Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

All in politics should take note of this polling – politicalbetting.com

13

Comments

  • TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    I very clearly remember the Tories saying they would have backed the war *without* the dossier.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629
    edited September 2
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Biden saying that the heckler is “entitled to be outrageous” is the difference, right there between Biden and Trump. Or liberals and MAGA.
    Trump and MAGA would call for that heckler to be beaten.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1565496846470062086

    The difference is that both of these old men are demented fools, but Trump’s use of the English language is the more interestingly weird

    “I am financially supporting people that are incredible and they were in my office actually two days ago, so they’re very much in my mind,”

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/01/donald-trump-pardons-january-6-us-capitol-attack
    The difference is that Biden seems to be turning into a pretty good president.
    Your assessment of his mental capacity notwithstanding.

    This Biden speech feels like a mistake. But then all of American politics feels like a mistake, at the moment

    The civil war inches closer

    You think politely pretending the current Trump dominated GOP is politics as usual would be more sensible ?

    I'm unconvinced.

    I genuinely don’t know. As I imply. How do you deradicalise America?

    To me, Wokeness is easily as big a threat to America as Trumpism. Indeed it is possibly worse, and Wokeness threatens the entire West

    I know PB doesn’t agree with me but then PB thought coronavirus was a boring Chinese flu in feb 2020
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,177

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    They did. Remember that the choices of government were (a) Labour who screwed up the intel on Iraq, or (b) the Tories who not only backed his government on Iraq, but after finding out said they would have backed the war anyway.
    Has anyone ever written a counterfactual where Bush was talked out of Iraq war? I wonder what would've happened.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,677

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    I very clearly remember the Tories saying they would have backed the war *without* the dossier.
    It is a no win situation for the Opposition. Especially a Tory opposition. They are not routinely invited to the intelligence briefings and hence they need to hedge their bets on the side of aggression in the name of the country. No Opposition (save for Jezza's perhaps) could afford to be blind-sided on national defence on account of not having access to the full facts.
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,448
    This may have been posted before. A chinese team sent up a drone from the summit of everest and it reached over 9km and caught some impressive footage. Not good at posting links on my phone but it's at t3.com.

    Ascent was in May but footage only released this week according to the article.

    I'm impressed it can fly at that altitude.
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,207
    Leon said:

    ...

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    It is genuinely shameful that we spend so much time and energy angsting about this dreadful woman. She chose her life, again, when she made that interview when she was 21

    Let her rot in the desert. There are 67 million Brits more deserving of our sympathy
    Your protestations over Shamima Begum remind me of Piers Morgan's attacks on Meghan Markle. Are you pissed Shamima didn't invite you to her wedding?
    I have a good friend that knows her. Met her in Syria. Says she’s quite hot and “you would”

    Lol. I don’t care. Drone
    Is that the guy from the ‘last man standing’ podcast. You mentioned something about him and Mosul before.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,259
    Leon said:

    I don't envy the young very much in this hostile and puritan world

    But one thing I do envy them is the Shuffle Dance and Pascal Letoublon's Friendship

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh4sjcsIE_E

    That is the BEST DANCE EVER. They have THAT

    It is sexy, exuberant, clever, addictive, feral, hypnotic, and fiendish in the best way

    I have actually tried to learn this dance, In my late 50s. It is impossible. You need ankles made of elastic, ie ankles aged 13-23

    God bless those that can. Superb

    Excellent. Surely not new to anyone who watched Michael Jackson in his heyday though.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 18,482
    edited September 2

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    They did. Remember that the choices of government were (a) Labour who screwed up the intel on Iraq, or (b) the Tories who not only backed his government on Iraq, but after finding out said they would have backed the war anyway.
    You asked if @MalcolmDunn is left or right. He's massively anti- Labour and pro- Conservative, so sorry still can't answer your question.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 3,363

    The case for bringing Shamima Begum back is now irrefutable
    The so-called Isis bride is a child victim of trafficking, not an international terrorist

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/09/01/case-bringing-shamima-begum-back-now-irrefutable/ (£££)

    That is a comment piece by Andrew Mitchell, MP, reflecting a growing line of thought. A headache for the new Home Secretary.

    He’s not neutral though? He’s long been an advocate for her return… it surprises me that it’s only a decade after the events and after all other avenues have been tried that these new “facts” have been unearthed

    Why would the Canadians do this? Why would they benefit?

    Why would the Canadians want to infiltrate ISIS? Surely that is obvious.

    From there, it is likely that Toronto Bond smuggled Shemima and her pals into Syria wearing his undercover ISIS hat rather than his Canadian spy hat. So from that point of view, Canada had no interest in trafficking terrorists; it was just the price to be paid for infiltration.
    Lots of supposition

    She was a naive idiot who thought she would do something exciting. She made the wrong choice but wanted a do over.

    Actions have consequences

    We seem to have moved from Canadian spies to Shemima Begum. Yes, she probably was naive; she may well have been groomed; and now we can add she might have been smuggled in by a Western intelligence agency. Quite what she herself thought was going on is another matter.
    She is claiming that the fact that Canadian spies smuggled her in means she is a victim of human trafficking and therefore shouldn’t face the consequences of her actions.

    I put it to you that this is self interested bullshit
  • TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    I very clearly remember the Tories saying they would have backed the war *without* the dossier.
    It is a no win situation for the Opposition. Especially a Tory opposition. They are not routinely invited to the intelligence briefings and hence they need to hedge their bets on the side of aggression in the name of the country. No Opposition (save for Jezza's perhaps) could afford to be blind-sided on national defence on account of not having access to the full facts.
    That is all true, but dodges around the central premise. Their instinct was to back the Americans. They said they didn't need the dossier, but you said their acceptance was predicated on "a lie, a government lie". I don't believe it was.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,301
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    I don't envy the young very much in this hostile and puritan world

    But one thing I do envy them is the Shuffle Dance and Pascal Letoublon's Friendship

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh4sjcsIE_E

    That is the BEST DANCE EVER. They have THAT

    It is sexy, exuberant, clever, addictive, feral, hypnotic, and fiendish in the best way

    I have actually tried to learn this dance, In my late 50s. It is impossible. You need ankles made of elastic, ie ankles aged 13-23

    God bless those that can. Superb

    Excellent. Surely not new to anyone who watched Michael Jackson in his heyday though.
    Nihil sub sole novum.

