|
Post by bracknellboy on Oct 8, 2021 20:15:29 GMT
I'm surprised how many seem to agree with me that she should be let back in. She should be prosecuted for any crimes and if the government believes the law isn't tight enough to cover her alleged crimes then make some news laws. I can't believe anyone would think it a good idea to invent a new punishment called "being stripped of UK citizenship". Our punishment of last resort is prison for a full life term. Those who believe she is super evil and should face the death penalty should campaign to bring back the death penalty for treason. Also, if she was somehow smuggled into the country and then she gave herself up at a police station, where we would deport her to? A second reason I don't like what has happened is that she was 15 when she left and got "married". If a 15 year old left home to meet some bloke over 18 for a sexual encounter, that bloke would be accused of being a pedophile and the 15 year old innocent of everything that happened. Having extreme views at that age and wanting to rebel against parents, run away etc is not that unusual albeit very extreme in her case.Exactly. frankly, to the extent that I understand how she and her 2 school friends got to that point, in any other circumstances she would have been considered a victim of grooming. Not a point I would want to overly push given subsequent events, but where does grooming & brain washing through immersion into a cult end versus her sole responsibility to be the way she is. Either way, bring her back, charge and try her. But don't foist the problem onto another country.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,251
Likes: 2,694
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Oct 8, 2021 20:29:04 GMT
Yes. She made a bad decision as a child (which I feel sorry for), but then made many more bad decisions as an adult after that so I have very little sympathy now, she also married someone from another 'safe' country they can have her if they want.
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 3,875
Likes: 2,313
|
Post by keitha on Oct 8, 2021 20:37:16 GMT
Yes, she should remain in Syria and she is no longer a UK subject . To return her to the UK is a security risk that you should NOT under estimate.(Empathy is not an option here). Should you consider it should be otherwise note that you will set a precident that is hard to ignore and others will follow. Any relationships and offspring in the UK would pose a similar risk of repeating her ethos and example. We are still at war with terrorism and it would be naive to ignore this. Her family bear the duty of care,not the UK population. it is clear from her behaviour she wants back here, look at the way she is now dressing etc. Anyone who can say seeing heads and hands in bins was normal is beyond brainwashed. One thing thjat can't be allowed to happen is her returning here to fight her case, because we all know once she is here she will not be removed.
on and the tweet from her lawyers the other week under a picture of the Taliban in the presidential palace entitled "the boys are back" tells me they are not fit to practice in the UK either
|
|
|
Post by df on Oct 8, 2021 20:44:30 GMT
I'm surprised how many seem to agree with me that she should be let back in. She should be prosecuted for any crimes and if the government believes the law isn't tight enough to cover her alleged crimes then make some news laws. I can't believe anyone would think it a good idea to invent a new punishment called "being stripped of UK citizenship". Our punishment of last resort is prison for a full life term. Those who believe she is super evil and should face the death penalty should campaign to bring back the death penalty for treason. Also, if she was somehow smuggled into the country and then she gave herself up at a police station, where we would deport her to? A second reason I don't like what has happened is that she was 15 when she left and got "married". If a 15 year old left home to meet some bloke over 18 for a sexual encounter, that bloke would be accused of being a pedophile and the 15 year old innocent of everything that happened. Having extreme views at that age and wanting to rebel against parents, run away etc is not that unusual albeit very extreme in her case. Instead of trying to punish a girl who made a stupid decision at the age of 15 they should look at the cause and punish those who are responsible for giving a space for ISIL state by destabilising Iraq and Syria. Their actions also fed the recruitment process. It's like punishing a drug addict and letting the drug dealer off.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,212
Likes: 6,021
|
Post by registerme on Oct 8, 2021 21:34:08 GMT
1. She was born in the UK. 2. Rendering somebody stateless is prohibited under article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights. 3. If she did wrong (which I am pretty sure she did) she should face trial and whatever sanctions are deemed appropriate. 4. Revoking her British citizenship is simply human fly-tipping, which is contemptible. (5. And yes, get anybody you can, legally, who was responsible for her radicalisation).
