Shamima Begum...

[Neph]

She's a UK citizen, and there is no legal basis to strip her citizenship.

Begum is not a terrorist.

Well the Supreme Court said otherwise so you're wrong.

Also, she made her shitty choice and now she can live with it.

 

[Sticko]

You don’t think joining a terrorist group makes you a terrorist?

In any event there is a thing called a court. If she has a case then she can make an application. But evidently you are wrong about their lack of a legal basis or she would have got somewhere by now

Does ISIS have an official membership roll or?

She was a naive and impressionable teenage girl with a terrible home life and few friends. ISIS sold her a bill of goods. She wanted to live in this amazing Islamic society but the reality wasn't anything like she'd been told.

At any rate, Begum was a civilian, not a fighter, she had no involvement whatsoever in any terrorist operations.

Section 40 of the 1981 British Nationality Act authorizes the Home Department to take citizenship away in some circumstances, the problem is that the language is incredibly vague, and as I said before, rendering a person stateless violates international law. If the UK thinks Begum can become a Bangladeshi citizen, they are wrong about that.

 

[Sticko]

Well the Supreme Court said otherwise so you're wrong.

Also, she made her shitty choice and now she can live with it.

The Supreme Court is wrong.

Watch the documentary.

 

[Neph]

The Supreme Court is wrong.

Watch the documentary.

Oh, okay internet person. The Supreme court is wrong.

 

[Sticko]

Oh, okay internet person. The Supreme court is wrong.

Here in America we have a Supreme Court too, and they're wrong about stuff all the time. Why should Britain's be any different?

Seriously, watch the documentary.

 

[SanchoMF]

Fuck her and everyone else who went and joined a terrorist organisation.
The only suitable action is to revoke their citizenships and let them rot where they are.

 

[Bargey]

Does ISIS have an official membership roll or?

She was a naive and impressionable teenage girl with a terrible home life and few friends. ISIS sold her a bill of goods. She wanted to live in this amazing Islamic society but the reality wasn't anything like she'd been told.

At any rate, Begum was a civilian, not a fighter, she had no involvement whatsoever in any terrorist operations.

Section 40 of the 1981 British Nationality Act authorizes the Home Department to take citizenship away in some circumstances, the problem is that the language is incredibly vague, and as I said before, rendering a person stateless violates international law. If the UK thinks Begum can become a Bangladeshi citizen, they are wrong about that.

No country can be forced to let a terrorist enter their borders. Vagueness is loved by lawyers because they can make it mean what they want. In this case though, they’ve got the backing of the community and the community expects rightly that their safety be prioritised.

Perhaps she can form a new caliphate

 

[Hellowhosthat]

That is unfortunate if true. Future teens who get sucked into extremism are not going to think about Shamima Begum before they go.

I would really encourage everyone to go see the documentary. It's quite powerful, and if enough people saw it, it might change some minds.

It might dissuade some and if it stops even a couple then it's arguably worth it.

 

[ElKarlo]

She's a UK citizen, and there is no legal basis to strip her citizenship.

Begum is not a terrorist.

What’? She literally joined a genocidal terroristic regime. How is she not a terrorist? She actively supported them.

 

[ElKarlo]

Fuck her and everyone else who went and joined a terrorist organisation.
The only suitable action is to revoke their citizenships and let them rot where they are.

She made her bed. It’s not like she was a local recruited at gunpoint. She travels there and made the decision to help IS and all it’s awfulness. Let her rot in an interment camp forever

 

[TryggeTryggvar]

What’? She literally joined a genocidal terroristic regime. How is she not a terrorist? She actively supported them.

Im sure she is a a sweet innocent girl. I mean we all made the mistake of joining a terrorist state once or twice, fooled by the great beheading propaganda videos they posted as commercials.

Even if she is "innocent", it would mean she is too stupid to know better and is therefore a danger to society either way.

 

[moreorless87]

You don’t think joining a terrorist group makes you a terrorist?

In any event there is a thing called a court. If she has a case then she can make an application. But evidently you are wrong about their lack of a legal basis or she would have got somewhere by now

The place called a court at which she hasnt been found guilty of anything, this is the UK foreign secretary/s acting extra judiciary.

Reguardless of that though stripping people of citzenship is frown on by pretty much every other western nation reguardless of what someone may or may not be guilty of.

 

[Staph infection]

Shamima Begum should absolutely be allowed to return to the UK.

It is a violation of international law to strip someone of their citizenship if doing so renders them stateless. The UK claims Begum is Bangladeshi, but this is not true. She does not have Bangladeshi citizenship and she is not welcome in Bangladesh.

What is the legal basis for stripping Begum of her citizenship?

Begum was recently featured in a documentary, The Return: Life After ISIS, along with several other women from Western countries who joined ISIS and are currently being held at the same refugee camp in Kurdish Syria. She describes how she was brainwashed into joining ISIS and how she was lied to about what it was going to be like. She says that in previous interviews she felt pressured into saying certain things because she was afraid of other people in the camp.

