it doesn't as she remains british regardless even if isis did become a state which thankfully it didn't.
"I was allowed to carry an AK47"
"I have never carried an AK. I was allowed to carry other weapons"
I rapidly changing story does never reflect well Mr Mitty.
The whole purpose in pointing out what I was allowed to do with regard to weaponry was to render your logic and the reason you provided as an accusation of terrorism as false. The detail is irrelevant, Like Begum I was allowed to carry weapons, I am not a terrorist, yet according to you, using your own logic, I am.
The train of logic here is stunningly incompetent. The detail is far from irrelevant.
I don't believe your story is true, but say it were. It would require a legal authorisation to possess firearms.
Somebody issued a firearms license is legally permitted to carry firearms, appropriate to the reason for being license. I would have no issue purchasing a long, range, high power, bolt action rifle. There are legal, and justifiable civilian reasons to carry such.
A terrorist organisation is not capable or granting legal authorisation. I'm baffled I have to point that out. Somebody, part of a terrorist organisation has no legal reason to posses a automatic assault weapon. Anyone carrying one as part of that organisation is a terrorist, and should be treated as such.
If you want to give ISIS credibility and a authoritative state that can issue firearms license. That's fine. But it cripples any complaint against the UKs actions. They would then be free to rescind her citizenship.
not a classic case of what you claim at all, or even an ordinary case of what you claim at all.
i wouldn't be sure that the rags will be here after we're gone, their readership is declining thankfully and the online stuff is only read for the celebrity crap.
No, your inability to come up with any form of meaningful argument to support your numerous statements negates any sensible interaction.
You still don't understand do you?
I am not on "her" side.
I am on the side of what is fair, what is just and how I consider fellow human beings should be treated. Were I to side with any individual on the planet, the lady would be one of the last I would support for anything unless maybe as a nomination for the merits of sterilisation if someone with an AK47 and a penchant for religious extremism is what floats their boat.
The reason you state that I am on her side is purely and simply it is what you want to believe, nothing more.
I have pointed out the problem with your approach. It's not uncommon.
You have no idea where I'm coming from and I honestly don't think you ever will work it out.
I did try :-(
your lack of credibility as a good faith poster negates further interaction
with people like you on her side she hasnt a hope thank f
You still don't read things properly do you?
If I never carried an AK47, I'm unlikely to have tested one don't you think?
Your responses are very indicative of a typical internet researcher these days, doing a selective examination of the information available, choosing only the bits of data that agree with or reinforce your supporting your standpoint.
I have no feelings one way or another for Begum, in fact I would never associate with someone so stupid and easily led, but I do care for human rights and can easily recognise what is simply right and what is wrong.
As a matter of interest, where did you get the ISIS work instruction from? What ranks are allowed weapons, who has the authority to allow the carrying, in fact how does the ISIS military structure work?
Frankly some of the terrorists that have hit the media for UK crimes have been a few sandwiches short of a picnic, I suppose recruitment isn't easy, but if they provide people with an IQ even lower than a Brexit voter with weaponry, I would guess that anyone would qualify for one. Let's face it if you were in the business of procreating for the greater well being of mankind, wouldn't you want to arm your sprogdropper if she or the sprog might be at risk?
You know its obvious that somebody reads something off Wikipedia but hasn’t understood it.
Gravity is an interaction between objects with mass. When dealing planet scale objects, that interaction manifests as an accelerating force. Space-time, lmfao
I never carried an AK47 in my life, like Begum though I was allowed to carry an AK47 should one be provided.
Right, as I expected. You were talking nonsense. You did not carry an AK as you tried to claim. Begum did (a distinction you seem to be missing).
And the fact you think you would have been allowed to, suggests, the entire story is a lie. Somebody in the MoD weapons dept would be authorised to handle mod weapons. It’s pretty obvious why that would not include the AK47. 😂
Not to mind the fact you are comparing authorisation of a government department, with a terrorist organisation. 🤣🤣
"I never carried an AK47 in my life, like Begum though I was allowed to carry an AK47 should one be provided."
lol
at least you got the name right this time , not bad for such a experienced weapons tester eh 😉😉😉
Gravity isn't a force, it's termed an interaction. I prefer to visualise it as a distortion of space/ time, it's a lot simpler that way.
But that apart, my job was to ensure things worked wherever their users went and under the same conditions or as near as possible.
Like the numerous photographers that went off to photograph their antics up in the Arctic, the reality of silver oxide batteries in their hitherto reliable equipment came as a shock. The MOD wasn't keen on a squaddie finding out that when he pulled the trigger on his weapon the projjie didn't exit the barrel because it was cold and raining outside. We never tested for it, but I suppose we should have tried them on Sundays and bank holidays also :-(
You haven't followed the reasoning at all have you?
so obviously your posts have so many holes in them and defy logic so often your not really worth engaging with
a experienced weapons handler like your self would know from your experience with "ak67s " seems to be a made up thing from a computer game called earthfall .
doubt youd have passed the vetting to mop the floor anywhere there are live firearms
i doubt your allowed to carry sharp stick pal
kinda calls into question the rest of your arguments doesn't it .
