Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Whatever your political persuasion, defend your corner here. All we ask is that you voice YOUR opinion, rather than just post a link to a half-hour youtube video. Politics can get a bit lively, and if you prefer a less combative debate, please post in the Politics for Moderates section instead.
gerryg
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:50 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by gerryg »

This is becoming tedious.. The conclusion that she has dual nationality was arrived at by the Supreme Court. It was not determined by Sadiq Khan, Boris Johnson or any other member of the Government. So the Court held that stripping her of Uk citizenship would not make her stateless since she held through her parents dual nationality with Bangladesh. Surely thats easy enough to follow. So she is not STATELESS.

If Bangladesh do not recognise this is neither here nor there. They are perfectly entitled to decide whatever they like. But it has no effect on the Supreme Court ruling in the UK. She is not Stateless according to Uk law and it is UK law that matters. So just in case I have not made myself clear she is not STATELESS. And if she is not a UK citizen why on earth would the UK allow her entry.

Gerryg
Jim B
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Jim B »

gerryg wrote: Sun Sep 11, 2022 8:00 pm This is becoming tedious.. The conclusion that she has dual nationality was arrived at by the Supreme Court. It was not determined by Sadiq Khan, Boris Johnson or any other member of the Government. So the Court held that stripping her of Uk citizenship would not make her stateless since she held through her parents dual nationality with Bangladesh. Surely thats easy enough to follow. So she is not STATELESS.

If Bangladesh do not recognise this is neither here nor there. They are perfectly entitled to decide whatever they like. But it has no effect on the Supreme Court ruling in the UK. She is not Stateless according to Uk law and it is UK law that matters. So just in case I have not made myself clear she is not STATELESS. And if she is not a UK citizen why on earth would the UK allow her entry.

Gerryg
It's becoming tedious because you don't appear to understand the Supreme Courts decision so its really a waste of time trying to explain it to you.
WHL
Posts: 6881
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:43 pm

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by WHL »

I stupidly opened a video, and saw Isis beheading and burning alive men in cages, anybody who supports these evil ***** deserves everything they get , she even said she was wasn't concerned about isis actions.
Had isis won their fight, would this nasty lady even want to come back to the UK, i doubt it.
Jim B
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Jim B »

WHL
Again your missing the point which has surprised me. I'm not defending anyone, I like many are concerned that this government can arbitrarily make a person stateless. There has been no court case to say the girl in question is guilty or not guilty of anything and contrary to comments on here the Supreme Court has not made the girl stateless, they have said she cannot enter the country to contest the government's decision but has to contest it from the location she is being held.
If this decision to arbitrarily remove a person's citizenship is left unchallenged then they can do it to anyone including, you, me, Poppy or anyone else for that matter and that is what is worrying especially when the country has a right wing fanatic like Suella Braverman as Home Secretary.
gerryg
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:50 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by gerryg »

Here is the Supreme Court ruling . Which part dont I understand?

Begum v Home Secretary [2021] UKSC 7 is the short name of three closely connected proceedings considered together in the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, R (on the application of Begum) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission; R (on the application of Begum) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; and Begum v Secretary of State for the Home Department, concerning Shamima Begum, a woman born in the United Kingdom who at the age of 15 travelled to Syria to join the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS). Her intention to return to England in 2019 resulted in a public debate about the handling of returning jihadists.

The case was heard on 23 and 24 November 2020, and in a judgment delivered on 26 February 2021 the Supreme Court unanimously found in favour of the Home Secretary on her appeal against an Order of the Court of Appeal that Begum should be given leave to enter the United Kingdom, which it overturned.[1] It also dismissed Begum's applications for judicial review of the leave to enter decision and of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission's preliminary decision in a deprivation of citizenship appeal. It considered that Begum's challenge to her loss of British citizenship could only be stayed until such time as she is in a position to play an effective part in it without the safety of the public being compromised.

Pretty clear I think. So the legal position is exactly as I have described. Whether or not it is fair is not a legal matter but a matter of opinion.

Gerry g
Jim B
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Jim B »

gerryg wrote: Mon Sep 12, 2022 9:52 am Here is the Supreme Court ruling . Which part dont I understand?

