Shamima Begum

She, as far as I am aware, is British. The law should always preside so she should we dealt with under British law in Britain evaluating all the evidence both factual etc. Emotion should not interfere.
Spot on. She was born in Tower Hamlets and was a British citizen until her citizenship was revoked. She should have been tried under British law. I do not know what she could be tried for - joining ISIS, I guess.
 
No. It was illegally removed to get votes. I don't like her at all but she is British.
This has been the premise of my points in this thread.
I believe that she has not received justice because of her race and religion, and that there was a political motive for that. To me, that is a fundamental breach of the nation's values. Whichever side of the political divide you sit, I cannot see how that is not absolutely clear.
 
This has been the premise of my points in this thread.
I believe that she has not received justice because of her race and religion, and that there was a political motive for that. To me, that is a fundamental breach of the nation's values. Whichever side of the political divide you sit, I cannot see how that is not absolutely clear.
It's called the law.
 
This has been the premise of my points in this thread.
I believe that she has not received justice because of her race and religion, and that there was a political motive for that. To me, that is a fundamental breach of the nation's values. Whichever side of the political divide you sit, I cannot see how that is not absolutely clear.
No mention of Two Tier Kier, for whatever reason, despite many others being able to return from doing exactly what she did.

Political grandstanding used as red meat to populists.
 
No mention of Two Tier Kier, for whatever reason, despite many others being able to return from doing exactly what she did.

Political grandstanding used as red meat to populists.
Yep. Politics ahead of the law and morality.
The Supreme Court backed the UK's government decision and declared it to be lawful.
I hope that the ECHR draws attention to the matter once more because it does not feel that a groomed 15 year old has received the right treatment here, IMO.
 
Last edited:

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top