What to do with returning jihadists?

UK Muslim Group: Infidels have no rights to strip Mohammedan head-choppers of citizenship

The Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC) in the United Kingdom have slammed Home Minister Theresa May for her plans to introduce new measures that would enable the UK to strip anyone considered to be a threat to the country of their citizenship. –-British Muslim NGO slams plans to strip citizenship of terror suspects

That’s far from doing anything about it.

Why were these jihadis allowed to come back to France after waging jihad in Syria? The risk is high that returning jihadis will continue their jihad in their home countries. This is why the governments of Britain, the U.S. and Australia are worried about this as well. Not that many politicians in any of those […] /Comments/Continue Reading »

“Who has the right to say that France in thirty or forty years will not be a Muslim country? Who has the right in this country to deprive us of it?” — Marwan Muhammed, spokesman, Collective Against Islamophobia in France (CCIF), Paris.

5 thoughts on “What to do with returning jihadists?”

  1. The UK has passed a controversial amendment to its Immigration Bill that could be used to strip foreign-born Britons of their citizenship.

    It is now one step away from becoming law and would allow the government to revoke the passports of naturalised citizens whose conduct is deemed to be seriously prejudicial to the UK’s interests.

    Opponents say that two safeguards added to the bill still will not prevent suspects from being made permanently stateless. Legal experts also question whether this could breach international laws.

    Lord Taylor of Holbeach, the parliamentary under-secretary of state for the home office, stressed the powers will be used with caution. Speaking in the House of Lords, he said: “The home secretary would reach a decision only after very careful consideration of the facts of an individual case.

    She will reach a decision based on whether she reasonably believes the person has recourse to another nationality under the law of another country.”

    So a necessary measure to protect security, or a law that is open to abuse? And do those who are only suspected of crimes risk becoming abandoned and forgotten?

  2. I thought the people of the UK were subjects, not citizens. Am I wrong?

    1. That is quite so. But even the queen has a hijabee in her employ, and there is a prayer room in Buckingham palace. The idiot prince is said to be a closet Muslim; none of the royals has ever been to Israel. But all of them have been to Arabiya, displaying their submission in diverse mosques. So the greater question might be who’s subjects are the Brits?

  3. @Sheik,

    Actions are a true indicator of thought and thus you make an excellent point about the British royal family.

    Why indeed, have they not been to Israel? Do you know if they’ve invited the Israeli’s to dinners and such?

    Admittedly, I was not aware that Lizzie and co have never been to Israel and found such admission, slightly shocking.

Comments are closed.