Shamima Begum lost her appeal....

[Noangelbuthavingfun]

Just heard on BBC news a reporter said one reason is that she has shown zero remorse and spoke exactly like other extremists - still. Whilst it us unfortunate fir her...
I think it's the right decision given the circumstances....what are your thoughts?

What do you disagree with? The whole point of grooming is that the victims are indoctrinated to believe they're acting of their own free will.

Almost as disrespectful as implying that someone is lying about their miscarriages and dead babies?

Sorry, are we supposed to blindly believe terrorists now?

It would appear so, AllOfThemWitches, or at least that's what some appear to believe; trouble is they don't seem to understand that asking for facts - such as proof of the alleged three children - isn't the same as implying someone's lying

Personally I can't posssibly know whether Shamima's telling the truth or not, but I'm certainly not going to take it on trust from someone with her proven views and behaviour

There are loads of male actual rapists born in this country and no-one gives a shit about convicting them. There are loads of guys who raped and murdered for ISIS who have been allowed back in the UK. Double standards when a young woman is (alleged) to have dome something.

“Terrorists” aren’t one big homogeneous group. They are capable of lying, telling the truth, committing awful atrocities and also loving their families. Humans are complex creatures. I think it’s easier for people to put Shamima in a box labelled terrorist and to believe she is the epitome of evil and therefore deserves anything thrown at her, rather than admit she was likely an impressionable teenager who made a very poor decision, has done incredibly awful things but has also experienced hardship and tragedy too. Humans tend not to be as one dimensional as a cartoon villain in person.

Well, I have mixed feelings about it, but I think it could be justified as dual citizenship having advantages as well as disadvantages. e.g. making you obliged to do military service if one of your citizenships has that system, the possibility of having your British citizenship removed etc.

DD has dual citizenship - it has caused a few complications about various bits of paperwork and I have considered whether to renounce it for her. But it is an important part of her identity, and carries the advantage of being able to live and work in the other country, which balances out any disadvantages.

The crucial aspect is choice - you can choose to keep it, or choose to renounce it. Then live with the consequences of that choice - which might include being eligible for removal of British citizenship if you decide to keep both, balanced against the possible advantages of that other citizenship.

But if someone has only ever held/claimed British citizenship then I do not think they should be treated as a dual national.

I haven’t really followed this or rtft but who funds the lawyers for cases such as this?

Its funded by legal aid ergo taxpayers

@MarshaBradyo - I am guessing legal aid as anyone committed of a crime or bringing a case under the Human Rights Act is eligible. As is only right really, if it’s you vs the state you should have some chance to defend yourself even if you have no money.

Whatever the outcome, if she comes back here she must absolutely be denied any ability to make money from the inevitable media scrum that will be surrounding her for interviews.

£2million the first time she appealed the decision ( uk tax payers )
Overall cost so far estimated in the order of £5million

It is a lot so I think the tax payer/ state is supporting her that way. But without being in the court with expertise it’s hard for people to say if wrong or right decision.

The Justice on the panel have decided. Then if another appeal it’ll be similar scrutiny.

Regarding the “she was a child, she couldn’t fully understand at 15, her brain wasn’t mature at that age” argument - it falls short when within the UK itself, you can vote at 16 years old. (Ridiculous but that’s another matter).

“Terrorists” aren’t one big homogeneous group. They are capable of lying, telling the truth, committing awful atrocities and also loving their families

Quite right, ChilliBandit
However I'm less bothered by what "box" Shamima belongs in and more about the greater safety of all, so if the security services - who after all know much more than we do - consider her a public risk then that's good enough for me

What she did was terrible and to be honest I couldn't really care less what happens to her. I do think she should come back here for trial though.
One thing she did say about her husband. 'I would never have got a man like that in England'.

That may be so but I imagine those she witnessed being beheaded and tortured were the ones experiencing severe trauma. Any trauma she experienced brought on herself.

She's a traitor, so she can stay where she is.

I absolutely agree. If Shamima was white British would everyone have the same view? It’s a really good point you make wondering if the empathy would be less if she was a male in the same situation, especially as it is said that black young adolescents are viewed as older.

I can’t get my head around why a young woman is being held to account for a terribly informed decision when she was 15. My daughter is in her 20s and I can’t imagine holding her to account for a stupid decision for potentially the rest of her life, except if she took a life or something like that.

Shamima is living in difficult conditions & I would imagine has to be careful what she says. She was a child who was groomed and sex trafficked. The decision today does not sit well with me.

It comes to something when some posters think it is perfectly fine to compare the situation this ghastly woman with the girls who were groomed by Pakistani gangs in Rochdale and Rotherham.

I mean, really-give your frigging heads a wobble and remember, no-one was saying this shite until her lawyers came up with the idea very late in the day.

Myra Hindley was 18 when she met Ian Brady... because of her life to that point she maybe had all the necessary traits to become what she became but IB was the catalyst. Maybe Begum is the same ...she still did what she did and appears to remain remorseless ...all the more concerning.

You can’t vote at 16 in the UK for Westminster general elections.

You can’t buy alcohol in a supermarket.

You can’t drive a car.

It’s all grooming whether you like to or not. Begum was groomed by another woman, an absolutely classic tactic of child sex traffickers. Happened in Rotherham too. Epstein didn’t keep his victims in chains. Many of them apparently willingly flew round the world with him knowing what they’d be expected to do. The recruited other girls. Does this mean they aren’t victims? I’m always horrified how little awareness there seems to be of grooming on MN. A site of primarily women and primarily parents. It’s actually a bit scary.

Luckily though, the powers that be have declared she is dangerous and that's that.

So, despite all the depressing nonsense and hand wringing about how she was a poor groomed child who knew naught of what she was doing, the fact remains-she is not coming back.

Thank God the decision was those with a little more wit than some posters and the dopes at the BBC. There is little more to say, just to raise a glass in thanks for the decision and that's what I'm off to do! Cheers!

You can’t vote at 16 or: smoke or vape, drive, marry without permission, buy alcohol, claim benefits or apply for a credit card or loan. Under 16 (Shamima was 15) you cannot do any of those things OR give consent for sex, work full-time, buy a lottery ticket, leave home without parental consent etc. She was a child.

For those who believe she was groomed do you feel her parents are responsible?

The judge today actually made it clear he believes she was groomed and trafficked.