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Oct 9, 2021 11:14:03 GMT
I am led to believe that the Government has a LOT of information on Ms Begum that we, the public, are blissfully unaware of, and that, if we were privy to this information, "We definitely would not want her back in the UK." Why they can't disclose this information to us, the public, is a mystery to me, but I do believe it exists. When interviewed I have never seen clearer nor shiftier body language in my life, where she is obviously V V uncomfortable with what she's saying, because she doesn't believe a word of it, and the constant looking away and reluctance to look at the camera, well, it's insincerity to the core. I appreciate there are legal arguments about this case and I'll keep out of that discourse. I believe the question was a basic "Should she have been stripped of her citizenship" and I still firmly believe "Yes", you know exactly what treason is, whether you're 15 or not. We are a VERY soft touch in this country and need to wake up, but not woke up.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,212
Likes: 6,021
|
Post by registerme on Oct 9, 2021 11:54:07 GMT
I am led to believe that the Government has a LOT of information on Ms Begum that we, the public, are blissfully unaware of, and that, if we were privy to this information, "We definitely would not want her back in the UK." Yes, I remember when Javid said that. Still, I'd far rather have that tested in court than simply take his / the government's word for it. This government doesn't exactly have a great record of telling the unvarnished truth (vis anything out of Johnson's mouth). Get her in front of a judge / jury, in camera if necessary, and let justice take its course. Don't just remove her citizenship (illegally) at the stroke of a bureaucratic pen and wash the country's hands of the problem.
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 992
Likes: 1,197
|
Post by james100 on Oct 9, 2021 12:53:53 GMT
I don't think the dangers of radicalization are effectively addressed (not restricted to quasi-religious ideologies either). Apparently she was a straight A student so not thick...reminds me of when I met a very well-dressed, superficially westernized and clearly intelligent Libyan doctor around the same time (2015) who, when the conversation turned to terrorism, went off on one about how evil Americans & British are and how they deserve everything they get. They were not far off being fully radicalized IMHO too but I don't think they knew...bizarrely gave me an email address so we could stay in touch
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,014
Likes: 4,825
|
Post by adrianc on Oct 9, 2021 14:35:34 GMT
I am led to believe that the Government has a LOT of information on Ms Begum that we, the public, are blissfully unaware of, and that, if we were privy to this information, "We definitely would not want her back in the UK." That doesn't make it any more legal to render somebody stateless, under UK or UN law. The gov't removed her UK citizenship, alleging she was eligible for Bangladeshi citizenship. The Bangladesh government have stated she does not and never has held Bangladeshi citizenship, sole or dual. If she does not hold Bangladeshi citizenship, then it is illegal for the government to remove her UK citizenship, since it leaves her stateless. If she is to contest the removal of her UK citizenship, she needs to enter the country to prepare her case. No country cannot refuse entry to the country to their own citizens, no country has to allow entry for non-citizens. If somebody is stateless, they are potentially unable to enter any country in the world. Of course, should a UK citizen return to the UK, they can be instantly detained according to all the usual rules of the justice system, and tried according to the evidence available against them... Probably because to disclose it would compromise secret sources and other ongoing investigations. Perhaps it's simply not robust enough to stand up to scrutiny in a court of law. One thing's for sure - if it does exist and is robust, then a court of law is the right place for it, not the papers. If it isn't robust enough for a court, then that's another good reason not to slap it all over the papers...
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Oct 9, 2021 15:08:47 GMT
"Why they can't disclose this information to us, the public, is a mystery to me, but I do believe it exists."
I had a further think about this, and one possible explanation is that someone in her own extended family has dobbed her in, perhaps they're in possession of emails, texts, phone videos, all sorts of damning evidence?
