Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Harrowby Hall on February 14, 2019, 02:31:04 PM
-
Four years ago, three 15 year old girls flew to Turkey and crossed the border into IS-held territory in Syria. They were British Muslims who had been radicalised on line. Within a few weeks of their arrival, they were married and began their task of bringing new soldiers into the world.
There was considerable publicity about their action at the time. Their parents knew nothing of their intention.
One of these girls, now 19, wants to return to Britain to give birth to her third child - her earlier children had died from malnutrition and disease. There is debate about whether or not this should be allowed, after all, she may act as a kind of fifth columnist and engage in clandestine activities herself. Her comments about atrocities that she has been aware of suggest that she is somewhat blase about IS activities.
My view:
1 She was 15 when she left - she was a child.
2 Her intentions were known to the security services and to the police - but her parents were not informed, nor was any attempt made to stop her or to deradicalise her.
3 She is a UK citizen by birth.
Therefore, I consider that she should be allowed to come "home". She should be carefully monitored and subjected to systematic deradicalisation - the state, through its own inaction, bears much responsibility in this instance. I am aware that deradicalisation is not always successful - but an attempt must be made. She is damaged and some attempt must be made to repair her.
What do others think? Am I being too naive and idealistic?
-
To refuse would seem to me weakness and fear of a 19 year old.
-
I don't think she should be let back into the UK. She is obviously still a supporter of ISIS, and stated she was not fazed by the heads in bins of the ones beheaded by that evil mob. She seemed quite proud of herself. >:(
-
I think she should come home and be looked after by her family. Imagine having three children in such a short space of time, two of which died! Of course the authorities will have to talk to her and listen to what she has to say but she is a very young girl and that must be taken into consideration. All the best to her, poor kid.
-
I think she should come home and be looked after by her family. Imagine having three children in such a short space of time, two of which died! Of course the authorities will have to talk to her and listen to what she has to say but she is a very young girl and that must be taken into consideration. All the best to her, poor kid.
She is not a kid anymore, and should be treated as a potential danger to this country. >:(
-
She is not a kid anymore, and should be treated as a potential danger to this country. >:(
That's surely covered by being monitored, and deradicalisised, and if there is any breach prosecution?
-
I thought she had the right to return, being British. Obviously, she would have to be vetted, then again, wasn't she groomed? Some people are talking about prosecution, what for?
I think 100s of people have come back from Syria, very few prosecuted, why is she different?.
-
The question here though is surely what efforts should be made to help her return? If as is covered in the article she were to present herself at an airport then there is a right of return. I would be loathe to put anyone in danger in trying to recover her. I don't think that she would be prosecuted unless after her return she acted in breach of whatever conditions were imposed.
-
It looks like 400 people have returned, about 10% prosecuted, presumably for actual armed combat or serious propaganda.
Just looking at the comments on LBC, including kill her, hand her over to Syrians, and other choice stuff.
-
It looks like 400 people have returned, about 10% prosecuted, presumably for actual armed combat or serious propaganda.
Just looking at the comments on LBC, including kill her, hand her over to Syrians, and other choice stuff.
Below the line, anything goes
-
Did people watch the interview with that woman?
-
Did people watch the interview with that woman?
Not yet, I've read it. Does watching it make a difference?
-
Not yet, I've read it. Does watching it make a difference?
It might, she comes over as so smug!
-
Shouldn't be let back, least of all to ponce off the state. Fuck her off! Let her rot there.
-
When her baby is born, maybe the child could be sent to the UK if Begum's relatives are prepared to look after her/him.
-
When her baby is born, maybe the child could be sent to the UK if Begum's relatives are prepared to look after her/him.
On what legal grounds are you excluding her citizenship?
-
It might, she comes over as so smug!
I don't see that as a relevant factor. I think you would be on stronger ground on lack of repentance but it has to be for something criminal to apply.
-
I don't see that as a relevant factor. I think you would be on stronger ground on lack of repentance but it has to be for something criminal to apply.
She said she didn't regret joining ISIS.
-
She said she didn't regret joining ISIS.
Yes, I know. To have any effect then she would need to be charged with a crime and her lack of regret may well count against her. Sounding smug isn't as yet a crime. Something for which I am truly thankful.
-
Yes, I know. To have any effect then she would need to be charged with a crime and her lack of regret may well count against her. Sounding smug isn't as yet a crime. Something for which I am truly thankful.
She was smug about her lack of regret.
We will have to wait and see what the powers that be decide. However, if she comes back and does something dreadful in the name is ISIS all hell with break loose.
-
She was smug about her lack of regret.
We will have to wait and see what the powers that be decide. However, if she comes back and does something dreadful in the name is ISIS all hell with break loose.
Smugness isn't a legal concept.
And your second paragraph sounds Trumpesque
-
Smugness isn't a legal concept.
And your second paragraph sounds Trumpesque
Oh thanks so much! ::)
-
Oh thanks so much! ::)
during her interview, did she make any mention of her husband/father of her children or his responsibility for anything?
-
during her interview, did she make any mention of her husband/father of her children or his responsibility for anything?
He wouldn't be allowed in after Brexit. He's Dutch.
-
Doubtful if she would be charged with a crime, most returnees are just questioned, and let in. I wonder if she has made it worse by her comments, now the right wing will be frothing at the mouth.
-
Disappointing to hear Tom Tugendhat, a Tory I have some time for, on Channel 4 news say a 19 year old 9 months pregnant person is a danger to us all. How glorifying of ISIS.
-
She went out to join and support a group engaged in genocide, rape as a weapon of war and enslavement.
Any number of women and girls have performed suicide bombings after grooming or brainwashing. As she has shown no sign of changing her views, she is potentially extremely dangerous, and must be treated as such.
-
She went out to join and support a group engaged in genocide, rape as a weapon of war and enslavement.
Any number of women and girls have performed suicide bombings after grooming or brainwashing. As she has shown no sign of changing her views, she is potentially extremely dangerous, and must be treated as such.
But she isn't a danger to us all and talking up the threat just makes ISIS a bigger danger than it is.
-
Four years ago, three 15 year old girls flew to Turkey and crossed the border into IS-held territory in Syria. They were British Muslims who had been radicalised on line. Within a few weeks of their arrival, they were married and began their task of bringing new soldiers into the world.
There was considerable publicity about their action at the time. Their parents knew nothing of their intention.
One of these girls, now 19, wants to return to Britain to give birth to her third child - her earlier children had died from malnutrition and disease. There is debate about whether or not this should be allowed, after all, she may act as a kind of fifth columnist and engage in clandestine activities herself. Her comments about atrocities that she has been aware of suggest that she is somewhat blase about IS activities.
My view:
1 She was 15 when she left - she was a child.
2 Her intentions were known to the security services and to the police - but her parents were not informed, nor was any attempt made to stop her or to deradicalise her.
3 She is a UK citizen by birth.
Therefore, I consider that she should be allowed to come "home". She should be carefully monitored and subjected to systematic deradicalisation - the state, through its own inaction, bears much responsibility in this instance. I am aware that deradicalisation is not always successful - but an attempt must be made. She is damaged and some attempt must be made to repair her.
What do others think? Am I being too naive and idealistic?
One more damaged person to add to the growing number of seemingly damaged people in Britain that this country seems to lack the resources or know-how to 'fix'? Even if she made it back it doesn't seem likely that she would be properly monitored due to lack of resources. I'm not sure what she means when she says she doesn't regret going to join ISIS but it doesn't sound promising.
I suppose it would be discrimination to decide that a damaged Muslim UK citizen was worse for society than a damaged non-Muslim UK citizen, but I don't think it would be discrimination to examine her views and speech and prosecute her for joining a terrorist organisation if she did make it back. Given that there seems to have been police action in Britain against certain types of speech in the past, it's only fair that she should be similarly prosecuted on her return if she uses “threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour that causes, or is likely to cause, another person harassment, alarm or distress” or is deemed to incite “racial and religious hatred” or “hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation” or language that “encourages terrorism”. But again, not sure the resources exist to monitor this.
What is difficult to deal with is people whose speech does not fall within the above definitions but nevertheless causes division. I went to a mosque seemingly full of ordinary, friendly people a few months ago and was extremely annoyed to hear someone say during a charity fundraising speech in the mosque that the mosque used to be a British Legion Club where members of the armed forces came to celebrate murdering and raping Muslims.
Obviously many members of the British armed forces have saved Muslim lives, and these stupid generalisations are similar to the garbage that people such as Tommy Robinson come out with.
Given this girl is helpfully stuck in a refugee camp out of the UK and still doesn't seem to understand that joining a violent caliphate made up of fallible humans was never going to end well, I don't see any need for UK consulate staff to travel to a failed state war zone to bring her back to add to the pool of people here who try to stir up division through facile generalisations about other groups. Hopefully her current lack of regret in joining ISIS means it's unlikely that she will be helped to get to a British consulate in Turkey by anyone who is against ISIS.
-
He wouldn't be allowed in after Brexit. He's Dutch.
thank you, I wonder what the Dutch will want to do about him. - I haven't been reading anything, but I have now googled and read a page about Begum and her Dutch husband, who surrendered, and since there is no further mention of him in the article, I wonder whether he is out of the picture as far as she is concerned.
-
Shouldn't be let back, least of all to ponce off the state. Fuck her off! Let her rot there.
Yet if we claim to be Christian, can we refuse to help her, distasteful as the interview was?
Legally, unless there is any evidence that she has committed acts of terror, I don't think we can refuse her entry should she present herself at a border -or even an embassy. She remains a UK citizen, her passport has not been revoked, and it cannot be revoked retrospectively.
Should she return, social services must be involved in monitoring the situaton, and effort made to'de-radicalise' her.
There's also the point that, should we refuse her entry, that might provoke the radical hotheads in the UK to some action which no-one wants.
-
Generally, such people have been let back in, and investigated. So how is she different? Possibly, because she doesn't sound remorseful, however it seems odd to make such a decision based on a newspaper article. However, Javid is sounding tough, but then the Daily Mail will be hovering.
-
The argument seems a little academic to me as surely this will require a change in international law (to prevent her returning) as she is a British citizen.
-
The argument seems a little academic to me as surely this will require a change in international law (to prevent her returning) as she is a British citizen.
I thought that she could be prevented from coming back, if she is deemed a dangerous terrorist. Opinion seems to vary on this. The Daily Mail article amused me, it began, "remorseless schoolgirl Begum" ....
-
One of the odd things about this is that a suspected murderer in another country, would probably be repatriated to stand trial. But apparently this is different.
-
One of the odd things about this is that a suspected murderer in another country, would probably be repatriated to stand trial. But apparently this is different.
No one thinks she killed anyone here. Certain offences committed abroad, including murder, allow extra-territorial jurisdiction under the Suppression of Terrorism act, but presumably there has to a case.
-
No one thinks she killed anyone here. Certain offences committed abroad, including murder, allow extra-territorial jurisdiction under the Suppression of Terrorism act, but presumably there has to a case.
I think wigginhall's point is that it seems odd to repatriate someone who we think is a murderer, but to refuse entry to someone where there is no such case.
-
hmm .. but it is not at all the same thing.
-
hmm .. but it is not at all the same thing.
Analogies never are - I think wigginhall's point is that it is odd that we should see an actual crime as somehow deserving of being repatriated in order to have justice, but in this case where there doesn't seem to be a crime that we are aware of that we want to stop return. He's not arguing for a specific action, just noting that it seems an inconsistent way of thinking.
