Should Shamima Begum be allowed back into the UK?

If only to put her case to the courts and face justice.

Thoughts?

No.
intercourse the dirty traitorous girl private.

Of course she should. As a British citizen she has the right of appeal against the decision which was made against her and the right to a chance to defend herself via her legal team. It is a fundamental tenet of British law.
Hopefully some clarity will be forthcoming on the background to the whole business which will end the allegations that the British secret service knew about her and her mates but then lost control of the situation.

It interests me greatly that the people who say she knew exactly what she was doing are quite often the people that say that Gretna Thunberg a girl of a similar age was too young and was manipulated by dark forces.

Of course not.

She "repented " only when ISIS were defeated militarily,  otherwise she would be happy to keep gloating over every severed head of the infidels she despised.

Of course this will now be the first of many, amazingly all desperate to get back to the "evil" UK now that their dream of blowing us all up has been temporarily halted.

No state wants her so of course whatever the outcome of the court case it will be the UK left holding the baby, although I have read media reports that she would be arrested on terror charges once she returns so not sure how that would affect things.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

Of course not.

She "repented " only when ISIS were defeated militarily,  otherwise she would be happy to keep gloating over every severed head of the infidels she despised.

Of course this will now be the first of many, amazingly all desperate to get back to the "evil" UK now that their dream of blowing us all up has been temporarily halted.

No state wants her so of course whatever the outcome of the court case it will be the UK left holding the baby, although I have read media reports that she would be arrested on terror charges once she returns so not sure how that would affect things.

Did you even bother to read the question? All that is happening here is that the Government are redressing a wrong that happened when they cancelled her British citizenship without giving her a chance to defend herself. If the case for the prosecution is stronger than that of the defence then she will lose.
It shouldn't escape you that the decision to allow her to defend herself was made by the most right wing government in my lifetime.

Quoted from barralad

Did you even bother to read the question? All that is happening here is that the Government are redressing a wrong that happened when they cancelled her British citizenship without giving her a chance to defend herself. If the case for the prosecution is stronger than that of the defence then she will lose.
It shouldn't escape you that the decision to allow her to defend herself was made by the most right wing government in my lifetime.

The government did not want her back. The courts decided and the government is likely to appeal.

What right wing government do you speak of? They are half an inch to the right of Labour.

You dont think pledging your allegiance to ISIS to kill your fellow citizens is reason enough to revoke British citizenship?

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

The government did not want her back. The courts decided and the government is likely to appeal.

What right wing government do you speak of? They are half an inch to the right of Labour.

You dont think pledging your allegiance to ISIS to kill your fellow citizens is reason enough to revoke British citizenship?

I dare say your last paragraph will form the basis of the case for not allowing her back.
The current Government and it's immediate predecessor have quietly been expelling people from the Windrush generation for over two years. A lot more besides who have been found not to be worthy of asylum following the due process of law. It is stretching the boundaries of credibility that if Begum is found to be guilty of all the things people say she is that this Government will not move heaven and earth to be rid of her.
If I thought even the current Labour Party was only half an inch to the left of the Tories I'd cut up my membership card.

Absolutely not. She only wants to return as she has nowhere else to go, she backed the wrong side and in doing so turned her back on the UK.

As sadly we no longer have capital punishment I see no reason to allow her return

Quoted from Ipswin

Absolutely not. She only wants to return as she has nowhere else to go, she backed the wrong side and in doing so turned her back on the UK.

As sadly we no longer have capital punishment I see no reason to allow her return

Some on here are as wet as the wettest of lettuces.

People like this woman and many more besides revel in the torture and murder of the infidels (us) including children.

She only wants to come back because her plan backfired and she has nowhere else to go.

I wonder what attitudes people on here would have if they had family members murdered by people like this evil woman?

What happened to “all lives matter”, the sovereignty of British law and the concern for victims of Muslim grooming?


“Here are my values, and if you don’t like them, I’ve got some different ones...”

Isn't the new UK sovereign government policy that immigrants who commit crimes should be sent back to their own country to be dealt with?

Quoted from Manchester Mariner

Isn't the new UK sovereign government policy that immigrants who commit crimes should be sent back to their own country to be dealt with?

Exactly. If the government and its supporters believe that criminals should be deported to their home countries they have to realise that works both ways. I imagine if the UK starts trying to deport foreign criminals, countries are going to reject it by pointing to thie whole affair. I don't want her back in the UK particularly but you can't be inconsistent with international relations otherwise you become a laughing stock.

