View Single Post
Old 16th February 2019, 09:42 AM   #168
baron
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,627
Originally Posted by IanS View Post
It's a question of what sort of risk or danger she might pose to the general public.
It's also about what kind of example it sets, if a well-known individual is permitted to indulge in terrorist activities then return to this country and be welcomed with open arms (and before you say that's hyperbole, that's what certain commentators are pushing for). OK, maybe she doesn't commit an act of terrorism when she returns, and maybe she doesn't encourage anybody else to do the same (leaving aside the 18m per year bill for her monitoring) but maybe the tens? hundreds? thousands? emboldened by her treatment will.

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
I ask (not you personally) again: What is the alternative to taking your citizens back?
Not taking them back. You don't have to strip a person of their citizenship to not allow them access to the country. What happens to her then, you ask? Who cares? At best she'll be imprisoned or killed abroad; at worst, she'll go live in an Islamic country more accepting of her views.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top