That said, I think that were someone regarded as having committed a terrorist act elsewhere we would seek not to repatriate them. And it's about where any crime takes place that creates the real problem with the analogy.
-
Whilst Begum may not have actually killed anyone, she appears to have been complicit by supporting those who committed the most appalling atrocities. Those who haven't actually watched the interview she gave should do so, it was scary, imo.
-
In a way, she has handled this badly, but then she is 19. Giving an interview with the Times, saying she has no regrets, severed heads, etc.,has alienated people. I guess that most of the 400 who have returned, did so quietly, and avoided the hang 'em and flog 'em brigade. It's possible also that she is heavily traumatized.
-
It's possible also that she is heavily traumatized.
Aw! Bless her heart!
-
Aw! Bless her heart!
I love the smell of Christian love in the morning, it makes you realize how Christians keep the flame of compassion alive!
-
I love the smell of Christian love in the morning, it makes you realize how Christians keep the flame of compassion alive!
There's no reason why the UK should be under any obligation to receive such people, especially as they'll only be a burden to the state. As far as the UK is concern, they should already be considered to be in their chosen home.
-
Aw! Bless her heart!
Indeed. We need topray fort thosde in trauma - and do what Christ commands; love and care.
-
There's no reason why the UK should be under any obligation to receive such people, especially as they'll only be a burden to the state. As far as the UK is concern, they should already be considered to be in their chosen home.
Smd yet, ifwe claim Christ as Lord, we cannot ignore her, even if we want to.
-
There's no reason why the UK should be under any obligation to receive such people, especially as they'll only be a burden to the state. As far as the UK is concern, they should already be considered to be in their chosen home.
except that's the law the UK signed up for, because this person is UKish
-
Indeed. We need topray fort thosde in trauma - and do what Christ commands; love and care.
Well said, Jim, Ad-o wants to throw the first stone, whereas at least you want to help the one being stoned.
-
Well said, Jim, Ad-o wants to throw the first stone, whereas at least you want to help the one being stoned.
Who's throwing stones? Not me. I haven't called for her to be strung up.
-
Who's throwing stones? Not me. I haven't called for her to be strung up.
Even if she does say Jehovah?
-
Why should any country be obliged to take such a person? It's fucking stupid, that's what it is.
-
Even if she does say Jehovah?
Very droll. All I'm saying is that no country should be obliged to accept such a person.
-
Very droll. All I'm saying is that no country should be obliged to accept such a person.
Even the country of which she is a citizen? Where is the utopia you would place her in?
-
Why should any country be obliged to take such a person? It's fucking stupid, that's what it is.
Because wherever they are, it's a country.
-
Even the country of which she is a citizen? Where is the utopia you would place her in?
Her own. The one she went to.
-
Well said, Jim, Ad-o wants to throw the first stone, whereas at least you want to help the one being stoned.
Yep.
And far from being the soft or easy way out, sometimes it's the hardest.
-
Why should any country be obliged to take such a person? It's fucking stupid, that's what it is.
Not so stupid as being short sighted, taking a shallow view of things
-
Not so stupid as being short sighted, taking a shallow view of things
It's rewarding her for what she's done. She'll get a free gaff and everything payed for by the state.
-
Her own. The one she went to.
It's certainly a new idea of citizenship, that if you go and live in country X, you become a citizen of X. So all those ex-pats are now Spanish citizens, and EU migrants are now UK citizens? I didn't realize.
-
It's certainly a new idea of citizenship, that if you go and live in country X, you become a citizen of X. So all those ex-pats are now Spanish citizens, and EU migrants are now UK citizens? I didn't realize.
Can't compare. She went to join that death cult, one that has been responsible for terrorist attacks around the world.
-
That noise you can hear is the sound of many goal-posts being dragged around.
-
Hopefully she'll grow up and realise what she did was wrong.
As for the whole caliphate thing, the main task is to make sure they can never get their hands on any big military equipment, as that's the reason it all started. I recall they took it from the Iraqi military?
Once the remaining fighters see there's no chance of that happening, they might get the message?
-
That noise you can hear is the sound of many goal-posts being dragged around.
There were some very chirpy sparrows in the background during the interview
-
Hopefully she'll grow up and realise what she did was wrong. As for the whole caliphate thing, the main task is to make sure they can never get their hands on any big military equipment, as that's the reason it all started. I recall they took it from the Iraqi military? Once the remaining fighters see there's no chance of that happening, they might get the message?
Here's a thought; If the numpties in Westminster stopped selling these regimes weapons in the first place, terrorists wouldn't have got a chance to nick 'em.
-
https://twitter.com/holland_tom/status/1096538567847882753?s=21
If you are on Twitter.
-
That is so horrific.
Can't compare. She went to join that death cult, one that has been responsible for terrorist attacks around the world.
Yes, at the age of fifteen.
Where's the compassion? She's given birth to children who have died, the girl deserves another chance. She must be living in misery.
I'm with Anchor on this one.
-
You're all mad. People like that should never be let back.
-
That is so horrific.
Yes, at the age of fifteen.
Where's the compassion? She's given birth to children who have died, the girl deserves another chance. She must be living in misery.
I'm with Anchor on this one.
Fine, but the follow-up question arises: would you personally be prepared to take on the responsibility of her monitoring etc etc?
Yes, that is not a fair question to you personally, but I add that of course it is not directed at you personally, but which arises inevitably.
When you think over the years about the pronouncements made by Archbishops et al about what we should do to be compassionate, blah, blah, but would they take refugees into their palaces permanently, fund them for years, etc? No way!!
Ahwell, that's the way of things I suppose.
-
That's a bizarre view that I should personally take on the monitoring and rehabilitation of Begum. Why? If I want a burglar apprehended, should I carry out a raid myself on his house? I assume that the UK has the personnel, and the knowledge to deal with returnees, since 400 have already come back.
-
That's a bizarre view that I should personally take on the monitoring and rehabilitation of Begum. Why? If I want a burglar apprehended, should I carry out a raid myself on his house? I assume that the UK has the personnel, and the knowledge to deal with returnees, since 400 have already come back.
Note that I very carefully made it clear that the you was not a particular person here , but a generalised question.
-
You're all mad. People like that should never be let back.
Sorry I thought you were a christian, did I have that all wrong ? A true follower of Jesus would surely try to walk in his steps, rejecting judgmentalism, and instead reaching out to sinners with compassion. If christian principals are not to your liking then why pretend they are ? You're a fake, it would seem.
-
You're all mad. People like that should never be let back.
Hmmmm.....
I've never read thast version of Christ's words in Matthew 25.
Does He say
"When I was a stranger, you told me to get lost."
Or elsewhere
"Love your enemies from a distance by doing nothing to help them?"
-
Begum has given birth to a son, both are said to be well.
-
Sorry I thought you were a christian, did I have that all wrong ? A true follower of Jesus would surely try to walk in his steps, rejecting judgmentalism, and instead reaching out to sinners with compassion. If christian principals are not to your liking then why pretend they are ? You're a fake, it would seem.
I'll tell you what. When the last homeless person is housed and the last hungry person fed and the last potless person given sone money first, then bring her back to ponce off the state as reward for her actions.
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/231521
-
Hmmmm.....
I've never read thast version of Christ's words in Matthew 25.
Does He say
"When I was a stranger, you told me to get lost."
Or elsewhere
"Love your enemies from a distance by doing nothing to help them?"
I'm afraid that love your enemies is snowflake Christianity. See instead the well 'ard version, kick your enemies out, and lock the door, as Jesus often said.
-
;D ;D
-
No one would be loving Begum if she came back to this country and committed an act of terrorism, which is not beyond the realms of possibility.
-
Yes, I would be prepared to monitor and care for Shamima Begum, with help of course. No-one could be expected to be responsible for her on their own. I'd do the best I could and hope it works. It has worked with others, including a man who became a journalist.
-
No one would be loving Begum if she came back to this country and committed an act of terrorism, which is not beyond the realms of possibility.
Understand that, clearly. On the other hand, it was largely christians of the Victorian age who initiated concepts of penal reform and prisoner rehabilitation. Ad-O doesn't seem to have come across christian teaching yet, surprising for someone who claims affiliation with a church. Still in the 'lock-em up and throw away the key' mindset. Insightful, not. Compassionate, not. Baffling to me.
-
It baffles me that Begum has been picked on. She did a stupid interview of course. But hundreds have returned from Syria, some rehabilitated, some prosecuted, she would be heavily interrogated, of course. It seems a wacky idea to me that she would return with a new baby, and do some terrorist act. She would never see the child again.
-
If Begum showed some remorse for her stupidity in joining ISIS it would be a different story, but she seemed proud to be one of their number. I do think her child should be removed from her, so she can't indoctrinate it with their poisonous take on Islam.
-
Hard-hearted Hannah. It's Trump who separates mothers and children.
-
If Begum showed some remorse for her stupidity in joining ISIS it would be a different story, but she seemed proud to be one of their number. I do think her child should be removed from her, so she can't indoctrinate it with their poisonous take on Islam.
I think we all do stupid things as youngsters. As we grow older, we gain in wisdom and experience. This girl is still only a teenager and she's messed up real bad. Really bad. She needs help to get back on track.
-
I think we all do stupid things as youngsters. As we grow older, we gain in wisdom and experience. This girl is still only a teenager and she's messed up real bad. Really bad. She needs help to get back on track.
Begum is an adult not a child and has to take absolute responsibility for her actions.
-
All these punitive comments make me feel ill, I need a break from it. Such cruelty, I suppose this is now part of British values.
-
All these punitive comments make me feel ill, I need a break from it. Such cruelty, I suppose this is now part of British values.
Maybe you should spare a thought for all the men, women and children who have been murder by the murderous ISIS mob, before feeling too sorry for their followers!
-
Understand that, clearly. On the other hand, it was largely christians of the Victorian age who initiated concepts of penal reform and prisoner rehabilitation. Ad-O doesn't seem to have come across christian teaching yet, surprising for someone who claims affiliation with a church. Still in the 'lock-em up and throw away the key' mindset. Insightful, not. Compassionate, not. Baffling to me.
I do not belong in the lock em up and throw away the key camp, except for nonces and terrorists of course.
-
Maybe you should spare a thought for all the men, women and children who have been murder by the murderous ISIS mob, before feeling too sorry for their followers!
Exactly.
-
Begum is an adult not a child and has to take absolute responsibility for her actions.
I don't think there is any such thing as 'absolute' responsibility, in reality. Nobody is free from influences. If someone commits a crime because they have been radicalised, does the radicaliser not bear any of the responsibility ? This is why we have concepts such as 'diminished responsibility' and 'mitigating circumstances'. If we fail to take account of all relevant factors, then we are being merely blind and judgemental when we could do so much better than that.
-
Maybe you should spare a thought for all the men, women and children who have been murder by the murderous ISIS mob, before feeling too sorry for their followers!
I am feeling sorry for myself, as too much exposure to your and Ad-o's views makes me feel ill.
-
I do not belong in the lock em up and throw away the key camp, except for nonces and terrorists of course.
So, cherry picking when you want to be a christian then, and not when it doesn't suit. You're a complete fake.
-
Maybe you should spare a thought for all the men, women and children who have been murder by the murderous ISIS mob, before feeling too sorry for their followers!
It is not an either/or situation.
-
So, cherry picking when you want to be a christian then, and not when it doesn't suit. You're a complete fake.
