Shemima Begum.

nanna8

Can’t imagine why she even wants to return. Pakistan would be much better for her.

Why do you think this?
I'm sorry but I don't understand why that would be...

The uk hasn't exactly been on the ball in the case of monitoring people, has it?

agree with GSM.

Galaxy

She is the UKs problem I am afraid.

No she is not, she is not a citizen of the UK. Thank goodness.

Urmstongran

“If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them"
Karl Popper.

You are so right, we live among the intolerant, and they are getting louder, and trying to ban things they do not agree with, shame on them.I will cry no tears over this person. No more appeals at tax payers expense.

Entirely agree GSM

She is the UKs problem I am afraid.

You need to separate the 15 year old from the woman she has become.

it is probably not a factor that is taken into account but if she did come back to the UK who would pay for her ? are firms likely to employ her ?

foxie48

So much misinformation, her mother made a statement in 2022 and is in this country, her parents were, as already corrected, Bangladeshi. I haven't changed my mind about this. She should be allowed back into the country, she was a naive 15 year old, trafficked by older men and women and she has had an utterly vile life at the hands of ISIS. We should accept responsibility for her because frankly, if her school and other agencies had not failed in their duty of care towards her, she would never have left the country in the first place.

Entirely this!

Sago

GrannyGravy13

When I first heard that Miss Begum wanted to return to the U.K. my immediate reaction was to leave her wherever she was.

After much soul searching I came to the conclusion that she is our (the U.K.’s) problem, she should come back and face the music.

I fear if she did she would end up being a “celebrity”.

She is indeed the UK's problem. She was born in the UK, she has no relationship with her parents' birthplace, Bangladesh. Making someone “stateless” is a horrific punishment. If she has committed a crime she should be in the UK being tried. If she hasn't, she should be in the UK being carefully, professionally re-integrated into society. Recollect that she was a 15-year-old child when she was groomed to become a “soldier's wife”. Had she been groomed for sex within the UK, one likes to think the groomer would have been prosecuted, not the child who was abused and raped. What she did was unbelievably stupid (teenage? hormonal?) but surely she deserves some compassion now?

"If you knew what I know."

Well as I don't I can only assume that the correct decision has been made.

Germanshepherdsmum

Legal aid - we do.

crikey, talk about light touchpaper and stand back! Still, as you said, the lawyers will be paying tax at 45%, so we will get a good chunk back anyway. The taxpayer also paid Johnson's fees, so there we go

Clearly the security services consider she has been radicalised HPQ. That, and hearing what she said in an interview some time ago, is quite enough for me.

Legal aid - we do.

JenniferEccles 👏👏and she should never be allowed back in this country.

Who pays her legal fees?

As GSM has said, the then Home Secretary’s comment “if you knew what I know” is more than enough to indicate just what a threat this woman is to our country.

Cases like this make me so cross.
Her family were given permission to settle here and this is how they repay us.
We’ve seen it time and time again with acts of terrorism.

GrannyGravy13

How can we as a civilised country send foreign criminals back to their home countries but not accept our own back.

She has not been tried by any court, I totally accept that she could be a danger, but also I have to acknowledge that she doesn’t have to be in the U.K. in order to carry out/organise anything against us.

Very good point GG13. I am confused over the issue of Ms Begum, but uncomfortable by the number of people on here, some who should know better, who state that she is 'radicalised'. At the very least SB should be referred to as allegedly radicalised. Yes, a bit picky perhaps, but she has not been charged, let alone convicted, and I do believe in the rule of law.

It is a very troubling subject, but I think that it is hypocritical of a govt and many of the electorate to call for convicted 'foreign' criminals to be deported on conviction, when we as a country are not taking responsibility for a UK citizen who has allegedly committed crimes in another country. We surely cannot have it both ways.

I doubt the security services allow their information to be coloured by whether or not someone is charmless. The Home Secretary’s decision was based on the information he received from them and the court has confirmed that he had the power to make that decision and remove her British citizenship.

Yes, as I said, it may be because she is traumatised. My point, which I thought was obvious, is that although she doesn't always do herself any favours, I think that this should not get in the way of justice.

Doodledog

My post crossed with yours, as I had to answer the door half way through - I wasn't ignoring you, GSM . Great minds think alike, anyway.

Ordinarily I don't think that 15 year olds should be punished for life, but in this case I don't think we necessarily know all the facts.

I do, however, have some reservations about the fact that SB is a distinctly charmless young woman. This may be because she is traumatised, or just be how she is, but someone more endearing might have more support, and something as life-changing as returning home from such a hostile environment shouldn't come down to things like that.

The deaths of 3 children may render some charmless, l think it would me.

She should never be allowed back on British soil.

I agree with the decision to leave her were she is.

Leave her where she is. Her allegiance doesn't lay with the UK which she left of her own free will, She admits she played a part in Isis's brutal regime. I suppose some human rights lawyer will win the case for her one day, citing human rights. Shame she didn't show much concern for others human rights when casually mentioning that seeing severed heads did not faze her.

Germanshepherdsmum

She has been radicalised and appears to show no remorse so I doubt she would be rehabilitated. More likely that she would radicalise others, as we know often happens in prisons. It’s clear that the security services know she has become a very dangerous person.

I think this decision will have been made in light of information known only to the security agencies and limited others and will have been made for the safety of the UK..