    I’m a Bill Bojangles Robinson man myself.
  • Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    They did. Remember that the choices of government were (a) Labour who screwed up the intel on Iraq, or (b) the Tories who not only backed his government on Iraq, but after finding out said they would have backed the war anyway.
    Has anyone ever written a counterfactual where Bush was talked out of Iraq war? I wonder what would've happened.
    The odd thing about Iraq was that 9/11 was used as the justification for a simple case of unfinished business from daddy's era. America has a long and proud history of empire building as do we. So WMD was just an excuse, as was 9/11. Has Bush been persuaded against it there and then Saddam would have done something else to trigger it later.
  • DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,259

    Ben Wallace: Submarines rather than ships could be the Royal Navy's future
    Defence Secretary has asked naval chiefs to assess the 'balance' between surface and submarine fleets as he launches a major review

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/02/ben-wallace-submarines-rather-ships-could-royal-navys-future/ (£££)

    Should we anticipate the Prince of Wales adapting to this policy shortly?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,496

    See Bristol Zoo is closing.

    https://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-62753770

    Oddly the BBC story doesn’t mention the best thing about Bristol Zoo - the urban legend about the car park attendant…

    https://bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/there-truth-behind-urban-myth-4941098

    Thankfully they're moving to a new site, rather than closing altogether. Much as I enjoyed visiting Bristol Zoo, the site in Bristol is extraordinarily cramped by modern standards, which is really tough on the animals.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
  • DavidL said:

    Ben Wallace: Submarines rather than ships could be the Royal Navy's future
    Defence Secretary has asked naval chiefs to assess the 'balance' between surface and submarine fleets as he launches a major review

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/02/ben-wallace-submarines-rather-ships-could-royal-navys-future/ (£££)

    Should we anticipate the Prince of Wales adapting to this policy shortly?
    The Moskva has led the charge.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,703

    DavidL said:

    Ben Wallace: Submarines rather than ships could be the Royal Navy's future
    Defence Secretary has asked naval chiefs to assess the 'balance' between surface and submarine fleets as he launches a major review

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/02/ben-wallace-submarines-rather-ships-could-royal-navys-future/ (£££)

    Should we anticipate the Prince of Wales adapting to this policy shortly?
    The Moskva has led the charge.
    All these submarine jokes are giving me a sinking feeling.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,977
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    HJ entry was at 14, btw.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,977

    See Bristol Zoo is closing.

    https://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-62753770

    Oddly the BBC story doesn’t mention the best thing about Bristol Zoo - the urban legend about the car park attendant…

    https://bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/there-truth-behind-urban-myth-4941098

    Thankfully they're moving to a new site, rather than closing altogether. Much as I enjoyed visiting Bristol Zoo, the site in Bristol is extraordinarily cramped by modern standards, which is really tough on the animals.
    I remember that too. I was staying in a very high flat in one of the Georgian terraces in a nearby road - clear line of sight, and it turned out at night, hearing to the zoo. Unusual to have lions roaring in the middle of the night.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,084

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    I don't envy the young very much in this hostile and puritan world

    But one thing I do envy them is the Shuffle Dance and Pascal Letoublon's Friendship

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh4sjcsIE_E

    That is the BEST DANCE EVER. They have THAT

    It is sexy, exuberant, clever, addictive, feral, hypnotic, and fiendish in the best way

    I have actually tried to learn this dance, In my late 50s. It is impossible. You need ankles made of elastic, ie ankles aged 13-23

    God bless those that can. Superb

    Excellent. Surely not new to anyone who watched Michael Jackson in his heyday though.
    Nihil sub sole novum

    I’m a Bill Bojangles Robinson man myself.
    This guy was the real innovator.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_W._Bubbles

    And not coincidentally what Jackson named his pet chimp.

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,496
    edited September 2
    DavidL said:

    Ben Wallace: Submarines rather than ships could be the Royal Navy's future
    Defence Secretary has asked naval chiefs to assess the 'balance' between surface and submarine fleets as he launches a major review

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/02/ben-wallace-submarines-rather-ships-could-royal-navys-future/ (£££)

    Should we anticipate the Prince of Wales adapting to this policy shortly?
    Wondering how long it will take HMS broken propeller to limp up to Rosyth. I'd quite like to watch it inch under the bridges.
  • eekeek Posts: 21,799
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    At which point ignore that bit.

    You can't remove someone's nationality on the basis that someone THINKS they have the right to citizenship elsewhere...

    Especially when the other country categorically states that that person does not qualify for citizenship...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,677

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    I very clearly remember the Tories saying they would have backed the war *without* the dossier.
    It is a no win situation for the Opposition. Especially a Tory opposition. They are not routinely invited to the intelligence briefings and hence they need to hedge their bets on the side of aggression in the name of the country. No Opposition (save for Jezza's perhaps) could afford to be blind-sided on national defence on account of not having access to the full facts.
    That is all true, but dodges around the central premise. Their instinct was to back the Americans. They said they didn't need the dossier, but you said their acceptance was predicated on "a lie, a government lie". I don't believe it was.
    Yes their instinct was that if it moves and the US says invade, then invade.

    But in this instance they were bound by having inferior or no intelligence so the choice was easy - if it was between backing the war and it turns out there was no justification; and not backing the war and it turns out there was justification, they were always going to go down the former route.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,977

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    In that case why haven’t the Tory party and various Tory hued governments repudiated the Iraq war? As far as I can see it’s only randoms on the internet that push the big lie stuff, mainly cos they feel a bit sick that they were so comprehensively suckered by Blair especially when the lentil munchers and the ghastly Nats were not.
    And, re the LDs and the SNP, the Scottish Trots were too - just to drive the point home.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    I think we can and have done. She made her bed, she can lie in it.

    The powers lie ultimately with the courts, not the Home Secretary, and if the courts approve the decision then that is justice being followed.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,977

    DavidL said:

    Ben Wallace: Submarines rather than ships could be the Royal Navy's future
    Defence Secretary has asked naval chiefs to assess the 'balance' between surface and submarine fleets as he launches a major review

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/02/ben-wallace-submarines-rather-ships-could-royal-navys-future/ (£££)

    Should we anticipate the Prince of Wales adapting to this policy shortly?
    Wondering how long it will take HMS broken propeller to limp up to Rosyth. I'd quite like to watch it inch under the bridges.
    I do hope it is under the control of tugs. One screw only ...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,259
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    As I say the evidence is mixed at best for her. But giving the HS the power to strip someone who is born in this country of their citizenship? Not for me.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,677
    I know we go round in circles here on PB but we did all this Shamima stuff almost exactly to the minute 24hrs ago.

    Can we move on to the unexplored benefits, or otherwise of Brexit or something.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,084
    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    At which point ignore that bit.

    You can't remove someone's nationality on the basis that someone THINKS they have the right to citizenship elsewhere...

    Especially when the other country categorically states that that person does not qualify for citizenship...
    Quite.
    Whether or not you much of a damn about her, but the principle is very important indeed.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,977
    edited September 2
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/sep/02/public-idea-of-dignified-living-is-miles-from-what-some-can-afford-this-winter

    Interesting if brief piece on the difference between the public and HMG on what income is requirted for decent/normal living standards.

    It should be noted that a laptop or decent mobile is now increasingly essential above all if one is on UC or similar. And that I have noticed foodbanks appealing for old mobiles to re-sim and hand out to their clients, I assume for precisely that reason.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629
    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    At which point ignore that bit.

    You can't remove someone's nationality on the basis that someone THINKS they have the right to citizenship elsewhere...

    Especially when the other country categorically states that that person does not qualify for citizenship...
    I never engaged with the citizenship argument. I dunno whether that was legitimate or not. I trust the English courts to decide

    They say it’s ok, so be it

    But as I’ve said multiple times, begum sacrificed her right to English justice when she willingly went to Syria to behead people and have Yazidi
    sex slaves. And was then unrepentant about it six years later

    Let the Syrians or Iraqis try her and punish her, as they see fit. They are her victims
  • MangoMango Posts: 1,003
    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,259

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    I think we can and have done. She made her bed, she can lie in it.