Christianity doesn't teach that our actions have no repecussions.
-
Christianity doesn't teach that our actions have no repecussions.
Don't start talking about Christian teaching, FFS.
-
I am feeling sorry for myself, as too much exposure to your and Ad-o's views makes me feel ill.
You would feel even worse if Begum or her mob murdered a member of your family! >:(
-
Don't start talking about Christian teaching, FFS.
You're a bore. Go away.
-
Maybe you should spare a thought for all the men, women and children who have been murder by the murderous ISIS mob, before feeling too sorry for their followers!
Or indeed tyhose Iraqi, Syrian, Afghanisetc, murdered by british bombsand missilestrikes?
Death isdeath; just because people ina niceuniform with nice glossy planes caused it does not mean weshould forget the dead.
-
If there was a good reason to do this, why not before? Oh right because it's now a headline in the Tory leadership contest.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47299907
-
Hard-hearted Hannah. It's Trump who separates mothers and children.
I see where you are coming from, I do. But sometimes, unfortunately a choice has to be made between the interests of the mother and the interests of the child - it's impossible to make it painless for both. I could well be completely wrong, but if I had to make a decision on the matter on whose welfare takes precedence, I would argue that by prioritising the mother, it might unintentionally lack compassion for the child.
If the mother's right to human compassion results in a child being brought up to not integrate because his mother feels so little connection and human empathy for the victims of bombings in the country she and her child are aiming to live in, I think that is throwing the child under a bus. Some separation might be best for the child to have a fighting chance to feel a valued part of the country he is growing up in rather than an outsider, who distrusts the motives and values of those around him, believes the worst of them, and feels isolated.
I feel bad for the women and children being bombed everywhere - it's not difficult to feel bad for them - and maybe Shamima Begum does too and just gave a clumsy interview using the word "retaliation" to describe the ISIS attack on children at a concert without adding the phrase "it doesn't justify what ISIS did and lashing out in revenge, while a human reaction, aren't the values that I aspire to."
-
It baffles me that Begum has been picked on. She did a stupid interview of course. But hundreds have returned from Syria, some rehabilitated, some prosecuted, she would be heavily interrogated, of course. It seems a wacky idea to me that she would return with a new baby, and do some terrorist act. She would never see the child again.
I don't pretend to know what is going through Begum's mind or what her motivations are. What I do know is that according to Muslim traditions, Prophet Mohamed's sons died in infancy so children dying in infancy is a burden that practising Muslims try to accept they have to bear with patience and faith if it happens to them.
I also know that according to Muslim traditions, if a Muslim is going through suffering and they can't find anything to feel gratitude to Allah for, a Muslim is encouraged to take the view that Islam teaches that any suffering in this world is compensated by Allah erasing some of your sins on the Day of Judgement, and therefore a Muslim could at least feel gratitude for that mercy. These are the kind of beliefs that Begum has signed up for - she said she became religious and that she accepted the hardships of leaving Britain in order to live in an ISIS environment as part of her expression of her religious belief. She wanted to live among people, who presumably prioritised the blessings they would get in the next world over the hardships of this world - that is the basics of Muslim belief.
So while I think we should feel compassion for her hardship, it should not be ignored that hardship is a blessing in the belief system that resonates with her enough to have made her run away from a loving family to a failed state to marry an ISIS fighter and then say the things she is currently saying in interviews. I think she sees hardship as a blessing, so there is a silver lining to her current cloud.
And based on her view of beheaded fighters, I wouldn't be surprised if she sees compassion as a weakness and something she despises about British culture, and perversely she might actually respect the strength of resolve it took for the government to strip her of British citizenship, because that strength of resolve and disciplinary measures is what drew her to an ISIS caliphate. You might be trying to save someone who deep down doesn't want to be saved yet - like an addict she might need to hit rock bottom first to get a fresh perspective, and her interviews thus far don't give me the impression of someone who has hit rock bottom yet.
-
Christianity doesn't teach that our actions have no repecussions.
No; Christ taught us tolove,to care,to forgive and to give.
Boring stuff like that.
-
The Home Office have a strategy document which lays out the actions it would take should a woman who went to support ISIS have a baby and try and return. It says it would have a managed return to the UK, followed by criminal investigation, with deradicalistion and, care for the baby. The foreward to the document is written by Sajid Javid.
-
It is the baby who is important, not Begum, he should be removed from her care as she is an unfit mother, imo.
-
The Home Office have a strategy document which lays out the actions it would take should a woman who went to support ISIS have a baby and try and return. It says it would have a managed return to the UK, followed by criminal investigation, with deradicalistion and, care for the baby. The foreward to the document is written by Sajid Javid.
Interesting strategy to get ISIS supporters out of Britain. Making them think they had nothing to lose so they might as well go and then pulling the rug out from under them once they left.
-
No; Christ taught us tolove,to care,to forgive and to give.
Boring stuff like that.
That's fine if the person shows remorse. She hasn't understood that the way the caliphate was set up was wrong (killing anyone who wouldn't convert etc) and so she still thinks that collateral damage from Western military action justifies terrorism.
-
No; Christ taught us tolove,to care,to forgive and to give.
Boring stuff like that.
Jesus didn't always get it right.
A person has got to show they have repented of their actions first, before they can be forgiven, imo. Begum doesn't appear to think she has done anything wrong. Her comment about not being fazed by severed heads in a bin, was sick, and proved she is not suitable to raise a child.
-
Interesting strategy to get ISIS supporters out of Britain. Making them think they had nothing to lose so they might as well go and then pulling the rug out from under them once they left.
I don't think possible criminal prosecution is nothing to lose. And given the document is from 2018, that wasn't anything in Begum's mind when she left
-
The Home Office have a strategy document which lays out the actions it would take should a woman who went to support ISIS have a baby and try and return. It says it would have a managed return to the UK, followed by criminal investigation, with deradicalistion and, care for the baby. The foreward to the document is written by Sajid Javid.
Yeah, well anyone can come up with sensible words and plans (or rubber stamp them) in periods of calm thought. But they are chucked straight in the bin when it's time for willy swinging.
-
I don't think possible criminal prosecution is nothing to lose.
You're right - it's not nothing to lose but it's not much to lose. If I believed in the rightness of my cause the idea of criminal prosecution wouldn't phase me in the slightest. Losing my right to be a UK citizen may give me pause for thought though. Or it may not - depending on how much I believed in my cause - suffering for my cause and being some kind of martyr might actually strengthen my resolve, who knows. Especially if I was 15 and I wanted to feel special to someone and marry and have my own family and feel part of a greater cause, and I got to check out from my fairly mundane, normal life where my freedoms were restricted by my parents.
And given the document is from 2018, that wasn't anything in Begum's mind when she left
I didn't know that document was from 2018, but I agree that the idea of returning to the UK probably wouldn't have been in Begum's mind when she left. I don't think anything much was in Begum's mind when she left other than what was good for Begum.
Religion interpreted in a selfish way where you think only about yourself and the blessings you think you are earning for your deeds and intentions, and ignoring the rights of everybody else in your community to not have the effects of your interpretation of your religion imposed on them, is one way of practising religion I suppose - whether it is a particular interpretation of Islam such as ISIS terrorism being imposed on people or a particular interpretation of Christian love that wants to allow Begum to come back.
I can understand why people might think the ethical thing to do would be to not allow Begum back. And I can also see why people think it is unethical to shift the problem of Begum to another country once Britain allowed her to have British citizenship - for good or for bad the country that allowed you citizenship is usually stuck with you. I think the government will buy some time by revoking her citizenship until it goes through the courts, and then the courts may well overturn their decision, but at least the government can say they tried to follow the view of what I suspect is the majority of people in Britain. I can understand where Sajid Javid, the politician, is coming from. Why would a politician with any intelligence jeopardise his political support over a silly kid - we live in the real world?
-
I can understand why people might think the ethical thing to do would be to not allow Begum back. And I can also see why people think it is unethical to shift the problem of Begum to another country once Britain allowed her to have British citizenship - for good or for bad the country that allowed you citizenship is usually stuck with you. I think the government will buy some time by revoking her citizenship until it goes through the courts, and then the courts may well overturn their decision, but at least the government can say they tried to follow the view of what I suspect is the majority of people in Britain. I can understand where Sajid Javid, the politician, is coming from. Why would a politician with any intelligence jeopardise his political support over a silly kid - we live in the real world?
Yes, this sounds right.
dipping into one or two bits of info on the internet today, I see that Begum's parents are Bangladeshi with, it would appear, nothing clear--cut, but I'm afraid I did not investigate further.
-
You're right - it's not nothing to lose but it's not much to lose. If I believed in the rightness of my cause the idea of criminal prosecution wouldn't phase me in the slightest. Losing my right to be a UK citizen may give me pause for thought though. Or it may not - depending on how much I believed in my cause - suffering for my cause and being some kind of martyr might actually strengthen my resolve, who knows. Especially if I was 15 and I wanted to feel special to someone and marry and have my own family and feel part of a greater cause, and I got to check out from my fairly mundane, normal life where my freedoms were restricted by my parents.
I didn't know that document was from 2018, but I agree that the idea of returning to the UK probably wouldn't have been in Begum's mind when she left. I don't think anything much was in Begum's mind when she left other than what was good for Begum.
Religion interpreted in a selfish way where you think only about yourself and the blessings you think you are earning for your deeds and intentions, and ignoring the rights of everybody else in your community to not have the effects of your interpretation of your religion imposed on them, is one way of practising religion I suppose - whether it is a particular interpretation of Islam such as ISIS terrorism being imposed on people or a particular interpretation of Christian love that wants to allow Begum to come back.
I can understand why people might think the ethical thing to do would be to not allow Begum back. And I can also see why people think it is unethical to shift the problem of Begum to another country once Britain allowed her to have British citizenship - for good or for bad the country that allowed you citizenship is usually stuck with you. I think the government will buy some time by revoking her citizenship until it goes through the courts, and then the courts may well overturn their decision, but at least the government can say they tried to follow the view of what I suspect is the majority of people in Britain. I can understand where Sajid Javid, the politician, is coming from. Why would a politician with any intelligence jeopardise his political support over a silly kid - we live in the real world?
Yeah I can understand where Javid's coming from, and that it is the real world where he is using this case to further his leadership ambitions by putting forward a diktat that may well fail in law and is likely to inflame the inclination of some of the media to politicise judicial decisions, while going back on a previous position, and if successful creates a dangerous precedent for the Home Secretary to make decisions like this for personal political gain, doesn't make it any better to me.
-
That's fine if the person shows remorse. She hasn't understood that the way the caliphate was set up was wrong (killing anyone who wouldn't convert etc) and so she still thinks that collateral damage from Western military action justifies terrorism. Perhaps it would be better to revoke her citizenship and not let her back into the UK for 15 years, providing she can demonstrate remorse. Something like a shortened life sentence?
"if"?
So, Jesus said "Love one another, if they belong to your groyp",
Or
"Love your enemies,mif they've shown signs of repentence"?
Or,in answer to aqwuestion on forgiveness...
"Seventy times seven? Don't be daft.When they show sign of repentence, accept Me as Lord, jump through umpteen theological hoops, then, yes, go on, forgive them."?
-
Intereresting thread
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1098150749454983168.html
-
"if"?
So, Jesus said "Love one another, if they belong to your groyp",
Or
"Love your enemies,mif they've shown signs of repentence"?
Or,in answer to aqwuestion on forgiveness...
