Shamima Begum

Chris B said:
It’s in there: “…her application for judicial review of SIAC’s preliminary determination in her appeal against the deprivation decision is dismissed.”
Click to expand...
I’d need to see the reasoning as to why it was dismissed. There is n mention of statelessness, that I can see.
 
Chris B said:
I feel like you’re misrepresenting what I’ve said. I’ve never said she was just a mouthy teen. There are numerous reports that she was actively involved with ISIS (that she was an armed member of the morality police, that she sew people into suicide vests), I doubt they could be proven in court, but that’s the basis on which I make my judgement of her.

She has already faced a court of law though, albeit from a distance. The court found the decision to remove her citizenship was lawful. What you are suggesting is that the government should actively give her citizenship, fly her back here, to then try her in the UK… just because she has said sorry and asked for it?

No, she has made her decisions and has to live with them.

You keep going on about forgiveness - I never said I don’t believe in forgiveness but it’s not my place to forgive this woman, she’s done nothing to me. I’d leave the question of forgiveness up to those who’ve suffered because of her actions.
Click to expand...

There's so much wrong with this reply.

You're inclined to believe "reports" that hold stories of what Begum was 'involved with' without actual evidence and yet are willing to dismiss her very own words of denial...??

I'd like you to actually decipher your position, right there.

In light of having no actual evidence that Begum was part of some "morality police" set up (yes, a female in charge of a gun in a hard lined Muslim male set up) or sewed any bombs into anybody's skin, I think she has a case to have her status returned.

As for your forgiveness response, you obviously don't forgive her childish behaviour... as a CHILD, not a WOMAN, as you castigated upon her yesterday.

And since you cannot prove if there WERE any victims of her actions in between carrying guns, laughing at beheaded parts in buckets and being pregnant 3 times and losing 3 children to lung illness whilst she kept captives in check with her Kalashnikov, I would think this discussion has come to an abrupt halt.

Thanks, anyway.
 
Bigga said:
There's so much wrong with this reply.

You're inclined to believe "reports" that hold stories of what Begum was 'involved with' without actual evidence and yet are willing to dismiss her very own words of denial...??
Click to expand...
Well, you didn’t think I’d actually been to Syria myself do you? Or spoken directly with her, and various eyewitnesses? Obviously I rely to an extent on the reporting of events to form a view. Again, you misrepresent what I said. I never said I was inclined to believe the reports, on the contrary I am inclined to think there’s a great deal of misreporting, misidentification and disinformation - including from her. None the less, there’s little else to go on, so I form my own views based on that.

All her actions in Syria were when she was above the age of criminal responsibility. She is now 19, hence I called her a woman. What would you called her - a child, at 19 years of age? I don’t consider the term woman an insult or any form of castigation so I can only imagine we’re taking at cross purposes on that point.

I’m not sure why you’d expect me to provide any evidence. I’ve stated there probably isn’t any of a standard that could be put before a court. The government has the duty to make a judgement on the basis of national security, and the Supreme Court has agreed they’ve undertaken that correctly. That’s a thorough enough process for me, as a disinterested party, to be satisfied it’s best that she isn’t permitted to enter the UK.

I do agree it’s best if we bring this to a close now. You seem a lot more emotionally invested in this than me and I get the distinct impression you’re getting pissed off with it.
 
Chris B said:
Well, you didn’t think I’d actually been to Syria myself do you? Or spoken directly with her, and various eyewitnesses? Obviously I rely to an extent on the reporting of events to form a view. Again, you misrepresent what I said. I never said I was inclined to believe the reports, on the contrary I am inclined to think there’s a great deal of misreporting, misidentification and disinformation - including from her. None the less, there’s little else to go on, so I form my own views based on that.

All her actions in Syria were when she was above the age of criminal responsibility. She is now 19, hence I called her a woman. What would you called her - a child, at 19 years of age? I don’t consider the term woman an insult or any form of castigation so I can only imagine we’re taking at cross purposes on that point.

I’m not sure why you’d expect me to provide any evidence. I’ve stated there probably isn’t any of a standard that could be put before a court. The government has the duty to make a judgement on the basis of national security, and the Supreme Court has agreed they’ve undertaken that correctly. That’s a thorough enough process for me, as a disinterested party, to be satisfied it’s best that she isn’t permitted to enter the UK.

I do agree it’s best if we bring this to a close now. You seem a lot more emotionally invested in this than me and I get the distinct impression you’re getting pissed off with it.
Click to expand...

I said the discussion had become circular which is why it should come to an end. I haven't moved the needle for you, despite showing how silly your posts were looking.

You've claimed I've "misrepresented" you, when I have used your own points against your argument. They're silly view points, but they're yours. No problem with that.

You said

I never said I was inclined to believe the reports, on the contrary I am inclined to think there’s a great deal of misreporting, misidentification and disinformation - including from her. None the less, there’s little else to go on, so I form my own views based on that.
Click to expand...

No, I said you were "inclined to believe" the reports as you offered no scepticism on unverified reports and dismissed Begum's on defence on those reports. Nor did you infer, at all, a view you've miraculously just had on "misreporting, misidentification and disinformation". Your ability to rewind time is misplaced.

I find this part most ironic as well as we know what Govs do very well, by now...

I’ve stated there probably isn’t any of a standard that could be put before a court. The government has the duty to make a judgement on the basis of national security
Click to expand...

You're completely aware this country helped murder 100s of 1000s of Middle Eastern civilians based upon "reports" without evidence searching for "weapons of mass destruction".

And this, at the time, misguided 15 year old child is a "threat to national security" based upon "reports".

I ask you to compare the two weights of "risk to national security" on a scale based upon "reports".

The woman is now 22, by the way, so maybe time has stopped by you?

If you cannot see the sheer stupidity of this situation then there's no hope, really, is there?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.