    The powers lie ultimately with the courts, not the Home Secretary, and if the courts approve the decision then that is justice being followed.
    No, the power is vested in the HS. What the courts decided was that that decision was not open to challenge by them.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 19,836
    edited September 2
    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    I doubt this ‘revelation’ changes much, even if it is true and it seems to be accepted as true by Begums supporters in the media.

    She was unrepentant as you say and her comments about the Manchester Arena bombing were appalling and made well after IS had fallen.

    She seems to have a well funded and slick PR campaign advocating for her. She doesn’t deserve it. I would let her be subject to the justice of the domain she committed her offences in.

    As Nick Palmer, iirc, said. There are far more deserving cases of our help.
    Well, not exactly. I prioritise unproblematic immigrants (for example, Afghans who actually helped us - why the hell are they STILL in B&Bs awaiting rehoming??) over immigrants with dodgy backgrounds. The issue with Begum is that she's as British as I am - rather more, in fact, as I'm spent half my life abroad. Her opinions are irrelevant - she was entitled to think whatever she liked about ISIS, we're a country where we have freedom of opinion. The issue is whether the exercise of power to remove nationality is appropriate in thsi case (if it ever is), and I don't think it is, because of the grooming and the weakness of the claim that she could be Bangladeshi if she chose.

    As a cause celebre it's awkward as her opinions were repellent. But justice should not hinge on whether its application is awkward.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,259
    TOPPING said:

    I know we go round in circles here on PB but we did all this Shamima stuff almost exactly to the minute 24hrs ago.

    Can we move on to the unexplored benefits, or otherwise of Brexit or something.

    Apologies, I was on my way to Ayr before 7.00 yesterday for another pointless hearing and missed all the elucidation.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,900
    edited September 2
    LOL at old people on this site suggesting a return of TotP as a way to encourage British music.

    British music is doing quite well both domestically and abroad, but next to nobody young streaming or making music, or aspiring to, would even watch TotP nowadays. Its certainly not 'inspirational' or part of a 'scene'.

    Going on TikTok is far more relevant for new music than a very dated has been of a TV show.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629
    edited September 2
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    As I say the evidence is mixed at best for her. But giving the HS the power to strip someone who is born in this country of their citizenship? Not for me.
    Yes I agree on that small particular point. I find it questionable - but let the lawyers argue it out

    Incidentally can I get your expert opinion on something?

    I’ve been faffing about with Stable Diffusion the image making AI. As may be obvious

    Some of the images it coughs up are extremely dodgy. Let’s file them as “underage nudity”

    What would happen if you were discovered to have these images? They are images invented ex nihilo, they depict people that never existed in situations that never happened. Are they still illegal?

    I can’t get my head around it
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 3,363
    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    I’m just reading Blood Sports about Whitewater - it’s startling how casually that generation of politicians was willing to lie through their teeth.

    Maybe ‘‘twas always this

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,259
    Mango said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
    Yes, but the Tories had chosen IDS to be their leader at the time so the qualification was not met.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    I think we can and have done. She made her bed, she can lie in it.

    The powers lie ultimately with the courts, not the Home Secretary, and if the courts approve the decision then that is justice being followed.
    No, the power is vested in the HS. What the courts decided was that that decision was not open to challenge by them.
    Didn't it go before the SIAC who upheld the decision, including ruling on the issue of her disputed citizenship of another country (saying that the law said she did have it)?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,703
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    Ben Wallace: Submarines rather than ships could be the Royal Navy's future
    Defence Secretary has asked naval chiefs to assess the 'balance' between surface and submarine fleets as he launches a major review

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/02/ben-wallace-submarines-rather-ships-could-royal-navys-future/ (£££)

    Should we anticipate the Prince of Wales adapting to this policy shortly?
    Wondering how long it will take HMS broken propeller to limp up to Rosyth. I'd quite like to watch it inch under the bridges.
    I do hope it is under the control of tugs. One screw only ...
    If only the other prince of Wales had stuck to one screw only.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,734
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    I think we can and have done. She made her bed, she can lie in it.

    The powers lie ultimately with the courts, not the Home Secretary, and if the courts approve the decision then that is justice being followed.
    No, the power is vested in the HS. What the courts decided was that that decision was not open to challenge by them.
    Yvette Cooper can let her back in then.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,615
    Mango said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jun/17/iraq.iraq
    Robin Cook was pretty clear in 2003.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,677
    DavidL said:

    Mango said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
    Yes, but the Tories had chosen IDS to be their leader at the time so the qualification was not met.
    Which is why it scares me that the Cons were somewhat near choosing another Jock Guard as their leader only last month.
  • eekeek Posts: 21,799
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
    They don't seem to be rushing to do so - why is that?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,301
    edited September 2
    Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    In that case why haven’t the Tory party and various Tory hued governments repudiated the Iraq war? As far as I can see it’s only randoms on the internet that push the big lie stuff, mainly cos they feel a bit sick that they were so comprehensively suckered by Blair especially when the lentil munchers and the ghastly Nats were not.
    And, re the LDs and the SNP, the Scottish Trots were too - just to drive the point home.
    I think the line is we backed a disastrous war that killed millions and whose effects we are still feeling and will for decades for all the right reasons, the LDs, Nats and Trots opposed this clusterfuck for entirely the wrong reasons.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,677
    rkrkrk said:

    Mango said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jun/17/iraq.iraq
    Robin Cook was pretty clear in 2003.
    He casts doubt on the intelligence, saying "Iraq was an appallingly difficult intelligence target to break".

    This if anything supports my case. The Opposition didn't have access to what intelligence there might have been and hence could not afford not to support action in case there was actual intelligence which showed Iraq was a threat.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629
    rkrkrk said:

    Mango said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jun/17/iraq.iraq
    Robin Cook was pretty clear in 2003.
    In retrospect, he appears an honourable, clever and capable politician: Robin Cook. The likes of which we don’t see any more

    Or is that nostalgia getting the better of me?

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,677
    Well that is a prime example of me being hoist with my own petard.

    I bemoan the fact that we are talking about Shamima Begum, which we did only yesterday, and then I enter into a discussion about the merits or otherwise of the effing Iraq War.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629
    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
    They don't seem to be rushing to do so - why is that?
    I believe it’s lack of money and stability. So let’s help to provide that. Sorting our problems AND theirs
  • Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    In that case why haven’t the Tory party and various Tory hued governments repudiated the Iraq war? As far as I can see it’s only randoms on the internet that push the big lie stuff, mainly cos they feel a bit sick that they were so comprehensively suckered by Blair especially when the lentil munchers and the ghastly Nats were not.
    And, re the LDs and the SNP, the Scottish Trots were too - just to drive the point home.
    I think the line is we backed a disastrous war that killed millions and whose effects we are still feeling and will for decades for the right reasons, the LDs, Nats and Trots opposed this clusterfuck for entirely the wrong reasons.
    Iraq opens up all kinds of uncomfortable debates about imperialism and patriotism. The "UN" missions in Iraq and Afghanistan were a great deal about western control and extraction of resources and very little about concern for the natives. So yes, long after the event when both countries and the whole area have been torn apart its easy to look back and say "that was wrong, it was a lie, send Bush and Blair to the Hague".