"Seventy times seven? Don't be daft.When they show sign of repentence, accept Me as Lord, jump through umpteen theological hoops, then, yes, go on, forgive them."?
I didn't say don't forgive her. I meant that if she doesn't admit she shouldn't have joined Isis then there are consequences.
Edit: I do think she should be allowed back, 100%.
-
Article from The Guardian that reinforces the point NS made earlier re. Javid.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/20/sajid-javid-shamima-begum-conservative-leadership
-
Yeah I can understand where Javid's coming from, and that it is the real world where he is using this case to further his leadership ambitions by putting forward a diktat that may well fail in law and is likely to inflame the inclination of some of the media to politicise judicial decisions, while going back on a previous position, and if successful creates a dangerous precedent for the Home Secretary to make decisions like this for personal political gain, doesn't make it any better to me.
Yes, the imperfections of politicians making political decisions. But that seems to be a consequence of leaders/ governments / MPs being chosen via an election process - they have to keep their voters happy. And their voters have their own biases, prejudices and agendas. Twitter users and the media are going to go after Javid or any politician through the use of selective quoting and headlines geared towards provoking a baying mob. Much like they did with Begum.
I think Javid wouldn't be very politically ambitious if he risked losing political support over Begum. IMO there are more important political issues to worry about than the problems of one silly kid sitting in a refugee camp in a failed state. If she manages to make it to Turkey and manages to wise up to the fact that the media are not her friends and stops giving interviews - there's a chance that the UK government might have had time to figure out what to do with her without the media breathing down their necks. They might have had time to gather evidence against her in order to prosecute her if she has committed a crime or they might have had time to figure out that she is not a serious threat to national interests/ security.
At least this country has a system of judicial review of political decisions - but this can be a slow process, and I'm sure the government is hoping to delay things as long as possible as they have enough problems with the electorate due to Brexit. Begum's child might be ready to start nursery by the time she gets her citizenship back.
-
From what I heard on the radio yesterday, shamima Begum seems to have a rather inflated idea of her own value and importance. She seems somewhat surprised that she has not become a celebrity, other than as an item of news.
-
From what I heard on the radio yesterday, shamima Begum seems to have a rather inflated idea of her own value and importance. She seems somewhat surprised that she has not become a celebrity, other than as an item of news.
None of which makes Javid's actions in pursuit of his leadership ambitions any more palatable.
-
None of which makes Javid's actions in pursuit of his leadership ambitions any more palatable.
I don’t know - I’m not sure i’d want a politician aiming for leadership to display stupidity. And at this moment, given public opinion and Begum being of a non-British heritage, I think it was a smart move, though obviously it was not particularly indulgent of teenage stupidity and more importantly is worrying in the way it undermines due process. Did Parliament debate the legislation that allows the Home Secretary these powers to revoke citizenship? Even if Begum had been of British heritage there would have been a call for her to not be allowed back in Britain, but it would have been more difficult to revoke citizenship.
I suspect in this instance, with Begum being of non-British heritage, Javid can possibly get away with it because he’s brown and has a Muslim background even if he isn’t a practising Muslim. If someone like Boris Johnson or Theresa May had done it there might well have been a different media spin on the situation.
-
What you think of as being stupid appears to me about being principled.
-
I agree it would be principled - that’s certainly one way of looking at it.
Poor choice of words on my part - I meant stupid politically. Principled people rarely get elected or get to positions of leadership. It’s difficult to find a principled person with political ambitions who actually gets into a leadership position as they need to play the game to get party and public support. It seems the majority of their potential voters or political supporters are not particularly principled, especially when manipulated by the media. There was Mandela I suppose who was the exception but he had to spend 27 years in prison to reach his principles and still get elected.
What Javid has done is not overstepping the powers Parliament gave him. If the Parliamentary process of giving him those powers was followed, which appears to be the case, then it would seem Parliament (our elected MPs) decided (possibly after recent terrorist atrocities on UK soil and people going to Syria to fight who might return in a brutalised state of mind that posed a risk to the public) that it was correct (?) procedure to allow the Home Secretary to revoke citizenship if he or she decided it was conducive to the public good and this did not need to be dependent on a conviction for a terrorist offence, and to then have a judicial review of the decision afterwards. Maybe it’s time for Parliament to review the legislation it passed?
Though it's difficult to establish whether Javid's decision was based on his assessment of what was conducive to the public good, or what was conducive to the good of his political ambitions. I'm not sure another Home Secretary who did not have leadership ambitions would have made a different decision about what was conducive to the public good in light of the interviews Begum gave to the media and the public reaction to the media reports.
Hopefully her lawyer can advise Begum to shut up if she wants her citizenship back. It's odd that she claims she didn't want to be in the papers when she left to join ISIS, yet she has no problems giving interviews now. It's a bit of a circus - reminds me of Meghan Markle's family and the circus that surrounds their various press interviews. Maybe I'm wrong and Begum is quite media savvy after all and is hoping to make money from a book deal - Diary of a Pushy ISIS bride.
-
...
Hopefully her lawyer can advise Begum to shut up if she wants her citizenship back. It's odd that she claims she didn't want to be in the papers when she left to join ISIS, yet she has no problems giving interviews now. It's a bit of a circus - reminds me of Meghan Markle's family and the circus that surrounds their various press interviews. Maybe I'm wrong and Begum is quite media savvy after all and is hoping to make money from a book deal - Diary of a Pushy ISIS bride.
You are right on the media circus ... Probably because the departure of the three schoolgirls was a story in itself, and also because Shamima Begum was found in Al-Hawl by a Times reporter looking for British jihadis. Then there is the added "human interest" of babies and dead children. Other fighters and women, have returned without much media attention.
There is really no way for her to make it to Turkey under her own steam. Possibly she could make it to Turkey or Iraq smuggled in by traffickers if someone put up the money. Otherwise her fate will probably be determined by the eventual outcome wrt. the camp following any eventual resolution of the Syrian war and Turkey/Kurdish conflict.
On the legislation, it seems to me that regulations are adopted on the main thrusts, not on the small print. Has anything ever failed to pass because it creates an unworkable bureaucratic nightmare?
-
Yes, ironic that fighters have returned apparently, with no fuss. But she has been very naive. She needed to confess and be full of regrets. Seeming to justify the Manchester bombing went down like a dead balloon. I wonder also if there is some misogyny around, a woman who goes to Syria, is the devil incarnate, whereas men are being men, silly buggers.
-
I think if there was a male ISIS supporter sitting in a refugee camp giving media interviews about how people should feel sorry for him and the government should help get him back to Britain rather than him making his own way back, his interviews would get a similar reaction. Especially if he said he still loved his fellow ISIS fighters and would wait for them to be let out of prison so he could have a happy reunion with his comrades. Begum voiced the idea that she could wait in Holland for her husband, whom she still loved, to get out of prison. She really should learn to avoid reporters or only agree to interviews that stick to a script or at the very least she should stick to a script.
A man would not be in her particular predicament - he wouldn’t be heavily pregnant. He would have been over there to fight and he might be injured or incapacitated. What happens to injured British fighters - did the government help bring them back? It will be interesting to see what happens to those fighters captured in Syria. This is a question of what happens to someone who joined ISIS before it became a crime to do so.
The problem is that it’s hard to prosecute people who left before new legislation made it a crime to go. If the CPS have no evidence of a criminal offence, it’s impossible to meet the court’s standards for evidence to mount a successful prosecution. It’s not likely there is helpful CCTV or DNA evidence or credible witnesses available from Syria. She doesn’t regret going to Syria and it sounds like she would still be a foreigner living in ISIS territory if her husband had not been captured and her dreams of her foreign Caliphate had not gone a bit pear-shaped. The public’s mood might well be due to violence suffered due to austerity cuts in the area of policing and crime but her reported responses to questions from reporters shows how disconnected she has become from the problems of people in Britain.
I don’t think the timing is going to be much better after a lengthy court case if Brexit happens.
-
Look on the bright side, it's good propaganda for the militants. Muslim woman and child abandoned in the desert, etc.
-
Good article by the journalist who interviewed Begum.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c329cc22-3527-11e9-b41a-ec1745518ba6
-
Look on the bright side, it's good propaganda for the militants. Muslim woman and child abandoned in the desert, etc.
I don't think they need any help in coming up with propaganda - from what I've heard they just make it up as they go along if any facts are inconvenient. Things like truth are pretty irrelevant when it comes to propaganda.
-
So because they lie we can behave in a way that make the lies true?
-
Good article by the journalist who interviewed Begum.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c329cc22-3527-11e9-b41a-ec1745518ba6
Thank you for directing us to an article which is firmly behind a paywall.
-
Thank you for directing us to an article which is firmly behind a paywall.
Registering an account allows access to 2 articles a week without paying. The piece describes the current regime in the camp and Begum's mindset.
-
So because they lie we can behave in a way that make the lies true?
I don't see how it would work if a Home Secretary decides policy based on the views of unhinged Muslim extremists while disregarding the electorate. I don't think he would retain public support for very long and I really can't see Javid risking political support for the government or jeopardising his own career at this crucial time over a runaway British girl. Successive British governments sell arms to regimes that bomb civilians so I don't think saving a girl from a refugee camp is going to make people see the British as some benevolent, welcoming nation.
Not sure who you are referring to when you say "we" as we, you and me, don't get to make the decisions about whether Begum is allowed back into the country. Legislation debated and passed by Parliament says that's the Home Secretary's job to review the information and make a decision, subject to judicial review.
-
Shamima Begum has now lost her third child.
Sajid Javid played the populist card in stripping Shamima Begum of her British citizenship and may have thus unwittingly determined the death of an infant British citizen. In allowing a 15 year old Shamima Begum and her two, similarly aged, companions to leave the country, the UK government was complicit in her joining IS.
She should be brought back to the UK, made to participate in whatever "re-adjustment" processes that are considered appropriate to see if she can fit into a modern western democratic liberal society. Simply slamming the door in her face is a fine demonstration of the values deemed to be important in our civilised world.
-
A lot of babies die unfortunately, even here in the UK, let alone in other parts of the world with poorer facilities. Part of the risk you accept if you leave the NHS for another country and get pregnant. I think quite a few civilised people probably think there are more important priorities that limited money and man hours should be spent on rather than attempting to extract Shamima Begum (or other Daesh members) from refugee camps in a war zone. The guidance from the foreign office seems to be:
"British nationals travelling or living overseas, particularly in areas where a crisis is more likely to occur, should take sensible precautions.... You’re responsible for your own personal safety....We have a duty of care to our employees and we won’t send our staff into a situation where we judge that their safety could be seriously at risk."
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/how-to-deal-with-a-crisis-overseas
Also, attempting to deradicalise them, with no guarantee that the dopey lot won't go and get themselves brainwashed again and go chasing after another utopia in a war zone, also has limited appeal given austerity etc. If there were few constraints on resources then yes of course, deradicalisation and ongoing monitoring by counsellors for at least 10 years seems useful.
-
Gabriella, do you work at the Home Office?
-
No. I do spend time working out income vs expenses though. I think it would be great and no doubt very civilised to help all these British people who have lost their way a bit but it does require funds and clearly there are lots of very worthy competing claims on the limited resources.
For example, if we're making money from our Saudi customers killing babies in Yemen, wouldn't it more civilised to send money to Yemen first?
-
No. I do spend time working out income vs expenses though. I think it would be great and no doubt very civilised to help all these British people who have lost their way a bit but it does require funds and clearly there are lots of very worthy competing claims on the limited resources.
