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

Regardless of what she's done, the idea of rescinding someone's British citizenship on the grounds that their family comes from abroad is sort of discriminatory, not to mention irresponsible. In the same way Britain takes pride in its good citizens it should take responsibility for its bad ones. She should be welcome to come back on her own dime, and then she should be held whilst it is figured out what crimes she can be charged of. She should then have a trial and be sentenced accordingly.

It would be childish for the government to make a decision based on what will satisfy the baying masses and attempt to foist her on a country she's never been to. Civilised countries have laws and trials and due process to deal with citizens who do bad things.
 
2cents said:
She originally said that life in Raqqa fulfilled her aspirations, she had no regrets, and things only got bad at the end (i.e. when ISIS was losing). So no reason to believe her more recent statements.
Click to expand...

Steerpike said:
She has made choices which she has more or less admitted she doesn't regret. If she returned to this country, she would no doubt have to be kept under surveillance (at what cost to the British taxpayer?), her history would be an impediment to her being a fully productive member of our society (at what cost to the British taxpayer?), and there would be the constant suspicion that she would seek to radicalise others (perhaps even her own children).

She made her choice and now she must live with it. If it is legally possible for the UK to deny her entry to the country, that would be my preferred route. If not, I wouldn't be desperately upset to learn she'd been found dead in a ditch somewhere (even if said ditch was in England).
Click to expand...

On a personal level with her, i have no sympathies truth be told. If there was a beneficial angle that could be gained from all this however, it would be great [the anti radicalisation thing], but maybe it's also wishful thinking on my part admittedly. I was more concerned with the legal - and by extension - ethical implications of a] the initial point of her being a British citizen, so she should face British justice, and now b] revoking her British citizenship and basically chucking our problem over to Bangladesh - a country where her parents or grandparents may have been born in, but she as an individual has little else connection to let alone a passport.
 
So if someone has dual nationality it's legal for the first country to revoke their nationality, but not for the second, as that would make them stateless? Best to act quick then, if that's what you want to do.
 
Carolina Red said:
Something tells me that that’s not quite why the UK rescinded her citizenship.
Click to expand...

You know what I mean. If she was chucked into Low Newton tomorrow she'd not be the worst person in the British prison system by a long shot, unless she's taken a far more active part in Daesh's activities than you'd expect of someone who was pregnant or breastfeeding newborns for the majority of their time over there. The reason the Home Office is talking about rescinding her citizenship is because her parents are recent immigrants, not because of the severity of her crimes, which at this point no-one knows.
 
711 said:
So if someone has dual nationality it's legal for the first country to revoke their nationality, but not for the second, as that would make them stateless? Best to act quick then, if that's what you want to do.
Click to expand...
One out would be saying she’s a citizen of the IS... I imagine the UK can’t just do that though, as that would require recognizing IS as a state.
 
iluvoursolskjær said:
On a personal level with her, i have no sympathies truth be told. If there was a beneficial angle that could be gained from all this, it would be great [the anti radicalisation thing], but maybe it's also wishful thinking on my part admittedly. I was more concerned with the legal - and by extension - ethical implications of a] the initial point of her being a British citizen, so she should face British justice, and now b] revoking her British citizenship and basically chucking our problem over to Bangladesh - a country where her parents or grandparents may have been born in, but she as an individual has little else connection to let alone a passport.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm inclined to agree that we, as a country, have a responsibility. I'm not clear on whether it is possible, legally, to revoke a person's nationality and leave them stateless. I am sure that having her return to the UK would serve no useful purpose, but perhaps there are no other options.

As I hinted previously, a happy 'accident' would solve so many problems.
 
Carolina Red said:
Or because she defected/committed treason/joined a terrorist group/pledged allegiance to the leader of the Islamic State.
Click to expand...

