No. First, it's 'all right', and only idiots use 'alright.' Second, you are deliberately promoting a false equivalence between a flat-out, all-out, dictator-fancying Red Nazi -- which is what Corbyn is -- and someone who just didn't quite say nothing in particular.

You're talking bollocks. I said nothing about the security services or about breaking the law. Begum's case, because of the publicity attending it, presents a particular problem for the government. And, as it now turns out, Begum does not have a passport. She travelled out on her sister's passport. She can only return to the UK with the co-operation of HM Government by applying for a Permit to Return. That means the government can apply pressure. And she clearly knows this, even if you don't, because she has today said that she will co-operate with the authorities, undergo a rehabilitation course, or even go to jail, as long as she can return to the UK. Which is what I said would happen.

From Umunna's appearance now on C4 news it seems the new "party" is little more than an anti-Brexit party with no other policies apart from some waffle about affordability that you'd get from the Tories.

I just hope some Tories break away and join them.

Getting the old band back together...

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...-back-14017366

lolabour

I was about to say "Derek Hatton next". It turns out that it was actually him.

I am not saying they're the same. I'm saying that neither are alright.

You just have no evidence for the second half of this paragraph and you're letting your mind run away with you.

Immediately making them the most sane party in British politics by a considerable distance.

Yes you are. You're whatabouting.

No, it was reported by BBC radio earlier today. Begum's actual interview with Sky, on inspection, is much vaguer, but she accepts that she will face restrictions on her return and that her child might be taken away.

https://news.sky.com/story/is-bride-...there-11640278

No I'm doing literally the opposite. Reread my post.

Nice to see you've dropped the whole 'the security services will break the law by pressuring her' part of it.

Degsy bloody Hatton. Honestly.

I never said that. You just made it up. You're lying.

Alright, I'm done with arguing with trolls. It's all above for people to make their own decisions.

stop talking and take my vote

For those who came in late, here is the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...ent%2525253Dni

Under Part 1 Chapter 2 Section 6, it specifically allows the Secretary of State to impose conditions on a Permit to Return -- requiring the subject to attend an interview with a constable or immigration officer -- and to refuse the permit, denying entry to the UK, if the subject does not attend.

Under Part 5 Chapter 2 Section 36, the subject, once under UK law, if deemed 'vulnerable to being drawn into terrorism' -- like by giving daft interviews pledging allegiance to the ideology of IS and saying severed heads in a bin are no biggie if the heads belonged to 'enemies of Islam,' for instance -- can be referred by a chief officer of police to a local-authority 'support panel' who can 'prepare a plan' for the subject's support and supervision. (The Act only mentions the intelligence services in regard to the fact that support panels cannot disclose information relating to the intelligence services.)

In addition, the subject's movements can be restricted and separate legislation could dictate whether she could keep her child. Begum seems to be aware of all this.

It's nothing to do with 'security services breaking the law.' It's to do with the Secretary of State and the police exercising their due rights and powers under the Act.

This was a bit of a tragic reminder.

and that bits ok but this also a serious threat to Labour. High chance more will leave and it will be timed for maximum effect.

I'd be surprised if links to Blair or Campbell don't emerge at some point.

>Liberals mugged by reality
>Right wing

Immigration has never been higher than when May was either home secretary or PM. Everything she says is the opposite of what she thinks or plans to do, anyway. A pathological lying kuntbag is more accurate.

Angela Smth's constituents say good riddance

Not entirely representative of the article, is it?

Articles quotes three old blokes playing snooker who say she's ****e, one old lady who thinks she's good, and a local Labour councillor who says the constituents will have mixed feelings. not exactly illuminating. article is a waste of time.

Shamima Begum's family lawayer claims she is to lose her UK citizenship

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47299907

Umunna's ambition outweighing his aversion to casual racism should surprise no one.