|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Sept 1, 2022 20:00:46 GMT
If she comes back, presumably she would have a trial. What do you think the " sentence " would be?( not "should" be) Presumably, like everyone else, once she has served her sentence she would be allowed to get on with her life......but would this really happen.....I doubt she'd have a truly secret identity and protection, and , in any case , as I understand it, she wants to return to her family.....I doubt she would be left in peace by the media and others. Sometimes there isn't a satisfactory solution. I'm in favour of prison coupled with service to the community (cleaning derelict buildings, litter picking, planting trees, getting rid of graffiti, etc.). Promotion later to taking on charitable work such as feeding the homeless and other environmental activities. Basically doing good for the community and the planet. If she's not happy with that then stay where she is. It's another subject but all prisoners should be forced to contribute to society in exchange for a cell, bed, food, prison perks, etc. I'm not sure she COULD do community service Fos. The sentence would not be deemed to be appropriate by some and she would not be left alone to do it. I think the only sentence that would be considered appropriate would be a prison term. Obviously she wouldn't be happy with that....more to the point, what happens to her on release could be like setting off a box of fireworks. I don't think it is possible for the judicial system to satisfactorily deal with her.
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Sept 2, 2022 7:10:37 GMT
Is there a coorelation between use of the words woke/snowflake and academic achievements? No but there may be a correlation 🙂
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Nov 21, 2022 16:15:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Nov 21, 2022 20:59:33 GMT
The sexual exploitation argument is a new one and is a brave card to play this early in the process. It will be interesting to see if it works out. She has never claimed this before so it'll be interesting to see what opposition she faces to such claims.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Nov 21, 2022 21:50:16 GMT
The sexual exploitation argument is a new one and is a brave card to play this early in the process. It will be interesting to see if it works out. She has never claimed this before so it'll be interesting to see what opposition she faces to such claims. It’s obviously a load of absolute bullshit
|
|
|
Post by sticky on Nov 21, 2022 22:06:01 GMT
The sexual exploitation argument is a new one and is a brave card to play this early in the process. It will be interesting to see if it works out. She has never claimed this before so it'll be interesting to see what opposition she faces to such claims. It’s obviously a load of absolute bullshit yep, wouldn’t be suprised if she’s already back tbh
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Nov 21, 2022 22:20:36 GMT
If that's her current look, she's up to a 4 pint maybe.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Nov 21, 2022 22:43:12 GMT
The sexual exploitation argument is a new one and is a brave card to play this early in the process. It will be interesting to see if it works out. She has never claimed this before so it'll be interesting to see what opposition she faces to such claims. It’s obviously a load of absolute bullshit Tbh in a case like this, the truth doesn't matter. What will matter is whether all the technicalities have been safely fulfilled. I suspect that they will find a loophole and she'll be home soon. Sadly, her return is both wrong and right. It's wrong in that we really do not want to bring her back. She's a terrorist. It's right because she's our mess to clean up. We expect other countries to take terrorists back.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Nov 21, 2022 23:09:13 GMT
Rot in hell
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Nov 21, 2022 23:20:52 GMT
The sexual exploitation argument is a new one and is a brave card to play this early in the process. It will be interesting to see if it works out. She has never claimed this before so it'll be interesting to see what opposition she faces to such claims. It’s obviously a load of absolute bullshit Oh dear maybe we are about to diverge again Whether she has been Sexualy Trafficked or not has no bearing on her Citizenship being withdrawn or not She put herself in harms way and it's not a factor in the reason for her Deprivation of Citizenship Under UK Law at 15 she is a minor and at her current age 23 not. When did the alleged crimes she committed take place which would determine the Court and Punishment The gift of Deprivation of Citizenship is solely in the hands of The Home Secretary although there is an automatic right to Appeal to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) When a person has been subject to Deprivation of Citizenship They have no right of reentry to UK to defend themselves (although some on this MB disbelieve) or indeed they or their Legal Council are not necessarily given the reason or evidence for their Deprivation of Citizenship They may if they wish have a Special Advocate appointed to review the evidence but once they have they can no longer communicate in anyway with the person being subject to Deprivation of Citizenship Personally I find this whole process abhorrent and not in keeping with Natural Justice. If someone is being charged with a crime they should know the bases of the charges against them and face their accusers in Court "In Camera" if necessary Curiously UK ranks second only behind Bahrain as the Country which invokes Deprivation of Citizenship The US for instance cannot do so Constitutionally I have no idea why this is, perhaps someone does?
|
|
|
Post by somersetstokie on Nov 22, 2022 17:50:53 GMT
Can't we let her into the country under her current status, and then send her to Rwanda as an illegal immigrant?