She did all that sure, but that's not the real reason they are trying to rescind her citizenship. We haven't revoked the citizenship of every terrorist the country has produced and plenty of UK citizens have committed similar crimes. Nah the main reason is it's the convenience to wash away the problem and dump it on someone else. Bit difficult to do without recognising IS as an actual state.
 
FlawlessThaw said:
She did all that sure, but that's not the real reason they are trying to rescind her citizenship. We haven't revoked the citizenship of every terrorist the country has produced and plenty of UK citizens have committed similar crimes. Nah the main reason is it's the convenience to wash away the problem and dump it on someone else. Bit difficult to do without recognising IS as an actual state.
Click to expand...
That's a good point, perhaps we should. Only possible for people with dual nationality though, by the looks of it.
 
FlawlessThaw said:
She did all that sure, but that's not the real reason they are trying to rescind her citizenship. We haven't revoked the citizenship of every terrorist the country has produced and plenty of UK citizens have committed similar crimes. Nah the main reason is it's the convenience to wash away the problem and dump it on someone else. Bit difficult to do without recognising IS as an actual state.
Click to expand...
Did any of the try to come home? Also just because something hadn't been done in the past doesn't mean they won't be done in the future. Policies change.
 
Snow said:
Did any of the try to come home? Also just because something hadn't been done in the past doesn't mean they won't be done in the future. Policies change.
Click to expand...

Some do, if we had this type of policy Maajid Nawaz for example wouldn't be able to come home, assuming we say anyone who joins a extremist overseas organisation can't come back.

And yeah policies change but citizenship is something a bit hardwired than your day to day policy. Having said that if they decide to strip the citizenship of all terrorists going overseas, I wouldn't lose much sleep over it. Retroactive policies are a nightmare.
 
iluvoursolskjær said:
I'm of the opinion that if she meant what she said, it could be a huge weapon for us against radicalisation. If that were to be part of judicial punishment, then any financial costs incurred [which some members here seem to be obsessed with..] will be akin to a grain of sand in the desert.
Click to expand...

Who gets to decide if she's telling the truth? Too risky, sorry. Especially when we're hearing that they've been trained to say all this stuff, rejoin our society and wait for the re emergence of ISIS or whatever they will call themselves, before attacking from within.
 
pocco said:
Who gets to decide if she's telling the truth? Too risky, sorry. Especially when we're hearing that they've been trained to say all this stuff, rejoin our society and wait for the re emergence of ISIS or whatever they will call themselves, before attacking from within.
Click to expand...

Yeah I already said that line of thought may have been a bit of wishful thinking, here:

iluvoursolskjær said:
On a personal level with her, i have no sympathies truth be told. If there was a beneficial angle that could be gained from all this however, it would be great [the anti radicalisation thing], but maybe it's also wishful thinking on my part admittedly. I was more concerned with the legal - and by extension - ethical implications of a] the initial point of her being a British citizen, so she should face British justice, and now b] revoking her British citizenship and basically chucking our problem over to Bangladesh - a country where her parents or grandparents may have been born in, but she as an individual has little else connection to let alone a passport.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
 
FlawlessThaw said:
Some do, if we had this type of policy Maajid Nawaz for example wouldn't be able to come home, assuming we say anyone who joins a extremist overseas organisation can't come back.

And yeah policies change but citizenship is something a bit hardwired than your day to day policy. Having said that if they decide to strip the citizenship of all terrorists going overseas, I wouldn't lose much sleep over it. Retroactive policies are a nightmare.
Click to expand...
They would have to do that to every single one from now on for sure. This case is a bit tricky because she left at 15, is now only 19 and supposedly wiser and she has a kid which you would imagine you'd want out of that environment. On the other side of the coin she's bringing in a son of a terrorist who isn't a citizen and she might be playing the long con planning to blow people up in a few years.
 
iluvoursolskjær said:
They're not quite the same thing mate..

Only way this works is if Britain cut some sort of deal with Bangladesh behind closed doors. Otherwise, she is indeed left stateless.

Bangladesh are under no obligation to provide a British jihadi bride citizenship.
Click to expand...