    What though is the difference between this particular piece of western imposition and all the others we are told we are to be proud of? Either imperialism and taking over someone else's country to stamp them down and exploit them is bad or its acceptable.

    I'd be happy for big powers to agree never again to invade and smash places up. But I am not that naive...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,259
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    As I say the evidence is mixed at best for her. But giving the HS the power to strip someone who is born in this country of their citizenship? Not for me.
    Yes I agree on that small particular point. I find it questionable - but let the lawyers argue it out

    Incidentally can I get your expert opinion on something?

    I’ve been faffing about with Stable Diffusion the image making AI. As may be obvious

    Some of the images it coughs up are extremely dodgy. Let’s file them as “underage nudity”

    What would happen if you were discovered to have these images? They are images invented ex nihilo, they depict people that never existed in situations that never happened. Are they still illegal?

    I can’t get my head around it
    Yes they are. Possession of drawings and tracings of an image of a child protrayed sexually or in a sexual context is illegal. It is the image that is illegal and its origin matters not. The fact that there is not an actual victim behind this image may be mitigatory but it would not be a defence.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 17,307
    edited September 2
    deleted; best left for the lawyers.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 8,610
    edited September 2
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
    Just to keep your blood on the boil - do you realise that the BBC is about to air a multi-episode podcast entitled "I am not a Monster"?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08yblkf/episodes/downloads
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,519
    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
    They don't seem to be rushing to do so - why is that?
    They certainly have done so to others, and have held her for years. Being British doesn't prevent prosecution.

    Indeed is there any evidence that she was involved in ISIS crimes? Being a sympathiser is not itself a crime, neither is being married to an ISIS fighter.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 31,950
    Leon said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    At which point ignore that bit.

    You can't remove someone's nationality on the basis that someone THINKS they have the right to citizenship elsewhere...

    Especially when the other country categorically states that that person does not qualify for citizenship...
    I never engaged with the citizenship argument. I dunno whether that was legitimate or not. I trust the English courts to decide

    They say it’s ok, so be it

    But as I’ve said multiple times, begum sacrificed her right to English justice when she willingly went to Syria to behead people and have Yazidi
    sex slaves. And was then unrepentant about it six years later

    Let the Syrians or Iraqis try her and punish her, as they see fit. They are her victims
    Would anyone complain if they just shot her?
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,723
    Absent the Iraq war it’s interesting to speculate what would have happened to Saddam in the Arab Spring. Possible that a civil war there would have triggered NATO strikes Libya style, and possibly a regime change. What would Russia have done? Or Iran? Probably a similar level of chaos but perhaps without IS as they wouldn’t have had the opportunities afforded by the Sunni rebellions in the mid 2000s. Maybe a different outcome in next door Syria, or maybe not.
  • Leon said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
    They don't seem to be rushing to do so - why is that?
    I believe it’s lack of money and stability. So let’s help to provide that. Sorting our problems AND theirs
    Good, lets move on from the Begum argument. "Money and Stability" is the way to resolve not just her and the rest of the ISIS lunacy, its the way to stop rich countries being swamped by refugees from warzones and desperately poor countries and places which will be desperately hard to live in as the climate changes.

    It strikes me that there is something we can do with chunks of Africa and the Middle East to help them and help us - enormous solar farms. Now that solar has become relatively cheap and efficient instead of fighting over Afghanistan for pipelines, just build solar and export cables. These countries grow wealthy, we get electricity, we avoid a refugee disaster as they all get air conditioning.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,677
    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    At which point ignore that bit.

    You can't remove someone's nationality on the basis that someone THINKS they have the right to citizenship elsewhere...

    Especially when the other country categorically states that that person does not qualify for citizenship...
    I never engaged with the citizenship argument. I dunno whether that was legitimate or not. I trust the English courts to decide

    They say it’s ok, so be it

    But as I’ve said multiple times, begum sacrificed her right to English justice when she willingly went to Syria to behead people and have Yazidi
    sex slaves. And was then unrepentant about it six years later

    Let the Syrians or Iraqis try her and punish her, as they see fit. They are her victims
    Would anyone complain if they just shot her?
    Good point. Much easier to shoot the people whose views we disagree with. Or perhaps render them to a third country and they can do it.

    I mean what exactly do we go to war for these days if not to prevent this type of behaviour?
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,207

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    I doubt this ‘revelation’ changes much, even if it is true and it seems to be accepted as true by Begums supporters in the media.

    She was unrepentant as you say and her comments about the Manchester Arena bombing were appalling and made well after IS had fallen.

    She seems to have a well funded and slick PR campaign advocating for her. She doesn’t deserve it. I would let her be subject to the justice of the domain she committed her offences in.

    As Nick Palmer, iirc, said. There are far more deserving cases of our help.
    Well, not exactly. I prioritise unproblematic immigrants (for example, Afghans who actually helped us - why the hell are they STILL in B&Bs awaiting rehoming??) over immigrants with dodgy backgrounds. The issue with Begum is that she's as British as I am - rather more, in fact, as I'm spent half my life abroad. Her opinions are irrelevant - she was entitled to think whatever she liked about ISIS, we're a country where we have freedom of opinion. The issue is whether the exercise of power to remove nationality is appropriate in thsi case (if it ever is), and I don't think it is, because of the grooming and the weakness of the claim that she could be Bangladeshi if she chose.

    As a cause celebre it's awkward as her opinions were repellent. But justice should not hinge on whether its application is awkward.
    Like you I dislike removing nationality. It’s the start of a slippery slope.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,496
    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Mango said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jun/17/iraq.iraq
    Robin Cook was pretty clear in 2003.
    He casts doubt on the intelligence, saying "Iraq was an appallingly difficult intelligence target to break".

    This if anything supports my case. The Opposition didn't have access to what intelligence there might have been and hence could not afford not to support action in case there was actual intelligence which showed Iraq was a threat.
    Lots of Tories like Ken Clarke disagreed. There was a process of UN weapons inspections to address the concerns of a threat from WMDs. It was not a case of war or do nothing.

    Sadly I believe that the inadequacies in HM Loyal Opposition at various different times means that we went to war over WMDs in 2003 when we probably shouldn't have, and we failed to go to war over WMDs in 2013 when we probably should have done so.

    In the future to come my feeling is that we will regret not doing more, earlier, to help Ukraine, but I suppose it's possible I'll be wrong and we'll regret acting instead.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    As I say the evidence is mixed at best for her. But giving the HS the power to strip someone who is born in this country of their citizenship? Not for me.
    Yes I agree on that small particular point. I find it questionable - but let the lawyers argue it out

    Incidentally can I get your expert opinion on something?

    I’ve been faffing about with Stable Diffusion the image making AI. As may be obvious

    Some of the images it coughs up are extremely dodgy. Let’s file them as “underage nudity”

    What would happen if you were discovered to have these images? They are images invented ex nihilo, they depict people that never existed in situations that never happened. Are they still illegal?