For example, if we're making money from our Saudi customers killing babies in Yemen, wouldn't it more civilised to send money to Yemen first?
Except we do send money to Yemen. The question is surely about individual positions rather than sacrificing individual babies?
-
Shamima Begum has now lost her third child.
Sajid Javid played the populist card in stripping Shamima Begum of her British citizenship and may have thus unwittingly determined the death of an infant British citizen.
I think the death was all too predictable. If he was unwitting about this, he is unwitting full stop.
In allowing a 15 year old Shamima Begum and her two, similarly aged, companions to leave the country, the UK government was complicit in her joining IS.
I don't see how that follows. How could they have been stopped from leaving the UK?
Simply slamming the door in her face is a fine demonstration of the values deemed to be important in our civilised world.
It's mob rule. I think the way she has been treated is shameful.
-
Perhaps the passport she was carrying, and presumably had inspected, should have alerted someone and stopped her from leaving the country?
Perhaps her father, who, I heard on the radio the other day, is now in Bangladesh, should not have taken his daughter to hear a radical preacher?
I don't know, of course, but I wish the reports one hears were more impartial.
-
I am very sorry her poor little baby died, very sad. :o However, Begum is to blame for the mess she is in, if she had apologised for her stupidity and seen the error of her ways then maybe she would have been permitted to come back to the UK. She didn't, she seemed proud of her ISIS connections and their crimes. If she came back here and committed a terrorist act, the Government would be blamed for letting her return. In this instance they are damned if they do and damned if they don't!
-
I am very sorry her poor little baby died, very sad. :o However, Begum is to blame for the mess she is in, if she had apologised for her stupidity and seen the error of her ways then maybe she would have been permitted to come back to the UK. She didn't, she seemed proud of her ISIS connections and their crimes. If she came back here and committed a terrorist act, the Government would be blamed for letting her return. In this instance they are damned if they do and damned if they don't!
It is not that she was not 'permitted' to come back, it is that she was in a place where there was no way she could get to an embassy or anyhthing like it. If, by some remote chance, things had been different, she might wel have been able to apply for assistance.
-
I don't see how that follows. How could they have been stopped from leaving the UK?
Apparently, the police and security services were aware of the three girls' plan but made attempt to warn their parents.
Since the girls were only 15 years of age they could have been prevented from leaving the UK - they did not have parental consent. I cannot recall the date of their travel but it may well have been in term time.
-
Except we do send money to Yemen. The question is surely about individual positions rather than sacrificing individual babies?
My point is pragmatic. Having a baby in a place with limited medical facilities, especially in a war zone, is dangerous for a mother and her baby, therefore Begum made a decision that resulted in her putting herself and any babies she may have in a very vulnerable position. There is no British embassy where she is, so no officials to help her, and if there were no aid workers or journalists willing to transport her and her baby out of the camp to a place with better medical facilities, the death of the baby is a predictably tragic outcome of travelling to a war zone and having a baby there. The foreign office makes it clear they don't send their people into risky situations, so they warn people not travel to dangerous places. Begum's current situation highlights the inevitable dangers of ignoring travel advice from the foreign office. Eventually the government may have to bring back the British jihadis but it will probably take some time to put together a process that won't cause a public backlash.
Talking to a journalist is another dangerous decision for a person to make when they have been supporting a group that beheads British aid workers and morally justifies rape of female prisoners whom it has taken as sex slaves. That decision to discuss the ethics of war and the ethics of terrorism on British soil with a British journalist to broadcast to the public put Begum in a very vulnerable position, and the outcome of Begum talking about these matters to a journalist has been predictably tragic, especially since many of her fellow British ISIS supporters made it back quietly without advertising their return by talking to journalists.
The journalist's audience have had the media focusing on cuts to their own services resulting in British deaths in Britain and many probably lead similar lives economically to the one Begum led before she left to join ISIS. So there is an irony to her appealing to voters for the mercy and compassion that she herself lacks. I can't see how politicians will not make political decisions about these issues, regardless of how many dead babies this leads to, and then wait for the courts to decide what is legally possible per the checks and balances of our political system.
-
It's mob rule. I think the way she has been treated is shameful.
That's one way of describing elections I suppose. We have rule of law, so a legal challenge can be mounted against political decisions and it's up to the courts to decide whether the government has breached any laws.
Much like CAAT has done over the government's military aid and sale of weapons to Saudi to bomb civilians in Yemen, which has resulted in many dead babies. The government's arms sales to Saudi will continue while they go through the slow process of being challenged as unlawful in the Appeal courts in April 2019 following the July 2017 High Court ruling that the arms sales to Saudi were lawful.
It doesn't look like the government has the time nor political will to pull together a repatriation process for runaway jihadis and their children so maybe they will just keep making noises about working on a plan to rescue these babies while the issue goes through the courts, unless the government senses that they will lose significant voter support for not intervening more quickly.
-
Bit of a tangent: Some people seem to think that evolution has some kind of moral purpose that all human beings should be kind, loved, etc etc. This is patently not so, and a species survives when there are sufficient numbers who do survive. Such a species survives in spite of, or regardless of, those who try to destroy other human groups.
-
Apparently, the police and security services were aware of the three girls' plan but made attempt to warn their parents.
Since the girls were only 15 years of age they could have been prevented from leaving the UK - they did not have parental consent. I cannot recall the date of their travel but it may well have been in term time.
I apologize, I misunderstood what you meant. I thought you were talking about stopping people from leaving in general terms. If there was good evidence that these individuals were intending to go to Syria, then, yes, they should have been stopped.
-
That's one way of describing elections I suppose. We have rule of law, so a legal challenge can be mounted against political decisions and it's up to the courts to decide whether the government has breached any laws.
.
There was no election. The government gave in to the baying mob.
-
There was no election. The government gave in to the baying mob.
I am assuming you don't mean the baying mob of British ISIS supporters whipped up by slick jihadi videos but a different baying mob whipped up by certain sections of the media? There will be an election - legally it has to happen at least every 5 years, and politicians are required to woo the baying mob, also known as voters, every election to persuade them to vote for them. So a lot of the time they give in to the baying mob.
Maybe the government wants to send a message that it isn't going to send its officials into a war zone and it will revoke certain people's citizenship if it is legal to do so - the courts may overturn the government's decision. Maybe the government's thinking on this occasion happens to be in sync with the people who want Begum's citizenship revoked. Maybe, having run the different scenarios they have determined revoking her citizenship for now is the least bad option for national interests. Bit like when the British government seems to have decided invading Iraq without UN Security Council backing and against the wishes of many of the British public was the least bad option.
-
Each morning this week there have been readings on BBC Radio 4 from Azadeh Moaveni's account of the experiences of the young women who decided to join ISIS a few years ago - Guest House for Young Widows.
These are available on BBCSounds for another four weeks.
It examines their motivations and influences on their decisions to go to Syria. They were "assigned" husbands and when widowed obliged to take the ISIS soldier available. As an account it seemed to me to be both sympathetic and critical of its subjects. I found it fascinating, instructive, horrific and moving.
-
Good article by the journalist who interviewed Begum.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c329cc22-3527-11e9-b41a-ec1745518ba6
Very good. I'd like to seeher come back home & be helped, she was so young when she went out there. With no publicity, quietly. She made a mistake and has suffered for it.
-
The problem with Begum is that her mind has been so radicalised, she is likely to be a danger to British society if permitted to return to the UK. I very much doubt she can be helped.
-
The problem with Begum is that her mind has been so radicalised, she is likely to be a danger to British society if permitted to return to the UK. I very much doubt she can be helped.
Evidence? Thought not.
-
Going against grain but I think she can be rehabilitated. She was 15 when she was radicalised and tstill only 20-21 having been through more than most do in fifty years. It would be the humane thing to do to help her & if she'd been involved in anything else, most people would want to.
-
Going against grain but I think she can be rehabilitated. She was 15 when she was radicalised and tstill only 20-21 having been through more than most do in fifty years. It would be the humane thing to do to help her & if she'd been involved in anything else, most people would want to.
Agree
-
Going against grain but I think she can be rehabilitated. She was 15 when she was radicalised and tstill only 20-21 having been through more than most do in fifty years. It would be the humane thing to do to help her & if she'd been involved in anything else, most people would want to.
Say we do have her back, from what I've heard these people are a lost cause, where you would like to think they can be reformed, the odds I have read and heard about are so slanted against any betterment in the way these people think, I don't think it's worth taking the all too realistic dangerous risk to all of us they present.
The odds on anything happening to you Robbie if we were to bring her back to the UK, must be very minimal as it would more than likely be for me too but what would you have to say to anyone here that likely suffered as a result of reinstating her here in the UK?
It is a hard lesson for the woman but I think a necessary one that also gives a loud signal to anyone else that has similar ideas, let's face it Isis isn't exactly one of the most friendly of ideologies, burning people alive in a cage etc.
Regards, ippy.
-
It could of course be an entirely counterproductive message to give. If it creates more people willing to act for the extremists, what would you have to say to anyone that suffered because of thar, ippy?
-
Say we do have her back, from what I've heard these people are a lost cause, where you would like to think they can be reformed, the odds I have read and heard about are so slanted against any betterment in the way these people think, I don't think it's worth taking the all too realistic dangerous risk to all of us they present.
The odds on anything happening to you Robbie if we were to bring her back to the UK, must be very minimal as it would more than likely be for me too but what would you have to say to anyone here that likely suffered as a result of reinstating her here in the UK?
It is a hard lesson for the woman but I think a necessary one that also gives a loud signal to anyone else that has similar ideas, let's face it Isis isn't exactly one of the most friendly of ideologies, burning people alive in a cage etc.
Regards, ippy.
I agree with you, I doubt the woman can be rehabilitated, she might pretend to be, before committing an act of terrorism.
-
It could of course be an entirely counterproductive message to give. If it creates more people willing to act for the extremists, what would you have to say to anyone that suffered because of thar, ippy?
Of course it could but I know what I would prefer and it wouldn't make life any easier for these Isis minded people.
While this known Isis supporter isn't here she is unable to convey her ideas to anyone else.
I don't think not trying is a good idea, the surveys I have seen telling us the percentages of people that are resident in the UK that supposedly sympathise with Isis ideas don't exactly encourage optimism.
Let's hope the BBC's continual pushing out the equivalent of 'Brave New World's Soma' to the population will get to the Isis sympathisers in the end, who knows?
ippy.
-
I agree with you, I doubt the woman can be rehabilitated, she might pretend to be, before committing an act of terrorism.
From what I hear about these people where you've accurately described their mantra there's so much in these religions that's so reprehensible just as you have described only one aspect of in your post L R.
Regards, ippy.
-
There have been quite a few young ex-Jihadists who have been de-radicalised here, in the USA and Denmark, probably elsewhere. If you do a search you will find them, I've only read a couple.
Shamima Begum was a groomed schoolgirl. Do we not show compassion to people who commit crimes as a result of being groomed, especially the young? I don't know what 'heinous acts' Shamima Begum committed apart from supporting those who did - and that didn't last. She gave birth to three children which would have taken up a lot of her time and energy.
I can't write off a 20 year old girl. She needs help. If I had the necessary training and experience I would help her but that's hypothetical because I'm not equipped to do so. However there are those who are.
Harrowby posted about BBC4's 'Guest House for Young Widows' which is worth listening to.