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,212
Likes: 6,021
|
Post by registerme on Oct 9, 2021 15:46:22 GMT
"Why they can't disclose this information to us, the public, is a mystery to me, but I do believe it exists." I had a further think about this, and one possible explanation is that someone in her own extended family has dobbed her in, perhaps they're in possession of emails, texts, phone videos, all sorts of damning evidence? It's irrelevant. There's a reason people aren't "tried in the court of public opinion". At best she's a gullible twit, at worst an actual terrorist in and of her own right. That should be decided in a court of law. But neither extreme has anything to do with the fact that she's a British citizen. That status cannot be revoked by ministerial fiat. The court system has oodles of experience dealing with evidence that may be embarrassing. It also has, unfortunately, oodles of experience dealing with evidence that may compromise existing investigations / other cases / intelligence sources etc. Don't buy that as an excuse for not returning her to the UK, or for revoking her citizenship.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,625
Likes: 4,195
|
Post by agent69 on Oct 9, 2021 16:07:53 GMT
"Why they can't disclose this information to us, the public, is a mystery to me, but I do believe it exists." I had a further think about this, and one possible explanation is that someone in her own extended family has dobbed her in, perhaps they're in possession of emails, texts, phone videos, all sorts of damning evidence? It's irrelevant. There's a reason people aren't "tried in the court of public opinion". At best she's a gullible twit, at worst an actual terrorist in and of her own right. That should be decided in a court of law. But neither extreme has anything to do with the fact that she's a British citizen. That status cannot be revoked by ministerial fiat. The court system has oodles of experience dealing with evidence that may be embarrassing. It also has, unfortunately, oodles of experience dealing with evidence that may compromise existing investigations / other cases / intelligence sources etc. Don't buy that as an excuse for not returning her to the UK, or for revoking her citizenship. I've often wondered why terrorists who have shown nothng but contempt for our laws expect to be able to rely on those same laws when the day of reckoning arrives.
Most people who have been groomed on the internet realise their mistakeswhen they meet their groomer. This young lady appears to have embraced the ISIS philosophy in full, and only showed the slighteset remorse once ISIS were overthrown. Personally I would leave her to stew in her own juices in Syria, and my only regret is that Albert Pierrepoint isn't still around.
Still, I'm certain the dogooders will have her returned to UK to serve a trivial sentence, then society can spend the next 60 years providing her with new identities and around the clock protection.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,014
Likes: 4,825
|
Post by adrianc on Oct 9, 2021 16:22:53 GMT
I've often wondered why terrorists who have shown nothng but contempt for our laws expect to be able to rely on those same laws when the day of reckoning arrives. Apart from the minor detail that, without a court testing the evidence, you don't KNOW that they HAVE "shown nothing but contempt for our laws", you appear to be proposing a slippery slope to vigilante executions in the street. Relying on laws is one of the most fundamental cornerstones of our civilisation. Even when courts have tested the evidence, miscarriages of justice have occurred in the past - resulting in the innocent spending years in prison for things they simply didn't do. Guildford, Woolwich...
|
|
foolsgold
Member of DD Central
Posts: 159
Likes: 194
|
Post by foolsgold on Oct 9, 2021 16:39:57 GMT
Ive heard it mention that she was below the age of consent at the age of 15
However in other major European countries the age of consent is lower for example France is 15 and Germany is even lower at 14.
My view is that she should not be allowed to come back to this country ever .
Why would we want to take a chance that she is radicalised and kills or injures a British citizen ....lifes a bitch and have no sympathy towards her whatsoever...she is a traitor to this country and it would be an insult to all the families of those who lost loved ones through the barbarism of ISIS and I dont know why we are even giving her publicity on this forum
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,625
Likes: 4,195
|
Post by agent69 on Oct 9, 2021 16:52:18 GMT
I've often wondered why terrorists who have shown nothng but contempt for our laws expect to be able to rely on those same laws when the day of reckoning arrives. Apart from the minor detail that, without a court testing the evidence, you don't KNOW that they HAVE "shown nothing but contempt for our laws", you appear to be proposing a slippery slope to vigilante executions in the street. Relying on laws is one of the most fundamental cornerstones of our civilisation. Even when courts have tested the evidence, miscarriages of justice have occurred in the past - resulting in the innocent spending years in prison for things they simply didn't do. Guildford, Woolwich... So using this logic you would say that Fred West and Jimmy Savile were innocent?
As far as Ms Begum is concerned, I think the following proverb is appropriate: if you live by the sword, you die by the sword.
|
|