Has anyone watched the 90 minute BBC documentary on Shamima Begum?

Whitewavemark2

GrannyGravy13

I have just posted on the other thread, that when Greta Thunberg was 15 she was on the world stage lecturing Presidents and Prime Ministers.

SB was the same age when she stole her sisters passport in order to travel to Turkey and on to Syria for what she describes as a ^life of adventure^

So are you saying that young women are never trafficked or groomed ? That in effect they know exactly what they are doing?

No that is not what I am saying.

But an intelligent Muslim girl (it’s been reported that she was/is intelligent) would have had knowledge of Daesh either through her family, mosque or just by watching/reading news.

She was not drugged or dragged onto the plane, it was meticulously planned even down to her stealing her sisters passport.

I have no idea what information the security services have on SB, I can only assume that it must be incontrovertible and damning.

The U.K. has an official policy of sending offenders back to their place of birth, no matter how long they have resided here. Which is why I think SB should be repatriated to the U.K. and face a trial. Not to do so makes an ass of our extradition laws.

She was a child of 15 when she first joined ISIS and from what is known neurologically about adolescent brain development is clear that decisions and reasoning at that age are not those of an adult. Brains continue to development until well into the 20s.

Factoring in the traumatic environment she subsequently experienced, this would have further markedly affected her neurological and psychological development

Understanding these facts I find it hard to condemn outright but am not naive enough to believe that she may not pose a threat in future without close supervision and possible detention, but also psychological help to process past events and alter her mindset.

If it was my child I wouldn’t want them written off without the chance for rehabilitation.

Germanshepherdsmum

Quite so, GG.
BlueBelle: Mary Bell and James Bulger’s killers cannot be compared with a much older girl who willingly participated in terrorism and mass murder. She is a dangerous enemy of our State, not a young child who committed one murder, heinous though those murders were.

Or you could view her as a naive girl who was living in what she felt was a restrictive family. This girl was groomed initially by a trusted friend, who told her that what she saw in the newspapers about ISIS was untrue and that her life in Syria would be different and exciting. So with two close friends (peer pressure + support) she followed instructions given to her by ISIS she went to Turkey and then was taken to Raqqa. It was not at all as she expected, she had to marry someone chosen for who who was abusive to her, one of her friends got blown up by a bomb and she went to identify her body and then had to inform her family. She had two miscarriages before having three children who all died in infancy. She lived in fear for her life either from bombs or from ISIS because as a woman you do as you are told. Her second friend is now dead and she has seen things in her short life that will have been traumatic for even an adult with a wide experience of life let alone a 15/16/17 year old. If you don't have any compassion for her situation, then you don't but I do!

The actual judgment makes interesting reading and I don't think this is the end of it.

"(The judge) described the case as finely balanced and said that reasonable people might strongly and profoundly disagree with the way in which Ms Begum's case has been determined."

"The outcome that we face is that no British child who has been trafficked outside the UK will be protected by the British state if the Home Secretary invokes national security," Part of statement by her lawyer

No, I have absolutely no compassion for her. You’ve chosen to put a spin on her situation with which I completely disagree.

Well her lawyer would say that wouldn’t she?! Do you believe everything you hear, regardless of who is saying it and what their agenda is?

The lawyers she has are highly paid individuals who are often involved in very contentious cases over the years. Who is paying for them? Surely not legal aid via our taxes.

BlueBelle

Foxie I agree totally
I think your views are harsh GSM Mary Bell murdered a child but has been given a new life so were the James Bulger murderers
She is our responsibility You don’t know she would radicalise others any more than I know she hopefully wouldn’t

I think she is very regretful of her actions when a child, but unfortunately for her she doesn’t show emotions and has obviously closed herself off, which comes across as hard and unremorseful I think she’s had a horrible life losing all her babies and ending up for years in a refugee camp
She should be reinstated and brought back to her home country not left in limbo land she’s our responsibility and should be dealt with by us not left to another country to sort out she didn’t take on there residency

It looks like we are once more in agreement, Bluebell, but this time with one or two others including foxie48. I've tried to read as many posts here as I can but have not seen this anywhere: “Arbitrary deprivation of nationality”, which means deliberately moving to make a citizen stateless, is prohibited under these instruments. Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is particularly explicit on this point.16 Jul 2020
The Human Rights Impact Of Making Someone Stateless . Pakistan has denied that Shamima Begum has any claim of citizenship there. I believe we could learn a great deal from Shamima Begum. At least we can monitor her..... Having been through major trauma throughout much of my childhood - though nothing to compare with what Ms Begum has experienced at such a young age - I too am a proficient in the art of dissociation as a survival mechanism.....

I have no compassion for her. She has dual nationality and is considered to be a Bangladeshi as both of her parents come from Bangladesh despite her being born in the UK. I hope she's never allowed to come back to the UK. She's a very dangerous person. Why the BBC, a company we are all funding, is spending so much money on making programmes about her is disgusting to my mind.

