I hear what you're saying and there's no easy answer to this question as she was a child in the eyes of the law when she was "taken?"... For some reason this reminds me of Blair and the "trust me they're there..." With her it's trust us she's a terrorist - but maybe not one who would be convicted in a UK Court.
“ a child” able to negotiate airports and crossing the Turkey/ Syrian border! “taken” have you not seen the photos of them passing through the airports alone?
That is why it is imperative that she doesn't return and rots in her own version of hell. Even the slightest risk of her still practising what was preached to her and becoming an icon and standard bearer to disaffected hijab wearing teens, fills me with fear for my nearest and dearest
There are more than enough sh**-stirring foreigners in the UK. One of the main reasons our once-proud country, full of people pulling in the same direction is going down the plughole. Just makes me sad, and helpless. Happy to stay here in the Philippines now.
She is/was old enough as proved by her actions, we all make decisions throughout our lives and we have to live with those choices, she is no different, widening the topic out a little, it is almost certain that some of the people arriving on these shores by boat will have terrorist tendencies and they will probably impact here in the years to come..
had she mudered someone in Britain--and done a runner---she could have been extradicted to stand trial here. what is she charged with ?
I think she was only 15 when she went... what isn't clear is whether she was trafficked... if she was, they have no option but to let her back in. If she wasn't trafficked it's still a tricky one for me because at that age children make mistakes... should she be punished for life for a mistake she made when she was a child ? Did she actually kill anyone or did she basically just get in with the wrong crowd or meet someone online that she fell for ? On her eighteenth birthday was she in a position to walk away? i.e. pop down to Gatwick and just jump on a plane back home etc. without being challenged or punished in some way... I doubt it. I'm getting ff'd off with governments picking the low-hanging fruit, like our foreign spouses, just to make it look as if they're in control and doing something to appease the masses etc. Strikes me this just another example of it.
You will have a vote come November when the next election is forecast so need to use it. Cant disagree with you on the low lying fruit being used but until they know there is a penalty for it they will continue for the political wins and headlines. Begum isnt a sympathetic case and there are definite questions over exactly what she did and definite risks to taking her back. To many political loses to taking her back for a party that wants to appear tough on issues but really doesnt sort them. Her own stupidity has got herself in this mess and has suffered loss of three children which is the real tragedy. That said morally I think she is our responsibility to deal with and shouldnt have abdicated responsibility for dealing with her. She was born and brought up here so she is our failure. Likewise she should fear coming back here and it shouldnt be a soft option.
Agreed. Nobody wants to give the girl an OBE or 4 bed council house in Kensington. The SAS shouldn't be sent in to repatriate her. But when the time comes that Syria forcibly deports her, we should take her back and introduce her to a cell in prison. If Rikki Neave's murderer who was 13 when he committed the crime can be sentenced to life when he was convicted many years later after the event as an adult, so can Shamima. The Home Office wouldn't dared have stripped Shamima of her citizenship if her fallback option was US citizenship instead of Bangladeshi. Neither would they have stripped an ordinary white guy such as me of my citizenship when I can fall back on Irish citizenship. Even though it may have done lawfully, it has also been done cowardly in that the Home Office will pretend not to notice Bangladesh's protests. The final resolution will probably be a multi million pound "international aid" donation to Bangladesh in order to convince them to accept the girl.
Javid in his role as home secretary has charged her as a threat to national security (dont think that is an actual crime in law but that is a separate issue) tried her in his office without a defence, convicted her in his role as jury, judged her and scentanced her to loss of citizenship, banishment and death if manages to get to Bangladesh and claim the citizenship he believes she is entitled to. That is his right under the law and appeals to the courts are pointless as long as he considered the impact of his decisions which he apparently did. Anyone who doesnt like it should remember the powers of the home secretary as can happen to you if he believes you can get or have another citizenship. Helps that she isnt a poster child and political points for the decision.
On a separate issue were you born in Northern Ireland as noted your comment that can fall back on Irish citizenship? Just checking as may still be able to access the EU settlement scheme.
