The question is that you (and some anonymous gov employee somewhere) say she's a wrongun and we should kick her out of society, so why don't we do that to everyone accused of a crime and save the money we spend on trials and imprisoning people?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Shamima Begum
- Thread starter SuperstarNeilC
- Start date
The question is that you (and some anonymous gov employee somewhere) say she's a wrongun and we should kick her out of society, so why don't we do that to everyone accused of a crime and save the money we spend on trials and imprisoning people?
meeesh
Well-Known Member
The question is that you (and some anonymous gov employee somewhere) say she's a wrongun and we should kick her out of society, so why don't we do that to everyone accused of a crime and save the money we spend on trials and imprisoning people?
Was her choice to leave in the first place wasn't it ?
Let's get that base covered first
LangleyBlue1970
Well-Known Member
The point also is that we do remove criminals from society by banging them up for however long a judge determines suits that particular crime.The point is that you (and some anonymous gov employee somewhere) say she's a wrongun and we should kick her out of society. So why don't we do that to everyone accused of a crime and save the money we spend on trials and imprisoning people?
This person removed herself from our society to go and learn how to prepare suicide vests, how to behead and how to be an all-round dangerous piece of shit. And now she wants to return to our society with all that knowledge in her head?
She’s been told no. Rightly so.
The blue phantom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2015
- Messages
- 9,592
Yea,if I didn't kill them myself first.
All about upbringing my friend,there are a lot of as I call them politely shit heads,and a lot who know right from wrong,and behave in a proper manner,which in this fucked up world we all live in,is very rare unfortunately.
Now this person has not,as far as we know,killed anyone,but seemed to be very interested in the thought process that is behind it,so ventured afar to see through their own eyes what is was about.
Very strange thing to do,but as I say each to their own,as I say a fucked up world we live in,but now to want to come back here,I'd say it's a risk the authorities are not prepared to take,and can't fault them really.
You know something,the majority of men or women in the street in the UK upon seeing this news today,either on their phone,as it pinged earlier,or later when they see the news on tv,are all gonna say one simple word- GOOD
Personally Meeesh I think you'd stick by your children whatever they did and however horrendous the act was. That's why I brought the question up. Regarding Shammina she should still face our courts and my gripe is why should someone else have to look after her for years just because of the Mouth foamers over here.
Was her choice to leave in the first place wasn't it ?
Let's get that base covered first
Well that's debateable in and of itself.
She was a child, she was trafficked by an international terrorist group that had a very well organised system of grooming adolescent girls.
Under UK law she would be classed as a victim of sexual exploitation and forced marriage.
Last edited:
The point also is that we do remove criminals from society by banging them up for however long a judge determines suits that particular crime.
Yes. We do it after they've been given a fair trial and sentenced by a jury of their peers.
We don't do it on the political whim of a Home Secretary who allowed dozens of others who did exactly the same thing or worse to come home and face the justice system.
LangleyBlue1970
Well-Known Member
A whim.Yes. We do it after they've been given a fair trial and sentenced by a jury of their peers.
We don't do it on the political whim of a Home Secretary who allowed dozens of others who did exactly the same thing or worse to come home and face the justice system.
Ffs.
kaz7
Well-Known Member
The home office know what she did and we dont, the decision is correct in that case, she has duel citizinship so she is not stateless at all
meeesh
Well-Known Member
Personally Meeesh I think you'd stick by your children whatever they did and however horrendous the act was. That's why I brought the question up. Regarding Shammina she should still face our courts and my gripe is why should someone else have to look after her for years just because of the Mouth foamers over here.
Fair enough
A whim.
Ffs.
Yes. The only reason Shamima Begum is not in the UK right now is because a reporter found her in a refugee camp and the story went viral, at which point Sajid Javid fancied looking tough on crime. IIRC from last time this popped up, 20+ people who'd done the same thing had been allowed reentry to the UK under Javid.
The home office know what she did and we dont, the decision is correct in that case, she has duel citizinship so she is not stateless at all
She does not have dual citizenship. That is simply not true.
LangleyBlue1970
Well-Known Member
Kaz is right though, they will have far more info than has been let on. That doesn’t assist us in this debate I guess so it’s just about opinions on here.Yes. The only reason Shamima Begum is not in the UK right now is because a reporter found her in a refugee camp and the story went viral, at which point Sajid Javid fancied looking tough on crime. IIRC from last time this popped up, 20+ people who'd done the same thing had been allowed reentry to the UK under Javid.
I trust they’ve done the correct thing.
Johnny Mars Bar
Well-Known Member
Good.
All this dressing up in western clothing and acting like the poor victim routine doesn't wash for a second.
She knew what she was doing then, and knows what she's doing now.
All this dressing up in western clothing and acting like the poor victim routine doesn't wash for a second.
She knew what she was doing then, and knows what she's doing now.
manclad
Well-Known Member
I've never felt the need to join a banned terrorist organisation so I've never felt my human rights have been infringed.What logic? It's a secret court decision based on an opinion by a secret and anonymous civil servant.
You're celebrating the idea that your citizenship can be stripped and you've no recourse to face your accuser or even what you're accused of.
She deserves all the shit that is being flung in her direction.
I'm sure that all the aid workers ( who were there voluntarily to give aid and help) would have liked their rights to have been observed by her and her evil cohorts .
They got their heads chopped off instead.
Kaz is right though, they will have far more info than has been let on. That doesn’t assist us in this debate I guess so it’s just about opinions on here.
I trust they’ve done the correct thing.
Kaz is literally wrong (she doesn't have dual citizenship) and it doesnt' matter if the home office know more, being denied your civil rights because a secret court hears secret evidende that you're not privy too, from a secret gov employee with zero oversight is not any kind of justice in a democratic country.
TinFoilHat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Jan 2023
- Messages
- 38,563
- Team supported
- Manchester City
She made a mistake as a naive child thinking she was an adult who could make adult decisions.
It has bitten her on the arse and it's a harsh lesson she has to learn from it.
I'm a soft fucker and would have given her a second chance to see if he had. Good job I'm not a judge eh.
A nice easy win for Cruella to use in her parties culture war.
It has bitten her on the arse and it's a harsh lesson she has to learn from it.
I'm a soft fucker and would have given her a second chance to see if he had. Good job I'm not a judge eh.
A nice easy win for Cruella to use in her parties culture war.
LangleyBlue1970
Well-Known Member
Ah well. Should the inevitable appeal be successful, I hope we are all safe from the psychotic ideas that swirl around her head.Kaz is literally wrong (she doesn't have dual citizenship) and it doesnt' matter if the home office know more, being denied your civil rights because a secret court hears secret evidende that you're not privy too, from a secret gov employee with zero oversight is not any kind of justice in a democratic country.
kaz7
Well-Known Member
She does and has somewhere to go, forget whereShe does not have dual citizenship. That is simply not true.
Cellarite
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 26,777
- Team supported
- Manchester City
My Uncle Alan being one of them.I've never felt the need to join a banned terrorist organisation so I've never felt my human rights have been infringed.
She deserves all the shit that is being flung in her direction.
I'm sure that all the aid workers ( who were there voluntarily to give aid and help) would have liked their rights to have been observed by her and her evil cohorts .
They got their heads chopped off instead.
The bitch made her decision, then years later thought she was being interesting by saying she saw heads in bins and didn't feel a single emotion. Well enjoy your prolonged adventure you evil bastard.
The blue phantom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2015
- Messages
- 9,592
Apparently Bangladesh where she's never visited in her lifeShe does and has somewhere to go, forget where