    I can’t get my head around it
    Yes they are. Possession of drawings and tracings of an image of a child protrayed sexually or in a sexual context is illegal. It is the image that is illegal and its origin matters not. The fact that there is not an actual victim behind this image may be mitigatory but it would not be a defence.
    Fascinating. Also a bit mad. And not up to speed with modern tech. These machines spew these images if you want them or not

    You can put in an entirely innocuous prompt: “woman, garden, photo 1947” etc etc and you often get startling and disturbing responses

    The law might need revisiting ASAP. God knows how you frame it
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,677
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    I doubt this ‘revelation’ changes much, even if it is true and it seems to be accepted as true by Begums supporters in the media.

    She was unrepentant as you say and her comments about the Manchester Arena bombing were appalling and made well after IS had fallen.

    She seems to have a well funded and slick PR campaign advocating for her. She doesn’t deserve it. I would let her be subject to the justice of the domain she committed her offences in.

    As Nick Palmer, iirc, said. There are far more deserving cases of our help.
    Well, not exactly. I prioritise unproblematic immigrants (for example, Afghans who actually helped us - why the hell are they STILL in B&Bs awaiting rehoming??) over immigrants with dodgy backgrounds. The issue with Begum is that she's as British as I am - rather more, in fact, as I'm spent half my life abroad. Her opinions are irrelevant - she was entitled to think whatever she liked about ISIS, we're a country where we have freedom of opinion. The issue is whether the exercise of power to remove nationality is appropriate in thsi case (if it ever is), and I don't think it is, because of the grooming and the weakness of the claim that she could be Bangladeshi if she chose.

    As a cause celebre it's awkward as her opinions were repellent. But justice should not hinge on whether its application is awkward.
    Like you I dislike removing nationality. It’s the start of a slippery slope.
    I think it makes people with potential dual nationality (Irish people?) very nervous.
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,207

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Her offences were mainly committed overseas. Why should we bring her to justice and imprison her, if guilty. for offences committed on Syrian soil ? Let her stand trial there.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 10,428
    My new Saudi mate that I met in Cairo reckons he and his other ISIS graduates were treated like minor celebs once they got back to the Kingdom. He shat it off before seeing combat against the Peshmerga and legged it home through Jordan.

    He tried faking sickness to avoid combat first and came up with constipation as the mitigating condition. The ISIS doctor (from London) just stuck a garden hose up his arse and turned it on full.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629
    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
    They don't seem to be rushing to do so - why is that?
    They certainly have done so to others, and have held her for years. Being British doesn't prevent prosecution.

    Indeed is there any evidence that she was involved in ISIS crimes? Being a sympathiser is not itself a crime, neither is being married to an ISIS fighter.
    She’s a self confessed member of ISIS and that alone is a capital crime in Syria and Iraq
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,496
    Leon said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Mango said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jun/17/iraq.iraq
    Robin Cook was pretty clear in 2003.
    In retrospect, he appears an honourable, clever and capable politician: Robin Cook. The likes of which we don’t see any more

    Or is that nostalgia getting the better of me?

    I'm sure there is chapter and verse on Cook's failings, but, at the risk of using a cliche, he got the biggest call in his career right. How many politicians can say the same?
  • Are people still talking about Begum ?

    Why would any government let her return when there is a chance she would engage in a terrorist action when back in this country ?

    Because if she did so it would end the career of any politician who allowed her to return.
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,207
    TOPPING said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    I doubt this ‘revelation’ changes much, even if it is true and it seems to be accepted as true by Begums supporters in the media.

    She was unrepentant as you say and her comments about the Manchester Arena bombing were appalling and made well after IS had fallen.

    She seems to have a well funded and slick PR campaign advocating for her. She doesn’t deserve it. I would let her be subject to the justice of the domain she committed her offences in.

    As Nick Palmer, iirc, said. There are far more deserving cases of our help.
    Well, not exactly. I prioritise unproblematic immigrants (for example, Afghans who actually helped us - why the hell are they STILL in B&Bs awaiting rehoming??) over immigrants with dodgy backgrounds. The issue with Begum is that she's as British as I am - rather more, in fact, as I'm spent half my life abroad. Her opinions are irrelevant - she was entitled to think whatever she liked about ISIS, we're a country where we have freedom of opinion. The issue is whether the exercise of power to remove nationality is appropriate in thsi case (if it ever is), and I don't think it is, because of the grooming and the weakness of the claim that she could be Bangladeshi if she chose.

    As a cause celebre it's awkward as her opinions were repellent. But justice should not hinge on whether its application is awkward.
    Like you I dislike removing nationality. It’s the start of a slippery slope.
    I think it makes people with potential dual nationality (Irish people?) very nervous.
    It also discriminates against those with an overseas parent.

    I’m surprised it has not fallen foul of anti discrimination laws.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629

    Leon said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Mango said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jun/17/iraq.iraq
    Robin Cook was pretty clear in 2003.
    In retrospect, he appears an honourable, clever and capable politician: Robin Cook. The likes of which we don’t see any more

    Or is that nostalgia getting the better of me?

    I'm sure there is chapter and verse on Cook's failings, but, at the risk of using a cliche, he got the biggest call in his career right. How many politicians can say the same?
    Yes, he really called Iraq right. I clearly remember his resignation speech on the issue. It shames all of us who supported the war, in retrospect. And I mean ME (not that it matters)

    I was far too glib in my support for that war. It was a squalid moral disaster which hastened the decline of the west. Ugh
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 31,950
    TOPPING said:

    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    At which point ignore that bit.

    You can't remove someone's nationality on the basis that someone THINKS they have the right to citizenship elsewhere...

    Especially when the other country categorically states that that person does not qualify for citizenship...
    I never engaged with the citizenship argument. I dunno whether that was legitimate or not. I trust the English courts to decide

    They say it’s ok, so be it

    But as I’ve said multiple times, begum sacrificed her right to English justice when she willingly went to Syria to behead people and have Yazidi
    sex slaves. And was then unrepentant about it six years later

    Let the Syrians or Iraqis try her and punish her, as they see fit. They are her victims
    Would anyone complain if they just shot her?
    Good point. Much easier to shoot the people whose views we disagree with. Or perhaps render them to a third country and they can do it.

    I mean what exactly do we go to war for these days if not to prevent this type of behaviour?
    We go to war for reasons of honour, interest, and fear.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,259
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    As I say the evidence is mixed at best for her. But giving the HS the power to strip someone who is born in this country of their citizenship? Not for me.
    Yes I agree on that small particular point. I find it questionable - but let the lawyers argue it out

    Incidentally can I get your expert opinion on something?

    I’ve been faffing about with Stable Diffusion the image making AI. As may be obvious

    Some of the images it coughs up are extremely dodgy. Let’s file them as “underage nudity”

    What would happen if you were discovered to have these images? They are images invented ex nihilo, they depict people that never existed in situations that never happened. Are they still illegal?

