Yeah, attempting to decline the re-entry of proud and unabashed members of terrorist organisations that openly wish harm upon Britain and it's inhabitants is "racism." I reckon it might have less to do with race and more to do with the terror and murder part.
Shamima Begum, IS teen wants to come back to the UK
- Thread starter Tommy
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
But previous cases have shown what the government is doing is unlawful. Why would the government take a decision they know the courts will rescind?
So you want to halt terrorism with state terrorism? What's the difference between 'us' and 'them' then?
People claiming that taking her back to Britain is a "left" "soft" "let off" are seriously kidding themselves. Her going to prison in Britain is probably the only way she will be going to any prison at all. Rescinding her citizenship is essentially unloading the problem unto whoever takes care of it. And no one will. She will walk out of that camp, possibly go back to Britain under forged papers, or somewhere else. Or if she is as dangerous as you all make out (which I don't really doubt) she'll blow herself up infront of some Syrian, Kurdish or Turkish school. The western countries these fighter's come from (lets face it, there's many like her from all over Europe / the United States and Canada too) are the best equipped to handle a threat like her.
Javid will have blood on his hands if she goes on to continue to be a terrorist down there. She could be locked up.
Last edited:
Explain to me the racist part.
Not saying racism but it's definitely political. And Javid knows they crowd he's playing to.
I only referenced the racism part in my response.
If she is effectively stateless that is a violation of international law
Do you think the British government would even try to deprive the citizenship of some one from a white Christian background, for instance, with similar circumstances ( indoctrinated into IS, came over, no solid proof of criminal wrongdoing other than being unrepentant?)I only referenced the racism part in my response.
4 years ago it was ‘a tragedy’, ‘she was groomed’. Now apparently she’s a mighty threat that the British gov and all of her majesty security services can’t handle.
I think it's fairly simple. If she finds her way back to the UK, for example due to being expelled from her current country of residence you try her for treason and terrorist activities.
You do not make her stateless nor expend resources to actually bring her back.
If the punishment turns out too mild that is a matter of legislation to be addressed.
You do not make her stateless nor expend resources to actually bring her back.
If the punishment turns out too mild that is a matter of legislation to be addressed.
Simple as.
I don't care if she dies tbh. In fact makes it easier for everyone. But as long as she's alive, she's our prob cause she's British.
The difference is...they are attacking innocents. We are attacking those who attack innocents. What they have been doing is unquestionable terrorism. What we have been doing is war.
Our laws lack penalty for these types of crimes and I include other mass murder. The death penalty should exist. I know some may see a prison sentence as worse, but its costly and risky. Many terrorists have been known to have been groomed in prison.
Taking prisoners is messy when dealing with terrorists and ultimately just extends the inevitable terrorist issues. The best answer is don't take prisoners and don't leave a war unfinished. She is only coming forward because the war is lost. She has shown no signs of wanting to come home before this.
There is a fairly simple answer here. She has advertised herself as a known terrorist on national news. She should be observed and at the appropriate time there should be a take down to take her and whomever she is associating with out.
Someone like the SAS? Just as they did in Gibraltar?
You sound as if you've been indoctrinated pal. Either that or you're a sociopath.
Yes, I absolutely do. There's a certain level of hypocrisy, don't you think, in wanting solid proof for criminal wrongdoing (other than unabashedly admitting she joined a terrorist organization and provided her services in supporting and sustaining it), while naming the motives of a government racist for stripping her of her citizenship without any 'solid proof?'
It’s as if history never told us that granting the state the power to eliminate elements it feels as ‘threatening’, in the name of security for the masses, is a colossally stupid idea with grave consequences.
Not in my view. We have, in a cowardly manner, tried to wash our hands of this issue and dump her on Bangladesh (where I believe she's never been) or Syria (a failed state which she essentially went to conquer). There is no ISIS diaspora because ISIS was never a country. It was literally never recognise by a single country and didn't perform many of the basic functions of being a country. She was a stupid kid, who went to a militia's local territory which has now been defeated and is now in a country which has no relation to her whatsoever.
