Shamima Begum

On the grounds that it was illegal to strip someone of their citizenship thus leaving them stateless. That can only be done to someone holding dual citizenship of two countries. That is what the appeal lodged on her behalf is intended to test.
 
Last edited:
Be interesting to see the cost of protecting her once she’s here.

Where is she now? And how would she even get back to the UK? Last I heard she was in a camp in Syria. Which has no diplomatic ties to the UK.

Surely someone would have to assist her in making the journey back here. In that case would they run the risk of aiding a terrorist?

as this is a special case would it not be wiser to hear her arguments for loss of citizenship remotely from the nearest embassy?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Double edged sword.

She wins...She stays in this country.
She loses....She stays in this country...because where are we going to deport her to?

And she should be denied or given a limit on any form of UK legal aid because this just allows (high priced) lawyers to argue the case non stop and charge £2k to send a letter to the government and £30k for photo copier paper (that's a joke...but you get my meaning)
 
Give her fuck all.
No legal support, no benefits.
She knew EXACTLY what she was doing when joining a TERRORIST organisation.
They lost their territory in Syria so now she wants to come "home".
When she gets here ( and I hope we aren't paying) she should be treated like a TERRORIST.
 
B_Side_The_C_Side said:
And she should be denied or given a limit on any form of UK legal aid because this just allows (high priced) lawyers to argue the case non stop and charge £2k to send a letter to the government and £30k for photo copier paper (that's a joke...but you get my meaning)
Click to expand...

I expect her appeal costs are already in the hundreds of thousands and rising. The barristers are one sector which always comes out smelling of roses.
 
Her barristers might be having to do this “pro bono”, i.e. for free, at the moment. Unless and until she wins and costs are awarded. There are a few decent lawyers, you know.
 
Once she returns here it doesn't matter what the court decides. Unless they can find a country that welcomes terrorists' wives with open arms she isn't going anywhere.
 
This case could be the tip of the iceberg, as over 900 Brits travelled abroad to join ISIS although it is estimated half have already returned, several hundred killed, there still remains several hundred who have possibly had citizenship removed that we do not know about. If the appeal by Ms Begum is successful then that could lead to many others appealing also.
I am surprised with today's modern technology her appeal cannot be done from Syria, because as has been said, if she fails then she cannot be deported, she would be effectively stateless.
 
regardless of the legal ins and outs, with everyone using zoom to video conference i fail to see why she needs to be physically in the uk to appeal..

I'd be all for sending the SAS in to the camps to quietly dispose of her and the others waiting to piggy back onto this decision...
 
basilrobbie said:
She should be denied the chance to argue her case because ....? Why?

You're full of how great we are, but you don't like it when the Court of Appeal does the right thing?
Click to expand...
Because it’s NOT the right thing. End of discussion.
 
It should be made clear that if she does come back to the UK it will be down to her family to fund her return and her legal costs. It should also be made known that if she wins her appeal to stay in the UK then she will be charged under terrorism offences and will then be subject to prison. Hopefully put her off the whole thing.
 
None of the objectors seem to be concerned that a 15 year old girl was groomed by extremists. Double standards at work again when the victim is not white.
 
20togo said:
Yep, you make a good point. It's wrong that extremists are influencing our young kids. Double standards indeed.
Click to expand...
As someone who is not an extremist, just someone with a social conscience I am glad we can agree about something. Dislike of Tory policies which deliberately drive people into poverty and victimize the poor and disabled is not extremism.
 
Goldfinger said:
Give her fuck all.
No legal support, no benefits.
She knew EXACTLY what she was doing when joining a TERRORIST organisation.
They lost their territory in Syria so now she wants to come "home".
When she gets here ( and I hope we aren't paying) she should be treated like a TERRORIST.
Click to expand...
I fully understand your anger. However she was at the time of joining Islamic State - and still is - a child. Society rightly has different standards of judging children in the decisions they make.
 
Jefflynnessongsheet said:
The only reason this bitch should be allowed in our nation is to be put to death! She was wholly complicent in terrorist activity and murder of innocents and should be treated as an enemy of our nation.
Our Supreme Court are nothing more than Blairs puppets and he is a war criminal responsible for thousands of innocent lives, including our own military. What else could we expect from them.
The current government should show some balls and must disband the Supreme Court as it is not fit for purpose!
Click to expand...
Like I said little Tommy fans and sharia law. Comedy gold
 
Jefflynnessongsheet said:
The only reason this bitch should be allowed in our nation is to be put to death! She was wholly complicent in terrorist activity and murder of innocents and should be treated as an enemy of our nation.
Our Supreme Court are nothing more than Blairs puppets and he is a war criminal responsible for thousands of innocent lives, including our own military. What else could we expect from them.
The current government should show some balls and must disband the Supreme Court as it is not fit for purpose!
Click to expand...
You do know the Supreme Court is pretty much the same as its predecessor don’t you? The Judicial wing of the House of Lords. It was just a name change or a change of branding if you’re into Marketing.

You really shouldn’t believe everything you read on the dubious websites you clearly frequent.
 
basilrobbie said:
They've only granted her the right to be present for her case being put. It's not like they've given her an apartment in Buck House.

You're quite the closet Nazi when it comes to the rights of people you don't like, aren't you?
Click to expand...
Now now. He’s just a Silly Sausage with anger issues.