Quoted from Bawmariner

Exactly. If the government and its supporters believe that criminals should be deported to their home countries they have to realise that works both ways. I imagine if the UK starts trying to deport foreign criminals, countries are going to reject it by pointing to thie whole affair. I don't want her back in the UK particularly but you can't be inconsistent with international relations otherwise you become a laughing stock.

Correct, and I believe that ship has already sailed. It may even have been the Royal Navy ship that brought Salman Abedi back to Manchester...

Quoted from barralad

I dare say your last paragraph will form the basis of the case for not allowing her back.
The current Government and it's immediate predecessor have quietly been expelling people from the Windrush generation for over two years. A lot more besides who have been found not to be worthy of asylum following the due process of law. It is stretching the boundaries of credibility that if Begum is found to be guilty of all the things people say she is that this Government will not move heaven and earth to be rid of her.
If I thought even the current Labour Party was only half an inch to the left of the Tories I'd cut up my membership card.

Your lucky to have a membership card I am still waiting for my trust card over 2 years after I bought a lifetime membership.

She should absolutely be allowed back into the UK. British citizen, born in Britain and needs to see the be dealt with by the British courts.

She should’ve been allowed in and immediately arrested when she initially tried, maybe her baby would’ve survived.

Just to be clear as well, when she left the country she was a 15 year old child. Groomed and radicalised by evil terrorists. There is much to be learned from her situation to stop these things happening again.

Quoted from barralad

Of course she should. As a British citizen she has the right of appeal against the decision which was made against her and the right to a chance to defend herself via her legal team. It is a fundamental tenet of British law.
Hopefully some clarity will be forthcoming on the background to the whole business which will end the allegations that the British secret service knew about her and her mates but then lost control of the situation.

It interests me greatly that the people who say she knew exactly what she was doing are quite often the people that say that Gretna Thunberg a girl of a similar age was too young and was manipulated by dark forces.

Interesting viewpoint. For me I have a small amount of sympathy for her as she was probably manipulated by ISIS recruiters being only 14-15 when they targeted her and her brain not being developed fully. I read that in a lot of cases brain development is not completed till 30 -31.

Having said that her crime of joing ISIS is to severe and she shouldnt be allowed back to the UK.

I would only allow her in en route to Holloway for say, 5 years?

Quoted from Ipswin

I would only allow her in en route to Holloway for say, 5 years?

Valid point what LewChaterlysLover said earlier in the thread. Hence had your son or daughter been killed by ISIS your views would most likely be revenge to those who think it's right on here and elsewhere that she should be allowed to return the UK.

Iam reading a book at the  moment of the army's time in Afghanistan over the last 15 years and its heart wrenching what our British military and normal Afghan civilians faced against the Taliban. Beheadings, innocent civilians being used as human shields ,IEDs blowing up military personal etc

Likewise as you maybe  aware I saw a recent documentary on ISIS and it was shocking what they did . Put women and children into cages and burnt them alive.  

Quoted from Rick12

Interesting viewpoint. For me I have a small amount of sympathy for her as she was probably manipulated by ISIS recruiters being only 14-15 when they targeted her and her brain not being developed fully. I read that in a lot of cases brain development is not completed till 30 -31.

Having said that her crime of joing ISIS is to severe and she shouldnt be allowed back to the UK.

Another one who hasn't read the question. Nowhere have I expressed sympathy or condemnation. The question limited itself to the question of justice.
I'd like to thank Lew Chatterley's Lover for his timely and accurate correction of my point about the Government allowing it. I should have known better.
However repugnant we find ISIS to be and I hate them as much as anyone  Begum's crime unless there is so far unreleased evidence may well rest with the law relating to membership of proscribed organisations which for those looking for her to get life imprisonment may come as a bit of a shock.

Quoted from barralad

Another one who hasn't read the question. Nowhere have I expressed sympathy or condemnation. The question limited itself to the question of justice.
I'd like to thank Lew Chatterley's Lover for his timely and accurate correction of my point about the Government allowing it. I should have known better.
However repugnant we find ISIS to be and I hate them as much as anyone  Begum's crime unless there is so far unreleased evidence may well rest with the law relating to membership of proscribed organisations which for those looking for her to get life imprisonment may come as a bit of a shock.

