Shamima Begum refused return to UK

Deleted

Active member
On 13 February 2019, The Times' war correspondent Anthony Loyd found Begum at the al-Hawl refugee camp in Northern Syria, in what one newspaper described as "scoop of the decade".
When interviewed, Begum revealed that she was nine months pregnant and hoped to return to the UK to raise her child, but did not regret her decision to join ISIL.

Begum was interviewed by BBC correspondent Quentin Sommerville on 18 February. During the interview, Begum asked for forgiveness and claimed that she still supports "some British values". She said she was inspired to join ISIL by videos of fighters beheading hostages and also of "the good life" under the group. However, Sommerville noted that she continues to espouse the ISIL ideology and justify its atrocities. When asked about the Manchester Arena bombing, she claimed it was wrong to kill innocent people, but that ISIL deemed it justified as retaliation for the coalition bombing of ISIL-held areas. When questioned about the rape, enslavement and murder of Yazidi women, she claimed, "Shia do the same in Iraq".


Yep model citizen. The court of the land is probably looking to make an example out of her to prevent anything similar happening in the future. Is that a bad thing?
Answer the question Randy
 

Deleted

Active member
After having discussions with you in the past fella and then ultimately been banned from the board for a few months (that might be me putting two and two together and making five, that maybe true) then I'm unwilling to get into another discussion with you.

There isn't a right or wrong answer to the Begum question.

I'm not the one comparing pedophilia with fighting for a failed attempted state.
The direct and irrefutable comparison is a child has being coerced and brainwashed into doing something that they otherwise would not have done. You blame the adult in one scenario and the child in the other. Is that fair?
 

Borobuddah

Well-known member
In my opinion it is ridiculous that the age of criminal responsibility is 10, the youngest in Europe.

However, in law she was a child when she went and can be legitimately considered to have been the subject of child exploitation .
 

Deleted

Active member
I did. Keep up. 😉

Where's this proof that she was groomed?
Her lawyer provided it to the court. BBC
The direct and irrefutable comparison is a child has being coerced and brainwashed into doing something that they otherwise would not have done. You blame the adult in one scenario and the child in the other. Is that fair?
Come on Randy, what's the difference?
 

coluka

Well-known member
In my opinion it is ridiculous that the age of criminal responsibility is 10, the youngest in Europe.

However, in law she was a child when she went and can be legitimately considered to have been the subject of child exploitation .
I agree (mostly), but as I have said, courts always take account of a persons capacity, age and many other factors and they will do so again with her appeal I am sure. This case is far from decided.
 

Colin Warnek

Well-known member
Or the way her community are treat here perhaps?

Sad that we as a nation are on the decline where civilisation is concerned. We're losing respect across the globe.
What hogwash. A global assessment of how other nations treat (or persecute) diverse communities in comparison with the UK is needed before reaching that conclusion.
 
Last edited:

Alzi

Well-known member
I did. Keep up. 😉

Where's this proof that she was groomed?

Radicalisation is very real. PREVENT does a lot of good work and this case in particular shows the importance of early intervention. Every Local Authority and Police Force have dedicated resources and procedures.

My work brings me into regular contact with this field. A lot of recent PREVENT referrals I've been involved are also to do with adolescents being in contact with White Supremacists / Far Right Groups, not just ISIS etc.
 

Borobarmy

Well-known member
Radicalisation is very real. PREVENT does a lot of good work and this case in particular shows the importance of early intervention. Every Local Authority and Police Force have dedicated resources and procedures.

My work brings me into regular contact with this field. A lot of recent PREVENT referrals I've been involved are also to do with adolescents being in contact with White Supremacists / Far Right Groups, not just ISIS etc.
Blimey Alzi that must be profound stuff . Don’t envy you at all
 

coluka

Well-known member
Radicalisation is very real. PREVENT does a lot of good work and this case in particular shows the importance of early intervention. Every Local Authority and Police Force have dedicated resources and procedures.

My work brings me into regular contact with this field. A lot of recent PREVENT referrals I've been involved are also to do with adolescents being in contact with White Supremacists / Far Right Groups, not just ISIS etc.
Radicalisation is very real, I agree. I too worked and played a part with Prevent. However, we must be careful and trust that the UK Government, and in particular the Supreme Court will have taken all aspects of this case into account, not just radicalisation, but the capacity, age, deradicalisation capability, crimes alleged, evidence, risks to her, her family as well as the wider community. Far more will be in the hands of the UK Government and courts than has reached the public domain. I accept the UK Government made a populist decision, but their evidence and reasoning has in part been tested and upheld and will be exhaustively tested by the courts during her appeal, which lets not forget, she may yet win.
 

Same_as_before

Well-known member
Radicalisation is very real, I agree. I too worked and played a part with Prevent. However, we must be careful and trust that the UK Government, and in particular the Supreme Court will have taken all aspects of this case into account, not just radicalisation, but the capacity, age, deradicalisation capability, crimes alleged, evidence, risks to her, her family as well as the wider community. Far more will be in the hands of the UK Government and courts than has reached the public domain. I accept the UK Government made a populist decision, but their evidence and reasoning has in part been tested and upheld and will be exhaustively tested by the courts during her appeal, which lets not forget, she may yet win.
Which level of court is left?
 

Same_as_before

Well-known member
This decision was about her right to return to the country to carry out her appeal for her loss of citizenship. She has to conduct her appeal of her stripping of her citizenship from where she is.
Cheers, it seems ludicrous to me, but as I always defend our system I will have to accept it.
 

FatCat

Well-known member
Radicalisation is very real, I agree. I too worked and played a part with Prevent. However, we must be careful and trust that the UK Government, and in particular the Supreme Court will have taken all aspects of this case into account, not just radicalisation, but the capacity, age, deradicalisation capability, crimes alleged, evidence, risks to her, her family as well as the wider community. Far more will be in the hands of the UK Government and courts than has reached the public domain. I accept the UK Government made a populist decision, but their evidence and reasoning has in part been tested and upheld and will be exhaustively tested by the courts during her appeal, which lets not forget, she may yet win.
How will she appeal - according to her lawyers it’s not possible from the camp where she is?
 

FatCat

Well-known member
Radicalisation is very real. PREVENT does a lot of good work and this case in particular shows the importance of early intervention. Every Local Authority and Police Force have dedicated resources and procedures.

My work brings me into regular contact with this field. A lot of recent PREVENT referrals I've been involved are also to do with adolescents being in contact with White Supremacists / Far Right Groups, not just ISIS etc.
Is it really as widespread as the media would have us believe?
 

Primus84

Well-known member
How will she appeal - according to her lawyers it’s not possible from the camp where she is?
This case was regarding her right to a fair trial and how she asserted that she needed to be present to allow her legal team to effectively conduct that case and receive instructions from her.

The case yet to come is regarding whether stripping citizenship was lawful.

I do think everyone cheering this verdict on needs to stop a moment and consider that if the UK Government can strip citizenship from her (when she had no other citizenship and it made her effectively stateless) then they could do it to anyone including you!
 

Londons_Moggie

Well-known member
This case was regarding her right to a fair trial and how she asserted that she needed to be present to allow her legal team to effectively conduct that case and receive instructions from her.

The case yet to come is regarding whether stripping citizenship was lawful.

I do think everyone cheering this verdict on needs to stop a moment and consider that if the UK Government can strip citizenship from her (when she had no other citizenship and it made her effectively stateless) then they could do it to anyone including you!
That's a bit of a stretch. She is potentially going to lose it because she joined ISIS. It's not a precedent for the government to strip anyone of their citizenship
 
Top
X