House wife's father now blames the UK

[Notch7]

I think it would have been almost impossible for the UK government to legally remove the child without its mother. We can't go around kidnapping people's children. I don't recall reading any articles saying she would give her child up to social services.

Himagin seems to not want to discuss this key point.

Probably because it renders his bluster all pointless

 

[sodthisforfun]

You were the one that suggested 'official advice' prevented intervention.

And please answer, where are the people to intervene, who are the people and if they are already there, why didn't they go? And please answer, why should other people risk their lives and wellbeing to help one woman who put herself in the situation that she was in? A woman who ran to join a terrorist group, who would still be happily a member of a terrorist group had it not gone to shi t? Why is her baby's life more important than anyone else?

What a shame you didn't attempt to go over, at least you'd have got brownie points.

 

[jasonzyx]

I don't think that is accurate.
If the appeal overturns the Home Secretary's decision, she will always have been a UK citizen.
When an appeal overturns a decision it is retrospective.

As long as the point you are making isnt vague

Not at all vague.
If you wish to isolate a few words, and place them out of context, it illustrates the weakness of your argument and the embarrassment you must be feeling having made several glaringly obvious errors. Some of them trying to extricate yourself from previous errors.

 

[jasonzyx]

I expect you haven't read any articles to the contrary either.

Himagin seems to not want to discuss this key point.

Notch hasn't read the posts again.
Motorbiking's comment was predicated on the mother not giving permission, because he hadn't read anything about the mother agreeing to the child being taken into care.
He hasn't read anything to the contrary either, so his argument is predicated on his assumption.

 

[Notch7]

Not at all vague.
If you wish to isolate a few words, and place them out of context, it illustrates the weakness of your argument and the embarrassment you must be feeling having made several glaringly obvious errors. Some of them trying to extricate yourself from previous errors.

of course it is vague.

what you are really saying is that, as things stand the woman is not a UK citizen and therefore Sodthisforfun's post is factually correct.

 

[jasonzyx]

You're a twit... Shows again what little grasp you have of the situation, ...
But then you did always like your dull analogies didn't you Himmy.

...You've no grasp on reality.

And now you've surpassed the silliness into insult again.

 

[sodthisforfun]

Not at all vague.
If you wish to isolate a few words, and place them out of context, it illustrates the weakness of your argument and the embarrassment you must be feeling having made several glaringly obvious errors. Some of them trying to extricate yourself from previous errors.

I have yet to see anything than unrealistic idealism from you, of how the problem should've been solved. No practical solutions, just vagueness. You've had no argument at all, and have failed to address what a nightmare helping the baby would've been..

 

[sodthisforfun]

And now you've surpassed the silliness into insult again.

You comparing a war-torn country to driving in snow means you will get treated like the idiot you are.

 

[Notch7]

He hasn't read anything to the contrary either, so his argument is predicated on his assumption.

So is yours old Bean.

your whole point hinges on the assumption that the mother has given permission.

 

[jasonzyx]

of course it is vague.

what you are really saying is that, as things stand the woman is not a UK citizen and therefore Sodthisforfun's post is factually correct.

If the appeal is successful, the decision is overturned and she will always have been a UK citizen.
At the moment it has not been determined whether she is or isn't. The decision to not intervene, on the basis that she is not a UK citizen, was taken prematurely.

 

[jasonzyx]

So is yours old Bean.

your whole point hinges on the assumption that the mother has given permission.

It hinges on the point that no-one knows whether she would or would not. Therefore your point is erroneous.
Motorbiking's point hinges on his assumption that she wouldn't.
We do not know. We cannot predicate our arguments on an assumption. It is pointless, counterproductive and not logical.

 

[jasonzyx]

You comparing a war-torn country to driving in snow means you will get treated like the idiot you are.

You are the one that suggested that no intervention was possible because the official advice is not go.
Official advice is usually ignored by rescue workers. Thank goodness.
"Help, I'm on thin ice", "sorry mate we can't help, official advice"
"Help I'm stuck in the mud", "Sorry mate, we can't help, official advice."
etc. etc.

Cue notch taking my flippant comments out of context.........

 

[sodthisforfun]

It hinges on the point that no-one knows whether she would or would not. Therefore your point is erroneous.
Motorbiking's point hinges on his assumption that she wouldn't.
We do not know. We cannot predicate our arguments on an assumption. It is pointless, counterproductive and not logical.

But you do that all the time, presume - often incorrectly.

Anyway, the crux of the matter is this:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659


It was too dangerous to send British officials to rescue Shamima Begum's baby son in Syria, Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt has said.

The child died in a refugee camp after his mother, who joined IS in 2015, was stripped of UK citizenship.

The boy was a UK citizen - but Mr Hunt told the BBC that any rescuers' lives would have been at risk in the camp.

"The mother chose to leave a free country to join a terrorist organisation," he said.

Speaking on The Andrew Marr Show, the foreign secretary confirmed that Jarrah, who was three weeks old, was a British citizen even though his mother was not.

But he said that - although several journalists had reached the camp and spoken to Ms Begum - "we have to think about the safety of the British officials that I would send into that warzone".

"Shamima knew when she made the decision to join Daesh, she was going into a country where there was no embassy, there was no consular assistance, and I'm afraid those decisions, awful though it is, they do have consequences," he said.

 

[sodthisforfun]

You are the one that suggested that no intervention was possible because the official advice is not go.
Official advice is usually ignored by rescue workers. Thank goodness.
"Help, I'm on thin ice", "sorry mate we can't help, official advice"
"Help I'm stuck in the mud", "Sorry mate, we can't help, official advice."
etc. etc.

Another useless and pointless comparison. Do you actually understand the severity of the situation in Syria? All your posts seem to show you don't.

 

[jasonzyx]

But you do that all the time, presume - often incorrectly.

Anyway, the crux of the matter is this:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659


It was too dangerous to send British officials to rescue Shamima Begum's baby son in Syria, Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt has said.

The child died in a refugee camp after his mother, who joined IS in 2015, was stripped of UK citizenship.

The boy was a UK citizen - but Mr Hunt told the BBC that any rescuers' lives would have been at risk in the camp.

"The mother chose to leave a free country to join a terrorist organisation," he said.

Speaking on The Andrew Marr Show, the foreign secretary confirmed that Jarrah, who was three weeks old, was a British citizen even though his mother was not.

But he said that - although several journalists had reached the camp and spoken to Ms Begum - "we have to think about the safety of the British officials that I would send into that warzone".

"Shamima knew when she made the decision to join Daesh, she was going into a country where there was no embassy, there was no consular assistance, and I'm afraid those decisions, awful though it is, they do have consequences," he said.

And the Foreign Secretary's opinion is gospel?
Of course he has to support the Home Secretary's decision, otherwise we'd have rebellion and mutiny in Cabinet. (although it's not too late for that)

Ask BJ if his opinion on journalists in Iraq was gospel.