Shamima Begum has her citizenship revoked

[KenAdams]

How can this happen? I thought they aren't allowed to leave a person stateless? Not that I'm disagreeing, I'm just wondering how they managed it.

If this British-raised and radicalised teenager is too dangerous to allow back into Britain, why do you think it's OK to put Syrians or Bangladeshis in danger?

Because our government's mandate is to protect it's people at home not elsewhere and certainly not at the expense of us.

Because this radicalised dangerous women has supported a regime that hates the west not Bangladesh.

There's a lot of evidence that the mother ran off and joined a known murdering terrorist organisation Wildcate.

Ok; but committing a crime doesn’t, in isolation, mean children are removed.

@Kintan
Exactly. But no doubt some bleeding heart will have me reported for saying it.

@GrubbyHipsterBeard That is my understanding too.

@KingHenrysCodpiece Sajid Javid has Muslim relatives, but he is not a Muslim. He doesn't practice any religion and he is married to a practicing Christian. However, because people make assumptions about him, based on his name and appearance, he receives hate mail from both Muslim extremists and Islamophobes. He will have done this to be tough on terrorism, not to be tough on Muslims. People who acquire citizenship by naturalisation promise to uphold the values of that country. It is not unreasonable for the country to have the power to revoke that citizenship if a person then flouts those promises. It is fine to disagree with his decisions and political opinions, but it is really important to be able to be able to express this without slinging race/religion-based insults.

I thought we were supposed to be a civilised country? Where is our compassion?

I reserve my compassion for the innocent victims of terrorism.

The beheadings didn't faze her. Nothing does it appears. I wonder will this spanner in the works of her grand plan of getting back to London faze her. I hope it does.

I genuinely feel she was an attempted plant over here.

She said 'they'll probably put me in jail for a while' or something similar.

It seems like she was well versed on what to expect.

All the snowflakes feeling sorry for this witch - what about all the hundreds of thousands of innocent people misplaced, killed, maimed, raped, tortured, starved, imprisoned, threatened and humiliated by IS? ODFOD.

I'm a thinker. I like to think. Try it sometime. Acting on emotion feels good in the moment, but what about the wider repercussions? What happens if this girl or her child falls ill in the camps? How do we look then? Where will she go unsupervised? Now shes out there with only Isis to cling to. She knows britain. How many more people can she radicalise now, like the White Widow did or Jihadi John? Why this decision now after an almost week long media frenzy and brexshit? What precedent does this send in regards our standards of justice and fairness? We haven't even established if she committed any crimes. Yet there are others we likely committed crimes who are here is this fair?

If you're happy for the government to cherrypick which citizens they feel deserve to be given a fair hearing and which ones they can just summarily mete out justice (revenge to win aporoval and bury shit news) to then yay hay for you. But realise it's throwing away the values that people in this country fight for. And it has repercussions.

People don't generally flea to countries over run by terrorists in fear of their lives or in search of a better life. She went there for one reason, to assist terrorists, leave her with them

But they're not there any more. They've been routed. Syria is a failed state, with a tyrant of a (secular, non-IS) ruler, with decades of hard recovery ahead of them, full of internally displaced people who despise IS. No one's going to convince me that it's fair for her or other foreign fighters to be left as the problem of a country who never wanted them and who have suffered extraordinarily at their hands.

Anyway, I maintain this is just PR. Even if you personally think it's a great decision, for god's sake don't give the government or Javid any credit for it.

Mymy I wouldn't say I was defending her but I'll answer: at age 15, none. The fact she did and still thought that life would be for the best, and didn't bat an eyelid at heads in bins, just shows how indoctrinated, brainwashed, manipulated and desensitised she was. The average, healthy, well adjusted teen doesn't look at those videos with a dispassionate, jaded eye. All the more reason why I'm disgusted she's been made an example of, so it would seem.

How predictable. Here are all the bleeding hearts, wringing their hands and wailing. 🙄

My understanding is that she has Dutch citizenship through marriage.

I've said this on another thread, but she absolutely doesn't. Marrying a Dutch citizen doesn't make you Dutch. Even if you live in the country for three years after marrying, you have to pass a test showing that you can read, write, speak and understand the language. You then have to pay over 800 euros application fee and wait 6 months to a year for the application to be processed.

In any case the Dutch government does not recognise religious marriages (only legal ones). So they don't consider her married.

Babies born to Dutch fathers and foreign mothers who are not married are not automatically Dutch at birth unless the father officially recognises the baby during the pregnancy. You do this at your local council offices, and something tells me that the father hasn't done that. So the baby wouldn't be considered Dutch either.

Given that the father has been convicted of terrorism in absentia (IIRC sentenced to something like 6 years, though I might be making that up) then I doubt that the Dutch government will be in any rush to do anything to help him in any way.

Good. But the soft UK will back down when she appeals. No way will something this sensible be allowed to stand.

Genevieva

I genuinely didn't know that and should have checked my facts first. So thanks for that. But I reject the latter half of your statement.

PostmanPatIsIncompetent you’re right it’s pr. she and her family have got an amazing amount of media coverage.

I read somewhere that they were thinking of adjusting the treason laws to cover this ..

AFAIK she is in a camp with other IS supporters, kept separate from real refugees. So it doesnt seem unreasonable that in due course the Syrian authorities, when they have the chance to get round to it, might like the chance to put some of these people on trial themselves, for the damage done to the country and its people. So under those circumstances, poor old Shamima and the baby (which I dont believe exists, or if it does is not hers) will just have to wait and see for a while. I very much doubt it will change her views, but it probably wont be very nice, poor ickle Shamima.

Can't the International War Crimes Tribunal have some jurisdiction over ISIS and all its affiliates?

Rather than say why not let her back if 300 others have come back, I think let her be the precedent - no longer are they allowed to come back if they willingly left.

The interview of her was eye opening and shocking.

Age 15 is legally old enough to know criminally right from wrong, we were happy to condemn the Bulger killers and look at their age.

But realise it's throwing away the values that people in this country fight for

You could not be more wrong.

What about HER values? What about her complete lack of respect for what we hold dear? This woman openly rejects our value system. She gave up her rights the second she got on that plane 3 years ago. She knew exactly what she was doing and she STILL holds that ideology close to her heart.

I suggest we take in 100 Syrian refugees in exchange for leaving her where she is.

Fat fucking chance. We haven't even taken in the number of young Syrian refugees we promised to take under the Dobs initiative.

Righttttt... now the family's lawyer has said she's never had a Bengali passport and this isn't the first time the HO have done this with British Bengalis. The HO, of course, have been defeated on those cases in the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC). The very commission the family is to appeal to.

Source 1

Source 2

@KingHenrysCodpiece that's OK - you can't have intend it that way, but I hope you can see how it might inadvertently be seen as a cheap shot.

This is disgusting. She was 15 and was enticed to being an IS house wife by clever propaganda videos. 15 year olds rarely make good choices- it's just usually over more trivial things. She would not have fully understood the extent of what it meant to join the IS regime at that age.

She should not have had her citizenship revoked and let her innocent baby rot in that camp. She has been indoctrinated and radicalised and that takes a lot of work to undo - even if it meant putting her in prison and taking her baby away from her when she got back, at least give her baby the chance not to be embroiled in an IS life.

15 is a time where teens are easily influenced- she was very unlucky to be targeted by and influenced by a dangerous regime. I realise I am in the minority but I do not think the government has acted correctly here- she does not currently have dual citizenship and now her baby will probably die of starvation and lack of medical supplies when we could have possibly prevented it, even if we had taken him away from her and held her accountable for crimes.