The law is created by man though and often changes.

Some things should be set in stone though. Hence going out to the middle east to join ISIS where their agenda is one of  killing western alliances and local people who are in tandem with British and other military forces should be a automatic bar to receiving a fair trial. Hence the locals who work with the British military are often beheaded by the Taliban and ISIS.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

Some on here are as wet as the wettest of lettuces.

Nailed it.

It's often life experiences that changes people and those who have had a cushdy life have no realities of the hardships some have to go through in life.

I see it in  football as well. Those who have had to fight more due to poverty etc often have more hunger. Truth is truth at the end of the day regardless if it sometimes goes against  some peoples agenda or the popular vote eg valuing life and trying to create a fairer balanced  society for all .

Quoted from barralad

Another one who hasn't read the question. Nowhere have I expressed sympathy or condemnation. The question limited itself to the question of justice.
I'd like to thank Lew Chatterley's Lover for his timely and accurate correction of my point about the Government allowing it. I should have known better.
However repugnant we find ISIS to be and I hate them as much as anyone  Begum's crime unless there is so far unreleased evidence may well rest with the law relating to membership of proscribed organisations which for those looking for her to get life imprisonment may come as a bit of a shock.

We all know that she'll get a housing association or council house and nice fat benefits package while spending the rest of her days sneering at the British public as she passes the homeless on every street corner.

Allocation of council housing is not, as far as I’m aware, Shamima Begum’s responsibility.

My initial gut reaction is " she made her bed" but......she was young, groomed, radicalised before heading out there as a 15 yr old.  
There are plenty of other victims in the UK that age that are in the sex trade, drug trade, gang life...all targetted and groomed in much the same way....do we feel as relaxed saying " they made their bed" ?

If the official channels havnt been followed then they should be and she should be given that opportunity.

Quoted from Ipswin

I would only allow her in en route to Holloway for say, 5 years?

I think Ollie has enough on his hands finding players for our club without having to baby sit her.

Quoted from moosey_club

My initial gut reaction is " she made her bed" but......she was young, groomed, radicalised before heading out there as a 15 yr old.  
There are plenty of other victims in the UK that age that are in the sex trade, drug trade, gang life...all targetted and groomed in much the same way....do we feel as relaxed saying " they made their bed" ?

If the official channels havnt been followed then they should be and she should be given that opportunity.

Aye, just your normal run of the mill teenager setting off for a life of cutting peoples heads off who dont share the same barbaric religion.

If we let her back, whatever happens with a trial and prison sentence she will become another recruiter for the cause of Islamic fundamentalism, needless to say all paid for by the hard pressed UK taxpayer.

Her sole intentions has been to kill western people whose only crime is not to be Islamic so for terrorists I would say she made her bed now let her lie in it.

Your collective concern for the British taxpayer is admirable.

How many of you complained about British taxes being used to train and support Syrian rebel militias, which have found a natural home in ISIS?  

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

Aye, just your normal run of the mill teenager setting off for a life of cutting peoples heads off who dont share the same barbaric religion.

If we let her back, whatever happens with a trial and prison sentence she will become another recruiter for the cause of Islamic fundamentalism, needless to say all paid for by the hard pressed UK taxpayer.

Her sole intentions has been to kill western people whose only crime is not to be Islamic so for terrorists I would say she made her bed now let her lie in it.

Yes, because every teenage girl naturally grows up with those thoughts don't they ??  Her young mind must have been influenced by someone/something along the way....but you can't/don't want to see that.  The people preaching the religious and racial hatred should be the targets.

"A child is born with no state of mind, blind to the ways of mankind"  someone poisoned that mind.

Quoted from Rick12

The law is created by man though and often changes.

Some things should be set in stone though. Hence going out to the middle east to join ISIS where their agenda is one of  killing western alliances and local people who are in tandem with British and other military forces should be a automatic bar to receiving a fair trial. Hence the locals who work with the British military are often beheaded by the Taliban and ISIS.

The law does change but until it does (and let's remember that the law relating to proscribed organisations was drafted and voted in by a Tory government) I guess we are stuck with what we have.

I see Boris Johnson has called the decision to allow legal aid for this terrorist "odd and perverse. "

That is one way of describing it, but I would say it is more of a kick in the guts for law abiding decent people who are sick to death of using taxpayers money like this. Is this what the legal aid system was designed to do - help fund the legal costs of terrorists who were deemed so dangerous their citizenship was revoked?