That's my point. It would be cheaper to bring her back and leave her in Belmarsh for the rest of her life than it would be to bribe Bangladesh.
 
Snow said:
They would have to do that to every single one from now on for sure. This case is a bit tricky because she left at 15, is now only 19 and supposedly wiser and she has a kid which you would imagine you'd want out of that environment. On the other side of the coin she's bringing in a son of a terrorist who isn't a citizen and she might be playing the long con planning to blow people up in a few years.
Click to expand...

They would have to if it was an actual law which it isn't. This is an out based on an 1981 act in which you can revoke someone's citizenship if they can have citizenship elsewhere, but that wasn't directly linked to terrorism. Also have major doubts the government will do it, we have a very weak government.

She could be playing that exact long game you mentioned. However if she was to come back I doubt she will be involved in raising the child, so the direct indoctrination of the child could be tricky.
 
Just catching up on newsnight, but apparently the baby might have dutch nationality too through the father. Might be a good idea to revoke the baby's citizenship quick before the dutch do.
 
iluvoursolskjær said:
They're not quite the same thing mate..

Only way this works is if Britain cut some sort of deal with Bangladesh behind closed doors. Otherwise, she is indeed left stateless.

Bangladesh are under no obligation to provide a British jihadi bride citizenship.
Click to expand...
I don’t care that they’re not exactly the same. I was essentially asking for both is what I’m saying.
 
It goes beyond her alone. One her doesnt make or break things. But the precedent it sets that an isis followers can post in social media and instead of facing punishment she receives gofundme and probably a lot of supporters. Imagine how many more her will come out crawling.

I'm all for compassion and giving people second chances but there's a line that mustn't be crossed. These hardcore terrorist wont change by a few hours of "rehabilitation programs" as much as it sounds nice and politically correct. Our very own bali bombers shown no remorse and choose to rot in jail when the president offers him remission due to old age. Only a year back a terrorist jail was having a riot and these terrorist controls the compound, tortures a female cop on duty, brutally killed several wardens.

If living and growing up in a western civilized society with a western privilege isnt enough to stop her from joining and isis and had no regrets in doing so i doubt any correctional programs will changer her views.

There are extreme cases where compassion changes a person totally, but what are the odds of an american histort x happening? Sometimes we just have to call it as it is.
 
One of the other girls who fled with her... Her father was filmed burning US flags while marching with the killer of Lee Rigby.... Me personally would like to see MI5 so far down the whole familys throats because I don't believe she was just groomed online I have a feeling this is a family affair.
 
Tommy said:
KILL HIM! NO TRIAL! Death to all tentatively suspected terrorists!
Click to expand...
jeff_goldblum said:
Regardless of what she's done, the idea of rescinding someone's British citizenship on the grounds that their family comes from abroad is sort of discriminatory, not to mention irresponsible. In the same way Britain takes pride in its good citizens it should take responsibility for its bad ones. She should be welcome to come back on her own dime, and then she should be held whilst it is figured out what crimes she can be charged of. She should then have a trial and be sentenced accordingly.

It would be childish for the government to make a decision based on what will satisfy the baying masses and attempt to foist her on a country she's never been to. Civilised countries have laws and trials and due process to deal with citizens who do bad things.
Click to expand...

This

It's just racist right-wing dog whistle politics in which it's a win-win for the Tories if somehow they manage to strip her of British citizenship, the gammon faced mouth breathers will be happy. But if the courts rightly rule it illegal (hopefully some type of court with foreigners on it) then the Tories can blame it on out of touch judges.

But beware of what you wish for maybe other countries will start rescinding the citizenships of their Nationals that commit crimes in the UK that they don't want anymore.
 
Just hearing g the news Javid is going to strip her of her citenzenship and make her stateless. This is an outrage.
 
Javid is playing politics. All the experts are saying he will lose a legal battle and he knows this. Javid is a cnut.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.