    I can’t get my head around it
    Yes they are. Possession of drawings and tracings of an image of a child protrayed sexually or in a sexual context is illegal. It is the image that is illegal and its origin matters not. The fact that there is not an actual victim behind this image may be mitigatory but it would not be a defence.
    Fascinating. Also a bit mad. And not up to speed with modern tech. These machines spew these images if you want them or not

    You can put in an entirely innocuous prompt: “woman, garden, photo 1947” etc etc and you often get startling and disturbing responses

    The law might need revisiting ASAP. God knows how you frame it
    If you think about it you cannot differentiate. If the offence was restricted to real children you would in every case need to prove that child actually existed which in the vast majority of cases would simply be impossible. If your stable diffusion software produces such an image I suggest that you discard it. Pronto. And never, ever send it to anyone, even for a second opinion.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,519
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
    They don't seem to be rushing to do so - why is that?
    They certainly have done so to others, and have held her for years. Being British doesn't prevent prosecution.

    Indeed is there any evidence that she was involved in ISIS crimes? Being a sympathiser is not itself a crime, neither is being married to an ISIS fighter.
    She’s a self confessed member of ISIS and that alone is a capital crime in Syria and Iraq
    Either you are wrong about that or despite holding her 6 years they have no evidence she is a member, or for reasons of their own are not enforcing that law.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,615
    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Mango said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jun/17/iraq.iraq
    Robin Cook was pretty clear in 2003.
    He casts doubt on the intelligence, saying "Iraq was an appallingly difficult intelligence target to break".

    This if anything supports my case. The Opposition didn't have access to what intelligence there might have been and hence could not afford not to support action in case there was actual intelligence which showed Iraq was a threat.
    Robin Cook of course was in the government and had seen the evidence - and was confident enough to say Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction and was not a clear and present threat. I may be misremembering, but I think didn't Blair publish/share that dodgy dossier with the opposition?

    I agree though that it would be better to let the opposition (some of them at least) see all relevant intelligence/attend briefings etc. if it is the significant case in justifying a decision to go to war.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,496
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    As I say the evidence is mixed at best for her. But giving the HS the power to strip someone who is born in this country of their citizenship? Not for me.
    Yes I agree on that small particular point. I find it questionable - but let the lawyers argue it out

    Incidentally can I get your expert opinion on something?

    I’ve been faffing about with Stable Diffusion the image making AI. As may be obvious

    Some of the images it coughs up are extremely dodgy. Let’s file them as “underage nudity”

    What would happen if you were discovered to have these images? They are images invented ex nihilo, they depict people that never existed in situations that never happened. Are they still illegal?

    I can’t get my head around it
    Yes they are. Possession of drawings and tracings of an image of a child protrayed sexually or in a sexual context is illegal. It is the image that is illegal and its origin matters not. The fact that there is not an actual victim behind this image may be mitigatory but it would not be a defence.
    Fascinating. Also a bit mad. And not up to speed with modern tech. These machines spew these images if you want them or not

    You can put in an entirely innocuous prompt: “woman, garden, photo 1947” etc etc and you often get startling and disturbing responses

    The law might need revisiting ASAP. God knows how you frame it
    The problem is how to prove whether the image is derived from a photo of a victim, or generated by an AI (although, ultimately, how does the AI know how to draw underage nudity unless it exists in its training database?)

    You don't want child abusers to escape conviction because it's difficult to prove the images they have weren't produced by an AI.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 31,950
    O/T but the Swedish election is as tight as can be.

    Of the five most recent polls:

    Ipsos, Sentio, and Novus all give a marginal lead to the parties of the Right. SIFO and SKOP give a marginal lead to the parties of the Left.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 15,919

    Are people still talking about Begum ?

    Why would any government let her return when there is a chance she would engage in a terrorist action when back in this country ?

    Because if she did so it would end the career of any politician who allowed her to return.

    Different people will have different reasons but for me right at the top because it significantly changes the whole relationship between citizen and state for millions of Brits who were born abroad, or simply had parents who were born abroad. In comparison minor interest because the courts are being kafka-esque and the security services have been lying, at least by omission.

    For me its not about sympathy for Begum, no problems with her being locked up whatever age she was, but being made stateless should be a no-no for a Brit.
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,207

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
    They don't seem to be rushing to do so - why is that?
    I believe it’s lack of money and stability. So let’s help to provide that. Sorting our problems AND theirs
    Good, lets move on from the Begum argument. "Money and Stability" is the way to resolve not just her and the rest of the ISIS lunacy, its the way to stop rich countries being swamped by refugees from warzones and desperately poor countries and places which will be desperately hard to live in as the climate changes.

    It strikes me that there is something we can do with chunks of Africa and the Middle East to help them and help us - enormous solar farms. Now that solar has become relatively cheap and efficient instead of fighting over Afghanistan for pipelines, just build solar and export cables. These countries grow wealthy, we get electricity, we avoid a refugee disaster as they all get air conditioning.
    That all sounds great as in principle I agree but for it to work the wealth has to be shared out. The reality of oil has been it has destabilised the region not helped it. Mineral and other wealth has not helped nations.

    Solar cannot be allowed to do the same.

    Octopus Energy are going big on Moroccan solar.
  • IcarusIcarus Posts: 766

    DavidL said:

    Ben Wallace: Submarines rather than ships could be the Royal Navy's future
    Defence Secretary has asked naval chiefs to assess the 'balance' between surface and submarine fleets as he launches a major review

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/02/ben-wallace-submarines-rather-ships-could-royal-navys-future/ (£££)

    Should we anticipate the Prince of Wales adapting to this policy shortly?
    The Moskva has led the charge.
    My car has countless warning lights - most of which I ignore - surely the Prince of Wales had a "Starboard Prop Grease Low" warning light.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 8,610
    edited September 2

    Are people still talking about Begum ?

    Why would any government let her return when there is a chance she would engage in a terrorist action when back in this country ?

    Because if she did so it would end the career of any politician who allowed her to return.

    That's true but is it germane to the legal position? She was 15 and a British Citizen. These seem crucial factors to me but what do I know?

    I am concerned that if she returns a circus of advocacy and celebrity will surround her at great taxpayer expense. Perhaps the best option is to allow her return on condition of residence with her family (inc financial support) and then do nothing other than put her on a terrorist watch list?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    As I say the evidence is mixed at best for her. But giving the HS the power to strip someone who is born in this country of their citizenship? Not for me.
    Yes I agree on that small particular point. I find it questionable - but let the lawyers argue it out

    Incidentally can I get your expert opinion on something?

    I’ve been faffing about with Stable Diffusion the image making AI. As may be obvious

    Some of the images it coughs up are extremely dodgy. Let’s file them as “underage nudity”

    What would happen if you were discovered to have these images? They are images invented ex nihilo, they depict people that never existed in situations that never happened. Are they still illegal?