Begum v Home Secretary [2021] UKSC 7 is the short name of three closely connected proceedings considered together in the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, R (on the application of Begum) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission; R (on the application of Begum) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; and Begum v Secretary of State for the Home Department, concerning Shamima Begum, a woman born in the United Kingdom who at the age of 15 travelled to Syria to join the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS). Her intention to return to England in 2019 resulted in a public debate about the handling of returning jihadists.

The case was heard on 23 and 24 November 2020, and in a judgment delivered on 26 February 2021 the Supreme Court unanimously found in favour of the Home Secretary on her appeal against an Order of the Court of Appeal that Begum should be given leave to enter the United Kingdom, which it overturned.[1] It also dismissed Begum's applications for judicial review of the leave to enter decision and of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission's preliminary decision in a deprivation of citizenship appeal. It considered that Begum's challenge to her loss of British citizenship could only be stayed until such time as she is in a position to play an effective part in it without the safety of the public being compromised.

Pretty clear I think. So the legal position is exactly as I have described. Whether or not it is fair is not a legal matter but a matter of opinion.

Gerry g
I believe you misunderstood all of it.
gerryg
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:50 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by gerryg »

Oh really! Which parts exactly ?

Gerryg
Poppy
Posts: 835
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:49 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Poppy »

Oh for goodness sake Jim this is getting really tedious. You accuse the then Home Secretary of not having a clue as he was merely a banker! You accuse the Courts even the Supreme Court of making political decisions etc. You accuse the current Home Secretary of being a fanatic!! ( Not sure why you think she is a fanatic unless it be because she is determined to stop illegal immigration of which decision I can tell you that 99% of UK residents are fully behind) You also say that the UK cannot dispute citizenship but that Bangladesh can - does that really make sense? No of course it does not! I told you earlier that she was not trafficked out of the UK and has admitted that she made her own way freely to Turkey en route to Syria. Finally let me tell you this if I had done anything that she has actually agreed that she has done I would expect my citizenship to be revoked. She has agreed that she has assisted in acts of treason against the UK, She has no rights whatsoever.
Firefly
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 2:08 pm
Location: Hereford UK

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Firefly »

Well said Poppy.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.
Jim B
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Jim B »

Poppy wrote: Mon Sep 12, 2022 12:51 pm Oh for goodness sake Jim this is getting really tedious. You accuse the then Home Secretary of not having a clue as he was merely a banker! You accuse the Courts even the Supreme Court of making political decisions etc. You accuse the current Home Secretary of being a fanatic!! ( Not sure why you think she is a fanatic unless it be because she is determined to stop illegal immigration of which decision I can tell you that 99% of UK residents are fully behind) You also say that the UK cannot dispute citizenship but that Bangladesh can - does that really make sense? No of course it does not! I told you earlier that she was not trafficked out of the UK and has admitted that she made her own way freely to Turkey en route to Syria. Finally let me tell you this if I had done anything that she has actually agreed that she has done I would expect my citizenship to be revoked. She has agreed that she has assisted in acts of treason against the UK, She has no rights whatsoever.
Yes it is tedious. I said Javid made a decision on popular politics , not on law to please the mob. He was told by numerous
Law Experts he would be breaking international law but he carried on regardless that is why the girl can contest the decision at the Supreme Court, as I said the only decision the Supreme Court made in favour of the government was that due to Security concerns she can't contest it in the UK and has to do it from Syri where she's presently held prisoner.
The girl was not born in Bangladesh nor does she have a passport or citizenship from there so how can she be classed as a citizen of a country she has no connection to.
Suella Bravaman many times under the Johnson government was quite prepared to support breaking national and international law to support the government when it was her job to advise the government of its legal obligations.
As said, if they can get away with making this girl stateless without legal recourse then they can do it to anyone and everyone.
It's not about the girl per se, it's about the law.
WHL
Posts: 6881
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:43 pm

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by WHL »