The example does not hold and actually there is no example which holds. This isn't the equivalent of a normal state. The closest equivalents would be saying something like the territory that FARC controlled in Colombia or the warlords in Afghanistan or the Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda if they'd managed to get a bit of an international following like ISIS did. Instead they were mostly local so when defeated, they slunk back to where they came from.
In the example of the Czech republic, the overwhelming majority of the people there are Czech. They speak Czech, they are culturally Czech, their family may well have been there for generations. They don't have 'another' place to go. Either they stay part of this country they've been annexed to or they have to go as a refugee and apply at another country, like most refugees do. Shamima Begum is not Syrian. She is not Arab. I reckon she probably can't even speak Arabic. Culturally, she is not Syrian or Arab. She has no link to that country or region at all and has been there for a grand total of 3 years. I'm sorry, it just isn't the same.
Want to block her from coming back and tell her that she needs to seek asylum elsewhere? That's fine. But revoke the citizenship and say she's now Bangladesh's/ Syria's problem. I don't agree with that tbh.
Right, because killing innocent associates is just "war"? I mean aside from the fact she's in a refugee camp, so by definition you'd be taking out refugees with her. Fight for the damn laws to be changed then, but don't go about saying you know better than the law while simultaneously claiming to be morally superior to those who say they know better than the law (her). In all honesty, your posts seem as radicalized as her interviews.
Last edited:
The move is almost guaranteed to be struck down in court. If the government didn’t feel that there won’t be public blowback, they wouldn’t have done so.
You are free to think that they would have done the same with a white girl. We are only speaking in hypotheticals after all.
I think its a case of her fame and that she has foolishly gone through the media to try to get the UK to rescue her.
There were a number of ISIS fighters and 'brides' that became famous. When these three girls left for Syria it was front page news for a couple of weeks. If she had made her way back to the UK she would have been let back in, as a number of actual ISIS fighters already have. She has foolishly tried to appeal to the UK government to actually go out there and rescue her whilst showing no remorse, actually declaring that she has no regrets, in a car crash interview.
Personally I think this is Javid making a political move given the vast amount of media coverage and outrage this story has generated. It seems she will be let back in eventually but the UK government will make it as difficult as possible.
The government has tried to wash it hands of at least one white (former) christian ISIS member.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...sis-fighter-could-face-repatriation-to-canada
It's all a smokescreen.
The government could use her in campaigns to deter others. A powerful tool in the war against extremism.
The government could use her in campaigns to deter others. A powerful tool in the war against extremism.
Pathetic but unsurprising.
The abandonment of principles to placate the daily mail reading public continues.
The abandonment of principles to placate the daily mail reading public continues.
So it seems the government has been doing this for a while. This from summer 2017:
Ministers strip 150 jihadists of UK passports
More than 150 jihadists and other criminals have been stripped of their citizenship and banned from returning to Britain amid fears that the collapse of Isis will lead to an influx of militants from Syria.
In a dramatic escalation of anti-terrorism activity, more than 40 suspects have had their right to a British passport removed this year, with about 30 targeted since March as the UK came under attack in London and Manchester.
Ministers stepped up the “deprivation orders” after intelligence chiefs warned that more than 300 battle-hardened terrorists could return and wreak havoc.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ministers-strip-150-jihadists-of-uk-passports-53fn899w2
This includes Aqsa Mahmood, who was apparently responsible for persuading the three Bethnal Green girls to travel over.
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/news.sk...s-where-are-the-female-jihadists-now-11637068
Ministers strip 150 jihadists of UK passports
More than 150 jihadists and other criminals have been stripped of their citizenship and banned from returning to Britain amid fears that the collapse of Isis will lead to an influx of militants from Syria.
In a dramatic escalation of anti-terrorism activity, more than 40 suspects have had their right to a British passport removed this year, with about 30 targeted since March as the UK came under attack in London and Manchester.
Ministers stepped up the “deprivation orders” after intelligence chiefs warned that more than 300 battle-hardened terrorists could return and wreak havoc.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ministers-strip-150-jihadists-of-uk-passports-53fn899w2
This includes Aqsa Mahmood, who was apparently responsible for persuading the three Bethnal Green girls to travel over.