    I can’t get my head around it
    Yes they are. Possession of drawings and tracings of an image of a child protrayed sexually or in a sexual context is illegal. It is the image that is illegal and its origin matters not. The fact that there is not an actual victim behind this image may be mitigatory but it would not be a defence.
    Fascinating. Also a bit mad. And not up to speed with modern tech. These machines spew these images if you want them or not

    You can put in an entirely innocuous prompt: “woman, garden, photo 1947” etc etc and you often get startling and disturbing responses

    The law might need revisiting ASAP. God knows how you frame it
    If you think about it you cannot differentiate. If the offence was restricted to real children you would in every case need to prove that child actually existed which in the vast majority of cases would simply be impossible. If your stable diffusion software produces such an image I suggest that you discard it. Pronto. And never, ever send it to anyone, even for a second opinion.
    Noted. Useful. Ta

    I stand by my assertion that the law will need to be updated to take into account computer models which will churn out these images by the trillion. They will flood the internet. They are created in seconds. And you don’t get any choice
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 3,363
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was trying to avoid the judicial process (such as it is) in Syria by claiming that she was a UK citizen so should face prosecution in the UK.

    One answer would be “fine - after you have been prosecuted in Syria”

    Another is “you’ve made your bed, now you get to lie in it - you’re no longer a UK citizen because you chose to leave the UK and team up with an enemy that was in conflict with the UK”

    In no circumstance is the correct answer “oh dear, please come back to the Uk for tea and biscuits and avoid the consequences of your choices and crimes committed in Syria”

    Naturally she (and her supporters in the press) want the last option
  • DynamoDynamo Posts: 651
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    So anyone who joins the Hitler Youth aged 15, participates eagerly in the war, is an unprotesting witness to the Holocaust, and who gets arrested in 1946 in Chile and EVEN THEN can barely express regrets for anyone killed or enslaved by the Nazis is also “a victim”?

    Give it a rest
    As I say the evidence is mixed at best for her. But giving the HS the power to strip someone who is born in this country of their citizenship? Not for me.
    Yes I agree on that small particular point. I find it questionable - but let the lawyers argue it out

    Incidentally can I get your expert opinion on something?

    I’ve been faffing about with Stable Diffusion the image making AI. As may be obvious

    Some of the images it coughs up are extremely dodgy. Let’s file them as “underage nudity”

    What would happen if you were discovered to have these images? They are images invented ex nihilo, they depict people that never existed in situations that never happened. Are they still illegal?

    I can’t get my head around it
    Yes they are. Possession of drawings and tracings of an image of a child protrayed sexually or in a sexual context is illegal. It is the image that is illegal and its origin matters not. The fact that there is not an actual victim behind this image may be mitigatory but it would not be a defence.
    Fascinating. Also a bit mad. And not up to speed with modern tech. These machines spew these images if you want them or not

    You can put in an entirely innocuous prompt: “woman, garden, photo 1947” etc etc and you often get startling and disturbing responses

    The law might need revisiting ASAP. God knows how you frame it
    To summarise: some guys have programmed a computer so that it sends out child pornography to unwitting parties who make innocent requests for computer art.

    Existing law should be able to cope with that.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,496
    TOPPING said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    I doubt this ‘revelation’ changes much, even if it is true and it seems to be accepted as true by Begums supporters in the media.

    She was unrepentant as you say and her comments about the Manchester Arena bombing were appalling and made well after IS had fallen.

    She seems to have a well funded and slick PR campaign advocating for her. She doesn’t deserve it. I would let her be subject to the justice of the domain she committed her offences in.

    As Nick Palmer, iirc, said. There are far more deserving cases of our help.
    Well, not exactly. I prioritise unproblematic immigrants (for example, Afghans who actually helped us - why the hell are they STILL in B&Bs awaiting rehoming??) over immigrants with dodgy backgrounds. The issue with Begum is that she's as British as I am - rather more, in fact, as I'm spent half my life abroad. Her opinions are irrelevant - she was entitled to think whatever she liked about ISIS, we're a country where we have freedom of opinion. The issue is whether the exercise of power to remove nationality is appropriate in thsi case (if it ever is), and I don't think it is, because of the grooming and the weakness of the claim that she could be Bangladeshi if she chose.

    As a cause celebre it's awkward as her opinions were repellent. But justice should not hinge on whether its application is awkward.
    Like you I dislike removing nationality. It’s the start of a slippery slope.
    I think it makes people with potential dual nationality (Irish people?) very nervous.
    As I understand it, people with Irish nationality are uniquely not at risk. The British Nationality Act of 1949 prohibits treating people with Irish nationality as foreigners, and HMG have no ability to remove Irish citizenship. If Begum was Irish she wouldn't be in the difficulties she is in now.
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,207
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
    They don't seem to be rushing to do so - why is that?
    They certainly have done so to others, and have held her for years. Being British doesn't prevent prosecution.

    Indeed is there any evidence that she was involved in ISIS crimes? Being a sympathiser is not itself a crime, neither is being married to an ISIS fighter.
    She’s a self confessed member of ISIS and that alone is a capital crime in Syria and Iraq
    Either you are wrong about that or despite holding her 6 years they have no evidence she is a member, or for reasons of their own are not enforcing that law.
    What she has said on its own is evidence enough. A confession but not under duress.

    So there must be other reasons.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,301
    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    I don't envy the young very much in this hostile and puritan world

    But one thing I do envy them is the Shuffle Dance and Pascal Letoublon's Friendship

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh4sjcsIE_E

    That is the BEST DANCE EVER. They have THAT

    It is sexy, exuberant, clever, addictive, feral, hypnotic, and fiendish in the best way

    I have actually tried to learn this dance, In my late 50s. It is impossible. You need ankles made of elastic, ie ankles aged 13-23

    God bless those that can. Superb

    Excellent. Surely not new to anyone who watched Michael Jackson in his heyday though.
    Nihil sub sole novum

    I’m a Bill Bojangles Robinson man myself.
    This guy was the real innovator.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_W._Bubbles

    And not coincidentally what Jackson named his pet chimp.

    Yep, there are so many geniuses lurking in our past with only a grainy bit of film or a crackly recording to testify to their talent.

    I have a soft spot for Bojangles because my great uncle Calum, a a taciturn Lewisman and merchant marine engineer let drop that he'd seen him in a Manhattan nightclub in the 1930s, and what a memorable sight it was. High praise from my slightly scary nunky.

    There was also a men's boutique in 1970s Aberdeen called Mr Bojangles that sold the big collared, swirly shirts and massive flares of that period, not quite so resonant.

  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 10,428
    Icarus said:

    DavidL said:

    Ben Wallace: Submarines rather than ships could be the Royal Navy's future
    Defence Secretary has asked naval chiefs to assess the 'balance' between surface and submarine fleets as he launches a major review

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/02/ben-wallace-submarines-rather-ships-could-royal-navys-future/ (£££)

    Should we anticipate the Prince of Wales adapting to this policy shortly?
    The Moskva has led the charge.
    My car has countless warning lights - most of which I ignore - surely the Prince of Wales had a "Starboard Prop Grease Low" warning light.
    Many, many ships, aircraft and cars have been destroyed by people willingly disbelieving what is right in front of their eyes.

    The FAA crashed a Hawk in the last days of 736 by unplugging an MCD on the engine because they were convinced it was giving a false indication. It wasn't and the engine blew up on its next flight.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,259

    Are people still talking about Begum ?

    Why would any government let her return when there is a chance she would engage in a terrorist action when back in this country ?

    Because if she did so it would end the career of any politician who allowed her to return.

