Shamima Begum, IS teen wants to come back to the UK

[Abizzz]

There's always the option of making a supermax run by the UK government that's not "in in" the UK just for these types of cases.

That didn't go over well when we did it though.

The problem with that was that it was specifically set up so one would not have to follow ones own rules. But western democracies are capable of changing their own rules. I don't see any reason we couldn't lock them up for life in the country of origin (mind the amount wanting to come back might drop off).

 

[P-Ro]

People in this thread seem to think that being 15 means you have the decision making capacity of a toddler.

 

[Abizzz]

we haven't just had people travelling to join, we've actively aided in the transfer of such people from one place to another. that's the biggest crime here. we've supported al qaeda and its various offshoots in syria. do people know this? or do they ignore it? that the weapons we pay for end up in such hands, as a matter of intent?

called dirty wars for various reasons, this is but one.

this girl was a child. what's the government's and the spooks' excuses?

Nah the kids at Ariane Grande were children. She was an adolescent who decided to join a death cult. No more sympathies from me.

 

[maniak]

I’m just saying that it exists and would be an answer to your question.

Fair enough, so if you were a citizen of a country that doesn't have a gitmo, you'd be in favor of bringing the nazis back?

 

[neverdie]

Nah the kids at Ariane Grande were children. She was an adolescent who decided to join a death cult. No more sympathies from me.

i'm speaking about the other children who were also murdered in syria by terrorist groups we supported. do they count? when are we going up on trial?

i've also not seen anyone say she shouldn't be tried according to the evidence. that's the obvious thing to do.

 

[stepic]

They gonna allow her around other inmates?

if convicted, she should be treated just like any other uk terrorist would.

not sure where you're going with this frankly.

 

[Abizzz]

i'm speaking about the other children who were also murdered in syria by terrorist groups we supported. do they count? when are we going up on trial?

I did none of that, if you did, turn yourself in.

If you mean our (western) states sponsoring shady shit: Yes I've been in favour of cutting that out for a very long time. We've been operating under the mantra of "our enemy's enemy is our friend" for far too long.

 

[VeevaVee]

Not sure this development in the story is as dramatic or interesting as the headlines are making out. Everyone knows ISIS were operating smuggling routes from Istanbul to Syria. The fact that some of the smugglers were passing on information to Western intelligence/embassies is hardly surprising either.

Yeah, seems like they're wording it to sound worse than it is. Spy/agent makes it sound like they've planted someone employed by them there who has become involved in the smuggling, when this guy being flipped and passing them info while still involved seems much more likely, and no doubt a regular occurrence for informants (not like they'd be much use otherwise).

This and the change of narrative from the press is interesting. Almost seems like they've been told to soften the blow of her being allowed back in in the near future..

 

[Carolina Red]

The problem with that was that it was specifically set up so one would not have to follow ones own rules. But western democracies are capable of changing their own rules. I don't see any reason we couldn't lock them up for life in the country of origin (mind the amount wanting to come back might drop off).

Oh no doubt there have been problems. I’d definitely use it as a “what not to do” guide if you all made a off shore super max for returning terrorist folk.

 

[2cents]

Yeah, seems like they're wording it to sound worse than it is. Spy/agent makes it sound like they've planted someone employed by them there who has become involved in the smuggling, when this guy being flipped and passing them info while still involved seems much more likely, and no doubt a regular occurrence for informants (not like they'd be much use otherwise).

This and the change of narrative from the press is interesting. Almost seems like they've been told to soften the blow of her being allowed back in in the near future..

The basic story was reported seven years ago, including speculation about the Canada angle. Just confirmed now -https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/12/man-british-schoolgirls-join-isis-arrested-turkey

 

[Carolina Red]

if convicted, she should be treated just like any other uk terrorist would.

not sure where you're going with this frankly.

That she shouldn’t be allowed around other folks in a situation where she could radicalize people who are to be released from prison back into society.

 

[ThierryFabregas]

Not talking about parole. Let's say a guy gets 20 years in jail. After 20 years he goes free, right? Does it matter if he's sorry?

It depends if he's considered a threat to society. There's a problem with a few prisoners having a 'The Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP)'. You have a problem with some offenders that have carried out a few violent but not that serious that aren't being released 20 years later. With some it is obviously justified, but others not so much so.

