And there is a difference between being eligible to apply for a passport (of Bangladesh or Pakistan or whatever country it may be) and being granted a passport. The Bangladesh government has already said it will not give Shemima Begum Bangladeshi citizenship.
Like most things on here I am not 100% tuned into the whole thing in relation to the former member of the defence forces going abroad.
What exactly has she done? By that I mean what has she either admitted to having done or what evidence is there of her doing stuff?
Just looking it up now and saw this…
She went to Syria to join a bunch of head hacking lunatics whose policies included genocide, sex slavery and mass murder.
At the very least she is due a long stretch in prison to contemplate her crimes. I was reading over the weekend that some lad is after getting twenty five years for some involvement in dissident organizations. She deserves at least that imho.
What ‘compassion’ did her friends show the people who were beheaded, burned and raped to infinity?
Agree 100%. Let her return here but only to face justice.
Accepted. So where does that leave the 3 idiots currently hold up in the Syrian ‘refugee’ camp? Do they just stay there until some other government offers them citizenship? Are the British government acting in contravention of International law? If so, why can’t we do the same? Leo the pussy cat will probably meet her at the airport with a bouquet of flowers.
Separate to my reply to you Beeko. IMO any EU citizens found to have been involved over there should be interned until their full roles can be established. We had the Nuremberg trials, we even had Gitmo. Something staunch needs doing, you can go soft on what these sociapaths were involved in.
It would, in my opinion, be incumbent on the nation of their citizenship to take them back to their own country (assuming no other country wants them) and deal with them. Shemima Begum is as much a British problem as she is a (radicalised) Islamic problem. The British Home Office, the Met Police and her school had plenty of opportunities to stop her going (along with the other two girls she left with).
Hold everything! I just saw the photo of her in a lost above. Let her home! I’d even collect her!
No argument r.e the second half of your post.
Have the British authorities not wiped their hands of the problem now? Or will offer them sanctuary if no other state takes them in? Looks to me like the previous. I’m speaking legally, not morally, personal opinion etc.
If she is guilty of such acts I have no time for her.
She doesn’t have to be guilty of the acts. She went out to live with them. At the very least she is giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
She has a right to come back here. And then she has a right to go straight to jail to contemplate her actions and to ensure that she is no threat to her fellow country people.
I can only assume that she will face the courts wherever she has been captured. But if not, has she actually broken any Irish law that would see her locked up here, and can that be proven in an Irish court?
May not be as clear cut a case as it would appear on the outside
I think the UK will end up taking her back and prosecuting her, to be honest.
By joining Daesh, are they not citizens of their glorious caliphate?
At the very least she deserves a boot in the gee for being a thick ■■■■.
Play your cards right u never know
So, brainwashing? Presume most people accept that brainwashing is something that people get inveigled into. And as a result end up doing things that ordinarily they wouldn’t want to do in a million years. We know this because previously very un-murderous and unsuicidal people have murdered and killed themselves after being brainwashed.
Which doesn’t mean they will not be prosecuted for murder, of course. But if you did not do anything like that, and if you were brainwashed, and ended up joining ISIS (or any other group) having initially just felt sorry for people who, we are all agreed, were being murdered and oppressed on a wholesale level by Assad, while the rest of the world looked on, or in some cases either actively or passively allowed the situation to develop, does that make you much more than naive, vulnerable, and taken advantage of?
This was a person who was universally considered a good and decent person, who had been in the Irish Defence Force, and who had the great misfortune to be from Dundalk. If it is proven that as far as can be proved she made some naive, stupid choices which many others did at the time, and then ended up being brainwashed into joining ISIS(which she ordinarily would never have done), and is she committed no other crime, then what is either the justification or the point in locking her up for long?
If any one of us right now could see the future and ended up in the same situation or similar, while I would not expect people to ever really trust my judgement or ability to avoid being brainwashed ever again, it could also clearly be said that there was not, until being exploited, ever any intention to harm anyone or be part of any group that intends to harm innocent people.
There were many Irish people who back in the 1970s ended up in religious cults, and getting into trouble over political involvement. Most of them were never bad people nor ordinarily intended harm to anyone. They got involved initially on a very low level, for religion, for social reasons etc, and got dragged in, and got brainwashed.
There were Irish and British people and some others in the 60s-90s who ended up involved in activities that led to crimes being committed and people dying, who were brainwashed into it and ended up involved due to a set of circumstances.
There are people on here who either supported or even had involvement in a group that justified the killing of innocent people for the cause in Ireland and the UK. They may not have agreed with the killing but they supported the cause. Should those people be compared to this woman and others who we are now debating about?
To answer your question at the end, imo absolutely not. Daesh/Jihad/All Islamic Caliphate fukology is the total enemy of Western Democracy (which is far from perfect either I accept). Anyone found complicit in it is, as they say, an enemy of the West. We are infidels to them, and they wish desth and destruction on us. Those attempting to return deserve to be treated robustly as such. Draft new legislation, internment, whatever it takes. I’d consider myself fairly liberal minded towards a lot of issues, but this is black and white for me.
Time will tell. I can’t see them reversing their decision at all to be honest.
Love the notion that our compassion for idiots fcukwits like her, is what sets us apart from them. That works great in theory.
But the stakes are too high here and the evil that these bastards represent, is too extreme for any compromises to be made, or concessions to be given.
I don’t really care whether she was some misguided fool that got brainwashed, or genuinely believed in their cause, there can be no place AT ALL for someone like her in our society. We can not take even the slightest chance of her playing a role in radicalizing the next generation of poor misguided fools, if she is allowed integrate herself back into society again.
People who travel thousands of miles to the middles east to kill people because of some religious notion are as mad as people who travel the same distance to drop bombs from their aircraft on people they never knew or met, for money.