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

There are problems inherent in allowing one person (or a team of people) to make such far-reaching decisions that over-rule others, particularly when all the sackings and resignations that have happened since the Tories were elected. We are not left with experienced and competent politicians in charge, and it’s worrying.

I agree that the intelligence officers will know more than we do, and rightly so; which makes my feelings more equivocal, but the usual way of British justice is that everyone knows the reason for someone being found guilty, as well as the specifics of the charges.

Unfortunately (but quite rightly) in this case, and others involving matters of national security, everyone does not know everything - but the Tribunal did, and came to their decision on that basis.

I wonder where the next generation of terrorists will be nurtured? The security services obviously missed the recruitment of UK citizens to Isis. Perhaps they'll be unaware of the next cohort, perhaps they will stem from the camps, where the UK has rejected a girl, born, raised, and educated here, an example of how we treat Muslim women.
It's a mistake to think what the security forces know is the biggest threat. It's what they don't know and can't imagine that's the real danger.
UK schoolgirls being groomed and recruited to a Jihad- impossible! (but it wasn't!)

This is not ‘how we treat Muslim women’. It is, however, how we treat members of proscribed terrorist organisations.

A succinct definition GSM 👏

Can anyone name a White British citizen who has had their citizenship revoked because they were a member of a proscribed terrorist organisation? I thought this was of interest Guardian 21.01.22

"In one case revealed by the Observer this week, a 40-year-old man, referred to only as E3, was stripped of his British citizenship in 2017. He was born in London to parents of Bangladeshi heritage, but had his citizenship removed when he flew to Bangladesh.

He was told he was an “Islamist extremist who had previously sought to travel abroad to participate in terrorism-related activity”. He has never been arrested or questioned in relation to these claims, nor has he been provided with any evidence which substantiates these claims.

His citizenship was reinstated after the Home Office accepted he is stateless as a result of having his British citizenship taken away from him."

Maybe white British citizens are rather less likely to belong to such organisations.
Begum is stateless as a result of having failed to make the necessary application for continuing Bangladeshi citizenship before the age of 21, not as a result of the HS’s actions which have been found to be lawful.

GSM, this, in your opinion, is a satisfactorily clear-cut result, but evidently not for the panel who did “know everything”, and who experienced “great concern and difficulty” in arriving at a decision.

Have I said it is, in my opinion, ‘a satisfactorily clear-cut result’? No.

Germanshepherdsmum

Maybe white British citizens are rather less likely to belong to such organisations.
Begum is stateless as a result of having failed to make the necessary application for continuing Bangladeshi citizenship before the age of 21, not as a result of the HS’s actions which have been found to be lawful.

It is not entirely her fault though. She was 15 when she was stripped of her British citizenship. At 15 or any age up to 21 years old, she cannot apply to obtain her parents citizenship by descent in her own right because she is a minor. After 21, she automatically lost her right to obtain citizenship through her parents.

Her parents (more so her father) are the ones that should apply for her before she reached 21.
If her father never apply for her then she never had Bangladeshi citizenship in the first place. I think she was entranged from her father?

Germanshepherdsmum

Have I said it is, in my opinion, ‘a satisfactorily clear-cut result’? No.

And that is exactly why she should be brought back to the UK and dealt with here. It is a very grey area (as said in the summing up) and we should have a justice system that deals with everyone as fairly as possible. Whilst she is in Syria she cannot speak freely without fear of reprisal. It would be a bit like asking a hostage how she was being treated by her captors whilst she was still under their control. If she has willingly taken part in acts of terrorism, then she should be punished if she was in fear for her life so did as she was told then surely that is a completely different matter?

Indeed Delilah.
To quote from the Commission The Commission has found this to have been a case of concern and difficulty. The legal issues have been challenging and (in respects of grounds 1 and 2 novel) and the evaluative judgements on the essential questions often finely balanced.

Begum’s lawyers obviously do not agree this decision is “clear cut”and have said they will challenge it.

No, GSM, that’s not a direct quote, but it’s hard to reach another conclusion from what you have said. Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you?

If anyone says "but she went willingly to join them" I will just say again, but she was 15, groomed for sexual exploitation and trafficked to Syria and we'll go round the same loop again. She became an adult whilst in Syria and by that time her choice and autonomy to make her own decisions had been taken from her.

I was simply taking issue with the invention of words which I had not spoken. I don’t consider the decision unsatisfactory and I have no wish to see this woman return to Britain.

This is an interesting report about how many women have been abandoned by the UK government

WORD - OHCHRhttps://www.ohchr.org › ReportHRC48 › CSO

www.ohchr.org › ReportHRC48 › CSO

I've been all over the place with this case. Initially I was totally opposed to her ever returning. Time has made me less decisive.

Her attitude toward the Manchester bombing wa shocking but she was apparently in a room with other isis members who won't have been placed of she'd been berating atrocities in the UK.

Her interviews have possibly been her downfall.

However the fact is she was 15. Many of us appear to have been terribly mature at 15 and wouldn't have done such a thing. When I was 15 I was a horror. Not Muslim so I wouldn't have joined up but it's wrong to suggest we all behaved and thought impeccably responsibly at that age. I actually ran away with a couple of footballers to London when 13. Not my best move.

We have sympathy with Virginia Giuffre, as we should, but she was 16 when she went to work and 17 when she met PA. Not many people will shout at her and tell her she knew exactly what she was doing.

So I think that Begum should be allowed to return. She'll probably have to wait until we have a new Government , Our legal system has its hands tied somewhat at present.

Excellent article in the Guardian. Refreshing change from the Mail

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/22/the-guardian-view-on-shamima-begum-stateless-and-detained-in-syria

Why have other countries repatriated similar?

Zoejory I think many of us have struggled with this. The actions of ISIS and her apparent agreement with their cause was vile, she doesn't come across as penitent or humble so she doesn't help her cause in any way. I've listened to the podcasts and thought most of the time she seems cold and detached, then I think about the things she has witnessed and what her life must have been like from 15 and I start to see a "survivor". However, none of that really matters, it's about how we, as a country, deal with people and tbh there's been lots that I have have found very difficult. The Windrush fiasco was appalling and people have still not been compensated, the way we are housing child migrants so they can be "spirited away" by criminal gangs and no-one seems to care, this business with SB is just another example. If other countries take responsibility for people like her then we should too.

Germanshepherdsmum

Maybe white British citizens are rather less likely to belong to such organisations.
Begum is stateless as a result of having failed to make the necessary application for continuing Bangladeshi citizenship before the age of 21, not as a result of the HS’s actions which have been found to be lawful.

And maybe not. Far Right terrorism is also a threat, and its adherents are much more likely to be white.

Why would she have done- she knows very little of the country and has never lived there, no speaks the language!

Doodledog

Germanshepherdsmum

Maybe white British citizens are rather less likely to belong to such organisations.
Begum is stateless as a result of having failed to make the necessary application for continuing Bangladeshi citizenship before the age of 21, not as a result of the HS’s actions which have been found to be lawful.

And maybe not. Far Right terrorism is also a threat, and its adherents are much more likely to be white.

That post by Gsm is truly disturbing,

Why?

Germanshepherdsmum

Why?

Because you have to ask that question - it makes it even more disturbing.

"Bangladeshi authorities said Begum did not have dual citizenship and had never visited the South Asian nation. They also ruled out granting her Bangladeshi nationality. International law forbids countries from making people stateless by revoking their only citizenship."

The UK has broken International law.