ISI Fighter Shamima Begum Not allowed to return to the UK

The poster said "She lived in the UK her whole life". Not true. She left the UK in February 2015 and it is now February 2024. That's a long and very significant chunk out of a 24 year old's life.

I don't disagree strongly with any of the rest of your post*, but I don't think you can rewrite what another poster could/should have said if they'd wished to be accurate, because their whole argument falls apart on that awkward fact.

• *Not sure that you're correct that she has "no link with Bangladesh" (we just don't know that, but her father lives there, so she has him at least there, and presumably other family members too) and also no reason to have Bangladeshi citizenship: after all, Ireland gives Irish citizenship by right to anyone with even one Irish grandparent, and you don't presumably deny those people's nationality? They don't even have to have visited Ireland.

She was 15, so there was no question whether the Syrian age of consent was being respected - it was.

But even if there had been a problem with that, Britain did not cause it. She chose to go to a war zone, and chose to live under Islamic State rules, so if Syrian law did not apply, then IS law did. What is certain is that there is no reason that UK law would apply, no matter what.

The argument that the UK age of consent meant anything out there is laughable, and shows how little understanding many people here have of the big wide world.

All moot. If she committed a crime, let her stand before a UK court and face trial and stop dicking around with this person's citizenship.

Just to correct you again I never called you a pedophile so that victim card wont work either.

I was refering to the people like you who are desperately trying to make this some sort of child sex grooming pedophilia type case rather than the actual case of a terrorist wanting to be let into a civilised state/continent.

she is a citizen of the UK, it's just that they haven't grown up and come to terms with it yet.

it is ultimately a racial issue because of the various factors involved that lead to the decision to make her stateless.

we have won the argument as britain have been unable to bully bhangladesh to take her on the basis of britain's dubious claims.

britain caused the problem of those choosing to join isis to be able to go without question as it does not believe in policing it's borders.

isis law doesn't exist because isis is not recognised as a country or state so therefore cannot have laws hence said non-laws can't apply.

so yes ultimately british law was breached via sex trafficking.

And do you have a link to that? What law is it? Because you may have seen someone say that, but you haven’t given us any evidence of that on here.

EDIT: however we know she never had Bangladeshi citizenship, that isn’t the question.

Why would it be British law? You said Syrian law doesn’t apply because they didn’t control that part of the territory, but nor did Britain.

If you think there’s some convention that says that British law applies by default anywhere that there is no other legal jurisdiction, you need to provide a link to that convention.

Because I’m not aware of any such agreement.

Just to clarify this point so it doesn't come up again.

It's illegal under international law to strip a person of citizenship if it would make them stateless.

Begum never had Bangladeshi citizenship.

But when she was stripped of her citizenship the home secretary said that she was entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship so she wouldn't be stateless.

But then the government in Bangladesh said she wasn't entitled to it and I believe they were never asked beforehand.

So she has therefore been left without any citizenship of any country.

(I think you agree with me on these things, but to stop the conversation going back and forth I thought I'd put it all down in one place).

I just read this blog. (Yes, I know it's a blog and I generally wouldn't trust it for that reason, but it quotes the commissions findings)

There was something interesting in it. One of the points being appealed was that the home secretary had made an invalid judgement because he did not consider what effect being stateless would have on her. But the appeal was rejected because it was determined that he did consider that. So he knew full well that it was likely to happen and what the effects would be.

Because the law is clear that the HS can strip citizenship the appeals seem to be mainly about procedural processes.

Radicalised usually means radicalised for life unfortunately. Its almost impossible to shake off radical brainwashing, especially if someone has been brainwashed from a young age.

Anyone who spent time with ISIS and then returns to the West poses a long term threat and will have to be monitored consistently by security services.

It's a British thing, you wouldn't understand.

They used to do it rather a lot at one time, it was great entertainment for the British public who used to turn it into a bit of a party. It was a real treat reserved for nobility, commoners were strung up, that was almost as good, but nothing compared to a good beheading.

It fell out of favour due to the mess and transport problems on British roads, as the popularity and crowds wanting a good party increased, it was decided to satisfy the hard of thinking via the gutter press and celebrity comics instead, where with the aid of nice easy words and coloured pictures the victims could be built up to nobility status and then dragged down and dumped in the "dustbin" of has been's to enable the bloodthirsty mobs to be satiated at brekkers while chomping down their marmalade on toast.

Poor old Begum, ostracised for being too British it seems :-(

What about those Brit's that abandoned their country to fight in Ukraine? How come they are not being called to account?

How about the civil servants and MP's in Britain that sorted out a safe haven for ISIS were they not aiding and abetting terrorists? ISIS might be a new name, but a Daesh rebranding does not come with a clean slate.

pregnant and nursing according to you ? but not every one

The Daily Telegraph reported that Begum had been an "enforcer" in IS's "morality police", and had tried to recruit other young women to join the jihadist group.[24] The report said that she was allowed to carry a Kalashnikov rifle and earned a reputation as a strict enforcer of IS's laws, such as dress codes for women. An anti-IS activist was also reported by The Daily Telegraph as saying that there were allegations of Begum stitching suicide bombs into explosive vests so they could not be removed without detonating.[25]

and still a committed and unrepentant believer in isis ideologies according to her own words and those of her father

dying the the desert would be the best outcome

and your version of the truth comes from ?