I do understand the opinions expressed last year by Gabriella, this is not a black and white issue but it's one that affects all of us.
-
If she is liable to to perpetrate acts of terrorism, it makes much more sense to have her here in prison or other managed environment than out free to inflict them elsewhere.
In any case why would we want the UK to support environments where people can be brainwashed and then export them along with death and misery around the world?
-
That's an excellent point & something that would stare all of us in the face if we opened our eyes to see it.
(Since posting my last effort I've been wracking my brains to think of ways in which I could actively help rather than just talking about it. I don't just exist in my own 'yard' & am open to possibilities.)
-
If she is liable to to perpetrate acts of terrorism, it makes much more sense to have her here in prison or other managed environment than out free to inflict them elsewhere.
In any case why would we want the UK to support environments where people can be brainwashed and then export them along with death and misery around the world?
I'll go along with you Ydayana, we need to be looking out for our fellow citizens first and in this case although I'm all for compassion wherever it can be applied but in this case there are times when compassion should be taking the back seat.
ippy.
-
One thing that is clear about Shamima Begum is that the police or the security services (or both) failed big time in her case. They were aware of her intentions and just let her carry them out. Her parents were not given any information about her intentions - they could have prevented her having access to her passport. Airport and airline authorities were not informed that that Shamima Begum and other teenage girls were likely to try to leave the country.
As Robbie has said, Shamima Begum gave birth to three children. Each was conceived because her role within ISIS was to have coitus with whichever "husband" had been assigned to her and to bear his offspring. When a "husband" was killed she was provided with another. All three children died.
I think it is quite likely that were she presented with supportive assistance for her to evaluate the propaganda that had been fed to her she might - aided by her own experience of the reality of ISIS - be able to re-orient her life, perhaps continue with her education and become a responsible citizen. Just writing her off suggests that our society is little better than the one which abused her.
-
I agree with you Harrowby. There are people who have done far worse than this girl who are cared for, rehabilitated and have their names changed. She has suffered enough for her mistake - which she made aged 15.
Ippy: "we need to be looking out for our fellow citizens first".
She is a fellow citizen.
-
I agree with you Harrowby. There are people who have done far worse than this girl who are cared for, rehabilitated and have their names changed. She has suffered enough for her mistake - which she made aged 15.
Ippy: "we need to be looking out for our fellow citizens first".
She is a fellow citizen.
I thought that woman's citizenship had been removed?
-
Luke 10:25-37.
-
I agree with you Harrowby. There are people who have done far worse than this girl who are cared for, rehabilitated and have their names changed. She has suffered enough for her mistake - which she made aged 15.
Ippy: "we need to be looking out for our fellow citizens first".
She is a fellow citizen.
L R is right and I think she elected herself out of the UK the day she made the decision to opt out of trying to behave in as near to being a civilised person as she could in the way most of us do.
Regards, ippy.
-
Luke 10:25-37.
So what!
Regards, ippy.
-
So what!
Regards, ippy.
God, this forum pisses me off at times. I think I'll try taking a break, but it probably won't last long.
-
L R is right and I think she elected herself out of the UK the day she made the decision to opt out of trying to behave in as near to being a civilised person as she could in the way most of us do.
Regards, ippy.
I think any 15yr old could have succumbed to ISIS propaganda in a similar way. The problem is that the apparently "civilised" people couldn't have cared or done less.
I expect, given the chance, they would be happy to send all our criminals to Bangladesh to be hanged.
Similar to how, in other times, they were exported to America, Australia and Africa to destroy civilize the native people there?
-
Begum is now a terrorist, and is unlikely to be deradicalized. If she was permitted to return to this country and committed an act of terrorism, people would be demanding to know why she was allowed to come back.
-
Begum is now a terrorist, and is unlikely to be deradicalized. If she was permitted to return to this country and committed an act of terrorism, people would be demanding to know why she was allowed to come back.
Er .. how do you know she is unlikely to be deradicalised? And, if she is, why would you allow her to commit terrorism?
-
God, this forum pisses me off at times. I think I'll try taking a break, but it probably won't last long.
Why do believers in these various religions think quoting sections of 'their', in this case the bible, should be taken as somehow impressive?
I could understand the quoting of names and numbers for the various parts of this book if there were anything more than zero evidence to be found in support of the magical, mystical or superstitional based parts of this bronze age book.
Very clever book for the bronze age, I'll give it that.
ippy.
-
Er .. how do you know she is unlikely to be deradicalised? And, if she is, why would you allow her to commit terrorism?
We can't take the risk, imo. Besides which, the UK has much more important things to be concerned about at present like the Coronavirus.
-
We can't take the risk, imo. Besides which, the UK has much more important things to be concerned about at present like the Coronavirus.
Of-course! We have to practice washing our hands!
-
Of-course! We have to practice washing our hands!
Definitely, where that woman is concerned.
-
I think any 15yr old could have succumbed to ISIS propaganda in a similar way. The problem is that the apparently "civilised" people couldn't have cared or done less.
I expect, given the chance, they would be happy to send all our criminals to Bangladesh to be hanged.
Similar to how, in other times, they were exported to America, Australia and Africa to destroy civilize the native people there?
How high a horse would you be sitting on if this woman came back here and somehow because of her indoctrinational background she engineered some form of injury or even the death of a close member of your family, or anybody else?
I'm here in the 21st century commenting on a 21st century problem, what has capital punishment or transportation have to do with the 21st century UK as opposed to those shining examples of humanity that film people having their heads cut off and burning men alive trapped inside an iron cage?
Regards, ippy.
-
How high a horse would you be sitting on if this woman came back here and somehow because of her indoctrinational background she engineered some form of injury or even the death of a close member of your family, or anybody else?
I'm here in the 21st century commenting on a 21st century problem, what has capital punishment or transportation have to do with the 21st century UK as opposed to those shining examples of humanity that film people having their heads cut off and burning men alive trapped inside an iron cage?
Regards, ippy.
I agree with you. Begum was 15, not 5 when she chose leave the UK and join that terrorist organisation, like it or not she has to accept the consequences.
-
Er .. how do you know she is unlikely to be deradicalised? And, if she is, why would you allow her to commit terrorism?
LR knows everything - surely you realise that?
-
I thought another factor is that her treatment is a brilliant recruiting sergeant for IS. Of course, I don't know this for sure, but if I was a jihadi intelligence officer, she would figure in propaganda against the West.
-
How high a horse would you be sitting on if this woman came back here and somehow because of her indoctrinational background she engineered some form of injury or even the death of a close member of your family, or anybody else?
And if we just abandon her and she causes deaths elsewhere (possibly in part because of our doing so), well, who cares, they're just foreigners after all, eh?
She was a UK citizen and we should have taken responsibility.
-
How high a horse would you be sitting on if this woman came back here and somehow because of her indoctrinational background she engineered some form of injury or even the death of a close member of your family, or anybody else?
I'm here in the 21st century commenting on a 21st century problem, what has capital punishment or transportation have to do with the 21st century UK as opposed to those shining examples of humanity that film people having their heads cut off and burning men alive trapped inside an iron cage?
Regards, ippy.
It would be awful if she helped with any further terrorist actions - of-course. But she is more likely to do so free in the Middle-East than here. Another possibility is that she is sent to Bangladesh where she would be hanged.
Bringing family members into the argument just emotionalizes the issue and does nothing to get to a rational conclusion. No matter who, if anyone, is killed, there will be relatives who would be equally affected.
-
I agree with you. Begum was 15, not 5 when she chose leave the UK and join that terrorist organisation, like it or not she has to accept the consequences.
Were you fully formed intellectually at 15 with ideology firmly fixed? Actually, don't answer that, I think I know the answer and you probably were. Most of us were not completely.
It's not surprising that you and Ippy are on the same page with this issue but there are probably other posters who either agree with you or are unsure but not sufficiently invested to want to discuss it.
Shamima Begum was not surprised about having her citizenship evoked a year ago and said her world fell apart at that. It's something I find difficult to come to terms with when there are so many who have done worse but remain British. However it is what it is at the moment.
I'm surprised Amnesty aren't doing more to support her. All I can find is this from a year ago:-
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/uk-revoking-shamima-begums-british-citizenship-legally-and-morally-questionable
-
Were you fully formed intellectually at 15 with ideology firmly fixed? Actually, don't answer that, I think I know the answer and you probably were. Most of us were not completely.
It's not surprising that you and Ippy are on the same page with this issue but there are probably other posters who either agree with you or are unsure but not sufficiently invested to want to discuss it.
Shamima Begum was not surprised about having her citizenship evoked a year ago and said her world fell apart at that. It's something I find difficult to come to terms with when there are so many who have done worse but remain British. However it is what it is at the moment.
I'm surprised Amnesty aren't doing more to support her. All I can find is this from a year ago:-
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/uk-revoking-shamima-begums-british-citizenship-legally-and-morally-questionable
At the age of 15 I was expected to be responsible for my actions, and rightly so, imo.
-
Were you fully formed intellectually at 15 with ideology firmly fixed? Actually, don't answer that, I think I know the answer and you probably were. Most of us were not completely.
It's not surprising that you and Ippy are on the same page with this issue but there are probably other posters who either agree with you or are unsure but not sufficiently invested to want to discuss it.
Shamima Begum was not surprised about having her citizenship evoked a year ago and said her world fell apart at that. It's something I find difficult to come to terms with when there are so many who have done worse but remain British. However it is what it is at the moment.
I'm surprised Amnesty aren't doing more to support her. All I can find is this from a year ago:-
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/uk-revoking-shamima-begums-british-citizenship-legally-and-morally-questionable
It's a well known fact that children below approximately the age of seven years they're the most likely candidates for successful indoctrination, most C of E schools are for children below seven years, then look at the rather obvious examples we see here on the forum, no need to name them.
We need people that are able to clutch the nettle and look after their own first.
I can't see why amnesty shouldn't be looking after anyone they like outside of our country, that's up to them and hopefully they'll not be kidnapped and executed in some horrific way or another during the process.
If the authorities do have a brainstorm and decide to bring this woman here to the UK I hope they keep her a lot nearer to where you live Robbie than anywhere near to my place.
I'm sorry Robbie because I do see you as a genuinely decent person but you seem to me to be saying the equivalent of, 'we must be giving that ten times serial axe murder a chance to reform there's an empty protection and security support in the community house next door to me I'll keep an eye on him the poor devil', my young family of small children and all the rest of us'll be OK'.
Regards, ippy.
-
At the age of 15 I was expected to be responsible for my actions, and rightly so, imo.
Well, what do you mean by that exactly? How does it relate to the Shamima Begum case?
-
At the age of 15 I was expected to be responsible for my actions, and rightly so, imo.
That wasn't what I asked but I do understand what you are saying, it was the same for most of us and for our children, we were expected to be responsible up to a certain point at different ages. For example, at 15 I was more responsible than my 12 year old sister. Parents and school teachers would give us more responsibilities.
However the responsibilities came with guidance, we were not expected to think like 25 year olds.
I never got into any trouble and was considered to be fairly sensible and mature but I know my thinking - my passions - had different emphases to when I became an adult. Not surprising, I was at school and hadn't yet even done my 'o' levels. My experience of life and my knowledge, which I considered to be pretty good at the time, was quite different to later on because I still had a lot to learn.
That's why we have juvenile courts and young offenders institutions, the law recognises youth. It wouldn't surprise me to know that your ideas were fully formed, or nearly, at 15 though. I'm just saying it's not the same for most people.
