice off your head with a silky saw, burn you, flatten you, blow your head off, drown you, vaporise you, boil you....

kill you certainly.

if you're not a follower of their version of Islam, you're nothing in their eyes

chooey

US2 wrote: »

Is this her bringing a few young girls off to marry there 40 year old husbands

That photo is so awful- those poor kids

HeidiHeidi

She's been taken to the CCJ according to a tweet (which I cannot link to for some reason). Presumably an application for an extension to her detention.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

If the rules are the same as syria then the child would have the citizenship of the father. or maybe i am misunderstanding you.

It was just one of those random thoughts going around in my head with different rules in different countries which country trumps the other countries?

The father isn’t from Syria either (I think), so if his country had a rule that only people born in that country could be citizens, it would leave a child in limbo.