Shamima Begum....where do you stand?

[LeahSMS]

What are your thoughts?

AIBU to think she was only a child but unfortunately she’s now considered as a threat so therefore she will never return it’s not only about her safety but the people around her?

Tell me your thoughts

@lyralalala

Yep, so when it does come around again and we see the bill £££.

we all know who to blame right? Sajid Javid

it was just a as you say "temporary popularity boost" for him.

okay. it clearly state you cant leave someone stateless....

I stand on not allowing this traitor back into the country. Nothing else to say.

@Phimma

"I stand on not allowing this traitor back into the country. Nothing else to say."

if thats how you feel about it, you should look at encouraging the government to write new law to not allow this sort of thing to happen again.

Even if she does regain her citizenship the Government aren't obligated to get her.
She'd have to find her own way to the border. And I assume somebody would go for the infamy of ending her life.

She wouldn’t have to find her way back to the border, but there was never any question of her being “rescued”. A citizen has to find their way to an embassy if they are somewhere it’s made clear they won’t be rescued from, such as Syria.

So there was never any chance of anyone going to get her, or rescuing her from the camp in Syria. That was just the press whipping people up into a frenzy.

It’s also interesting at a time when we’re supposedly going to be planning international trade deals that we’re pissing off the likes of Canada and the USA for our attempts at palming off our problematic returnees from Syria, or potential returnees, odd on other counties. There would be an outcry here if another country so publicly pulled the stunts Javid did with her and Letts.

Oops hit enter too soon...

There would be an outcry here if another country so publicly pulled the stunts Javid did with her and Letts if we were expected to pick up citizenship for someone who had proper citizenship of Canada or the US, or Bangladesh, but they’d decided to go for a bit of popularity and make them our problem.

I thought she was in Syria. The Embassy there is suspended. So I assume the nearest one would be Turkey.
But Turkey won't allow her to cross the border.

Looks like she's in serious need of a paddle.

There would be an outcry here if another country so publicly pulled the stunts Javid did with her and Letts

Except they’ve already ‘pulled that stunt’ which is exactly the reason he is not stateless, we WON’T have her back and it’s perfectly legal under international law.

A few years the UK tried to deport a couple of men with Bangladeshi parents but born in the UK themselves then convicted over terror offences. The men were over 21. We lost the case and had to keep them.

The UK and Bangladesh as a result exchanged formal and legally binding diplomatic documents where both accepted that children born in the UK to Bangladeshi born parents automatically have both UK and Bangladeshi citizenship, but the Bangladeshi citizenship lapses automatically at age 21 unless they’re resident in Bangladesh or take other legal steps to retain Bangladeshi citizenship. Bangladeshis are usually very keen on this system as it provides them with a great deal of flexibility over where they live, work and pay taxes and sometimes it has been used for not entirely ethical purposes (dodging the law, avoiding taxes, abducting children and human trafficking). It also has plus points like fluidity in travel, voting rights etc. Understandably a lot of Bangladeshi expats are not keen on giving that up. But there are drawbacks.

The upshot of that law though is that Shamima is UNDER 21. She has Bangladeshi citizenship. She is not stateless, it is perfectly legal for us to withdraw her citizenship and given Bangladesh have accepted the same principle multiple times over in other cases it’s almost impossible Shamima will be allowed in.

When her child was alive there was a small possibility that she may have been able to claim entry because or him, but that’s now not relevant. Her father is resident in Bangladesh too so she is free to go to him anytime.

The only slight argument she may have is that she’ll be subject to the death penalty but that’s extremely doubtful as she doesn’t fulfil the Bangladeshi conditions for the death penalty.

Legal argument over, Cherie Blair and her murderous cunt of a husband are worth £70 million+. I doubt they would have to worry too much that Begum could harm or radicalise their children and until she does, quite frankly she can stick her views where the sun doesn’t shine.

Begum has a state. It’s Bangladesh. Her treatment is entirely ethical. I’m afraid all the bleeding hearts will be in vain.

And the moral to this story is don’t commit genocide, make other humans slaves and oppress them with violence unless you’re over 21 if you want to keep your British citizenship.

There were many reports produced in 2015 that suggested none of these things. Her family environment was supposedly quite permissive. She was viewed as a strong, forceful, opinionated teenager. Scrutiny from others certainly triggered changes in her family's behaviour as they would with anyone cast under the spotlight but the people in her immediate family that she lived and associated with were not radicals.

I wonder if people are getting confused with the other girl (same surname but not a relative) - her friend Sharmeema Begum (who was also at Bethnal Green Academy) and the first to travel to Syria in 2014. She was believed to have been targeted by the 'Sister's Forum' after her mother's death when she was in a vulnerable state. Her travel to Syria was arranged by the 'Sister's Forum'. She had lived with her grandmother and didn't get on with her stepmother.

Groomed or not she made the choice to go. The UK government had made it clear that anyone choosing to do so would not be welcome to return.

She has not expressed or shown any remorse or regret for the decision she made. She was planning to go and live with her husband in his home country. They made the decision to have babies in a war torn country, while actively participating in the war. They were irresponsible. If they didn't have access to contraception, then abstain. Don't bring a child, or 3 (if there ever were any), into it.

I think the Syrian government should be given the choice of whether they want to deal with her or not. Her crimes were committed in that country. She should face their judiciary system, just like anyone else who commits a crime in another country. If not, she comes back here. No-one should be risking their lives rescuing her. I agree with posts saying if she gets to an embassy then bring her back.

Bangladesh have no responsibility for her and it should not be on them to accept her as a citizen.

It doesn't matter what anyone thinks ,she will be allowed back, she will receive benefits and a house and probably a new identity.