Jim B wrote: Mon Sep 12, 2022 8:56 am WHL
Again your missing the point which has surprised me. I'm not defending anyone, I like many are concerned that this government can arbitrarily make a person stateless. There has been no court case to say the girl in question is guilty or not guilty of anything and contrary to comments on here the Supreme Court has not made the girl stateless, they have said she cannot enter the country to contest the government's decision but has to contest it from the location she is being held.
If this decision to arbitrarily remove a person's citizenship is left unchallenged then they can do it to anyone including, you, me, Poppy or anyone else for that matter and that is what is worrying especially when the country has a right wing fanatic like Suella Braverman as Home Secretary.
I am not missing any point, this girl chose to go and join probably one of the most evil group of people , right up there with the Nazis, when questioned about innocent people being beheaded etc, she said it did not worry her, she and her kind can rot in hell for all I care, if you want to play the Perry mason roll , then go for it, but I for one hope this piece of trash and others like her, never sets foot in the UK
gerryg
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:50 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by gerryg »

Well Jim Its quite clear that you are the sort of man who does not let facts or the truth get in the way of a good story. Well done. Oh and don't forget to throw in a rant about the new Home Secretary who has nothing to do with any of the decisions made in this case.

Those of you who have read the Supreme court ruling can see that the Court has not completely shut the door on Begum. It is still slightly ajar. And It was the Foreign Minister, I believe, in Bangladesh who said that neither Begum nor her parents were entitled to become citizens of Bangladesh. This view could be challenged in court in the same way that it was in the UK. However it would be risky. If she won in court and was granted citizenship the door to the UK would close still further. And the British Government believe that this would happen. However if she were to lose in court in Bangladesh it would be extremely difficult for the British Government to maintain its view that she has dual citizenship.

All in all she is in a very difficult position. And you can imagine the issues that would arise if by any chance such a high profile figure ever went back to the UK. She would probably need constant police protection .

Lastly (and it really is lastly) Lisa Smith a returning Isis member in Ireland having been found guilty of belonging to Isis was given a 15 month sentence. So the chances of any returning Isis members being locked up for a long time is remote as is finding any other evidence of wrongdoing.

Gerryg
Jim B
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Jim B »

I think you'll find Suella Braverman as AG has been involved in the Begum case but that's by the bye.
Everything I've posted about the Supreme Courts decision is factual, it has NOT declared the girl stateless. Fact.
Now that might not suit your narrative but it's true.
As said from first post my concern is the arbitrary way the government can declare a person stateless against international law without any legal recourse. I believe we all should be concerned but who was it who said, First they came......
living the dream
Posts: 123
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 10:18 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by living the dream »

I do not understand why anybody bothers to responds to Jim B - he ALWAYS bends the narrative to suit his argument, always did the same with Brexit Posts then with the UK Vaccine rollout and every topic he has cared to complain about or champion since. I have not always agreed with HIC, WHL or others on this forum but there has always been a level of give and take and sometimes mutual consent - Jim B is a complete A-s-h-l- and keyboard warrior who must spend his days looking for his next cause to champion or Government Minister to put down.

The Begum case is clear cut for I suspect 99% of decent Britains wouldn’t want her living anywhere near them - she gave up her rights when she went of her own free will and accord to join ISIS the most despicable and cowardly terrorist group ever formed.

Their have been 466 case of citizenships been revoked over the last 16 years mainly for Terrorist and serious fraud activities - hardly an avalanche and more to the point these are serious crimes against the UK but Jim B as usual bends the narrative to suit his ridiculous argument that we should all be concerned.
Jim B
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Jim B »

living the dream wrote: Fri Sep 16, 2022 11:10 am I do not understand why anybody bothers to responds to Jim B - he ALWAYS bends the narrative to suit his argument, always did the same with Brexit Posts then with the UK Vaccine rollout and every topic he has cared to complain about or champion since. I have not always agreed with HIC, WHL or others on this forum but there has always been a level of give and take and sometimes mutual consent - Jim B is a complete A-s-h-l- and keyboard warrior who must spend his days looking for his next cause to champion or Government Minister to put down.

The Begum case is clear cut for I suspect 99% of decent Britains wouldn’t want her living anywhere near them - she gave up her rights when she went of her own free will and accord to join ISIS the most despicable and cowardly terrorist group ever formed.

Their have been 466 case of citizenships been revoked over the last 16 years mainly for Terrorist and serious fraud activities - hardly an avalanche and more to the point these are serious crimes against the UK but Jim B as usual bends the narrative to suit his ridiculous argument that we should all be concerned.
Thankyou for your kind comments, they're very much appreciated.

