Shamima Begum Who Left The UK To Join ISIS Is To Be Stripped Of Her U.K. Citizenship

originally posted by: Flavian

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter

originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: UKTruth

Absolute garbage. She was groomed into going to the Islamic Caliphate in the first place, whilst still a child. That makes her a victim, as hard to swallow as you may find that.

By your logic the death squads who were "groomed" into the Hitler Youth then onto the SS were victims too

Any child that is groomed into a certain way of thinking and behaving has been manipulated into that way of life. Pyschologists and pyschiatrists understand this principle easily enough but clearly not here on ATS!

That's exactly what we DO understand.
Every child is a product of grooming - positive and negative. It does NOT mean we should feel sorry for monsters.
Give your sympathies to those that deserve it - like the victims of the vile creature referred to in the OP. She has already left 2 dead babies in her wake and how much she helped murderers to prepare for their killing sprees and executions, the Lord only knows.

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: ScepticScot

In the case of a person who is a direct threat to the lives of the British people, I think the course of action taken is a sensible one. Take away citizenship to avoid letting that person back in the country, risking lives, and let them face war criminal charges in the international courts.

There is no law being broken here, no due process being ignored. It is within the law today to strip someone of citizenship without a trial. So your suggestion doesn't hold water - it just puts lives at risk if it was followed.

There a range of options short of removing her citizenship available.

No one is arguing that the home Secretary doesn't have the power (althrough there is some legal disagreement in this specific case).

The argument is about if it's appropriate for a politician to.be able to remove the citizenship of someone who hasn't ever been convicted of any crime.

Consider the more general consequences. What if a future corbyn government (shudder) decided to remove the citizenship of right wing activists for the public good?

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: ScepticScot

She' over there on Jihad in a recognised sovereign state and is part of a genocidal group targeting Yazidis, Christians, alawhtyes etc and you think she shouldn't be tried in the locality? Total nonsense

It's the view of the UK government.

a reply to: UKTruth

Do you know that whilst she was being groomed, the Police and Security Services made the decision NOT to inform her family? The very people that could have nipped this in the bud were ignored. That is a serious failing right there (never mind all the others).

I don't agree with her views, i don't sympathise with IS at all. But i am very uncomfortable that we (as a nation) can completely and systematically fail a child and then wash our hands of the consequences. We are supposed to have national values that run contrary to that.

Given all the failings throughout this case, i can easily see the High Court overturning the Home Secretary's decision - there would certainly be a sound legal basis for this. Again though, this is for this case in particular, as opposed to generally for returning Jihadi's or their partners.

originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: UKTruth

Do you know that whilst she was being groomed, the Police and Security Services made the decision NOT to inform her family? The very people that could have nipped this in the bud were ignored. That is a serious failing right there (never mind all the others).

I don't agree with her views, i don't sympathise with IS at all. But i am very uncomfortable that we (as a nation) can completely and systematically fail a child and then wash our hands of the consequences. We are supposed to have national values that run contrary to that.

Given all the failings throughout this case, i can easily see the High Court overturning the Home Secretary's decision - there would certainly be a sound legal basis for this. Again though, this is for this case in particular, as opposed to generally for returning Jihadi's or their partners.

Listen, you seem to have a problem with the notion of personal responsibility.
It's the parents fault that they didn't know what their child was up to, not the police's fault and the responsibility for thie POS in the OP's actions is all her own.
Please don't now try and blame the police.

originally posted by: FlavianI would add, again, that she isn't actually a terrorist herself. So the Hitler Youth to SS analogy also doesn't really compare as the SS squads actually did murder people - she didn't. If she had, i would have no argument whatsoever to her having her citizenship revoked.

That's good

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Flavian

The guy who blew up innocent people in the Manchester bombing was groomed too.

.....and when she was interviewed by Sky News, I think it was, she showed no remorse about the Manchester bombing and basically said it was justified retaliation for what we had done to Syrians! So very glad she has dual citizenship so they could revoke her UK one!
Video with a young lady who lost her parents were murdered at the Manchester bombing.



Rainbows
Jane

originally posted by: midicon

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: ScepticScot

She' over there on Jihad in a recognised sovereign state and is part of a genocidal group targeting Yazidis, Christians, alawhtyes etc and you think she shouldn't be tried in the locality? Total nonsense

Under normal circumstance she'd be handed over to the Syrian authorities who would then decide on her fate.

If you were a Syrian who had seen there country descend into hell on Earth by being invaded by foreign Jihadis aided in many cases by western and Sunni governments including our own and had your family murdered in the most medieval ways you might see it from another angle

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: ScepticScot

She' over there on Jihad in a recognised sovereign state and is part of a genocidal group targeting Yazidis, Christians, alawhtyes etc and you think she shouldn't be tried in the locality? Total nonsense

It's the view of the UK government.