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/news.sk...s-where-are-the-female-jihadists-now-11637068
Not sure how this will work. She's going to be in for a torrid time as soon as she's back in the country, because her face has just been plastered all over the news. Most of us will forget but I'm sure a lot won't, and will make her life awful.
She's pretty much going to be the face of Muslims being discriminated against in the west.
And it would be even cheaper to wave a magic wand and make all bad things go away.
She can’t be locked up in Belmarsh for life. There’s no laws that would enable a judge to deliver such a verdict. Unless the prosecution can prove she killed or tortured people (which I doubt we can do) then from what I’m reading the precedence already exists for people simply being part of a terrorist organisation and that is 5-6 years in jail.
Exactly why she should be used in the opposite way.
The face of been there, done that, got some of the tee shirt.
And 5-6 years in jail is possibly out of jail in 1-2 years.
But how do you stop her from being discriminated against? You need the average person to buy into that message.
I believe it’s a 10 year sentence where they actually serve 5-6.
The average person isn't the target audience .
It's young British Muslim girls.
Tbh, she'd probably be elevated to celebrity Z-list status knowing the UK.
I don’t know what the jail sentence is for being a member of a banned terrorist organisation is but most people only serve a third of their sentence (good behaviour). Rest is parole.
She'd be doing celebrity big brother and wife swap in no time.
I'm not debating the credentials of it from a legal perspective, I think you're probably right. The cynic within me also agrees it was a move to curry favour with the British public, but that doesn't make it an inherently racist action.
I'm a Muslim who has lived in Canada and sc*m like her don't deserve to be anywhere near foreign land where she will just contribute to the negative sterotypes about us. Regular Muslims have to live under the shadow of idiots like her and with the risk of losing our own sense of belonging in that country.
If she cares so much about the baby, then the UK can happily take the baby from her and have it under the care of another Muslim family in the UK.
If she cares so much about the baby, then the UK can happily take the baby from her and have it under the care of another Muslim family in the UK.
That would make for interesting viewing
I personally would not want to share a bus with her. It's hard to trust someone who went through all this effort to join IS. She hasn't expressed regret either, her statements are full of weasel words. She's probably still a supporter of IS. It's possible she could be a sleeper cell or something like that.
However that doesn't make her Bangladesh's problem. She should be locked up, either in Syria (if it can be proven she commited a crime there), or in the UK (if it can be proven she commited a crime).
However that doesn't make her Bangladesh's problem. She should be locked up, either in Syria (if it can be proven she commited a crime there), or in the UK (if it can be proven she commited a crime).
The fairest interpretation imo is that it’s not racially prejudiced in the sense that her being a Muslim of Bangladeshi descent was the primary factor behind the action taken, but her race certainly made it easier for it to materialise.
I agree with that.
Bit scary how quickly some people wish to jettison the rule of law and opt for whatever barbaric solution is most effective. The post-WWII world order is not as resilient as I had hoped.
"he who hunts monsters..."
"he who hunts monsters..."
She is as she decided to make her 'home' with the Caliphate after deserting her family and friends here. The Caliphate became her new home and she made an informed choice to leave and settle there. The comparison does not hold up. She choose to join a new state. it's called Islamic State. She does not need to have a link to Syria to be thrown into a Syrian jail but guess what? she does have a link to Syria as she birthed a baby there. Maybe the Syrians will grant her child their nationality?
He really is a twat.
Oh look, now we have a woman wanting to come back to the US from ISIS, too...
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/20/am...6-pvPVNj8pbihs-W5OQ&r=https://m.facebook.com/
(CNN) — At the age of 19, a young woman from Hoover, Alabama traveled to Syria to join ISIS -- the so-called "Islamic State."
Five years and three husbands later, she says she regrets what she did and is begging to return to the US.
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/20/am...6-pvPVNj8pbihs-W5OQ&r=https://m.facebook.com/
(CNN) — At the age of 19, a young woman from Hoover, Alabama traveled to Syria to join ISIS -- the so-called "Islamic State."
Five years and three husbands later, she says she regrets what she did and is begging to return to the US.