Boris says the government are considering a change in the law. I suggest he stops considering and starts to implement laws and actions that benefit the law abiding majority and let terrorists rot in Hell.

The Conservative government was given a huge mandate by the British people to sort out a lot of things including supporting the law abiding public and making life more difficult for terrorists, criminals, rapists and other assorted wrong doers so let's get on with it.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

I see Boris Johnson has called the decision to allow legal aid for this terrorist "odd and perverse. "

That is one way of describing it, but I would say it is more of a kick in the guts for law abiding decent people who are sick to death of using taxpayers money like this.

I am a law abiding citizen and would like her to be allowed home so she can be jailed rather than free to roam the rest of the world spreading a terrorist message.

Quoted from LH

I am a law abiding citizen and would like her to be allowed home so she can be jailed rather than free to roam the rest of the world spreading a terrorist message.

That's fair enough - different opinions are the lifeblood of discussion forums but surely we dont need a postscript to every post that "this is my personal opinion? "

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

I see Boris Johnson has called the decision to allow legal aid for this terrorist "odd and perverse. "

That is one way of describing it, but I would say it is more of a kick in the guts for law abiding decent people who are sick to death of using taxpayers money like this. Is this what the legal aid system was designed to do - help fund the legal costs of terrorists who were deemed so dangerous their citizenship was revoked?

Boris says the government are considering a change in the law. I suggest he stops considering and starts to implement laws and actions that benefit the law abiding majority and let terrorists rot in Hell.

The Conservative government was given a huge mandate by the British people to sort out a lot of things including supporting the law abiding public and making life more difficult for terrorists, criminals, rapists and other assorted wrong doers so let's get on with it.

This Government were given a huge majority to implement Brexit. I cannot speak for the whole country but certainly in Grimsby whilst canvassing I was told "Only Brexit matters". I suspect by the end of this parliamentag there will be a lot of very narked voters.

Quoted from barralad

This Government were given a huge majority to implement Brexit. I cannot speak for the whole country but certainly in Grimsby whilst canvassing I was told "Only Brexit matters". I suspect by the end of this parliamentag there will be a lot of very narked voters.

There always are Ian most of them Labour voters.

Quoted from barralad

This Government were given a huge majority to implement Brexit. I cannot speak for the whole country but certainly in Grimsby whilst canvassing I was told "Only Brexit matters". I suspect by the end of this parliamentag there will be a lot of very narked voters.

You are probably right but Labour could not seem to grasp WHY it mattered to respect the result of a democratic vote and what Brexit stood for.

The leadership did, and got slaughtered for it by every stooge the establishment could put in front of a camera.

Quoted from ska face

The leadership did, and got slaughtered for it by every stooge the establishment could put in front of a camera.

Pretty accurate I'd say

That's funny as I can recall the Labour party saying that if they won the election they would renegotiate a "credible " Brexit deal, then put it to another referendum with, you've guessed it, the option to remain!

They then said they would campaign to remain!!

The voting public told them in no uncertain terms they wanted their original democratic vote to leave upheld.

I would say that you’ve not read (or understood) what I just said, and that you have a remarkably uninformed understanding of how that policy was arrived at, but I wouldn’t want you to have another hissy fit.

Corbyn’s 2017 policy showed what would’ve been in place if not for a sustained, 2.5year campaign against the Brexit position by everyone from Blair, Campbell, Brown, Darling, the EU mouthpieces, Straw, Blunkett, Alan Johnson, the right of the party, almost every Labour Lord you should point out, The Guardian, most of the PLP, the Shadow Brexit Secretary, the entire mainstream media, the Lib Dems & SNP, the defecting politicians who set up Change UK and every pro-EU astroturf campaign that popped up with a Millbank office and endless pots of cash.

Quoted from ska face

I would say that you’ve not read (or understood) what I just said, and that you have a remarkably uninformed understanding of how that policy was arrived at, but I wouldn’t want you to have another hissy fit.

Corbyn’s 2017 policy showed what would’ve been in place if not for a sustained, 2.5year campaign against the Brexit position by everyone from Blair, Campbell, Brown, Darling, the EU mouthpieces, Straw, Blunkett, Alan Johnson, the right of the party, almost every Labour Lord you should point out, The Guardian, most of the PLP, the Shadow Brexit Secretary, the entire mainstream media, the Lib Dems & SNP, the defecting politicians who set up Change UK and every pro-EU astroturf campaign that popped up with a Millbank office and endless pots of cash.