Its also the view that she is not longer a UK citizen.....so suck it up

originally posted by: UKTruth

Listen, you seem to have a problem with the notion of personal responsibility.
It's the parents fault that they didn't know what their child was up to, not the police's fault and the responsibility for thie POS in the OP's actions is all her own.
Please don't now try and blame the police.

So the Police can admit their failings but you can't accept that? That is some serious head in the sand thinking right there. Legally, they should have informed her parents. They didn't. Can you grasp that?

It is absolute nonsense to pretend that this is anything other than a very complicated case - not the open and shut type case that you seem to be trying to push.

Sceptic has it right stating that this sets a dangerous precendent. She is not guilty of any crime.

a reply to: Flavian

Grooming for sex with a minority group [young girls] is not the same as wanting to change a 'free' [ish] country to an islamic nightmare killing and raping and eventually subduing a whole nation.

One is a sad and disgusting crime, the other is something far bigger, not even in the same league, more like war.

If she was poor groomed minor, she aint any longer. She is an adult mother. So asking her now what she wants is still the same, Britain islamic. As I said, she is a traitor and so are her parents.
No, the grroming excuse can only be played had she woken up, showed remorse and had cried and said that Britain was right after all and how she regrets everything but she was groomed and she hates isis [even then I wouldn't believe her], but she didn't do any of that.
Something that all groomed girls did however.
That's why it can't be compared with each other.

One problem I have with this... the child she just have is going to be condemned alongside the mother when its only crime is momma is an idiot.


Should have brought her back taken the kid (child endangerment should have been enough), then stripped her citizenship (aid and comfort to a terrorist group that was guilty of crimes against humanity) or something like that.


The baby is the one I feel bad for.

a reply to: Flavian

You are making the assumption that the parents would have cared or that they didn't know.

Thing is that when you look at the statistics on Muslims and their feelings toward things like ISIS and/or radical Jihad, there are three camps: the actual radicals who would do anything, the ones who wouldn't personally do anything but support it passively, and the ones who wouldn't either do anything or support it.

In order for her parents to care and try to stop her, they would have to be in camp C, but for all you know, they were part of the grooming process in attitude and were in camp B, so they didn't actually care that she was being groomed or self-radicalizing all that much. They may not have believed she would actually leave to join ISIS. After all, they, however sympathetic, may not ever do much to actively help either, but their attitude was never one of censure for the group.

It would be like a kid who suddenly runs off to join ELF having grown up in a family that constantly watches things like Whale Wars on Animal Planet and has dinner time discussions about how bad humans treat the planet. They act shocked, but they were setting him up for it all along in their own way.

"I think a lot of people should have sympathy towards me for everything I've been through," she told Sky News.

Their sympathy is going to the victims of ISIS who deserve more than you do. A lesson in consequences for actions.

a reply to: roadgravel

I think a lot of people think she should pish right off!

originally posted by: roadgravel

"I think a lot of people should have sympathy towards me for everything I've been through," she told Sky News.

Their sympathy is going to the victims of ISIS who deserve more than you do. A lesson in consequences for actions.

I don't know why we should feel sorry for her. She is living the consequences of her choice in faith. If I decided tomorrow to strip myself of the world and go convert to Amish life and then resurfaced claiming it was horrible, I doubt anyone would feel much sympathy for me. I suffered the consequences of my choice in faith. That's what freedom of religion is. My only sorrow is that she did not have the wisdom to understand how much her tenets were going to demand she suffer.

a reply to: Flavian

I really couldn't give a snip about finding other people to blame for the human garbage that wants to come back to the UK after joining ISIS.
It's not the police's fault. She's not a victim.
She is a terrorist.

a reply to: infolurker

We already have 'Muslims' who are 'OK' with the idea of beheading in the name of their god and sharia law, so I'm glad people have seen sense with this case.

a reply to: ketsuko

Whilst i understand your comment, you are also making the assumption that the parents wouldn't have cared or tried to stop her. We have no (publicly available) evidence to suggest that the parents have IS sympathies - quite the opposite in fact.

The fact is, legally the parents should have been informed - and they weren't. That right there is a child protection failure before we go any further.

Her lack of remorse for IS is certainly worrying. There are though some serious failings throughout this case and she has now been stripped of citizenship despite not having broken any laws. She has lost her citizenship through essentially having distasteful views.

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Flavian

I really couldn't give a snip about finding other people to blame for the human garbage that wants to come back to the UK after joining ISIS.
It's not the police's fault. She's not a victim.
She is a terrorist.

Brilliant. How is she has a terrorist? What acts of terror has she committed? What evidence is there for these attacks?

Or will you admit that you are simply making that up?