moral yeah

@Nordhand the British government always had the ability to remove her citizenship, even if she wasn't a bangleshi citizen, she was entitled to claim it

Which still allowed the British to revoke her citizenship

legal, I don't know. How should a state treat an enemy combatant?

in interviews with her she said that she had no remorse of what she had done or been part of. I think that did make the choice easy as all she was looking for was a easy way out from the consequences of her actions

I personally would fly her ass back to Syria and have the locals do as they may, but this is a very arbitrary decision

she still is a supporter of ISIS and it evil dream, it just that now the dream is falling apart around her

She just wants that British welfare

yea and a good distance between her ass and the Kurds and other anti IS fighters as they do still believe in the eye for an eye part of the holy books

hot take, LOL...
https://twitter.com/BronxBloggerNYC/status/1098461749509046273

Well tbh international law doesnt allow any state to make a person stateless. If she is a dual citizen, and the fact the state she is living isnt trying to get rid of her, they have the right to revoke.

The law is to prevent a state from simply dumping unwanted people on another. But that isnt the case here.

Diane Abbott is the one claiming breach of human rights? imagine my shock

Asian meaning

I think there might be a slight difference between child sexual exploitation and joining isis

but I could be wrong

<:pepe_sad:378719408345841664> https://twitter.com/John_Kass/status/1098192209822863362

https://twitter.com/ArchRose90/status/1098268379872251904

*Second, the association added, the justices should clarify that “a private property owner is not converted into a state actor merely because it operates a space where free expression is encouraged to occur”*
This is wrong, the SCOTUS actually has ruled exactly that, in a case about someone streetcorner preaching in a private company town.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/02/argument-preview-justices-to-consider-whether-first-amendment-applies-to-public-access-channels/

https://twitter.com/Michael_Heaver/status/1098553469022232578

Idk, as far as I’m aware the arab countries wrre doing relatively well whilst venezuelans are starving to death atm

the arab countries that are doing well are the ones that trade oil in dollars <:makes_you_think:382980749780844554>

And the General population is still living in shit conditions, it's the kings that enjoy wealth

Isn't Erdoguan just fine now?

His Lira is shit but otherwise I think he is pretty solid, at least no military coup anytime soon

The situations are comparable, but from what I gather, Iraq and the other Arab countries had way better standards of living overall than Venezuela in the past few years

At least until the wars fucked shit up

Yeah

Bye enlightened islam

Iraq honestly doesn't seem to be the hellhole that propoganda makes it out to be.

You mean Iraq or Iran?

Iraq

Iran is... 'Safer' than you might think, but still shitty. People make the best of it though, and I hold a great deal of respect for that.

Iraq is a hellhole though.

Depends upon the region

No need to even use propaganda the reality is just as bad

The middle East is a failed fucking disaster that should be wiped off of the map so we can all forget about it and move on. But then a lot of innocents live there lol...

I mean I also think it depends upon how we are defining it. Culturally, safety, standard of living?

Iran is still the "best" shit hole in the middle east yeah