IS Teenager Shaminna Begum to lose British Citizenship

[Derbiean]

I don't agree with everything timco says, but I applaud the willingness to offer an alternative perspective to the vengeance and hatred we are hearing.

this girl is a traitor and deserves no mercy

But the Lord (or Allah, if you prefer) is merciful, and so should we be. That doesn't mean that her alleged crimes are not investigated and, if appropriate, punished.

Allah does not love aggressors and there is no reason to be merciful to a citizen who gave comfort and aid to the enemy as she did as mere "housewive" to an IS fighter. She made her choice and must now accept the consequences.

[macliam]

I'm in two minds about all this.....

My inclination is to be merciful, but I am well aware that some Islamists would regard that as proof of the weakness of the West. I am somewhat surprised that the government moved so quickly to remove her citizenship - but they do have prior on that, don't they. It's also possible that the action could be overturned, because that wouldn't be the first time either.

However, we are being drip-fed the facts, as usual. Firstly, it seems that removing her citizenship will not automatically make her stateless either due to her marriage or by inheriting the nationality of her own mother - but dumping her on Holland or Bangladesh seems a dubious course of action, particularly as she has never even been to either country. As for the child, I wonder if it will also be a race between the UK and Holland to see who removes citizenship first, since his father is Dutch ........ either way, he seems a likely candidate to be weaponized by radicals in a few years time. What it says about Javid is that he's quite happy to keep her in a refugee camp for the foreseeable future, rather than dealing with the issue of returning Islamists now.

So what is her crime? Daesh being what it is, it seems likely she was never more than a brood mare for this foreign fighter - married 10 days after arriving in 2015 and then bearing three children in four years, there would be precious little time for anything else, but who knows? From her comments, I doubt she would be calling on the UK, if she could still be living in the caliphate as she seems to have thought her life there was quite "normal" - and again, I have known a Muslim who took his family off to live in Saudi, to ensure they lived under Islam, even though he knew that they were likely to be treated worse than in the UK. I'd also be interested in the timeline of her "escape" and her husband's surrender - because if he surrendered first, I'd surmise that she had no choice but to go on the run as daesh wouldn't be too well pleased, or too merciful on a deserting fighter's family.

I don't think this is going to go away any time soon............

[pabenny]

What ever happened to the UK Treason laws...?

That’s a fair question.

In the UK, High Treason* is essentially about disrupting the succession to the throne. So plotting to kill the monarch is treason, so is sleeping with his wife. But merely being anti-monarchist doesn’t really come into it.

Someone plotting to kill the Queen or her heirs may well be guilty of high treason. Suicide bombers targeting the general public probably aren’t, and nor is this lady.

(* There is no UK offence of just 'treason'. Petty Treason referred to certain murders only as was abolished as a distinct offence in the 19th century. Treachery was a wartime crime, targeting spies.)

[pabenny]

...there is no reason to be merciful to a citizen who gave comfort and aid to the enemy as she did...

On the contrary. We are instructed in the Bible to be merciful to our enemies.

Or if you prefer a secular authority, Machiavaelli counselled "keep your friends close and your enemies closer". We can keep more of a watch on her here than in Syria or Bangladesh.

She made her choice and must now accept the consequences.

In the clip shown on ITN news last night, she expressed readiness to accept her child being taken into care and to face prosecution.

[Derbiean]

...there is no reason to be merciful to a citizen who gave comfort and aid to the enemy as she did...

On the contrary. We are instructed in the Bible to be merciful to our enemies.

Or if you prefer a secular authority, Machiavaelli counselled "keep your friends close and your enemies closer". We can keep more of a watch on her here than in Syria or Bangladesh.

She made her choice and must now accept the consequences.

In the clip shown on ITN news last night, she expressed readiness to accept her child being taken into care and to face prosecution.

The Bible is well truly out of date in addition to being so vague on many subjects that anybody can interpret it to suit their viewpoint making it worthless as an instruction/guide.

As for Machiavalli yes indeed in an ideal world it would be as simple as that however it is not guaranteed that the authorities would be able to keep an eye on her so on that basis alone she shouldn't be allowed back into the country.

She has no remorse and is bleating that the decision is unjust, well she can go to the Netherlands to be with her husband, lets if they accept her.

[pabenny]

She has no remorse and is bleating that the decision is unjust.

Plenty of people who are convicted of crimes show no remorse. That is reflected in their sentence.

She - or at least her lawyers - are saying that revoking her citizenship is unlawful, not, afaik, that it's unjust.

Edit - according to the BBC news website, she *is* saying the revocation is unjust

[blythburgh]

My initial reaction was let her rot where she is.

Now having heard various opinions for and against my initial reactions I have changed my mind.

She was 15 when she left. Would she have left if she had not been radicalised? No she would not. At 15 you are so open to manipulation and nothing that has happened since has given her any other view than the Daish one.

I would let her back here, but I would not just let her go free. She certainly needs to be de-radicalised and maybe a trial would be necessary.

It was said on the "Today" programme this morning that people went out to Bosnia to fight this morning are some of the best people to explain why you should not go to fight and why your views are wrong.

But having said that at the moment she is in an area that is dangerous to go to. No British person should put their safety at risk in trying to contact her or get her out.

Sadly Javid wants to be PM and he feels that depriving her of British Citizenship will go down well with the Tory Party members. I can only feel he has put that above any other thoughts about this case.

[Derbiean]

She has no remorse and is bleating that the decision is unjust.

Plenty of people who are convicted of crimes show no remorse. That is reflected in their sentence.

She - or at least her lawyers - are saying that revoking her citizenship is unlawful, not, afaik, that it's unjust.

Edit - according to the BBC news website, she *is* saying the revocation is unjust

What you say is true on both accounts. What will likely save her is that according to reports on this issue we've allowed 400 people back into the country who were suspected IS fighters so I don't see them successfully arguing she is special, those 400 should have had their citizenship revoked if it is indeed true they were fighters.

[Richard Frost]

Bangladesh appears to have disowned her. They said she is nothing to do with them as she is British born by birth.

Story here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47312207

[macliam]

Bangladesh appears to have disowned her. They said she is nothing to do with them as she is British born by birth.

Story here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47312207

Well, no surprise there..... the Home Office appear to have made an error in an effort to please their masters, yet again.

Ball back in Javid's court, methinks