Shamima Begum

[west didsblue]

We are following the system though, like I said I think she may well end up here. But you can't have it both ways and say we must follow the legalities until you disagree with someone in that process.

BTW every country play fast and loose with international obligations and my main disagreement is those that bleat she was some dopey kid and was somehow conned into being an evil little shit.
We can argue forever and a day but if she were never to return I wouldn't lose a wink.

There are far more deserving people we should be concerned about rather than this turd that we can't flush.

I don’t think many are particularly concerned about the unflushable turd. More the fact that we are attempting to offload our responsibilities to a third country that has only a very tenuous connection to her. It might be technically legal in terms of UK law but it’s hardly a great example of conducting international relations.

Offshoring our responsibilities seems to be a theme with this government. At least with the Rwanda farce they’ve been consulted.

 

[hilts]

I don’t think many are particularly concerned about the unflushable turd. More the fact that we are attempting to offload our responsibilities to a third country that has only a very tenuous connection to her. It might be technically legal in terms of UK law but it’s hardly a great example of conducting international relations.

Offshoring our responsibilities seems to be a theme with this government. At least with the Rwanda farce they’ve been consulted.

The Rwanda scheme is another debate but I agree its farcical.

I'm glad you agree it's going through a legal process which debunks plenty of posts we have seen so far from the highly gullible.

I'm also certain the international community aren't giving a single fuck. The one thing all sane people are aware of is countries will deal with any fucker if its in their interest.


China
Russia
Israel...........















Country not keen on terrorist sympathiser being in the country.




The only thing this will cost us is money. If she never returns we may have saved lives but we will never know.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

The Rwanda scheme is another debate but I agree its farcical.

I'm glad you agree it's going through a legal process which debunks plenty of posts we have seen so far from the highly gullible.

I'm also certain the international community aren't giving a single fuck. The one thing all sane people are aware of is countries will deal with any fucker if its in their interest.


China
Russia
Israel...........















Country not keen on terrorist sympathiser being in the country.




The only thing this will cost us is money. If she never returns we may have saved lives but we will never know.

It‘s a debate that comes down to accepting our responsibilities as a country and upholding our laws to our citizens versus people that just don’t want her back and are willing to ignore the methodology because they get their want.

I wonder if the same would happen if Grealish did something awful abroad and we Cleverley decided he was now Ireland’s problem.

It‘s not quite the same as he actually has dual citizenship, but still, I guess you can see the point.

 

[hilts]

It‘s a debate that comes down to accepting our responsibilities as a country and upholding our laws to our citizens versus people that just don’t want her back and are willing to ignore the methodology because they get their want.

I wonder if the same would happen if Grealish did something awful abroad and we Cleverley decided he was now Ireland’s problem.

It‘s not quite the same as he actually has dual citizenship, but still, I guess you can see the point.

Like I said it's been going through a legal process and will continue to do so.

Some seem to throw but it's the law into things when it suits their narrative. The legal process will take care of itself we have no control over it.

Like with politics we are not in control of the outcome we can only discuss what we would like to see happen.

Some see her as a victim, some don't.

 

[BrianW]

What I can't quite get my head around is that 499 others did what she did (or worse) and are living here among us with few, if any, consequences. While I have no real sympathy for this stupid woman, I don't see what makes her worse than the rest.

Maybe the law needs to change so that British citizens who go abroad to take part in terrorism and support illegal regimes commit a definite offence just by going, and face heavy penalties.

Neither the Statute of Treason (1352) nor The Foreign Enlistment Act (1870) appear to be effective in these cases. However, to my mind, a clearer case of 'adhering to the King's enemies without the realm' can scarcely be imagined.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Like I said it's been going through a legal process and will continue to do so.

Some seem to throw but it's the law into things when it suits their narrative. The legal process will take care of itself we have no control over it.

Like with politics we are not in control of the outcome we can only discuss what we would like to see happen.

Some see her as a victim, some don't.

The issue is the decision by the then Home Secretary, not the law so far.

It’s going through the process to see how much they can be held accountable as we’ve not had such people in office that flounce international law, so our legal system is having to learn how to deal with that.

The fact that people are happy to leave a citizen as de facto stateless to satisfy their want doesn’t sit right with me.

Saying that we can only say what we want to happen is false. We have a legal system that is there to try people who have broken the law, not leave them untried.

Due process doesn’t seem to be needed on social media these days. It’s just “bring back the noose” etc. Nuance is dead.

She isn’t a victim, she’s a criminal that needs bringing to justice.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Apologies if inappropriate or wrong thread...

Liz Truss caused far more harm to this country and its standing in the world than Shamima Begum.

 

[BobKowalski]

Like I said it's been going through a legal process and will continue to do so.

Some seem to throw but it's the law into things when it suits their narrative. The legal process will take care of itself we have no control over it.

Like with politics we are not in control of the outcome we can only discuss what we would like to see happen.

Some see her as a victim, some don't.

It can be both. As an underage teen she was a victim. This does not absolve her from any crimes she may have committed. We have washed our hands of her for expediency and because she was high profile. It has nothing to do with our safety because we have allowed others in similar circumstances to stay.

We took the easy route and the cowards route and created a precedent that will be misused in the future.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

They’re not moaning about it, they’ve said all along she wasn’t a citizen and she’s never wanted to go there, it’s never been or going to be a realistic option - the judges found that too.

Why aren’t you thinking it should be tough shit on us? It’s an absurdly arrogant position to think tough shit on Bangladesh and horrendous in terms of international relations.

"She's never wanted to go there" irrelevant argument.

"they’ve said all along she wasn’t a citizen" They're own law states otherwise

Like I said go and research the law before making incorrect statements

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

The UK Government have banned an individual for being a terrorist before they have been convicted of being a terrorist. One of our guiding principles is that all people are ‘’innocent until proven guilty’’

See the problem yet?