Murderers and drug smugglers can hold on to their British passports but the British government is considering revoking passports of Britsh born Muslim men/boys who have decided to go and fight in the Syrian war against the Assad regime and the creeping mission to other parts of the Middle East.
Does the British government represent the people or are we under its rule and at the mercy of its whims and disregard of human rights?
Whilst I fully appreciate the mission creep of these boys in Iraq sits uncomfortably did the British Government not consider military action against the Assad regime? Did William Hague not push to arm the rebels in Syria? The young men chose to side with the rebels. Had the House of Commons voted for military action, these young men and the British army would have been fighting on the same side. I would not wish my brothers or friends to go to any war zone but since they have gone at their own expense, of their own free will why are they being branded a threat to British security?
I hope the families of the young men would appeal any decision to revoke the British passports, why should the Home Secretary go unchallenged?