 

[stepic]

That she shouldn’t be allowed around other folks in a situation where she could radicalize people who are to be released from prison back into society.

well we send other terrorists sentenced in the uk to jail. don't see why she should be a special case. the same rationale applies.

and even if you did grant this to be reason enough not to sentence her here, the same situation will arise in Bangladesh, or wherever the UK expect her to go.

 

[Carolina Red]

Fair enough, so if you were a citizen of a country that doesn't have a gitmo, you'd be in favor of bringing the nazis back?

I don’t believe so. I would be in favor of setting up one similar… or in bringing the trial to them and punishing them under either our terrorism laws there or under the laws of the country they tried to set up their 4th Reich in. Whichever one was harsher.

 

[Carolina Red]

well we send other terrorists sentenced in the uk to jail. don't see why she should be a special case. the same rationale applies

Are they in the general population or kept segregated?

 

[stepic]

Are they in the general population or kept segregated?

no idea to be honest.

in any case, it doesn't matter what she did, she deserves the right to a fair trial. it's a fundamental part of our legal system. she won't get that in Syria.

 

[Carolina Red]

no idea to be honest.

in any case, it doesn't matter what she did, she deserves the right to a fair trial. it's a fundamental part of our legal system. she won't get that in Syria.

Something she should have considered before joining ISIS.

They could just try her under ISIS law, since that’s the “country” she wanted to be in.

 

[Abizzz]

no idea to be honest.

in any case, it doesn't matter what she did, she deserves the right to a fair trial. it's a fundamental part of our legal system. she won't get that in Syria.

If you go to Dubai and commit a crime there, do you expect to be extradited and trialled in the UK for said crime in Dubai?

 

[neverdie]

If you mean our (western) states sponsoring shady shit: Yes I've been in favour of cutting that out for a very long time. We've been operating under the mantra of "our enemy's enemy is our friend" for far too long.

yeah, this is what I mean. are we not responsible for our states' actions? isn't that the point of democracy? and if we're off the hook, then do we put the military and political brass up on trial instead? not an unimportant question, because though I'm glad you agree we need to stop doing this kind of thing, I also think we need to hold those who have done it in our names to account. most would agree, surely?

 

[Abizzz]

yeah, this is what I mean. are we not responsible for our states' actions? isn't that the point of democracy? and if we're off the hook, then do we put the military and political brass up on trial instead? not an unimportant question, because though I'm glad you agree we need to stop doing this kind of thing, I also think we need to hold those who have done it in our names to account. most would agree, surely?

We all share a moral responsibility but that doesn't mean criminal culpability. If people worked outside the law to do this they should be held to account, however I think it's more than likely that it was and is being done with the lawmakers approval. As such I don't think we can use the actual people as whipping boys/girls for our societal failings.

 

[RedDevil@84]

People in this thread seem to think that being 15 means you have the decision making capacity of a toddler.

It doesn't matter what people think, it is the law that has a cut-off age for being considered as an adult. If a 15 yr old was groomed and then sold for sex, no one uses the "not a toddler" argument.

 

[RedDevil@84]

If you go to Dubai and commit a crime there, do you expect to be extradited and trialled in the UK for said crime in Dubai?

But if Dubai doesn't want the criminal in their country, then you have obligation to take the person back. By cancelling the passport, you make the person stateless and ask Dubai to deal with it.

 

[Carolina Red]

It doesn't matter what people think, it is the law that has a cut-off age for being considered as an adult. If a 15 yr old was groomed and then sold for sex, no one uses the "not a toddler" argument.

Places also have provisions that allow 15 year olds to be treated as adults if their crime is severe enough.

 

[stepic]

If you go to Dubai and commit a crime there, do you expect to be extradited and trialled in the UK for said crime in Dubai?

i would expect everyone to have the right to a fair trial. if you aren't able to be trialed fairly in Dubai, then yes, they should be extradited. There have been reports of British citizens being charged in Dubai on bullshit grounds, Matthew Hedges comes to mind.

the case with Shamima is that she was effectively detained in a detention centre without charge or trial. the UK has a legal and moral responsibility to ensure she is tried, and not effectively left to die.

 

[RedBanker]

Just out of curiosity...who pays for these supermax prisons and the cost of "bringing back" delinquents who walked off to join death-dealers of their own volition?

