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?

@Esspee

So we have to support her and her children for the next however many years not knowing how screwed up she is? No way!

Why should Bangladesh have to? She's not a citizen, she has never been there. Why should Syria have to? She was never lawfully in the country and isn't a citizen.

People saying 'she's a risk, what about our safety' what about the safety of Syrians and Bangladeshis? Or do they not matter?

This is a British problem. We allowed one of our own to be radicalised. We need to deal with it.

Can someone explain the lack of consistency here? There have been 100s of fighter and brides that have returned without the media outcry.

I really can't see how her British citizenship was legally stripped. Why should Bangladesh have to deal with this situation and I also think she was groomed.

@Lifeisabeach09 I think that’s a false equivalence. Women are not the less violent arm of ISIS, if that’s the implication. This is a woman who was violent, allowed to carry a firearm (uncommon for women, and suggestive of her status in the group), and committed atrocities including attacks on women and her willingness to enforce detonation on people given suicide vests to wear by stitching the vest on such that it couldn’t be taken off without escape.

Your example of the IRA doesn’t fit, as relinquishing their British citizenship would have been acquiescing to their political objectives. Regardless, the handling of former dissidents was dealt with through formal political agreements which do not exist in the case at hand.

Ultimately, all the moral arguments in the world won’t do anything. This is about security, as it should be, as well as about votes, as it shouldn’t be.

@sergeilavrov, not really a false equivalence. I was merely querying what acts she committed as I don't know and I can't be assed to google.

As for the IRA example, I was referring to those who did not relinquish their British citizenship. Were they stripped of it? If not and, other British 'terrorists' have not been, where is the precedent for it?

@Cosmosgrowinmygarden

All this “she was a child” - when I was 15 I started work full time in an office in the centre of London, travelling by tube every day. I also got a job working in a central London department store on Saturdays. I was paid a monthly salary, had a current account with a cheque book, paid board to my parents, bought my own clothes etc. I behaved and was treated as an adult. And I definitely knew right from wrong.

And how lucky you were that you didn't meet someone who struck up a casual friendship with you, chatted to you, flattered you, told you you were special, bought you thoughtful little gifts, made you laugh, made you feel wonderful, and grown up, listened to you, valued your opinions and slowly, oh so slowly infiltrated your thinking, isolated you from friends and family until without you realising it you were so in thrall to them that you had nowhere else to go, no one to turn to......

That's how it works, that's how groomers work, religious cults, online scammers, sexual predators, county liners, jihadist recruiters.... They all work the same way, on immature and vunerable minds, no matter how much they think they know right from wrong.

Don't be smug about the way your life worked out , be thankful.

@Lifeisabeach09 I’d argue it is based on the fact she wants British citizenship, based on the fact there is no political agreement in place, based on the fact the conflict remains ongoing. There can be no IRA based precedence, as the Home Secretary gained these powers under the 2006 Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act.

More generally, there is precedent to suggest that under British law, we would expect Bangladesh to grant citizenship in this case. This comes from the David Hicks case. It has also been done before on around 100 people, whose cases are sealed.

@sergeilavrov Isn't they're also a precedent that when the Gov has revoked citizenship where a parent was Bangladeshi they have been told they acted illegally. That's what I have read

She was a groomed and abused child. Just as girls in Rotherham were groomed abuse victims rather than child prostitutes.
She had two babies die before her 19th birthday.
She was sent to a country where she had no links as a very young bereaved mother.
She’ll spend most of her life in custody.

I feel desperately sorry for her.

To those saying that you feel sorry for her, why?

She supports a group that kill and maim people in the most brutal and barbaric of ways for no reason whatsoever.

She is clearly a dangerous person with a dangerous mindset, why do you want her back in our country that she seemingly despises?

@GhostTypeEevee Yes, that has happened on three separate occasions. The issue is that the UK 2014 Immigration Act allows for people to be left stateless, while international law dictates that can’t be the case. The government served these notices in such a way they argue they could reasonably believe the people were not left ‘abandoned.’ They did this by waiting until two of the three were in Bangladesh with their families, and another was with their family in Turkey.

