Shamima begum allowed to return to UK

[mummabear1967]

Surely I’ve got this wrong? She’s actually allowed back to the UK after joining a terrorist group abroad?

Anyone just a tiny bit worried about what might happen if she does return?

Disappointing to think that so many on this thread don't believe in the rule of law. Pathetic.

[quote mummabear1967]@Iminaglasscaseofemotion I do believe that a 15 year old would know what is right and wrong about going to ISIS.[/quote]
Do you really thinks she was groomed, given instructions and fled within a few weeks? Did it occur to you that the grooming could possibly have gone on for years?

@RunningAwaywiththeCircus

I agree with the OP.

This is a gift to the far right. Utterly appalling decision.

I don't think you really understand what fascism is.

@Queenoftheashes

Victim or not the UK produced this person. Why should a much poorer, war-torn country have to deal with her? It’s embarrassing that the UK is attempting to make her Syria or Bangladesh’s problem.

This. She is British. She has no other nationality. We don't get to just dump our problematic citizens on other countries, particular poor countries who have far fewer resources to deal with the issue.

Begum is Bangladeshi and British.

But her Bangladeshi papers weren't done when she was a child and Bangladesh Govt, not unreasonably, refused her citizenship when her lawyers applied after she was arrested.

That means she has to stay British (you can't have 0 nationality) so the UK Govt's attempts to get rid didn't work.

Every country on the planet boots out its foreign crims - it's not just the UK, you know. Begum is, by default, a Brit.

She was 15. At 15 she knew not to join isis but did anyway.

She shouldn't be allowed back

[quote BrassyLocks]@lifeafter50
Deported where?[/quote]
Quite.

Whatever you think about her, she is the UK's problem. We can't just dump her on another country.

@dannydyerismydad

If we can accept that white British teens can be groomed by Asian gangs, abused and prostituted, it can't be hard to accept that teens of any colours can be groomed by extremists.

This is not a case of welcoming her back with open arms. It's allowing her back to the country for questioning and potentially a trial. And if she is found guilty, she is a british citizen, groomed whilst living on British soil. It's our problem. We can't go foisting her on other countries.

But ee don't accept that children can be groomed by Asian gangs we are notorious as a country for tolerating the gangs shutting girls down when they complain that poor girl from Rotherham her social worker contacted HER RAPIST in prison to see if he wanted contact with the child if that doesnt prove how fucked up the uk is on rape victims and grooming i don't know what does

Saying that some compassion wouldn't go amiss but she would need to be watched and I don't trust the government to do that

I’m genuinely shocked at how many parents (as most here are parents) think children who are groomed deserve the consequences of that grooming.

You would think parents would be horrified by a child being groomed for sex, marriage and being groomed to do anything her husband demanded.

Surely those same people would want their own son/daughter to be treated in the same way if they were groomed. If not they’re hypocrits.

My father is from Australia. I have a right to citizenship there, but have never claimed it; I was born and have always lived in the UK.

If I had done what Shamima Begum did, I don't think anyone would be saying, "she can go live and be dealt with by Australia". It would not be Australia's problem, and Begum is not Bangladesh's problem.

Victim or not the UK produced this person. “Why should a much poorer, war-torn country have to deal with her? It’s embarrassing that the UK is attempting to make her Syria or Bangladesh’s problem”.

Agreed. I was unsure 20 min ago, having read that I have been swayed one way. Thank you.

SB is not Brotish by default, she is just British. She may have been entitled to dual citizenship, but she is a British national, born and bred in the UK. She is not and has never been Bangladeshi.

Removing her citizenship and dumping her on (I forget where) was a dick move

But she didn’t want to stay in the UK. Didnt want anything to do with this country.

Didn’t she also think the Manchester Arena bomb attacks which killed children as young as 8 years old was justified.

Why would she come back here if she hates the country so much.

British men have been found guilty of supporting ISIS in very direct ways but have not received anything like the level of attention this one girl has received. Smacks of scapegoating and misogyny to me.

She was 15. At 15 she knew not to join isis but did anyway.

Did she know? How long to do think she was groomed by members of Isis before she left this country when she was 15? Plenty of 15 year olds (or younger) aren't mature enough to know right from wrong, especially when they have been groomed by adults and convinced they are doing the right thing.

She is being allowed back ONLY under supervision and to allow her to appear in court to appeal the removal of her British citizenship. She has not got her citizenship back yet, she has not got freedom and she may not get it back. It is right that she should be able to defend herself in court. That's the rule of law and justice.

@Oliversmumsarmy
What she wants is neither here nor there. We have a duty to deal with her, even if she didn't want to return, by extradition if necessary.

She was a child ,she made a mistake,she was groomed

That is what this appeal is all about isn't it?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53427197

Nothing has been decided. She is appealing the British Governments decision to strip her of her British citizenship. Her lawyers are arguing it is unlawful because it leaves her stateless - which it is illegal to do to someone "Under international law, it is only legal to revoke someone's citizenship if an individual is entitled to citizenship of another country.". Bangladesh refuse to do what the UK government want and give her Bangladeshi citizenship which the UK govt say she is "a citizen of Bangladesh by descent" from her mother. Bangladesh, understandably, disagree. Nothing has changed on this front and that is what the legal appeal case going through is about. What has changed is that the Court of Appeal have ruled that "she should be allowed to return to the UK to fight the decision to remove her British citizenship". The UK govt disagrees and will "apply for permission to appeal" i.e appeal the cecision to allow her to come here to appeal their decsion to take her British citizenship away.

It's a legal mess that will take years to sort out and she isn't going anywhere any time soon.

I thought she was also a Bangladeshi citizen
Bangladesh has said that she is not a Bangladeshi citizen, and that if she enters Bangladesh, she will be sentenced to death. (www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-48154781)

This is not about whether she was a perpetrator or a victim; it's about the fact that it is illegal to make someone stateless, and it is illegal for the government to do anything that might put a person at risk of torture or the death penalty.

Why don't Bangladesh want her?

@HousesforChickens

Why don't Bangladesh want her?

Read the full thread, it's been clarified several times that she is not, and never has been, a Bangladeshi citizen. So why do you think they should take her on as their problem? Because she's not white maybe?