She joined a terrorist group of her own free will and there is evidence that she was a active member of that group and is unrepentant , therefore there is a very strong risk she would commit further offences ,
terrorists belong in as many pieces as possible
gudluck Mr Mitty
Ah, when you referred to tested firearms for MoD I assumed you included the AK in that. As previously you said you carried an AK47, and many other weapons. So that’s begs the question in what capacity you were carrying an AK47, if not during testing for the MOD?
You might consider needing proof that a weapon shot a projjie into the air a bit pointless, but nothing was taken for granted. It was not practical to measure the velocity and accuracy of a projjie as it was fired vertically, but if you have a weapon your life depends on and you find that someone using a parachute is firing at you, it's comforting to know One's weapon will work and not lock up after a few dozen rounds I suppose.
A firearm fires a projectile at many times the force of gravity. I wouldn't have thought that was any concern overcoming the force of gravity. Were the MoD cutting corners or something, what cheap firearm where you testing?
But sure, maybe that feel the need to test everything for reasons. That doesn't back up the claim though. Why were you were carrying an AK47?
Never right in a million years I would guess :-)
To be fair to them they have serious competition in the UK. The Sun, Mail, Express and Stephen King are all competing hard for the attentions of the less able fiction lover.
Arguably Stephen Kings followers are less intellectually challenged and not quite as gullible as few of his readers take his work as factual though.
The MOD did not test AK47's, or at least my bit didn't. I have no doubt whatsoever that not only were AK47's very thoroughly tested by some reputable proving establishment on behalf of, or even part of the MOD itself, but so would every other weapon likely to be used against the military. We did test East European ammunition, I doubt somehow that we ever bought any though.
I was not the person demanding the tests, I merely carried them out. As far as proof went, I even had to prove our stock in trade measuring systems for small calibre ammunition by photographing the projji'es as they entered the detection area. At supersonic speed too as the shock wave clearly portrayed. I processed the 35mm contact sheets myself and stored them as proof after having a few sent out for printing to no doubt give the gun fetish merchants a bit of a thrill.
Be as skeptical as you wish, it does not alter the fact that the world is a big place and some actions within it might occur when you are not observing.
Thanks for the advice.
I would be 100% confident the ToryGraph made it up.
It's what they do.
Yes being a mouth piece for the Tories.
Are you a Righty? 😂
Hmmm, there's a bang of Walter Mitty off this. You had a jig to prove you could fire up into the air? I don;t think that required proof. And why were the MOD testing AK47s? skeptical to say the least.
Regardless, the context that you are missing is that the rules of a civilised society are not the same as that for a militant muslim group. Women are second class. If this women was allow, by her male terrorist leaders, to carry a weapon. She had both a need, and some sort of position of power within ISIS. Conflating that with a legal authorise and test firearms is laughable.
When did I say it was in public? I was allowed to carry weapons, full stop.
You didn't suggest that the lady was allowed to carry an AK67 in Britain either, although I assume ISIS would allow it?
Just to show their's no hard feelings, I am allowing you to take an armoury of weapons to Blackpool pleasure beach.
There you are, by your own logic, you are now a terrorist that needs to be made stateless.
Justice and fair treatment under UK law involves a trial with the accused given a opportunity to defend themselves. There seems little reason why the woman is deprived of that. What do you find so bad about that?
The topic refers to the lady being made stateless, not her suitability for employment as a babysitter. Maybe the plethora of words was too much?
Anyway, were you to define suitability to retain citizenship by the integrity level required of a babysitter, I suspect the British Isles would have a pretty low population density.
If you don't understand the "word salad" it's easily checkable incidentally. Sometimes you have to look beyond your immediate experience and time period to see different behavioural trends.
Anyway the point replied to was that The lady not realising beheadings were wrong until age eighteen was comical, so naturally it brings to mind that in Britain most of the country saw beheadings as a jolly good day out at one time.
I know that a lot here don't get out much and do not understand the implications of being made stateless, they also look on things in very simplistic terms and try to mould their ideas of justice into something in keeping with their own experience. The woman has not had the justice a British citizen is entitled to. It really is that simple.
WTF , what kind of word salad bs are you on about. Totally Kwackers.
Pop quiz! let’s say you have 3 children and you are in a bind and the only person you can leave them with is Shamina (beheadings don’t bother me) Begum.
What do you do?
A classic example of Lefties losing it. The Telegraph was here before you and will be here long after you’re gone buddy.
Lads, this topic is less to do with any sympathy for her or not, or the rights and wrongs of her choices than it does with the UK's failure in its obligations to its citizens, its crass and dishonest politicians and its intransigent courts.
so you went and corroborated your version then ? or just dont like the multiple link posted here
justice and fair treatment would be to leave her to die where she is
you never carried a weapon in public then? , nothing like close to the example you tried to make
But the "evidence" was what I replied to.