    Different people will have different reasons but for me right at the top because it significantly changes the whole relationship between citizen and state for millions of Brits who were born abroad, or simply had parents who were born abroad. In comparison minor interest because the courts are being kafka-esque and the security services have been lying, at least by omission.

    For me its not about sympathy for Begum, no problems with her being locked up whatever age she was, but being made stateless should be a no-no for a Brit.
    Exactly, it makes the citizenship of those we invited into this country and gave citizenship to something less than the full thing. That is wrong and the fact that it is being applied to their children born here is even more wrong.

    As for Begum, if she is tried in the country where she was a party to ISIS crimes and they choose to execute her, well, so be it. I won't be losing a lot of sleep over it. My concerns are the fact that she is British and should have remained so and the monsters who did groom her here need to be hunted down and severely punished.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,496
    edited September 2
    TOPPING said:

    Well that is a prime example of me being hoist with my own petard.

    I bemoan the fact that we are talking about Shamima Begum, which we did only yesterday, and then I enter into a discussion about the merits or otherwise of the effing Iraq War.

    We could always talk about Scottish Independence. I received this leaflet with 10 key facts about independence.


    The leaflet seemed very confident there would be an independence referendum on 19th October 2023.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Mango said:

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    Voters elected Tony Blair after he lied through his teeth to get Britain into a war which saw 175vfamillies lose a loved one and hundreds of others have loved ones return physically or mentally maimed.

    At the time of the 2005 election most people still regarded the 2003 invasion as valid. You have made the mistake of looking at things from a 2022 viewpoint rather than the viewpoints of 2005.
    if i remember rightly the bulk of the tories were in favour of this. it was only Kennedy against, and him and the libdems were pilloried for it.
    Yeah this old one. If the government (which has access to more intelligence than the opposition) says that there is a real and credible threat to the nation the Opposition has no option but to go along with it.

    The problem in that case was that the Opposition support was based upon a lie, a government lie.
    Bollocks. Anyone with half an active brain cell could tell that the whole thing was illegal, immoral, irresponsible and ill-conceived. Bleedin' obvious in 2003, and bleeding obvious in 2022.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jun/17/iraq.iraq
    Robin Cook was pretty clear in 2003.
    He casts doubt on the intelligence, saying "Iraq was an appallingly difficult intelligence target to break".

    This if anything supports my case. The Opposition didn't have access to what intelligence there might have been and hence could not afford not to support action in case there was actual intelligence which showed Iraq was a threat.
    No, not true. IDS was given access to the relevant intelligence.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,629
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Why don’t the Syrians and Iraqis have the right to bring her to justice?

    It was Syrians and Iraqis that she helped to enslave, torture and kill
    They don't seem to be rushing to do so - why is that?
    They certainly have done so to others, and have held her for years. Being British doesn't prevent prosecution.

    Indeed is there any evidence that she was involved in ISIS crimes? Being a sympathiser is not itself a crime, neither is being married to an ISIS fighter.
    She’s a self confessed member of ISIS and that alone is a capital crime in Syria and Iraq
    Either you are wrong about that or despite holding her 6 years they have no evidence she is a member, or for reasons of their own are not enforcing that law.
    I’m not wrong


  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,177

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was trying to avoid the judicial process (such as it is) in Syria by claiming that she was a UK citizen so should face prosecution in the UK.

    One answer would be “fine - after you have been prosecuted in Syria”

    Another is “you’ve made your bed, now you get to lie in it - you’re no longer a UK citizen because you chose to leave the UK and team up with an enemy that was in conflict with the UK”

    In no circumstance is the correct answer “oh dear, please come back to the Uk for tea and biscuits and avoid the consequences of your choices and crimes committed in Syria”

    Naturally she (and her supporters in the press) want the last option
    Were we actually in a state of war with Isis? Could it be described as a state?
  • Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Mr. JohnL, yet ISIS was in the news continuously, often as the headline, for barbaric atrocities. This is not an irrelevant point. It beggars belief that those who travelled thousands of miles to join a genocidal cult of master faith religious zealots that had dominated the news could not be aware of what it stood for.

    Pretending that was not the case and those who travelled were just 'misguided' disregards that they willingly went to join a murderous cause of the utmost evil, and one which was widely known about and reported upon.

    Would a man be getting this sympathy?

    Indeed

    Moreover, Begum was unrepentant about ISIS a full SIX YEARS after she joined, in that famous TV interview in her tent. She just regretted the fact ISIS did not win

    She was not 15 then. She was 21

    This is like a Nazi being interviewed in Argentina in 1947, saying “Auschwitz was great, shame they closed it”. It was only when she realised this was catastrophic PR that she changed her tune

    It beggars belief we waste this time on a piece of human trash. Let the Syrians execute her

    There is certainly a line of argument that even if Shemima (and her mates) were groomed and trafficked at 15, they really ought to have figured out something was wrong six years later.
    I think that you are missing the consequences of grooming. She joined a cult. An evil, vicious, monstrous cult that pretends to be a religion and brainwashes its adherents. I agree that we should be highly sceptical that she is fully recovered but I am still open to the idea that she is a victim.
    Of course she is a victim. She believed she was on a mission from God to travel to Syria and have babies with God's chosen fighters ousting the infadel from God's lands. She didn't think that until after her grooming.
    I am not in that camp either. There is such a thing as automony and personal responsibility. I think the evidence is mixed at best. But I remain uncomfortable with the powers given to the Home Secretary in this regard and do not think that the UK can simply wash its hands of her.
    She was groomed. She then committed serious offences. She is ours to bring to justice.
    Her offences were mainly committed overseas. Why should we bring her to justice and imprison her, if guilty. for offences committed on Syrian soil ? Let her stand trial there.
    They are offences here. Would be yet another example of British exceptionalism if we have our citizens commit offences abroad then remove their citizenship so they become Someone Else's Problem.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 2,008

    TOPPING said:

    Well that is a prime example of me being hoist with my own petard.

    I bemoan the fact that we are talking about Shamima Begum, which we did only yesterday, and then I enter into a discussion about the merits or otherwise of the effing Iraq War.

    We could always talk about Scottish Independence. I received this leaflet with 10 key facts about independence.


    The leaflet seemed very confident there would be an independence referendum on 19th October 2023.
    Yes. We need to talk more about Scottish independence and Indyref2 on here 👍
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 32,012
    Icarus said:

    DavidL said:

    Ben Wallace: Submarines rather than ships could be the Royal Navy's future
    Defence Secretary has asked naval chiefs to assess the 'balance' between surface and submarine fleets as he launches a major review

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/02/ben-wallace-submarines-rather-ships-could-royal-navys-future/ (£££)

    Should we anticipate the Prince of Wales adapting to this policy shortly?
    The Moskva has led the charge.
    My car has countless warning lights - most of which I ignore - surely the Prince of Wales had a "Starboard Prop Grease Low" warning light.
    That 'failure to grease propeller shaft' story in the Telegraph is being treated with some scepticism on-line. Another theory is that the propeller struck something: either the seabed or something else in the water. Which might make sense in the area the failure occurred in.

    Incidentally, I've also seen it reported that it is going to drydock in Amsterdam...
This discussion has been closed.