 

[Abizzz]

But if Dubai doesn't want the criminal in their country, then you have obligation to take the person back. By cancelling the passport, you make the person stateless and ask Dubai to deal with it.

Yes, and I'm not in favour of that. I'm just saying if you travel abroad and commit crimes you can't expect a trial at home for those crimes, or even a trial to the standards you would expect in the west.

 

[P-Ro]

It doesn't matter what people think, it is the law that has a cut-off age for being considered as an adult. If a 15 yr old was groomed and then sold for sex, no one uses the "not a toddler" argument.

You almost certainly will be tried as an adult in the UK in you are 15 and commit a serious offense. I also find it quite bizarre you use an example of a child rape victim in this context and compare it to a 15 year old who fled the UK to join ISIS.

 

[maniak]

Just out of curiosity...who pays for these supermax prisons and the cost of "bringing back" delinquents who walked off to join death-dealers of their own volition?

The same people who pay for other prisoners, sick people, students, etc. You know, society...

 

[MoskvaRed]

I personally think she should be brought back to face trial and, if contrite, used to educate other potential recruits to such Islamist death cults. But…, whatever the legal or moral rights and wrongs, she’ll never be allowed back by a UK Government. Concern about the resulting media-driven public outrage would vastly outweigh any desire to do the right thing. She’s a public hate figure, the ISIS Myra Hindley.

 

[Penna]

I personally think she should be brought back to face trial and, if contrite, used to educate other potential recruits to such Islamist death cults. But…, whatever the legal or moral rights and wrongs, she’ll never be allowed back by a UK Government. Concern about the resulting media-driven public outrage would vastly outweigh any desire to do the right thing. She’s a public hate figure, the ISIS Myra Hindley.

I agree with your point of view. I think she was exactly the kind of girl ISIS were looking for - not very bright and easy to manipulate. Notice she's shed all the religious garb and has gone back to how she was when she first went out there. So, her convictions don't run very deep.

 

[Maticmaker]

So it seems this move to remove her citizenship just created extra legal problems.

I mean, it will get the desired outcome eventually, which is her ending up dead somewhere, but that's hardly justice.

The removal of citizenship status did create extra problems for Ms Begum.... obviously? Given that she openly/willingly, or so it seemed at the time (maybe not now though, given the latest thing about Canada's involvement) joined a terrorist organisation, then that was pretty obvious.
As I have said before the extenuating circumstances, (in my opinion) if there are any, would have been her age. 15 year old's tend to live in a world of their own, I know I did at that age.. if she now renounces her decision then she should be given a chance. However renouncing her decision to join Isis is important in allowing the Home Office to come to a decision that she is no longer a danger to herself or others around her.

Not sure I understand that the second point has anything to do with her citizenship; presumably if you are suggesting someone is out to kill Ms Begum, then it wont make any difference whether she is a citizen or not?

 

[Carolina Red]

I agree with your point of view. I think she was exactly the kind of girl ISIS were looking for - not very bright and easy to manipulate. Notice she's shed all the religious garb and has gone back to how she was when she first went out there. So, her convictions don't run very deep.

Unless she's doing it intentionally.

 

[maniak]

.
The removal of citizenship status did create extra problems for Ms Begum.... obviously? Given that she openly/willingly, or so it it seemed at the time (maybe not now though, given the latest thing about Canada's involvement) joined a terrorist organisation, then that was pretty obvious.
As I have said before the extenuating circumstances, (in my opinion) if there are any, would have been her age. 15 year old's tend to live in a world of their own, I know I did at that age.. if she she now renounces her decision then she should be given a chance. However renouncing her decision to join Isis is important in allowing the Home Office to come to a decision that she is no longer a danger to herself or others around her.

Not sure I understand that the second point has anything to do with her citizenship; presumably if you are suggesting someone is out to kill Ms Begum, then it wont make any difference whether she is a citizen or not?

You said she can't go to the UK to stand trial because she doesn't fill the requirements to enter the country. But that's only the case because you removed her citizenship. So you can't really use it as an argument.

The second point is that the UK is praying to all gods, the old and the new, that someone kills her and put an end to this soap opera. To me that doesn't sound like justice or how a civilized country should behave. They created a situation where she's more likely to be killed extra-judicially than face justice.