The government argues that issues of national security should not be overridden by international law. There will need to be a process set in place, and right now there isn’t - which leaves everyone in limbo. The government are likely willing to pay fines associated with breaking international law, but are also unlikely to be pulled up on it beyond the country receiving these people.

It’s a complex legal area. For what it’s worth, I disagree with the decision as I think Bangladesh is not an appropriate destination in terms of receiving radicalised individuals (Bangladesh has a huge issue with ISIS and lackluster intelligence services who should not be trusted to monitor sufficiently).

She is clearly a dangerous person with a dangerous mindset, why do you want her back in our country that she seemingly despises?

Because she is Britain's problem, no one else's.

Can someone explain the lack of consistency here? There have been 100s of fighter and brides that have returned without the media outcry.

The vast majority of returners have been men. The media were able to turn this one in to a silly teenage slutty girl. Much better story.

What has she actually done?

Did she actually commit any atrocities herself? Was she involved in bombings

If you are stitching bombs to people who are going to kill not only themselves but those around them then I think the answer has to be yes she was involved.

She might have only been 15 when she left but she isn’t 15 now and even though she wants out of the camp she cannot bring herself to say anything against the bombers who blew up children in this country.

I know we have to take her back but I can’t see her lasting very long. I think the politics were a stalling tactic in the hope she would quietly die in the camp or escape and never be heard of again.

Radicalisation is a similar process to grooming. It surrounds something called a cognitive opening. In the same way girls who have been subject to ongoing sexual abuse suffer from lifelong effects, so do those who are radicalised. The critical difference is that those who are groomed turn that most often on themselves in the shape of low self esteem, self harming activities, those who are radicalised retain a worldview where a group have wronged them, and turn on others.

There are deradicalisation programs that seem effective in the short term, but these most often take place in counties where they are better able to select into programs those who are less ingrained in those thought processes. We have no data for long term outcomes, and that’s a big risk to take in the community.

@Hoppinggreen i hope you're well and having a nice days far ...

Just wanted to respond to your comment, she wasnt furthering the cause of islam at all. Islam says do not kill. The quran actually says do not kill for killing someone is as bad as killing the whole of mankind. But if you save someone,if as if you have saved the whole of mankind.
ISIS do not represent islam. They have raped and murdered more muslims than they have anyone else.
She was groomed and goaded into whatever horrific lifestyle. And goodness knows if she faced assault and abuse on a daily basis while there.

I dont know if I get your statement in the wrong way. So, I apologise if I did
But from what I gathered, do you believe isis actually represent islam?

Hi @viques I hope you're well.

The actual true meaning of jihad is to struggle and strive in the name of God. Jihadi is not even a real word.
The word has been taken by the western and turned into something else.
Struggling to strive happens in everyday life.
A teenager struggling in their gcses but getting through.
A woman struggling in childbirth but pushes through.
A man at work and struggling to achieve the tasks but manages to achieve.
This is what true jihad means and then giving thanks to God Allah for getting through it

Anyone know how old she is now and any surviving children with her?

@PopsicleHustler

Hi *@viques* I hope you're well.

The actual true meaning of jihad is to struggle and strive in the name of God. Jihadi is not even a real word.
The word has been taken by the western and turned into something else.
Struggling to strive happens in everyday life.
A teenager struggling in their gcses but getting through.
A woman struggling in childbirth but pushes through.
A man at work and struggling to achieve the tasks but manages to achieve.
This is what true jihad means and then giving thanks to God Allah for getting through it

Thanks Popsicle. I didn't know that. It's interesting how language can be used and its meaning changed.

Sorry., Posted too soon, she is about 20, it is not clear if she has had two or three children. None of her children are alive.

This country's laws are crap the worse you are the better you get treated.
They will probably give her a new identity and everything.
Then her and her new little group she befriends can carry on and try to kill us all. But the government don't care about that as it is very likely not going to happen to any any of them. X

Everyone has a human right to due process before the law, and to a fair trial. However heinous their alleged crimes might be.

The Court of Appeal have ruled that expecting someone to defend their case in the British court system while being banned from even entering Britain is not fair. I for one cannot disagree with that.

I for one am delighted she's coming back. I was appalled when she had her passport removed, and basically abandoned. She is British and was a child when she left. How many of us did things at 15 we're appalled at now?