Yes, she’s getting legal aid Forsythia.
She’s not stateless, seadragon. She has Bangladeshi (not Pakistani) citizenship.

She doesn't have Bangladeshi citizenship they have refused to give it to her because she did not activate a claim to it before she was 21.

Firstly she was a child soldier. The recruitment of under 18s and the treatment they should receive after the conflict ends or they are released is set out clearly by the UN.
We are clearly in breech of those rules. childrenandarmedconflict.un.org/six-grave-violations/child-soldiers/

The most important being as far as she is concerned these two States should take all possible measures to prevent such recruitment –including legislation to prohibit and criminalize the recruitment of children under 18 and involve them in hostilities.
States will demobilize anyone under 18 conscripted or used in hostilities and will provide physical, psychological recovery services and help their social reintegration

As for the security argument, perhaps someone can explain to me how anyone with beliefs which include armed and violent actions against the west is less dangerous when housed in camps and countries with less than adequate intelligence services, where they are free to influence and recruit more disaffected young people.

I don't see whether or not she knew what she was doing is relevant, or whether she is a nice person or not is relevant, she is our citizen and we should take responsibility not try to palm it off on another country.

Glorianny is absolutely correct, the UK Govt has made her stateless which is illegal under the UN Convention.

Glorianny is not correct. At the time her British citizenship was revoked she had Bangladeshi citizenship also. The HS did not render her stateless.

Germanshepherdsmum

Glorianny is not correct. At the time her British citizenship was revoked she had Bangladeshi citizenship also. The HS did not render her stateless.

The UK may believe so but Bangladesh doesn't. Its laws on citizenship for the children of Bangladeshi parents born in other countries are clear. The child must activate their claim to citizenship before they are 21. They have denied her citizenship. www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/20/rights-of-shamima-begums-son-not-affected-says-javid
The UK does not have the right to decide who is a Bangladeshi citizen

She was a Bangladeshi citizen by virtue of her parents’ citizenship at the time the HS acted. That is the relevant time. The UK did not render her stateless.

Imagine being born and growing up in a country that is so vastly different to the one where your parents were born- that you know very little about, on the other side of the world- then told you are a citizen of that country! I'd say that means even if she was allowed Bangladeshi nationality, how could she be 'returned' there??? I have taught many Bangladeshi children in the past, they knew very little about it, some didn't speak the language, or a weird rural dialect, unable to read or write.

She was born in the UK, and British, just like my children and yours.

But more importantly, we are all much safer for her being here, in prison and later tagged, and getting counselling and support - then there.

My OH found out by chance that he was not British- after living all his life in the UK. He arrived at the age of two, at the same time of Windrush, in his case from Apartheid South Africa.

Had he not found out then, by chance- he would still be South African, without knowing it, and could have been returned there if something terrible had happened! He would have known little of this country, and would have felt completely lost there- despite having family there, and it not being such a poor country, compared to Bangladesh.

Anyone who says she was not made stateless has no idea, truly, of the realities of their statement.

OH was 25 when he found out! The shock was massive- he had never been there!

The legal position is that the UK did not render her stateless. At the time her British citizenship was revoked she had Bangladeshi citizenship whether she wanted it or not. It is clearly thought by those who have more information than we do that she would be a greater danger to us if she were here rather than elsewhere. We don’t have access to all relevant information, nor should we. In prison (radicalising others, as happens so much in prisons), then tagged and having counselling and support - you have to be joking.

If the UK can deprive children born here of their citizenship because their parents weren't born here I wonder what rules they will make in the future? Prhaps if your grandparents weren't born here.
Bangladesh says she is not a Bangladeshi citizen because she has never applied to be one This is the act
www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain/opendocpdf.pdf?reldoc=y&docid=543d0d724#:~:text=(5)%20The%20Government%20shall%20not,be%20a%20citizen%20of%20Bangladesh.

She wasn’t deprived of citizenship because her parents weren’t born here. You know perfectly well why her British citizenship was revoked. She had dual citizenship of Great Britain and Bangladesh at the time her British citizenship was revoked. It’s hardly the fault of the British government if she subsequently allowed her Bangladeshi citizenship to lapse.

Germanshepherdsmum

She wasn’t deprived of citizenship because her parents weren’t born here. You know perfectly well why her British citizenship was revoked. She had dual citizenship of Great Britain and Bangladesh at the time her British citizenship was revoked. It’s hardly the fault of the British government if she subsequently allowed her Bangladeshi citizenship to lapse.

Gsm I've posted the Bangladeshi position on this. Are you really saying that the UK has a right to dictate to other countries who they accept as citizens?
They say she never was a Bangladeshi citizen.

As for "She wasn't deprived of British citizenship because her parents weren't born her" of course she was. If her parents hadn't been born outside the UK she would still be a British citizen.

That was not the reason. Of course I am not saying what the Bangladeshi government should do. But she was not left stateless.
I’m pretty fed up with wasting time on this woman so will not post further. She is not worthy of my time and I have no desire to argue with her apparent supporters.