Quite correct and the only time I'd have accused Corbyn of weakness. Too many Remain M.P.s voices in London constituencies worried about losing a couple of thousand from their majorities whilst constituencies in the Midlands and the North were sacrificed despite repeated warnings about what was happening from canvass returns etc.

Agree with that mate. He made too many concessions to keep a treacherous PLP on board, even after the failed coup, when mandatory reselections or open primaries would’ve been a good step forward.

Lavery & Trickett’s “Northern Discomfort” report is worth a read for those who haven’t seen it - https://images.jacobinmag.com/.....FORT-for-release.pdf

I am not sure why the two posts above are relevant- the official Labour party line was as I described earlier irrespective of how it was arrived at. It might be very important to died in the wool Labour members to describe how one faction or another has behaved in reaching a decision, but it doesnt interest the voting public one jot.

The Labour party position ensured their heaviest defeat since the 1930's and any blood red Labour government has not been in power since the 70's so I am not sure where they go from here.

Corbynism or a variant of it will never be elected by a generally conservative with a small c public, so a more moderate party might gain more traction in England if the Conservatives implode but then they will never regain Scotland so it is a dilemma for Labour.

Perhaps more relevant to the title of this thread this thread is the mistake of Starmer to be photographed taking the knee when it was trendy to do so - manna from heaven for the Conservative PR machine come election time.

You just asked why the Labour Party didn’t think they should’ve enacted the result - people are just answering you. It was due to forces of capital that did not want any challenge to the status quo, which to them is the end goal, regardless of which party defends them.


In what way is Black Lives Matter, supposedly an anarachist/Marxist organisation according to you, relevant to Shamima Begum, an Islamic-fascist terrorist?

Quoted from ska face

You just asked why the Labour Party didn’t think they should’ve enacted the result - people are just answering you. It was due to forces of capital that did not want any challenge to the status quo, which to them is the end goal, regardless of which party defends them.


In what way is Black Lives Matter, supposedly an anarachist/Marxist organisation according to you, relevant to Shamima Begum, an Islamic-fascist terrorist?

That's a fair cop Ska. I thought this discussion about politics was on the anti racism thread hence the reference to taking the knee.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

I see Boris Johnson has called the decision to allow legal aid for this terrorist "odd and perverse. "

That is one way of describing it, but I would say it is more of a kick in the guts for law abiding decent people who are sick to death of using taxpayers money like this. Is this what the legal aid system was designed to do - help fund the legal costs of terrorists who were deemed so dangerous their citizenship was revoked?

Boris says the government are considering a change in the law. I suggest he stops considering and starts to implement laws and actions that benefit the law abiding majority and let terrorists rot in Hell.

The Conservative government was given a huge mandate by the British people to sort out a lot of things including supporting the law abiding public and making life more difficult for terrorists, criminals, rapists and other assorted wrong doers so let's get on with it.

I've just re-read this and I'm not at all sure how I missed the significance of Johnson's comment. Legal Aid is and should without question remain available to everyone who needs it. The issue of Legal Aid in cases like The Yorkshire Ripper and Fred and Rose West was never questioned and yet those people would almost certainly have qualified for and been given Legal Aid. Once politicians start making pronouncements about the validity of Legal Aid then we are on the top of a very slippery slope. Today Begum tomorrow somebody else who the press have decided don't deserve a fair hearing.

Quoted from barralad

I've just re-read this and I'm not at all sure how I missed the significance of Johnson's comment. Legal Aid is and should without question remain available to everyone who needs it. The issue of Legal Aid in cases like The Yorkshire Ripper and Fred and Rose West was never questioned and yet those people would almost certainly have qualified for and been given Legal Aid. Once politicians start making pronouncements about the validity of Legal Aid then we are on the top of a very slippery slope. Today Begum tomorrow somebody else who the press have decided don't deserve a fair hearing.

From a purely political perspective this sort of attitude plays badly with voters.

They go to work, pay their taxes and generally lead exemplary lives only for the Labour party to refuse to sanction any idea that we might play hardball with terrorists who want to kill us in the word of "fairness "

The refusal to accept such extraordinary circumstances and that we need to be more assertive and not worry that we are on a slippery slope leaves voters perplexed.