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jan 13, 2023 19:00:22 GMT
The BBC have been on the way down for years... But I think this could be the first nail in the coffin. They've created a Shamima Begum podcast, I'm Not A Monster; nothing like the impartial BBC pegging their flag to the mast. Now I've joked for years that the Guardian would give her a column if she came home. She's their ideal guest writer and a good chunk of their authors probably share her overall worldview I didn't think the BBC would take it literally.... And in Syria. The Guardian must be gutted. Now for me, THIS is the kind of shit that SHOULD be considered offensive in 2022. Fucking misusing someone's pronouns, how about giving a platform to a woman who openly admitted to manufacturing suicide vests designed to blow up innocent people? Giving a 10 episode podcast on one of the largest news networks in the world to a terrorist. Allowing a terrorist to clearly drive the narrative "I am so much more than Isis", "I am not a monster". No, you're an awful human-being who travelled to a country with the sole intention of participating in a war that was killing innocent men, women and children on a daily basis. Get it gone. Time for the BBC to wave goodbye.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jan 13, 2023 19:51:08 GMT
The BBC have been on the way down for years... But I think this could be the first nail in the coffin. They've created a Shamima Begum podcast, I'm Not A Monster; nothing like the impartial BBC pegging their flag to the mast. I wasn't that far off with this then... Celebrity Big Brother & a weekly column in the Guardian is awaiting her, I can see it now... "Why white, male, working class Brexit voters made me join ISIS".
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jan 13, 2023 23:44:20 GMT
The BBC have been on the way down for years... But I think this could be the first nail in the coffin. They've created a Shamima Begum podcast, I'm Not A Monster; nothing like the impartial BBC pegging their flag to the mast. I wasn't that far off with this then... Celebrity Big Brother & a weekly column in the Guardian is awaiting her, I can see it now... "Why white, male, working class Brexit voters made me join ISIS". The fact that the BBC are behind this is disgusting. I would expect this shite from the likes of ITV but the BBC is government-backed at the expense of the taxpayer. It's yet another betrayal from a company with such little credibility these days, it just needs dumping. Write it off as a relic from a bygone time.
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jan 14, 2023 8:43:03 GMT
The BBC have been on the way down for years... But I think this could be the first nail in the coffin. They've created a Shamima Begum podcast, I'm Not A Monster; nothing like the impartial BBC pegging their flag to the mast. I wasn't that far off with this then... Celebrity Big Brother & a weekly column in the Guardian is awaiting her, I can see it now... "Why white, male, working class Brexit voters made me join ISIS". The celebrity version of The Traitors would be interesting. And let's not forget The Independent either- 'ISIS were the extreme side of toxic and aggressive patriarchy- but we still have work to do here in the UK'
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Jan 14, 2023 9:05:21 GMT
I wasn't that far off with this then... The celebrity version of The Traitors would be interesting. And let's not forget The Independent either- 'ISIS were the extreme side of toxic and aggressive patriarchy- but we still have work to do here in the UK' Now you me and the big c is finishing the BBC need a new podcast and media darling. In the new weekly podcast 'Eh Begum' Azeem Rafiq and Shamima Begum present an irreverent take on the week in cricket across the world whilst explaining what putting the IS in terrorist is really like. If the figures work out it'll transfer to BBC 2 as Mock the Weak.
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Jan 14, 2023 13:23:55 GMT
I wasn't that far off with this then... The fact that the BBC are behind this is disgusting. I would expect this shite from the likes of ITV but the BBC is government-backed at the expense of the taxpayer. It's yet another betrayal from a company with such little credibility these days, it just needs dumping. Write it off as a relic from a bygone time. There’s something very wrong about giving her airtime. I just don’t get the justification.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Jan 14, 2023 14:04:51 GMT
The celebrity version of The Traitors would be interesting. And let's not forget The Independent either- 'ISIS were the extreme side of toxic and aggressive patriarchy- but we still have work to do here in the UK' Now you me and the big c is finishing the BBC need a new podcast and media darling. In the new weekly podcast 'Eh Begum' Azeem Rafiq and Shamima Begum present an irreverent take on the week in cricket across the world whilst explaining what putting the IS in terrorist is really like. If the figures work out it'll transfer to BBC 2 as Mock the Weak. ..... and next week the new Westernised Shamina discusses why I love the West together with an irreverent take on beheadings over the dark ages from Henry to Islamic State.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Feb 11, 2023 12:33:16 GMT
Well I watched the programme last night interviewing her and it made for an incredibly uncomfortable listen on so many levels. I suspect that she's had the most difficult life lesson that any young person could possibly have and must know that she's been a complete stooge for one of the most abhorrent movements in recent history. Despite the coaching by lawyers, the dressing by lawyers, the evasion of difficult questions possibly for self preservation on balance it's probably right that she should be allowed back she's probably already received enough justice for one lifetime. You'll only ever hear her real thoughts when she's in a place of safety.
