Shamina Begum

Well The Supreme Court rules she can't return. That's British Justice working.

Firecracker123

So do you think given a chance to speak SB would tell the truth, I don't think so would you.

I said that I think she should be given the chance to tell her side of the story. It would be for the court/jury to decide whether she was telling the truth.

That's how I understand British justice works.

We shouldn't forget that what Isis offered was a religious experience for young people. It is generally agreed that teenage girls are more susceptible to religious suggestions. It was once common for them to want to be nuns and to be recruited by the Catholic church. There is a quantity of info about this on the Internet, some from US churches, which is quite worrying. It would be useful to have her returned to this country to provide more information about the process of radicalisation, which isn't going to go away.

how old is she now? she must still be quite young
she has had had three dead children as well.
As for her Dad

So do you think given a chance to speak SB would tell the truth, I don't think so would you.

It's similar to how in some US states a child who commits a crime can be kept on death row until they are old enough to be executed

I didn't know that. Am shocked.

I think SB should be allowed to come home and answer for her actions here. She was much too young to know what she was doing. Her parents must be brokenhearted.

She only wants back because the side she chose have lost.

How do you know? This sounds like someone who says things like 's/he's only sorry because they got caught' - judge and jury making assumptions, perhaps based on the way they themselves behave, without the benefit of being able to read the mind of another, and refusing them the right of reply.

I think that this is a dangerous way to think, as if there is no going back after transgressing, there is no incentive for anyone to try to make things better, or to allow others the closure of forgiving them.

Iam64

She has said she is in fear of her life. Several journalists have reported that SB is a target by the women in the camp who continue to support Isis. She has been identified as having left that group.

Absolutely. She can't give evidence from there, as if she is overheard she would be a target. She says things that seem to me to be trying to tread a difficult line between condemning IS and staying alive (eg condemning the targeting of women and children in the UK, but saying that women and children are being killed in Syria)) and is assumed to be treacherous for the latter, but who knows - the former part of the quote might be the important one?

She needs to be given a chance to speak safely, so that we can hear her side of the story - surely any decent society would at least let one of its prodigals do that?

She openly renounced all that Britain stands for. She only wants back because the side she chose have lost.

Her first interview revealed the real person - before her legal aid funded lawyers got to her with the good old ‘media training’.

I'm not sure what is the right outcome but the decision makes me very uncomfortable! As previous posters has said many rash decisions are made at 15

She has said she is in fear of her life. Several journalists have reported that SB is a target by the women in the camp who continue to support Isis. She has been identified as having left that group.

I would be devastated and heartbroken trisher. Inconsolable with grief and shame.

But as her own father in Pakistan said only last year - she ran away to join, planned it secretly with her friends, stopped listening to Western music, sat in her room most of the time in chat rooms. She was a changed girl.

Her teachers were worried about radicalisation. She never delivered the letter to her parents. She read it herself so will have known how worried everyone was. But. She. Still. Went.

I don’t kid myself.
If ISIS hadn’t been defeated she would still be the gun toting wife of a warrior, bearing sons for ISIS.

She is in limbo land right now but she isn’t in fear of her life.

She can stay where she is as far as I’m concerned.

I wonder if your DGD met someone on line at 15, was convinced he offered her a better life and ran off to join him, but he introduced her to a life of prostitution and drug dealing. Then she surfaced several years later as a criminal in another country would you expect her to lose her citizenship and face death or life imprisonment in somewhere like Thailand?

I’m posting on both threads.

I used to be indecisive but now I’m not sure...
?

No Urmstongran I think the opposite. This thread is far more thoughtful, less of the "she made her bed" mentality on here and more recognition of our having to take some responsibility as a country.
It is far easier to just wash our hands of the problem and let another country deal with it. Or is that actually what you meant? That the other thread is easier and therefore preferable? I know you often do like to think of different sides of a coin.

Ilovecheese

It is very interesting to see the difference in tone between this thread and the one in "chat".

Indeed Ilovecheese
?
No wonder most people prefer to post on the ‘chat’ thread!

Biscuitmuncher

I don't see the problem, she wanted to live out there and now she is

There were lots of things that I wanted at 15 that would have been very unwise choices if I'd been allowed to make them. Luckily, as I was a child, there were adults around to make sure that I didn't.

I think that SB has been badly served by all the people who were supposed to protect her - her parents/guardians, the school, social services, even the system that allows 15 year olds to travel alone to war-torn areas without having to explain why and who will be looking after them when they land.

The fact that she is now an adult is, IMO irrelevant. It's similar to how in some US states a child who commits a crime can be kept on death row until they are old enough to be executed - it makes a nonsense of having laws which recognise the immaturity of children and make allowances for it.

I can't help by think that the decisions made by 15 year olds should not affect their
whole life. Maybe she could be helped to become a useful member of society? Whatever else she was radicalised here so the country does have some responsibility. It's too simplistic to just wash our hands.

What a relief to see posts that reflect the complexity of SB’s actions and experience. Good posts from trisher and LauraNorder.
This young woman is stateless. My fear is she may well pose more of a risk than if she was returned to the UK and subjected to judicial process.
She was groomed, it’s shocking that the school, police, children’s services knew of the radicalisation she and her friends were undertaking. To give a 15 year old a letter for parents in these circumstances must have breached the safeguarding guidance.
We can’t simply dismiss her and thousands like her as unreachable, beyond redemption.

Me too franbern.

So pleased that myself, nor my children & g.children can be held so responsible for their thoughts and decisions made at the age of 15yrs.

Thank goodness for the judges decision. She and her 2 friends went of their own choice to join ISIS. Britain is fighting a war against terrorism. We are deluded if we think our country is free of those who wish us harm. I don't want to look at the newspapers and have to read about yet another bombing/shooting/stabbing of innocent people by a supporter and believer of these brutal regimes. Public safety is more important than Begum.

Blinko, I felt the same as you initially but if she were my 15 year old daughter who had been groomed and abused, taken to a war torn country and had baby after baby, all of whom had died. I would move heaven and earth to get her home to some safety and hope a rehabilitation. I really don't like the undertones of 'some 15yo girls are mature' they are ALL children.

libra10

Shamina Begum has dual citizenship, let her go the Bangladesh.

She betrayed our country, and cannot be trusted.

Actually she doesn't. Bangladesh does not recognise her as its citizen. She was born. in UK and her father had a right to reside here so she is deemed British. By withdrawing her citizenship the UK is in breech of the UN regulation which says people cannot be made stateless.
Even if she had Bangladeshi citizenship should she be returned to that country she would face the death penalty. Are you happy with that?

My initial reaction when this first surfaced a while ago was, 'Her choice to leave, now she doesn't like the way things have turned out, hard cheese'.

However, on reflection and thanks in part to some very helpful articles elsewhere and thoughtful posts on this thread, I realize it's not so simplistic.

Thanks to CrazyGranny for listing the various complexities, and to others for their thoughts and compassion.

There's also an article in The Guardian by Maya Foa arguing that she was groomed and trafficked.

Food for thought?