-
It's a well known fact that children below approximately the age of seven years they're the most likely candidates for successful indoctrination, most C of E schools are for children below seven years, then look at the rather obvious examples we see here on the forum, no need to name them.
Can't see how that is relevant unless you are saying that all Muslims are indoctrinated into terrorism or supporting it?
We need people that are able to clutch the nettle and look after their own first.
I can't see why amnesty shouldn't be looking after anyone they like outside of our country, that's up to them and hopefully they'll not be kidnapped and executed in some horrific way or another during the process.
If the authorities do have a brainstorm and decide to bring this woman here to the UK I hope they keep her a lot nearer to where you live Robbie than anywhere near to my place.
It will be decided by the courts. They have already decided that it was legal to remove her citizenship, they will go on to consider whether she should be barred from re-entry on security grounds.
I'm sorry Robbie because I do see you as a genuinely decent person but you seem to me to be saying the equivalent of, 'we must be giving that ten times serial axe murder a chance to reform there's an empty protection and security support in the community house next door to me I'll keep an eye on him the poor devil', my young family of small children and all the rest of us'll be OK'.
Regards, ippy.
She is not a one time murderer let alone ten times. The murderer would of course be kept in prison as long as he was dangerous - barring govt. cutbacks or incompetence. At one time he/she would have been executed, but we found too many people were being executed when they were not, or may not, have been responsible for the crimes they were convicted of.
-
ippy:- "but you seem to me to be saying the equivalent of, 'we must be giving that ten times serial axe murder a chance to reform there's an empty protection and security support in the community house next door to me I'll keep an eye on him the poor devil', my young family of small children and all the rest of us'll be OK'. "
..........
Oh do I really. What you seem to be saying is that there is a fair comparison between Shamima Begum and a ten times serial axe murder (er).
"I can't see why amnesty shouldn't be looking after anyone they like outside of our country, that's up to them and hopefully they'll not be kidnapped and executed in some horrific way or another during the process."
Amnesty exists for anybody of any race or culture in any country. They have helped people from here and would help us and our children if necessary. At the moment they are trying to gain freedom for a British woman, a mother- Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, maybe you object to that too. I'm grateful there are neutral agencies prepared to go anywhere to fight injustice and give aid where needed (the Red Cross is an example of the latter). We don't need them right now with our stable comfortable lives but cannot be oblivious to the needs of others less fortunate. We're more than citizens of the UK, we're part of the world.
Reading what you've posted I wonder why I've bothered to even read your posts never mind respond to them. I won't from now on.
-
That wasn't what I asked but I do understand what you are saying, it was the same for most of us and for our children, we were expected to be responsible up to a certain point at different ages. For example, at 15 I was more responsible than my 12 year old sister. Parents and school teachers would give us more responsibilities.
However the responsibilities came with guidance, we were not expected to think like 25 year olds.
I never got into any trouble and was considered to be fairly sensible and mature but I know my thinking - my passions - had different emphases to when I became an adult. Not surprising, I was at school and hadn't yet even done my 'o' levels. My experience of life and my knowledge, which I considered to be pretty good at the time, was quite different to later on because I still had a lot to learn.
That's why we have juvenile courts and young offenders institutions, the law recognises youth. It wouldn't surprise me to know that your ideas were fully formed, or nearly, at 15 though. I'm just saying it's not the same for most people.
In the UK the age of criminal responsibility is 10. Begum should have known better at the age of 15, I have no sympathy whatsoever for her. Anyway we are never going to agree on this topic so I will leave it there.
-
... And you take the easy way out. Lock yourself in a little world of simple absolutes.
By all means do so. But not until you have gone to BBC Sounds and listened to all five parts of Guest House for Young Widows.
You tell us - from time to time - about your experiences with fundamental christianity. Just imagine yourself as a twelve year old, and a member of an identifiable minority ethnic group and an identifiable minority religious group, living in an environment in which a vocal section of the population, which did not share your ethnic and religious identity, continually derided and attacked these important elements of your life. And then someone comes along with messages which appear to give value to these aspects of your personal life and tell you how you can act on these values ...
-
In the UK the age of criminal responsibility is 10. Begum should have known better at the age of 15, I have no sympathy whatsoever for her. Anyway we are never going to agree on this topic so I will leave it there.
The amount of empathy and therefore sympathy one feels for anyone depends on one owns nature and experience. I myself have little sympathy with Begum.
I'm sure that most people, including the woman herself, would agree that she should have known better and that her behaviour and actions were stupid and wrong. And that she is responsible and accountable for them.
The issue is on how to deal with her fairly and to achieve the best longer term outcome.
-
In the UK the age of criminal responsibility is 10.
Ah, the "Little Englander" force is strong here!
::)
-
ippy:- "but you seem to me to be saying the equivalent of, 'we must be giving that ten times serial axe murder a chance to reform there's an empty protection and security support in the community house next door to me I'll keep an eye on him the poor devil', my young family of small children and all the rest of us'll be OK'. "
..........
Oh do I really. What you seem to be saying is that there is a fair comparison between Shamima Begum and a ten times serial axe murder (er).
"I can't see why amnesty shouldn't be looking after anyone they like outside of our country, that's up to them and hopefully they'll not be kidnapped and executed in some horrific way or another during the process."
Amnesty exists for anybody of any race or culture in any country. They have helped people from here and would help us and our children if necessary. At the moment they are trying to gain freedom for a British woman, a mother- Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, maybe you object to that too. I'm grateful there are neutral agencies prepared to go anywhere to fight injustice and give aid where needed (the Red Cross is an example of the latter). We don't need them right now with our stable comfortable lives but cannot be oblivious to the needs of others less fortunate. We're more than citizens of the UK, we're part of the world.
Reading what you've posted I wonder why I've bothered to even read your posts never mind respond to them. I won't from now on.
"I can't see why amnesty shouldn't be looking after anyone they like outside of our country, that's up to them and hopefully they'll not be kidnapped and executed in some horrific way or another during the process."
In the UK if you're among a group performing criminal acts even if you're just with the group and not the one actually performing the criminal act just by taking a part, being there with them you'll find the law will consider you to a greater or lesser extent just as guilty as the rest of that group act dependent on the evidence presented. (Nothing to do with axe murderers in general, I was using a reference to an axe murderer as an analogy).
We don't agree about having her back here in the UK, that's fair enough, we don't agree, so why, apparently, get so upset when all it is, we don't agree?
Regards, ippy.
-
Court of Appeal rules she needs to be let into UK to fight govt decision.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53427197
-
I would be more sympathetic to her cause if she had any regrets for joining that terrorist mob.
-
I would be more sympathetic to her cause if she had any regrets for joining that terrorist mob.
Which is irrelevant to the idea of legal due process.
-
I would be more sympathetic to her cause if she had any regrets for joining that terrorist mob.
She wants to come back. Sounds like she does have regrets.
Personally, I think it was a travesty that Britain revoked her citizenship rather than have to deal with the problem (if there still is one). It's also a contravention of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to deny her citizenship.
-
She wants to come back. Sounds like she does have regrets.
Personally, I think it was a travesty that Britain revoked her citizenship rather than have to deal with the problem (if there still is one). It's also a contravention of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to deny her citizenship.
Begum has regrets that she is stuck in a camp and not permitted to come back to the UK, there doesn't seem any sign of her regretting leaving in the first place and joining ISIS. However, it doesn't look as if she will permitted to come back the the UK any time soon, if ever.
-
Begum has regrets that she is stuck in a camp and not permitted to come back to the UK, there doesn't seem any sign of her regretting leaving in the first place and joining ISIS. However, it doesn't look as if she will permitted to come back the the UK any time soon, if ever.
Except for the ruling from the Court of Appeal
-
I'd say that her situation probably does require a proper review. I thought at the time that the decision to remove her UK citizenship was a knee-jerk political/populist reaction, and that the justification that she could have Bangladeshi citizenship was reaching.
She may well have a case to answer, and as this ruling indicates, her case should be heard.
-
Begum has regrets that she is stuck in a camp and not permitted to come back to the UK, there doesn't seem any sign of her regretting leaving in the first place and joining ISIS.
Your mind reading ability is impressive.
However, it doesn't look as if she will permitted to come back the the UK any time soon, if ever.
The government would have to be granted an appeal and win it to stop her from coming back to fight her case.
Theres no justification for leaving her stateless.
-
UK security comes first, if Begum comes back to the UK, still influenced by ISIS, she could commit an act of terrorism. If she does come back to have her case heard, she must be kept in a very secure unit.
-
UK security comes first, if Begum comes back to the UK, still influenced by ISIS, she could commit an act of terrorism. If she does come back to have her case heard, she must be kept in a very secure unit.
What crime(S) do you think she is accused of that would justify incarceration?
-
What crime(S) do you think she is accused of that would justify incarceration?
The fact that she is a member of ISIS, is more than enough justification, imo.
-
The fact that she is a member of ISIS, is more than enough justification, imo.
So you want the legal process to be subverted because you write 'imo'?
-
People would be screaming blue murder if Begum is permitted to come back to the country and then commits an act of terrorism. As I said previously, if it is decided to let her back into the UK to state her case she must be kept firmly under lock and key.
-
People would be screaming blue murder if Begum is permitted to come back to the country and then commits an act of terrorism. As I said previously, if it is decided to let her back into the UK to state her case she must be kept firmly under lock and key.
You're right they will, and some probably will if she does not.
I am torn but on balance thinks she should be allowed back.
She was 15, and a child when she left.
-
UK security comes first, if Begum comes back to the UK, still influenced by ISIS, she could commit an act of terrorism. If she does come back to have her case heard, she must be kept in a very secure unit.
do you know what acts of terrorism she has committed so far?
She had three children (all deceased).
This woman is not a danger.
-
do you know what acts of terrorism she has committed so far?
She had three children (all deceased).
This woman is not a danger.
You don't know that for a fact at all, she could be waiting to get back to the UK to commit an act of terrorism at the behest of her ISIS mentors.
-
You don't know that for a fact at all, she could be waiting to get back to the UK to commit an act of terrorism at the behest of her ISIS mentors.
So you want to get rid of the principle of innocent until proven guilty?
-
So you want to get rid of the principle of innocent until proven guilty?
As a member of ISIS she is guilty.
-
So you want to get rid of the principle of innocent until proven guilty?
To be fair she is guilty of joining a terrorist group that was linked to lots of horrendous crimes.
She is not completely innocent, but I think she was a child and not fully informed before she made her decision
-
You don't know that for a fact at all
I think I'm more likely to be right the you.
she could be waiting to get back to the UK to commit an act of terrorism at the behest of her ISIS mentors.
You don't know that for a fact at all.
-
As a member of ISIS she is guilty.
Not in the eyes of the law until she has stood trial.
-
To be fair she is guilty of joining a terrorist group that was linked to lots of horrendous crimes.
She is not completely innocent, but I think she was a child and not fully informed before she made her decision
She then would have to be tried for any crimes, not just locked up on the basis of what she might do. The law works on an assumption of innocence but it doesn't declare people innocent (completely or otherwise) as regards crimes, it says they are not guilty,
-
As a member of ISIS she is guilty.
That isn't how the law works. You need to have a trial. You are getting rid of that process and therefore the idea of innocent till PROVEN guilty - you sound like Trump.
-
That isn't how the law works. You need to have a trial. You are getting rid of that process and therefore the idea of innocent till PROVEN guilty - you sound like Trump.
