National News Shamima Begum

Essexyellows said:
In one case one was engaged with the system and its consequences.
In one case one was not engaged with the system and its consequences.

In both cases there are failings within "the system", but they are far outweighed by the choices made by the individuals.
Click to expand...
Choices made by children who had been groomed by radical individuals. Yes both failures of state. is one sort of terrorism worse than other? is one child different from another?
 
OUFCGav said:
both were groomed as children by radicals. In one case they are saying being groomed is a reason not to prosecute. In another they say it is not.
Click to expand...
Who is saying we shouldn't prosecute Begum? The cases are so different that no comparison can be drawn - the practical purpose of a prosecution is rendered entirely meaningless if she is sat in the desert where she no longer poses a threat to the British public.
 
bashamwonderland said:
Who is saying we shouldn't prosecute Begum? The cases are so different that no comparison can be drawn - the practical purpose of a prosecution is rendered entirely meaningless if she is sat in the desert where she no longer poses a threat to the British public.
Click to expand...
But we are not prosecuting Begum - we have politically decided to arbitrarily remove the citizenship of the country of her birth (in a legally dubious manner, done by government not courts). If she really is a threat to the UK public then present the evidence to a UK court and have it properly decided.
The government would rather make her a political football to play to their base.
 
OUFCGav said:
But we are not prosecuting Begum - we have politically decided to arbitrarily remove the citizenship of the country of her birth (in a legally dubious manner, done by government not courts). If she really is a threat to the UK public then present the evidence to a UK court and have it properly decided.
The government would rather make her a political football to play to their base.
Click to expand...
"Legally dubious" as in the highest court in the land and possibly the most respected legal forum in the World, the Supreme Court, has considered her case and ruled in the government's favour?

It has been properly decided. What part of the judgment in Begum v Home Secretary [2021] do you disagree with?
 
OUFCGav said:
Choices made by children who had been groomed by radical individuals. Yes both failures of state. is one sort of terrorism worse than other? is one child different from another?
Click to expand...

Yes everyone is different and many teenagers are full of ideas, ideology and a will to change the world.
The overwhelming majority don`t start plotting to kill people to achieve their aims.

One case the subject fully embraced the "wrong team" and is now paying the price.

One case the subject tried Prevent but was a disturbed soul who paid the ultimate price for her troubles.

Thats it. The end.

Everyone happily blames "the state" but, by the time the state is involved, a lot of people have already failed them in both cases, either by their choices or their actions.

The state, in all its forms, is a very blunt instrument.
 
www.bbc.co.uk

Shamima Begum bid to regain UK citizenship rejected

The 23-year-old loses her appeal on national security grounds and means she cannot return to the UK.
www.bbc.co.uk

"The Special Immigration Appeals Commission has ruled that decision, taken after ministers received national security advice about Ms Begum's threat to the UK, had been lawful"

Leave her there to consider how poor her choices were.

I expect "Shamima - The Movie" to arrive on Netflix soon enough.
 
OUFCGav will be along shortly with full legal analysis of the judgment and will explain exactly where the court erred in its findings.
 
Personally I think leaving a group of people in a desert sateless creates a problem down the road. Families being brought up to hate their oppressors, ie us does not stop the cycle it perpetuates it.
I get that there is a strong feeling of let her rot there I just don’t think it’s the best long term or cheapest solution. Bring her back and try her here and deal with her on the outcome of a free and fair trial.
 
A retired Chief Constable was on the radio earlier saying that it would cost roughly £1m a year if she lived here with extra security, checks, etc.
Personally I’d rather use that money to pay NHS, extra policing, etc. If we do have to pay to keep her out I’d rather do that tbh.
 
Yellowmania said:
A retired Chief Constable was on the radio earlier saying that it would cost roughly £1m a year if she lived here with extra security, checks, etc.
Personally I’d rather use that money to pay NHS, extra policing, etc. If we do have to pay to keep her out I’d rather do that tbh.
Click to expand...
Please give a link. Would like to see who said it and where
 
bashamwonderland said:
How much more? Please give a link.

Would love to see your source on that.
Click to expand...
It’s subjective, as I’m sure you know. However, If you read this you will see that the cost comes in the form of having to deal with far more terrorists in years to come, having created a breeding ground for isis.

I don’t know how much it cost to defeat isis first time round more than 1 million a year I recon.

 
Yellowmania said:
A retired Chief Constable was on the radio earlier saying that it would cost roughly £1m a year if she lived here with extra security, checks, etc.
Personally I’d rather use that money to pay NHS, extra policing, etc. If we do have to pay to keep her out I’d rather do that tbh.
Click to expand...
It's also seems that you are happy for a terrorist to get off Scott free! She should have the full force of the law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Peterdev
National News Shamima Begum
Replies
1
Views
1K
Essexyellows
Essexyellows
Back
Top Bottom