From webstump at ..iark.greenend.org.uk Tue Aug 13 14:25:04 2024 Return-path: To: hex at ..seen.ac.am Subject: Re: Re: Shamima Begum References: <9461435972.20da152c@uninhabited.net> In-Reply-To: Reply-To: matthewv+ulmtestmod at ..riolis.greenend.org.uk Errors-To: webstump+ulm-bounces at ..iark.greenend.org.uk X-Webstump-Event: [172355536227389] reject notnew Message-Id: From: webstump+ulm-bounces at ..iark.greenend.org.uk Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 14:25:03 +0100 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 The post that you submitted to uk.legal.moderated has been rejected by a moderator. This post contains insufficient new material. Similar points have been made already in this discussion, which is in danger of becoming too repetitive. The group charter and moderation policy can be found at https://uklegal.weebly.com/ Disputed moderation decisions can be discussed in the newsgroup uk.net.news.moderation ============================================ Full text of your message follows > From webstump@chiark.greenend.org.uk Tue Aug 13 14:22:42 2024 > Return-path: > Envelope-to: webstump+?@slimy.greenend.org.uk > Received-SPF: pass (mailhub-cam-d.mythic-beasts.com: domain of uni-berlin.de designates 130.133.4.89 as permitted sender) client-ip=130.133.4.89; envelope-from=mod-submit@uni-berlin.de; helo=outpost5.zedat.fu-berlin.de; > X-STUMP-Warning-0: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-1: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-2: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-3: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uni-berlin.de; s=fub01; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Mime-Version:References:Message-ID:Date:Subject:From:To:Sender: Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=1Mx+jkE7AbRvVyVU7b1z7QRDkQd7B1c3VrlmGCCus3A=; t=1723555359; x=1724160159; b=IItkVV8IVL3CyoE > From: Norman Wells > Newsgroups: uk.legal.moderated > Subject: Re: Shamima Begum > Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 14:22:37 +0100 > Message-ID: > References: > > <9461435972.20da152c@uninhabited.net> > > > > > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > X-Orig-X-Trace: individual.net inebIDPcR7Hc0mcZDNBKCga6z/ZksE9dZTRvU2Aqrx0vkrkNDw > Cancel-Lock: sha1:+8MMRGz4rhNx9uOK2/msWzrIAXg= sha256:ozki7e+ewFGLIYr+dXsoXKyhLcJy3Q84QTK+qhTFGv0= > User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird > Content-Language: en-GB > X-Originating-IP: 130.133.4.5 > X-ZEDAT-Hint: RO > X-Mythic-Source-External: YES > X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 17 > X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7 > Delivered-To: usenet-uk-legal-moderated@usenet.org.uk > X-BlackCat-To: usenet-uk-legal-moderated@usenet.org.uk > X-Mythic-Originator: uid-1081-on-lynx.mythic-beasts.com > X-STUMP-Warning-4: Unfolded headers Received: Received: Received: Received: Received: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: > > On 13/08/2024 13:52, The Todal wrote: > > On 13/08/2024 13:30, GB wrote: > > >> I asked "are you suggesting that she can be 'un-deprived'?", and you > >> said "Yes, of course".  If you were not sure whether new primary or > >> secondary legislation would be required, it would have been even > >> better if you had said so. > > > > That's called pettifogging. It would have been better if you had > > contributed usefully to the discussion, or held your tongue. > > > > A Home Secretary can reverse previous decisions of her department or of > > a previous Home Secretary. It isn't up to me to find out whether she has > > executive powers or additional statutory instruments, or to satisfy you > > or Norman that she would be acting within her powers. > > I just thought you might have something substantive to back up your > views and assumptions, that's all. Otherwise, they're no more than that. > > > I suggest you go and do your own homework. Maybe write to the Home > > Office. Or, of course, you can believe Norman. After all, nobody cares > > whether you do or not. He reckons that the decision to deprive a person > > of citizenship is cast in stone. I'm sure he will be very disappointed > > if and when events prove him wrong. > > I'd actually be surprised and indeed interested from a legal point of view. > > Disappointment doesn't come into it. I have no emotional stake in the > fight. > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEfWu6wfyjzX88oocanSrwpvmn4x4FAma7Xq8ACgkQnSrwpvmn 4x6Bewf9GdYjYIOUHOm+t2XnX1dIzmroT3Bspzpq1kZLU4S42BhPBOU65BgkRCcs 8+GhWDeAdUGE4mZuY508lSNz6vUWSfxGM32YNXV7ESjq/iuQgRdjCoNecfkC5jO0 uRTmhrdYy96gx8NBEsFGLPJZMFH07xiYybExsb7nv9NiiIrsXyoaXk+IgFGWzmI9 tul2vWx/N6bMZXoPiGYZcf88XJA4hjQnz3cJl/Sl5oPovrrQw8JSsoeleIYwctZ8 7pC7SJlvMQz/qau1T4gcw2TjzOeEaDIVswqC5I2emD0ae+x7ekHvhw5f615wCwcV 0A6cCQAKMLJWwXnURJ1LUGOZjcAo5g== =zn7Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----