Nothing that a bit of therapy and stronger meds can’t sort.
 
basilrobbie said:
They've only granted her the right to be present for her case being put. It's not like they've given her an apartment in Buck House.

You're quite the closet Nazi when it comes to the rights of people you don't like, aren't you?
Click to expand...
Absolutely not, she’s the Nazi not me. I care about innocent law abiding citizens. Not pure garbage. Leave her to rot in whatever hell hole she residing. I presume you won’t be offering her a room at your place ? No thought not.
 
Jefflynnessongsheet said:
The only reason this bitch should be allowed in our nation is to be put to death! She was wholly complicent in terrorist activity and murder of innocents and should be treated as an enemy of our nation.
Our Supreme Court are nothing more than Blairs puppets and he is a war criminal responsible for thousands of innocent lives, including our own military. What else could we expect from them.
The current government should show some balls and must disband the Supreme Court as it is not fit for purpose!
Click to expand...
20s. This is what a real hate filled extremist posts. No regard for the law or letting justice take its course. That said I happen to agree with him that Blair is a war criminal but nothing else.
 
Scaramanga said:
Absolutely not, she’s the Nazi not me. I care about innocent law abiding citizens. Not pure garbage. Leave her to rot in whatever hell hole she residing. I presume you won’t be offering her a room at your place ? No thought not.
Click to expand...
You celebrate 'law-abiding' people on the one hand whilst also posting that a decision made in law by the Court of Appeal is not right. Then you decide that no further discussion on the matter is permitted. Which is right: abiding by the law or abiding by the laws of which you approve, with no room for discussion?
 
Scaramanga said:
Absolutely not, she’s the Nazi not me. I care about innocent law abiding citizens. Not pure garbage. Leave her to rot in whatever hell hole she residing. I presume you won’t be offering her a room at your place ? No thought not.
Click to expand...
"Offering a room at your place"
"these days you get locked up in jail for being English"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Scaramanga said:
Absolutely not, she’s the Nazi not me. I care about innocent law abiding citizens. Not pure garbage. Leave her to rot in whatever hell hole she residing. I presume you won’t be offering her a room at your place ? No thought not.
Click to expand...

I won't be offering her a room at yours, that's for sure. I have some compassion. 😀

I hold no brief for this wretched woman. But when she eventually gets the justice she deserves, I don't want there to be any scope for complaint that due process wasn't scrupulously followed, and the rule of law upheld. We are not only better than that, we should be seen to be.

I doubt you'll understand that, but some of us care about these things.
 
yeah let her have her say and if she is found guilty of being a member of a terrorist organisation, let's throw the book at her.
She should be in no doubt that she'll get a fair hearing whereas the organisation's idea of justice that she went to join was to behead people and publish it for the world to see. Of which no doubt she approved.
All's fair in love and war but that's not really true is it when it comes to terrorist organisations?
 
Someone that age ending up with views like that and acting on them has clearly been brainwashed. I have no problem in her coming home and explaining herself. The problem is when they get put away for a few years, come out again, and end up causing further atrocities. I can see why the government want to keep her out and hold a harder line. Like everything, it’s the judges that have the final say.
 
I have sympathy for her because of her age, and the possibility she may have been groomed.
If she has let the courts decide and yes if she has then the Islamic groomers in this instance, if proven guilty, are a disgrace and just as abhorrent as any groomers.
Don’t really see anybody disagreeing with that on this thread. It’s not rocket science.
 
Lala said:
I have sympathy for her because of her age, and the possibility she may have been groomed.
If she has let the courts decide and yes if she has then the Islamic groomers in this instance, if proven guilty, are a disgrace and just as abhorrent as any groomers.
Don’t really see anybody disagreeing with that on this thread. It’s not rocket science.
Click to expand...
Just thinking how I can pick on you tonight 🤔🤣
 
1966_and_all_that said:
You celebrate 'law-abiding' people on the one hand whilst also posting that a decision made in law by the Court of Appeal is not right. Then you decide that no further discussion on the matter is permitted. Which is right: abiding by the law or abiding by the laws of which you approve, with no room for discussion?
Click to expand...
Were discussing it are we not ? Or rather you are being self righteous and I’m a nazi. Which is it ?
 
basilrobbie said:
I won't be offering her a room at yours, that's for sure. I have some compassion. 😀

I hold no brief for this wretched woman. But when she eventually gets the justice she deserves, I don't want there to be any scope for complaint that due process wasn't scrupulously followed, and the rule of law upheld. We are not only better than that, we should be seen to be.

I doubt you'll understand that, but some of us care about these things.
Click to expand...
I understand compassion, however I’ll show her the same compassion she showed so many innocent people. Absolutely nowt.
 
I think a lot of this is tainted by what exactly “justice” for her would be.

Again I imagine she’d have to have a plethora of extras in place to keep her safe in the prison system, which if we re all honest isn’t fit for purpose.
The prison system also has a big problem with Islamic radicalism, a less than ideal scenario in any form of justice for her.

This really is a nuanced situation, I don’t think you can find the correct outcome by taking either absolute position that she must or mustn’t come back to the UK. That is if there is a correct outcome in this situation.
 
recalcitrant?

Pot and kettle there my Marxist friend. Seems you approved of the BLM marches, despite social distancing, seems you attempted to justify the violence and vandalism on those marches trying to blame everyone but those responsible. I'm not sure you're some-one who can lecture me on respect for authority and discipline.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top