Are you not aware of just what evidence is?
Don't you realise that a reporters job is to write news stories and you have to look at whats printed as questionable fact, not a corroboration of what you want to hear?
I said nothing about the woman deserving pity, although as a human being she would would indeed have my pity. I believe a mother losing a child is a horrendous experience and she has lost several. I am not so inhuman that I cannot feel sympathy and regret over another's suffering.
The woman deserves justice and fair treatment, nothing more and nothing less.
I wandered around with all sorts, the stuff I couldn't lift I used to take my kit too.
I tested ammunition and just about every parameter of a weapon at the point of firing. I even had a jig to prove one could fire up in the air. All nicely hydraulically damped to simulate a shoulder. I could have run the same test by asking a squaddie to fire upwards, but it wasn't allowed. Too dangerous or insecure I guess?
The one thing I never did in my years at the MOD was fire a weapon, I had a person do that for me, and a different person again to load the weapon.
We thought it was fine carrying assault weapons, not into an unlicenced building though and we would not carry both weapon and projectiles together.
We only ever killed one person on site, so we didn't do too badly. It too a round of armour piercing ammo to polish him off though and was down to a know it all issuing a command to fire at the wrong time.
I would guess that you might be familiar with the type if you use a shaving mirror?
confronted with more evidence and you go off on that bs tangent ?
repeating something over and over again weakens your argument rather that strengthens it especially when it was clearly factully and proveabley wrong in the first place 🙄
your racial nonsense is so weak its not even worth responding to at this stage
so you have nothing but the bleating's of a unrepentant terrorist then, and even that contradicts your narrative that she somehow deserves pity
In what circumstances were you wandering about with such an arsenal to know ? because if you think its fine to wander around with those sort of weapons it is absolutely a cause for concern ? Routinely carrying firearms would further indicate that she was an active and able part of a group who were the enemy of civilization .
I ve actually carried firearms on occasion and have a very different view, id be interested to hear how you think it ok to openly carry assault weapons.
nd imo committing a criminal act makes you a criminal. hard to believe that need to e clarified but here we are I guess 🤷♂️
she is a british citizen regardless of what any british politician claims or what any british court rules and that will always be the case as it is illegal to make someone stateless which is what britain has done on the basis of debunked claims.
making her stateless absolutely is a racial issue because it was done on the basis of trying to appeal to racists who don't believe the politician who made the decision is british himself.
Does not regret coming here?
Get serious me old chum!
I made mistakes, I took on a disgusting job in an industry I soon hated. I was dealing with electronics, but in the gambling industry.
I had no prior knowledge in the industry and knew no one outside one of those recommending the position.
I hated the job and the people, I thought a few would be better off behind bars. I would never, ever enter the industry again under any circumstances for any pay rate.
Do I regret working in that job? No! Sometimes a high price has to be paid to learn a lesson.
Regret is a human thing dependent on time and circumstances. A woman that popped out so many duff sprogs is hardly in a fit state emotionally to look on the place in a balanced fashion I would have thought. Regret is a personal feeling, it hasn't any measurable units, so how do you relate it to not regretting a visit to the dentist, or not regretting a walk in the park?
You need to quantify these things really to convey any meaning.
Have a go on Google, see if you can find something else that agrees more solidly with your fixation.
Frankly the poor woman has my sympathy. Anyone with a value for British citizenship these days deserves pity. Once it was a nationality to take pride in, but when the entire nation chooses to follow liars and behave like a bunch of lemmings, then they go on to vote a compulsive liar with a history of incompetence and failed projects to lead them, it really does throw any value that being British still has into question.
My MP in Britain was Gullis, he lied to me. I have the email. The questions that could not be answered with factual distortion were ignored. I wonder if Begum trotted out as many lies as your average Tory MP?
Evidence?
I am not making the claims, you are making the claims, unless you are naive enough to claim the Telegraph has integrity?
Being allowed to use an AK47 does not represent a need. I was allowed to carry an AK47, I carried many weapons the limit being what I could physically carry. I was allowed to carry ammunition including and up to HE 30mm.
It meant nothing, it was nothing to do with my politics, they were no different to any other piece of mechanical apparatus, it is only the likes of yourself who get fed the word "allowed" and weapons and immediately condemn a person on that basis. You need a course in Boolean logic methinks!
As someone not only allowed to carry all forms of weapons, but I did so on a daily basis, and I can assure you it means nothing as far as my approach to others goes, apart from a certain amount of contempt and caution around those that do get fixated by the disgusting devices. There a a lot of those around, but I guess you would understand that better than how to interpret a gutter press article.
Allowing an act, even a criminal act does not make the person a criminal no more than allowing the same person to time travel risks a rewrite of the history books.