 

[maniak]

It depends if he's considered a threat to society. There's a problem with a few prisoners having a 'The Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP)'. You have a problem with some offenders that have carried out a few violent but not that serious that aren't being released 20 years later. With some it is obviously justified, but others not so much so.

Is part of that demanding the person to say they're sorry?

 

[Maticmaker]

.
The removal of citizenship status did create extra problems for Ms Begum.... obviously? Given that she openly/willingly, or so it it seemed at the time (maybe not now though, given the latest thing about Canada's involvement) joined a terrorist organisation, then that was pretty obvious.
As I have said before the extenuating circumstances, (in my opinion) if there are any, would have been her age. 15 year old's tend to live in a world of their own, I know I did at that age.. if she she now renounces her decision then she should be given a chance. However renouncing her decision to join Isis is important in allowing the Home Office to come to a decision that she is no longer a danger to herself or others around her.

Not sure I understand that the second point has anything to do with her citizenship; presumably if you are suggesting someone is out to kill Ms Begum, then it wont make any difference whether she is a citizen or not?

You said she can't go to the UK to stand trial because she doesn't fill the requirements to enter the country. But that's only the case because you removed her citizenship. So you can't really use it as an argument.

The second point is that the UK is praying to all gods, the old and the new, that someone kills her and put an end to this soap opera. To me that doesn't sound like justice or how a civilized country should behave. They created a situation where she's more likely to be killed extra-judicially than face justice.

No I didn't say anything about her standing trial, its about are their extenuating circumstances, (like her age at the time) that would allow Ms Begum to return to the UK, with her citizenship restored? If she is judged no longer to be a danger to herself or others and she renounced her involvement, with Isis then I agree she should be allowed back... whether she faced charges in the UK (or elsewhere there is an extradition process in place) thereafter is a risk she would have to take and presumably if she wants to get back to her family, that is a risk she would consider worth it?

Your second point.... I am sorry, but it makes no sense.

 

[berbatrick]

haven't they used her as precedent to strip others of citizenship, with everybody here (still) cheering them on? of course they can't get her back, it's a slippery slope to actually respecting basic rights.

 

[GreenFieldsGoldenBarley]

They gonna allow her around other inmates?

I’m just saying that it exists and would be an answer to your question.

There is very little to suggest she is a threat to other inmates, or other people in general. She was recruited to IS starting from when she was approximately 13 as a vulnerable barely-teenage girl, watched and endured all kinds of brutalities in a horrific warzone, and she has now totally renounced ISIS. It seems totally ignorant of the case, as well as pretty cruel, to speak about you have done in this thread.

Not to mention it's like your attitude to justice is just 'feck her!' And that's a terrible approach to justice, not just from a moral standpoint, but also from a deterrence/prevention standpoint.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/uk-58573501.amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th.../2021/sep/16/shamima-begum-uk-british-muslims

 

[ThierryFabregas]

Is part of that demanding the person to say they're sorry?

If they have an IPP, no, they can apologise and show remorse but the system largely forgets about them and they're locked up indefinitely. Here's an albeit old video about it but there still many IPP prisoners and those on licence who are being re-prisoned because of the IPP if they break any minor rules of their licence.



Note the suicide case, likely would be because he had no hope of a release date

It's an unjust travesty of our prison system.

 

[GreenFieldsGoldenBarley]

haven't they used her as precedent to strip others of citizenship, with everybody here (still) cheering them on? of course they can't get her back, it's a slippery slope to actually respecting basic rights.

Basically yes. It's in the context of the windrush scandal. We have a government that wants the power to strip black and brown people of their citizenship with pretty much no oversight, and she is the justification for the government basically throwing out a load of human rights conventions ad-hoc

 

[dannyrhinos89]

why is this young woman any different?

Take her to court, accuse her of whatever crimes you think she committed, and either send her to jail or let her go, depending on the outcome of the trial.

The UK treating her as some sort of super villain is really embarrassing.

What the feck are you on about? So you'd be happy for her to live next door to you then?

Say she does serve time in jail. I take it when she's released you'd be happy to let a person that openly supported the Manchester bombing and self admittedly had no emotion to seeing decapitated bodies living as your new next door neighbour?

You must be fine with that, seen as though she's not at all a villain.