No doubt she will be back. No doubt she will get legal aid but at least the government can say they opposed it while Labour look like the pro terrorist party.

I genuinely think you have a mental condition of some description. Is barralad a Labour Party spokesman now? Do you even know the party’s official line on the situation?

I think this is emblematic of a disturbing phenomena where people are so detached from any form of reality, they’ll just pile everything they dislike on one party, and project all their wishes onto another party despite the lack of any evidence or even suggestion that it’s what they stand for. The Tory party only have a mandate to deliver on what they set out in their wafer-thin manifesto, not just what you’ve decided in your head.  

For what it’s worth, barralad is correct - again - in that govts deciding who is and who isn’t entitled to legal representation based on what plays well with their potential base is a very slippery slope. Let’s say, for example, Corbyn won in Dec (or 2017) and stripped Marine A or Solder F of their citizenship for the murders they carried out, and denied them access to any recourse. Is that fair? No. And that’s why the law is there, to protect everyone regardless of which set of jokers is in the chair for this 5 years or the next.

Yes, but at the same time, she is a terrorist, and whatever sentence is available should be applied.

Personally a gun and a wall would be my preferred outcome.

She was 15 when she went to join ISIS with her 2 young friends.  Whatever she knew at the time about ISIS, she did know that she was not running away to join the Girl Guides.

Her 2 friends are presumed dead.  If she knew this would happen and the extent of ISIS atrocities, she would probably have stayed in the UK.  She was incredibly naive, stupid and immature. Possibly thinking that she was going on an overseas adventure for some excitement.


To what extent was she culpable?  

At 15 you cannot legally consent to sex.  At 15 though you a few years past the criminal age of responsibility.  She is then arguably fully accountable legally for her actions - and the consequences.

The Government have been right in their actions to remove her British Citizenship.  The Courts have probably made the right decision to give her the right to argue her case in the UK.

I hope though that her claim is denied.  This would be just.  Also, at the very least, a refusal would also act as a deterrent to others considering joining a terrorist organisation.

Even though she is probably going to cop for the lot of it, I don’t get how you - or any of us - can say what is “just” based on what we have read in a newspaper or heard on a 2 minute newsclip.

I certainly can’t understand how you’ve come to the conclusion the govt were right to remove her citizenship when The Court of Appeal have just ruled that they acted unlawfully.

Just purely on the Begum issue - she should swing on the end of a rope for treason! no prison sentence that we have to pay for. just a nice strong piece of rope costing no more than a few quid.

Sorry but what she did is treason and the only way to stamp out this sort of thing is by being tough, if people dont like our country and its values then feck off. its gone far too soft bending to looney left wing idiots.

Quoted from monkeyboy

Sorry but what she did is treason and the only way to stamp out this sort of thing is by being tough, if people dont like our country and its values then feck off. its gone far too soft bending to looney left wing idiots.

errrr...that’s exactly what she did, galaxy brain.

Quoted from barralad

Of course she should. As a British citizen she has the right of appeal against the decision which was made against her and the right to a chance to defend herself via her legal team. It is a fundamental tenet of British law.
Hopefully some clarity will be forthcoming on the background to the whole business which will end the allegations that the British secret service knew about her and her mates but then lost control of the situation.

It interests me greatly that the people who say she knew exactly what she was doing are quite often the people that say that Gretna Thunberg a girl of a similar age was too young and was manipulated by dark forces.

I dont think the families of the Manchester Bombings will agree with you.
Nor the familiesof those Blown up by a Jihadi on a London bus or any of the other terror attacks.
The renounced her own British Citizenship when she left!

Quoted from Azimuth

I dont think the families of the Manchester Bombings will agree with you.
Nor the familiesof those Blown up by a Jihadi on a London bus or any of the other terror attacks.
The renounced her own British Citizenship when she left!

For the last time the question referred to her coming back for her legal team to present her case for keeping her British citizenship. I have no great desire to see her win her case but there is something fundamentally unfair in not allowing her to be heard. If it will save you the trouble of typing it I know that ISIS have no regard for fairness and the rights of their victims but I happen to believe that in a country with one of the best legal systems in the wored we shouldn't sink to their level.

She is entitled to her day in court as much as the rest of folk. Nobody is saying she should be winning it nor given her citizenship back but she is entitled to that day in court.