From a humanitarian perspective, Begum has suffered tremendously. She joined ISIS at 14 or 15 years old and was almost immediately forced to marry. She had 3 children while still a teenager and in the chaos of war all 3 of them have passed away from illness and a lack of food and clean water and medical care.

As a teenage girl and a newly practicing Muslim who doesn't even speak Arabic, there is no reason to think Begum participated in any terrorist acts.

Whatever criminal charges there may be, if any, Begum should face them in Britain.

She gave up her citizenship when she went abroad and became a member of a terrorist organization. She only wants to come back because it did not work out for her. If things did not go bad she would have happily kept popping out future soldiers and watching people get tortured and killed.

She made a choice and she needs to deal with it. You cannot just go participate in terrorism and if it doesn’t work out for you, just head back to home your home country.

 

[moreorless87]

She gave up her citizenship when she went abroad and became a member of a terrorist organization.

I think people are underplaying stripping someone of citizenship, its something no other western nation is doing even if they have the death penalty, well bar someone actually getting citizenship under false pretense.

Part of that is that its not just about punishment either its about taking responsibility for your own citizens.

This is something you'd expect in tinpot authoritarian dictatorship, so naturally Tony Blair paved the way for it legally.

 

[ICHEERTHEBULL]

I like this compromise. What would the expected sentencing be?

I’m not sure what the parameters are but dissident republicans often get 4 - 5 years if the conviction is for membership alone (always trials without jury’s). Tommy Robinson got 10 months for using a fake passport to get into the US but he had long list of convictions for assault and fraud previously. So all in all I’d say she could face two years maybe and probably serve half of that.

Here in America we have a Supreme Court too, and they're wrong about stuff all the time. Why should Britain's be any different?

Seriously, watch the documentary.

Do you have a link for the documentary

 

[Ayin]

Having listened to several interviews with these women on the BBC over the last year or so, I’m continually shocked at the total lack of regret nearly all of them show, often combined with strong denial. The interviewers are sympathetic and rarely willing to pressure them, but even still that attitude comes through in their claims. you would think if you wanted your home country to accept you back, you’d be willing to say “ I was wrong, this was not the cause I thought it was”, but from the ones I have listened to, that has not been the case.

Also surprising was the lack of willingness to send the child away. When the argument is that the camps are Terrible, violent places where children are given no education, and then the interviewer says “the UK government is willing to take your child back to live with your parents while you go through the court proceedings” the answer is a form “No.”

As in, it would be better for my children to be here with me than there with my parents. If that’s the case (and assuming the parents are capable and safe to put the child with), then by her estimation it can’t be so bad there.

 

[moosaev]

Im sure she is a a sweet innocent girl. I mean we all made the mistake of joining a terrorist state once or twice, fooled by the great beheading propaganda videos they posted as commercials.

Even if she is "innocent", it would mean she is too stupid to know better and is therefore a danger to society either way.

She was underage when it all went down. So her brain was literally not even fully developed. There's a reason minors don't get the same punishment as adults.

 

[moosaev]

Having listened to several interviews with these women on the BBC over the last year or so, I’m continually shocked at the total lack of regret nearly all of them show, often combined with strong denial. The interviewers are sympathetic and rarely willing to pressure them, but even still that attitude comes through in their claims. you would think if you wanted your home country to accept you back, you’d be willing to say “ I was wrong, this was not the cause I thought it was”, but from the ones I have listened to, that has not been the case.

Also surprising was the lack of willingness to send the child away. When the argument is that the camps are Terrible, violent places where children are given no education, and then the interviewer says “the UK government is willing to take your child back to live with your parents while you go through the court proceedings” the answer is a form “No.”

As in, it would be better for my children to be here with me than there with my parents. If that’s the case (and assuming the parents are capable and safe to put the child with), then by her estimation it can’t be so bad there.

I agree that if she wants to be let back in she should show genuine contrition. However expecting her to simply send her child away is a little much. Mothers are biologically hardcoded to stick with their babies, asking her to give up ever seeing her kid again is essentially like asking her to sever a limb. It might be good for the child but still a tough ask.

 

[Bald1]

These people renounced their birth place citizenship when they became citizens of the ISIS caliphate. Too bad the state they adopted as their new home collapsed. It's their own fault that they're stateless. Fuck em.

 

[Yehudim]

She was underage when it all went down. So her brain was literally not even fully developed. There's a reason minors don't get the same punishment as adults.

Plenty of other Muslim girls also faced an allegedly tough family life and were groomed by older men. They didn’t take the trip to Syria. They didn’t show zero remorse like Begum.

This is not someone who needs whiteknighting. Most teenagers understand the gravity of this genocidal group.

The only difference is that if she were a few years older she would understand how risky this was - not that she disagrees with them, but that it’s a risk to actively aid and abet them.

Not exactly comforting to know.