If she comes back to the UK to stand trial it is imperative she is kept in a secure unit until it takes place. As far as I am aware she has never voiced any regrets for her decision to join ISIS.
People who are sticking up for Begum might not be so forgiving if she commits an act of terrorism, which kills or maims one of their loved ones.
-
If she comes back to the UK to stand trial it is imperative she is kept in a secure unit until it takes place. As far as I am aware she has never voiced any regrets for her decision to join ISIS.
People who are sticking up for Begum might not be so forgiving if she commits an act of terrorism, which kills or maims one of their loved ones.
While currently the court has ruled that she should be brought back to appeal a ministerial decision about her citizenship status. It isn't clear that there is a criminal case to answer, If she comes back and there are no criminal charges, and it's the citizenship cases, then locking her up would be an abuse of the criminal justice system.
I'm not sticking up for her, I'm sticking up for treating het with due legal process. People who want to subvert that because of their 'opinion' are very scary.
As the quote from A Man for All Seasons goes:
“William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”
Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”
William Roper: “Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!”
Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!”
-
If she comes back to the UK to stand trial it is imperative she is kept in a secure unit until it takes place. As far as I am aware she has never voiced any regrets for her decision to join ISIS.
Nor has she voiced any desire to commit terrorist atrocities in the UK. Even in Syria, she did not, as far as I now, commit any atrocities, she just had babies for ISIS.
People who are sticking up for Begum might not be so forgiving if she commits an act of terrorism, which kills or maims one of their loved ones.
You could say that about anybody who goes on to commit a violent act. If you or a loved one ever gets into trouble with the law, you'll be very glad of the presumption of innocence and due process.
-
I have had my say and won't discuss it again, until we know what is going to happen next.
-
I have had my say and won't discuss it again, until we know what is going to happen next.
It must be very comforting for you to be able to venture around the world with your mind firmly shut.
See if the radio adaptation of guest House for Young Widows is still available on BBC Sounds - but try listening to it and not throw objects at the loudspeaker because its message does not correspond with your entrenched world view. You might learn something.
Shamima Begum did not join ISIS to be a terrorist - she joined to be a baby factory (and thus also to be abused).
British intelligence organisations were well aware of her before she and her companions left the country but did nothing to stop her. Nor did they inform her teachers and parents of her intentions. There was every opportunity to stop her at the airport departure gate.
Of course, if she comes back to the UK, she should be segregated from society - but the opportunity should be taken to de-programme her. Because of its earlier failings the British state owes her at least that.
-
So a 15 year old British citizen (maybe) joins ISIS (yet to be tried in a court of law) and loses her citizenship so is stateless.
There may be isolated instances, but I can't think of any other group of terrorists who lose their citizenship, including convicted IRA bombers.
I think we absolutly should give this person the right to a fair hearing and a trial if deemed in the public interest, in this country.
-
This
https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/19/britain-can-no-longer-shirk-its-responsibility-for-shamima-begum?__twitter_impression=true
-
You're right they will, and some probably will if she does not.
I am torn but on balance thinks she should be allowed back.
She was 15, and a child when she left.
Agree BeRash. She suffered so much. What may have seemed like an adventure to a 15 year old turned into a nightmare.
-
My gut says leave her there, but I think fair play and compassion says let her back even though I'm sure she and her offspring will more than likely be a permanent drain on our resources.
ippy
-
She has no offspring. She produced three babies when employed as a baby factory. All three have died.
For this alone she deserves your compassion.
-
Agreed H. I hope she is afforded some anonymity on her return.
-
Agreed H. I hope she is afforded some anonymity on her return.
Difficult. She has a quite striking, distinctive face, and will probably be recognised. i suppose she could wear a niqab.
-
Frank Gardener looking at this and more generalized questions. Interesting point at the end about the Kurds.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-53428928
-
If this is the interview talked about Shamima Begum doesn't come across as smug to me. She is more articulate than I'd imagined but quite nervous:-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47276572
I also don't think she is especially distinctive looking, would blend in and back in UK, make up & different clothes would change her appearance. Theres no need to keep taking photos of her either, we'd soon forget how she looked.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56209007
Begum has been refused permission to come back to the UK.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56209007
Begum has been refused permission to come back to the UK.
I think the government needs to show some humanity here.
-
That woman could be a danger if she returns to the UK. >:(
-
That woman could be a danger if she returns to the UK. >:(
She was only 15, for heaven's sake, and hasn't committed any terrorist outrages herself. She appears to be penitent. How about showing a bit of tolerance for once?
-
She was only 15, for heaven's sake, and hasn't committed any terrorist outrages herself. She appears to be penitent. How about showing a bit of tolerance for once?
She is not child any longer, what evidence is there that woman has shown any penitence for her actions? If she committed a terrorist attack there would be an outcry that she was give leave to return to the UK. Far better safe than sorry, imo.
-
The UK govt is very keen on deporting criminals to their country of origin. Seems a bit inconsistent.
-
She is not child any longer, what evidence is there that woman has shown any penitence for her actions? If she committed a terrorist attack there would be an outcry that she was give leave to return to the UK. Far better safe than sorry, imo.
You inflict a succession of glutinously sentimental, self-penned signatures on us, but in the final analysis you are hard-hearted and intolerant. We see it in many of your posts: everything you approve of should be compulsory, everything you disapprove of should be banned. You should try practising your current signature.
-
You inflict a succession of glutinously sentimental, self-penned signatures on us, but in the final analysis you are hard-hearted and intolerant. We see it in many of your posts: everything you approve of should be compulsory, everything you disapprove of should be banned. You should try practising your current signature.
YAWN! ::)
-
YAWN! ::)
Except it is not a YAWN as you put it in your elegant way of debating.
It's an important point. If we are not able to show tolerance and yes even mercy, we surely become no better than those we choose to criticise.
-
Except it is not a YAWN as you put it in your elegant way of debating.
It's an important point. If we are not able to show tolerance and yes even mercy, we surely become no better than those we choose to criticise.
We have shown tolerance to other members of IS and it has been a HUGE mistake.
-
We have shown tolerance to other members of IS and it has been a HUGE mistake.
I'm sure you can back up that statement with specific examples.
-
I'm sure you can back up that statement with specific examples.
The November 2015 attackers in Paris were returned ISIS fighters.
What and/or who is to say that this situation is not going to be repeated here? Is the risk of UK residents being murdered by returning ISIS fighters acceptable?
Unless the chance of such attacks is ZERO per cent it is unacceptable in my opinion; especially having a close relative who is a copper and thus a likely target for such an attack!
Owlswing
)O(
-
The November 2015 attackers in Paris were returned ISIS fighters.
What and/or who is to say that this situation is not going to be repeated here? Is the risk of UK residents being murdered by returning ISIS fighters acceptable?
Unless the chance of such attacks is ZERO per cent it is unacceptable in my opinion; especially having a close relative who is a coper and thus a likely target for such an attack!
Owlswing
)O(
Good post.
-
I'm sorry she is not allowed back home & is stateless. She was just a school kid when she went off & believe she should be forgiven. I wonder if the decisision is irrevocable.
-
I'm sorry she is not allowed back home & is stateless. She was just a school kid when she went off & believe she should be forgiven. I wonder if the decision is irrevocable.
I agree with your comments, but she went knowing full well the kinds of atrocities that the people she was joining were perpetrating upon anyone who disagreed with them She must thus have agreed with the inflicting of those atrocities, teenager, schoolkid or whatever she might have been, she cannot have been unaware of the position in which ISIS was held by the Western World and its populations.
I am sorry, but she was perfectly happy to go, let her take the consequences of her actions, as we all have to, a harsh lesson in life - at least she has managed to stay alive, many of those she joined and was living with are not!
Owlswing
)O(
-
I agree with your comments, but she went knowing full well the kinds of atrocities that the people she was joining were perpetrating upon anyone who disagreed with them She must thus have agreed with the inflicting of those atrocities, teenager, schoolkid or whatever she might have been, she cannot have been unaware of the position in which ISIS was held by the Western World and its populations.
I am sorry, but she was perfectly happy to go, let her take the consequences of her actions, as we all have to, a harsh lesson in life - at least she has managed to stay alive, many of those she joined and was living with are not!
Owlswing
)O(
You start off agreeing with Robbie's comments and then assert the complete opposite!
-
This is such a difficult issue and I do understand all points of view but can you remember how strongly felt and ho easily influenced you were at 15? Since then she has given birth and lost three infants, she was found in a camp a couple of years ago. She was really no more than a groomed child when she went away. Imagine if she was one of our daughters.
I'm sure her family here would keep a good eye on her (or two at least), they don't want to lose her again and she could have helpful information.
-
When I heard this my first thought was whether Patel had greased the palm of the Supreme Court. But am I right in thinking that this is still not the final situation?
She should be re-admitted to the UK, and supervised and mentored with the intention of (a) understanding the method and extent of her original indoctrination (b) assessing the affect that her experiences have had on the development of her current understanding and attitudes and (c) exploring opportunities to get her to evaluate her experiences and to re-orient her.
I would still like to know why she was permitted to leave the country.
-
She is not child any longer, what evidence is there that woman has shown any penitence for her actions? If she committed a terrorist attack there would be an outcry that she was give leave to return to the UK. Far better safe than sorry, imo.
She is British. We need to take responsibility for British people no matter how bad they are. Not the I think she's a danger anymore. It's inhumane to leave her in a camp in Syria.
-
I'm sorry she is not allowed back home & is stateless. She was just a school kid when she went off & believe she should be forgiven. I wonder if the decisision is irrevocable.
It's only a decision that means she can't come here to fight her appeal against the withdrawal of her citizenship. If she wins her appeal, she can come home.
Incidentally, she was born and raised in Bethnal Green. Where is she supposed to go if she can't come back here?
-
Am I alone in not understanding this? She made her decision at the age of 15 – terrible though it was when she made it in the eyes of the law she was below the age of legal responsibility (which is 16). Why then are the courts treating her now as if she's legally responsible for her decision when she made it?
-
Am I alone in not understanding this? She made her decision at the age of 15 – terrible though it was when she made it in the eyes of the law she was below the age of legal responsibility (which is 16). Why then are the courts treating her now as if she's legally responsible for her decision when she made it?
Criminal responsibility is 10 in England but I think that os irrelevant to this decision which is about whether she has to be here for her appeal against the govt's decision. It doesn't mean that the appeal can't be heard.
-
NS,
Criminal responsibility is 10 in England but I think that os irrelevant to this decision which is about whether she has to be here for her appeal against the govt's decision. It doesn't mean that the appeal can't be heard.
OK, thanks. I googled “age of criminal responsibility” and got this from a Guardian article:
“The age of criminal responsibility is 16, though children aged 12 and over can be considered to have committed crimes. Children under 12 are considered incapable of breaking the law, and are treated as victims, not offenders, if they do something that would be considered a crime for someone older.”
Having now read the article though, I see that this part refers specifically to Portugal rather than to the UK. Notwithstanding, she still made a terrible life choice at an age in which people in the UK are not considered capable of making all sorts of informed decisions, and it’s not at all clear that she had much control over her “choices” once she got there. It’s the govt’s decision itself I was thinking of rather than where her appeal should be heard – I fail to see how “you made a bad decision at age 15 on the basis of which we can bar you from returning” is ok when if, say, instead she’d got married at 15 by lying about her age the marriage would (presumably) automatically be deemed invalid.