All the xenophobes who claim so much to love dear old Blighty should remember that the country they love so much does indeed provide opportunity to have that day in court. If that right is removed then surely your anger is at the country and the state for removing one of the basic entitlements.

She isn’t the first and won’t be the last.

Using the families of terror attack victims is also on the crass side.

People really need to understand that saying she is entitled to her day in court is it saying she should be entitled to her citizenship back.

Quoted from aldi_01

She is entitled to her day in court as much as the rest of folk. Nobody is saying she should be winning it nor given her citizenship back but she is entitled to that day in court.

All the xenophobes who claim so much to love dear old Blighty should remember that the country they love so much does indeed provide opportunity to have that day in court. If that right is removed then surely your anger is at the country and the state for removing one of the basic entitlements.

She isn’t the first and won’t be the last.

Using the families of terror attack victims is also on the crass side.

People really need to understand that saying she is entitled to her day in court is it saying she should be entitled to her citizenship back.

We understand that perfectly well, but some of us believe her crime is so heinous, and by going over there to join ISIS she removed her rights enjoyed by the rest of society.

We would prefer her to be made an example of in order not to set a precedent for similar cases, and to show others thinking of joining a terrorist organisation that the UK will take a hardline approach.

As ever there are two distinct viewpoints both of which deserve a fair hearing.

As it happens I am sure your approach will win out and she will indeed see her day in court with expensive legal actions paid for by the very people she would like to kill. The sign of a civilised society most certainly, but of course terrorist organisations feed off this perception of weakness and have no respect for it.

Quoted from ska face

errrr...that’s exactly what she did, galaxy brain.

Soon changed her flipping mind though didn't she?

My main concern about allowing her 'a day in court' to appeal against the loss of her citizenship is that, with the ridiculous unpredictable rulings of the Court of Appeal judges and after that the Law Lords, the female dog is likely to win!

Still at least we won't end up paying for her kids

Quoted from Ipswin

Soon changed her flipping mind though didn't she?

My main concern about allowing her 'a day in court' to appeal against the loss of her citizenship is that, with the ridiculous unpredictable rulings of the Court of Appeal judges and after that the Law Lords, the female dog is likely to win!

Still at least we won't end up paying for her kids

You embarrass yourself with your lack of common humanity, to celebrate the death of any child in such a way is disgrace

Quoted from codcheeky

You embarrass yourself with your lack of common humanity, to celebrate the death of any child in such a way is disgrace

On a par really with the many hundreds if not thousands of children slaughtered by the regime she both supported and assisted

Quoted from Ipswin

On a par really with the many hundreds if not thousands of children slaughtered by the regime she both supported and assisted

Any child that dies though Ipswin is a tragedy.All are born pure.Sadly its a combination of genetics/environment and free will that in almost all cases creates a criminal.

Quoted from Rick12

Any child that dies though Ipswin is a tragedy.All are born pure.Sadly its a combination of genetics/environment and free will that in almost all cases creates a criminal.

Yes of course you are right but when she regains her citizenship (as she surely will) and is back living in London on benefits (as she surely will be) I'm buggered if I wanted to be paying for and supporting children she concieved with a terrorist who killed children faster than he made them

Quoted from Ipswin

On a par really with the many hundreds if not thousands of children slaughtered by the regime she both supported and assisted

When you celebrate the death of an innocent child there is little hope for the likes of you, Isis have won already if you can sink to that level through blind hatred.
If you want to live in a country with no similar laws and persecution of tiny children you should move abroad, there are plenty to choose from, part of what has made this country great is tolerance and respect of the law.

Quoted from codcheeky

When you celebrate the death of an innocent child there is little hope for the likes of you, Isis have won already if you can sink to that level through blind hatred.
If you want to live in a country with no similar laws and persecution of tiny children you should move abroad, there are plenty to choose from, part of what has made this country great is tolerance and respect of the law.

Oh do loosen up, go and have a pint or one off the wrist or something.
If you read my message above your latest tear jerking ripost you will see that far from celebrating the death of her children I strongly deplore the death of all the children by the terrorist organisation she and her husband supported.
A case of 'All Child Deaths Matter' perhaps to use a current soapbox movement.
I simply would not want to support her children (or her) when she is back in UK claiming benefits and sticking two fingers up to you whilst planning how she can best support terrorism back here..
If you are so keen on respect for the law you will like me want this woman imprisoned for a very long time assuming she is allowed back at all