|
|
|
Post by cheadlepotter on Feb 22, 2023 11:45:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by flea79 on Feb 22, 2023 12:28:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by deeside2 on Feb 22, 2023 12:57:35 GMT
Excellent news
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Feb 22, 2023 13:07:13 GMT
Good,let the slag rot.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Feb 22, 2023 13:28:18 GMT
Hopefully it serves as a warning to anyone else similarly inclined so that, if they do go through with their plans, they at least do so with their eyes wide open as to the consequences of their actions.
|
|
|
Post by xchpotter on Feb 22, 2023 13:54:55 GMT
Have to say I am pleasantly astonished, not because I thought she should win, more a case of being convinced a judgement in her favour was inevitable. Still, there will no doubt be an appeal as her lawyers have said. This isn't over and won't be until she's allowed back in.
The cynic in me thinks the judge has been influenced to find against her in the short term so as to repel the growing reballion around an alternative to ECHR for which there would have been an outcry had she won. Its just cosily on the back burner and once she appeals and wins, the long term aims for the powers that be will be to have squared any displeasure at ECHR away.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 22, 2023 17:18:59 GMT
Have to say I am pleasantly astonished, not because I thought she should win, more a case of being convinced a judgement in her favour was inevitable. Still, there will no doubt be an appeal as her lawyers have said. This isn't over and won't be until she's allowed back in. The cynic in me thinks the judge has been influenced to find against her in the short term so as to repel the growing reballion around an alternative to ECHR for which there would have been an outcry had she won. Its just cosily on the back burner and once she appeals and wins, the long term aims for the powers that be will be to have squared any displeasure at ECHR away. It's hard to show any level of sympathy for this deeply unpleasant person. However my understanding (I'm no stranger to being wrong) is that under present and proposed (Nationalities and Borders Bill) UK Law it is not legal to deprive someone of Citizenship if it makes them Stateless, which is what has happened. Briefly reading through the Judgement it is evident from the wording that this is very much round 1. The Immigration Tribunal Court concluded that its scope was narrow and constrained to considering whether she should be allowd entry to UK and not whether the revocation was legal in the first place or indeed if the case was proven that she was a threat to National Security or not. In fact it concluded that other eminent people reviewing the evidence presented to Javid when he revoked her Citizenship might well reach a different conclusion There were many references to the Supreme Court and Article 8 ECHR which is inevitably where this is heading I find it uneasy if their is a case which can be proved that Begum is a threat to National Security why not try her in a British Court, "in camera" if necessary It is ironic that many who trumpet "innocent until proven guilty" in other circumstances see no conflict in applauding this Judgement I suspect this will run and run for some time yet
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Feb 22, 2023 17:24:31 GMT
Have to say I am pleasantly astonished, not because I thought she should win, more a case of being convinced a judgement in her favour was inevitable. Still, there will no doubt be an appeal as her lawyers have said. This isn't over and won't be until she's allowed back in. The cynic in me thinks the judge has been influenced to find against her in the short term so as to repel the growing reballion around an alternative to ECHR for which there would have been an outcry had she won. Its just cosily on the back burner and once she appeals and wins, the long term aims for the powers that be will be to have squared any displeasure at ECHR away. It's hard to show any level of sympathy for this deeply unpleasant person. However my understanding (I'm no stranger to being wrong) is that under present and proposed (Nationalities and Borders Bill) UK Law it is not legal to deprive someone of Citizenship if it makes them Stateless, which is what has happened. Briefly reading through the Judgement it is evident from the wording that this is very much round 1. The Immigration Tribunal Court concluded that its scope was narrow and constrained to considering whether she should be allowd entry to UK and not whether the revocation was legal in the first place or indeed if the case was proven that she was a threat to National Security or not. In fact it concluded that other eminent people reviewing the evidence presented to Javid when he revoked her Citizenship might well reach a different conclusion There were many references to the Supreme Court and Article 8 ECHR which is inevitably where this is heading I find it uneasy if their is a case which can be proved that Begum is a threat to National Security why not try her in a British Court, "in camera" if necessary It is ironic that many who trumpet "innocent until proven guilty" in other circumstances see no conflict in applauding this Judgement I suspect this will run and run for some time yet I agree, it actually sets a dangerous precedent as well in my opinion……
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 22, 2023 17:53:17 GMT
It becomes worse in new law when a person doesn't even have to be informed their citizenship has been removed, most likely when overseas
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Feb 22, 2023 18:11:13 GMT
Hopefully it serves as a warning to anyone else similarly inclined so that, if they do go through with their plans, they at least do so with their eyes wide open as to the consequences of their actions. I’m not sure how I do feel about this one. On one hand, she was 15. On the other hand, 15 seems old enough to know better. Did she actively recruit others? If she did, screw her. If not, I feel less strongly about it.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 22, 2023 18:27:41 GMT
|
|