Bangladesh have no responsibility for her and it should not be on them to accept her as a citizen.

Yes they do. Why do people pass definitive comments like this when they don’t have a scooby what they’re talking about? We stripped her citizenship legally, she is a Bangladeshi citizen. Both countries have agreed to those rules.

Just because you assume something doesn’t make it true.

It doesn't matter what anyone thinks ,she will be allowed back, she will receive benefits and a house and probably a new identity.

The way things stand at the moment the only way she could do that would be to show the UK erred in law when her citizenship was stripped which would be almost impossible to do when both the UK and Bangladesh have both agreed multiple times on the law used to do it.

Yes they do. Why do people pass definitive comments like this when they don’t have a scooby what they’re talking about? We stripped her citizenship legally, she is a Bangladeshi citizen. Both countries have agreed to those rules.

Bangladesh have disagreed that she’s their citizen so it’s not looking so cut and dried

And it’s still ridiculous to dump someone born here, brought up here, radicalised here, and allowed to travel on someone else’s passport from here onto another country just to give the foreign secretary a bit of a popularity boost.

This is our problem and we should not be passing the buck elsewhere in legally dubious moves

Also if she is automatically entitled to get Bangladeshi citizenship if she applies before she’s 21 what happens if she’s still in Syria by then? Surely then she’s back to automatically being Britain’s problem as she has no right to Bangladeshi citizenship then?

So at most it’s a delayed issue?

Bangladesh have disagreed that she’s their citizen so it’s not looking so cut and dried

It doesn’t matter what Bangladesh say, they’re subject to international law just the same way we are. We’ve legally stripped her of her citizenship. Bangladesh and the UK signed and exchanged legal letters agreeing the legal status of Bangladeshi citizens under 21. They can say what they like but they can’t change the law.

She had a UK based lawyer who up until this was pointed out was extremely keen to extract legal aid to fight her case, but even he’s given it up as a dead loss.

@Lweji - there was a great deal of evidence of it presented and the family fled the country. Many
Many pictures at rallies as a child which were anti western

@doubtingmorag I didn't imply it shouldn't matter at all. I've said through the thread that I feel she would need a long time in a locked unit until considered safe. We treat many people deemed as threats to the country the same way.

Bangladesh has said they will not let her in - that is unlawful as her only citizenship is Bangladeshi now and she is the right age to have that citizenship and her father is there. That is hers and Bangladesh's problem. May be her father can lobby Bangladesh to allow her in there or a third country such as her husband's might let her in. However many of those people do not have the funds to leave and are currently held by the local forces anyway and may well be tried there just as if I had committed a crime when I was in business in Lagos or Iran I would expect to be tried out there and I would not be getting a penny of help with my legal costs from the British Government and quite rightly so.

Also if she is automatically entitled to get Bangladeshi citizenship if she applies before she’s 21 what happens if she’s still in Syria by then?

She doesn’t have to apply for it. The child of a Bangladeshi born person receives citizenship of Bangladesh automatically at birth, which means those born in the UK have dual UK/Bangladeshi citizenship. At the age of 21 if they still have dual citizenship the Bangladeshi citizenship will lapse unless steps are taken to retain it. However, international law says it is illegal to make a person stateless. In a case like Shamima’s where a citizenship has been lost (eg stripped because of criminal activity) then the country that they still hold citizenship of (in this case Bangladesh) will no longer have the option of stripping citizenship or letting it lapse because they cannot make a person stateless.

Surely then she’s back to automatically being Britain’s problem as she has no right to Bangladeshi citizenship then?

So at most it’s a delayed issue?

It doesn’t work like that, she is now and in future a Bangladeshi citizen.

@Lweji - there was a great deal of evidence of it presented and the family fled the country. Many pictures at rallies as a child which were anti western

That’s Amira Abase’s family not Shamima Begum’s. Her father was pictured at a demo celebrating the death of Lee Rigby. She was one of the school girls who ran away with Shamima.

Hang on, Ibiza - I'd suspected that Shamima was spinning things out, so that at 21 her Bangladeshi citizenship would lapse and someone else (ie: us) would have to take her. But you appear to be saying that Bangladesh can't lapse it because we effectively got there first in removing her citizenship, and for them to turn their backs on her at 21 would make her stateless

Have I got that right? Because if so, and even if she did somehow reach an embassy, that appears to wrap it up for any chance of her ever being allowed back to the UK

Oh dear; how sad, too bad, never mind ...

Thanks for the info @Ibiza2015. It’s interesting that the Bangladeshi foreign minister said she’d have to apply for citizenship and it would be denied. Presumably that must have been just to put pressure on the UK then

There is no evidence that shamina Begum s family is at all radical. And as a school girl shamina wore western dress and did not cover.
Even the photos of her at the airport leaving for her new life as a jahadi bride show her wearing western clothing and just a lose headscarf.

Any radicalisation happened as she actively sort it out.
I might have had some sympathy for her if she sought to leave isis controlled territory before they were defeated, maybe when her first child died or even the second. But until they fell it would appear she was quite happy with her isis fighter husband and losing two children. Busy sewing suicide vests and being a good isis bride.

Let her rot where she is. Eventually Syria will be in a position to put her and her fellow terrorists on trial and as seeing severed heads didn’t faze her maybe it won’t be too traumatic if they choose to chop off hers.

“Even the photos of her at the airport leaving for her new life as a jahadi bride show her wearing western clothing and just a lose headscarf”

Well, obv.

Even her berserk Isis handlers will have advised that as part of a low key profile.

I dunno. I think about the child soldiers.

For her, it’s all whatever is in the detail. I couldn’t say from the Little I know from the press.