Saudi Arabia again - Saudi girl facing possible death in Bangkok Airport

Caporegime
OP
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
Flipping that on its head, do you assert that there is no hypothetical situation - at all - where the UK could allow the repatriation of a Saudi citizen against their will, and be able to plausibly deny any involvement?

I don't think it is very plausible that the UK can secretly hand over an asylum seeker to the Saudis and keep it quiet, no.

I don't think it is probably that the UK would want to even if they thought there was a chance of getting away with it.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
I don't think it is very plausible that the UK can secretly hand over an asylum seeker to the Saudis and keep it quiet, no.

I don't think it is probably that the UK would want to even if they thought there was a chance of getting away with it.
Or allow to happen by inaction? Ie deliberately failing to take protective custody of said Saudi citizen?
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
Or allow to happen by inaction? Ie deliberately failing to take protective custody of said Saudi citizen?

In what way? What are you referring to now? This person is in the UK and wants to claim asylum?

(you're still deflecting by the way)
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
That's your stipulation not mine.

Everything is a deflection to you because you are rigidly locked on to wanting me to say something I have never once claimed.

Anyway let's say the events play out slightly differently.

The Saudi agents travelling on the plane with her successfully apprehend her at the hotel and the media doesn't get wind of her plight (until much later if ever). Her asylum claim is never officially made. She might make a couple Facebook posts and telephone calls but that's it.

A private chartered plane is arranged and Saudi agents are allowed to board with her and leave without interception. A few UK govt officials are aware at the highest level and take no action.

All that has to happen in any of these hypothetical situations is that the UK govt is aware and chooses not to obstruct the treatment by the Saudis of their own citizens.

I'm not saying the UK has to round them up and fly them back to Saudi on BA planes, screaming and kicking as they go, with the media taking photos and running headlines about our violation of human rights. That's precisely what I'm not saying.

But the idea that the UK would always rigorously stand up for the rights of foreign nationals against an allied nation of which that person was a citizen... when there are clear and precedented cases of laws being outright ignored for the same nation's good relations...
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
OP
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
That's your stipulation not mine.

Everything is a deflection to you because you are rigidly locked on to wanting me to say something I have never once claimed.

I just wanted you to explain your position/claim. I think it is quite clear that you can't and that is because your claim is rather dubious and won't stand up to scrutiny.

This is nonsense:

Let's not kid ourselves here... the UK would probably have handed her over if they could do so quietly without gaining any unwanted media attention.

You can't explain how that is plausible/realistic and so you've continually deflected further scrutiny and kept things vague.

We have enough trouble deporting people yet you think it is plausible we'd secretly vanish some Saudi asylum seeker because they'd asked... with some handwaving reason of "because arms deals/oil" etc... Even if there was the desire to within some part of government it would be hard to see how it could be done in secret/without drawing attention.

in b4 "oh no I'm not claiming that I'm claiming something different but I won't provide any clarity on what it is as it is such nonsense I don't even know where to start now"
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
You can't deport someone easily because they're in the system. As in, living in the UK. Totally different.

If they aren't in the system, apart from a brief check in at the airport (plenty of people fly onwards to some other destination after landing at the UK temporarily)... then yes there might be opportunities.

e: Ultimately all this come down to is your belief that the UK would never do such a thing.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
Whether the UK was the final destination or not if someone wanted to claim asylum at a uk airport then you’d be hard pressed to just dissapear them...

This is just nonsense, and you’re not going to persuade me otherwise as you can’t even explain how it would work.

It doesn’t just come down to belief that the UK govt would want to do such a thing, my assertion was that even if they did want to then it isn’t very plausible that they’d be able to either do it or keep it quiet.

Even legally deporting asylum seekers has issues. A bunch of hippies making noise on a plane is enough to stop the deportation of an asylum seeker in the west.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
Sorry, I was hoping it wouldn’t carry on and wanted him to cut to the chase/explain but I think it has concluded now. Or at least I’m certainly not going to pursue any further discussion of his claim.
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Nov 2012
Posts
17,934
Location
Close to Swindon, but not Swindon
Saw a couple of tweets from Saudis (or at least people with the Saudi flag in their profile) responding to people covering this. Comments about "what about the rights of her parents" and "you incite to her parents with this". All about family honour and talking about her like she's property of her parents.



The USA very much did need them for oil up until quite recently, when technological advances made home-produced shale oil suddenly viable for the States. The Saudis did their best to undercut the market and kill the shale oil industry before it could get off the ground, attempting to deny it initial funding by tanking their own oil price and making it no longer worthwhile. But I don't think they succeeded so the situation is now different, as you point out.

Her parents have no rights, she's free to do as she pleases. I understand there a culture thing here, but they need to also understand, as kids grow up, their views on life will change and naturally push them towards wanting to experiment and explore, probably much against their parents/guardians wishes.

Also, is there any country that the states haven't "invaded" (read miliraty presence but may as well be the same thing) lol
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Jun 2011
Posts
5,468
Location
Yorkshire and proud of it!
All of them half-assed and tantamount to complicity.

Stop selling them weapons, stop supplying strategic information and assistance in their war on Yemen, cut back on buying oil from them, exile Saudi citizens, block purchases of British assets, account freezes. That's just off the top of my head. None of them are "tantamount to complicity", all of them have significant impact for Saudi Arabia and all of them refute your idiotic assertion that the only choices are to either invade Saudi Arabia or accept everything they do to their citizens.
 
Back
Top Bottom