Skip to main content

You're hard.

Sajid Javid, Sajid Javid, you're hard, you're hard, Theresa May, Theresa May, you're hard as well.

Yes, belatedly, here's the Coastalblog take on the Shamima Begum farrago, not so much a hot take as a lukewarm one, I grant you, but what the hell. Now, I hate to be so predictably on-brand about this, but, as I'm sure you've already guessed, I tend towards the view that the whole thing's a misconceived pile of easily-avoided fuck-up with a nice cool glass of racism on the side.

It was when I noticed normally sane people starting to share Katie Hopkins videos that I realised that there was a disturbance in the force. Friends who I know to be mild-mannered and reasonable were quietly muttering about how she shouldn't be allowed back. What on Earth was going on? The facts of the case seemed pretty straightforward: idiot goes and joins ISIS, has a traumatic time of it, loses two children, figures baby number three will have a better shot back in the UK and says she wants to come back. Well, fair enough, she's a UK citizen after all. One who has, granted, associated willingly with terrorists capable of the most appalling acts of horror, but, as UK citizen, subject to UK law. So, let her come back and submit to said process. The point being that as a functioning Western Democracy that purports to hold the rule of law paramount, you have to be seen to be doing that.

Then everyone lost their shit and The Saj revoked her citizenship (even though he, um, can't, actually), a decision which probably has a bit more to do with Sajid Javid's chances of being Prime Minister than they do about due process of law. Now, I understand that we're not big on ISIS, I'm not really a fan myself. I equally understand that Begum has made a calculated decision and displays a startling lack of contrition, all this is irrelevant, if you start playing silly buggers with the actual law in order to score political points it's the start of an exceedingly slippery slope.

Because that's all that lies behind this catastrophic bit of grandstanding from Javid, the archetypal kid who hid behind the big kids at school. Stripping the rights from a bereaved rape-victim, you're nails, lad, hard as fuck. You simultaneously worry the shit out of a huge amount of your fellow countrymen who wonder what you might do to them, hand a propaganda coup to your enemies, show the world that you, personally, are afraid of a young woman and basically send out the message that the British system is unable to cope with the repatriation of one single non-combatant. To bring her back would have said, we are strong, we can cope, our way of life is the right one. But no, The Saj chose to do the sort of thing that gets you a moment's approval from the Mail, bolsters fear and stokes division. It was a craven, politically illiterate act. A posturing attempt to show strength which, I'm afraid, reveals only weakness.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Inedible

"He says it's inedible" said my front of house manager, as she laid the half-eaten fish and chips in front of me, and instantly I relaxed.  Clearly, I observed, it was edible to some degree. I comped it, because I can't be arsed arguing the toss, and I want to make my front of house's lives as simple as possible. The haddock had been delivered that morning. The fryers had been cleaned that morning. The batter had been made that morning (and it's very good batter, ask me nicely and I'll give you the recipe some time). The fish and chips was identical to the other 27 portions I'd sent out on that lunch service, all of which had come back more or less hoovered up, we have have a (justified, if I do say so myself) very good reputation for our chips. But it was, apparently, "inedible". When it comes to complaints, less is more. If you use a hyperbolic word like that, I'll switch off, you've marked yourself as a rube, a chump, I'm not g...

Chop chop

I was completely ignorant of the fuss over the edited Trump speech in an edition of Panorama until, one moment later, I wasn't. And the reasons for my ignorance are instructive. I had no idea that the story was even brewing until the surprise Sunday night news of the resignations of Tom Davie and Deborah Turness. As I'm sure you are by now aware, this was occasioned by a clumsy edit in an old edition of Panorama, which has already been on the iplayer for a year. It's a non-story. Except people decided to make it a story. The reason I'd heard nothing of it until the resignations was that I'm not on X, where, apparently, it was all the media classes had been talking about for a week. It was an obsession of the unholy right-wing trifecta of the Mail, Telegraph and Times (who, given that they sent a bloke just last week to interview the wrong Bill di Blasio, you'd think would wind their necks in over factual inacccuracy). It was big news on GB news, all self-contain...

Creepy old men

I note, somewhat wearily, that creepy old men are back in the news, being creepy. Creepy old men, and their apologists and enablers, who argue that their creepiness is somehow the natural order of things. Old men would have you believe that it is difficult to not be a creepy old man. That it is a task of epic proportions. It is not that difficult. It is a matter of intention. As yet more of the grimness of Epstein unfolds, creepy old men are, sadly, a flaccid topic once again. Whether it be pursuing students thirty years their junior, or simply not asking too many questions about the background of the probably legal young woman who you've just been introduced to by your good pal Jeff. To be clear, I am not referring to criminal creepy old men, the ones who actually committed statutory rape, the ones who fucked trafficked hirls. That is not something which is allowed to get away merely with the contempt of the observer.  That deserves prison.  No , I'm referring to the hinterla...