Did you by any chance check how many of the 466 people had dual citizenship, I would hazard a guess 466 but I may be wrong, but it is illegal under International law to make a person stateless.
I have no problem with people having their citizenship revoked if they have been proven guilty of a crime, where we differ is I don't believe in vigilante justice like you and your fellow cohorts appear to do and I guess that's why you're referring to me as an Arsehole.
My posts on both Brexit and the Vaccine were both factual and have turned out to true, backed up with links to confirm this, now I know this doesn't fit your narrative though the general world consensus is that Brexit is turning into an unmitigated disaster but of course you believe otherwise.
I find it amusing that all the people supporting you calling me an Arsehole are those who regularly denounce anyone who disagrees with their views.
User avatar
Devil
Forum Curmudgeon
Posts: 3968
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 8:34 am
Location: Mosfiloti

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Devil »

Brexit is turning into an unmitigated disaster
Disaster? Yes! Unmitigated disaster? I doubt it very much!
Firefly
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 2:08 pm
Location: Hereford UK

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Firefly »

Jim B

I would never support name calling, it's totally unjustified. However, I seem to recall that it is you that denounces anyone who disagrees with their views.

It is of deep concern to myself, and many others, that terrorists live amongst us in the UK. Indeed, two of my granddaughters were at the concert in Manchester where a terrorist struck, with terrible consequences. Fortunately, my elder granddaughter decided to drive instead of travelling by train, as they were due to do, or else they would have been caught up in the blast. The likes of Shamima Begum are not welcome here and should be denied entry to our country at any cost.

Your posts on Brexit and the vaccine were wrong in my eyes, and still are, but I won't discuss either matter any further.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.
Jim B
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Jim B »

Devil wrote: Tue Sep 20, 2022 2:21 pm
Brexit is turning into an unmitigated disaster
Disaster? Yes! Unmitigated disaster? I doubt it very much!
I thought "unmitigated" was used correctly but I'll bow to your better judgement.
I read in Websters it means Absolute.
User avatar
Devil
Forum Curmudgeon
Posts: 3968
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 8:34 am
Location: Mosfiloti

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Devil »

Jim B wrote: Tue Sep 20, 2022 2:36 pm
Devil wrote: Tue Sep 20, 2022 2:21 pm
Brexit is turning into an unmitigated disaster
Disaster? Yes! Unmitigated disaster? I doubt it very much!
I thought "unmitigated" was used correctly but I'll bow to your better judgement.
I read in Websters it means Absolute.
I can hardly agree that Brexit was either an absolute or an unmitigated disaster. It was, overall, in my opinion, a disaster. In the first place, it showed the European Union that some people had different opinions. Secondly, it showed the people that there were differences of opinion, some of which were positive and some negative: that alone negates the use of the terms absolute and unmitigated. Simply said, Brexit was an eye-opener, no matter the degree of its implications for the UK and the EU.
Jim B
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Shamima Begum: arch villain or unwitting patsy?

Post by Jim B »

Firefly wrote: Tue Sep 20, 2022 2:29 pm Jim B

I would never support name calling, it's totally unjustified. However, I seem to recall that it is you that denounces anyone who disagrees with their views.

It is of deep concern to myself, and many others, that terrorists live amongst us in the UK. Indeed, two of my granddaughters were at the concert in Manchester where a terrorist struck, with terrible consequences. Fortunately, my elder granddaughter decided to drive instead of travelling by train, as they were due to do, or else they would have been caught up in the blast. The likes of Shamima Begum are not welcome here and should be denied entry to our country at any cost.

Your posts on Brexit and the vaccine were wrong in my eyes, and still are, but I won't discuss either matter any further.
Firefly
I cannot recall ever writing anything of personal nature about any member in all the years I've been posting and would be the first to apologise if proved otherwise.
You have your beliefs and I have mine, you defend your point of view and I defend mine.we disagree on some things and agree on others.
I totally agree with your view on Terrorists, I have five Granddaughters and worry about them constantly but I also worry about the path the UK is taking under this government. People being arrested for holding up blank sheets of paper, same as Russia or arresting a protester for calling out a Prince who paid off his accusers over sex crimes. You can now be arrested for shouting in public. Making people stateless without trial, The Home Secretary wants to leave
the ECHR, Why!!!
My wife who comes from the old Soviet Union says the UK is getting more like Russia every day where people are arrested for daring to criticise the establishment.
It's frightening.
Post Reply