Lightbulb moment

[Croydon Claret]

So, despite the courts firmly deciding that the retraction of her UK citizenship is lawful the UK taxpayers are going to continue to foot the bill for UK solicitors to continue legal challenges for someone who the courts recognise as no longer a UK citizen? She is no longer a UK citizen so why should she have free access to a UK legal system?

I don't know the rights and wrongs of whether she should be entitled to legal aid or not, but I do accept that everybody should be entitled to a legal defence.

What I don't accept is that the average person, on an average wage, cannot afford the same legal process that somebody on no income, or very little income, can

[Billy Balfour]

What I don't accept is that the average person, on an average wage, cannot afford the same legal process that somebody on no income, or very little income, can

Yep. Very good point.

[IanMcL]

Well I agree the 15 = too young. So UK issue to be solved and she is British.

However, in watching her on TV, different stations, I am not impressed by her.

It also strikes me- how is she able to appear on all these programmes? There are other but it is just her that gets airtime.

It also strikes me that this is just building a social media platform - reality programmes next, for sure. This is a would be influencer, with a story to tell, book rights, film rights etc.

Yuk.

[Colburn_Claret]

Could they really though?

I'm assuming that the court backlog won't get any smaller if everyone has one chance to prepare absolutely everything that might come up, and I shudder to think of the costs of that

Murderers, rapists, burglars only get one bite of the apple. If they appeal it is in extraordinary circumstances and with a valid reason for a retrial.

I'm not suggesting that Asylum seekers, or Begum are criminals, but the justice system they are relying on has the same authority. You also make it sound as if the filed motions are something new, that hadn't been discovered before. That's rubbish. they use the same arguments over and over again. The same refiling of the same motions, over and over again. They aren't reinventing the wheel with these motions, it's the same ones, and the sole purpose of the said motions is to drag the process out as long as possible. That doesn't serve justice, or the truth, the only people who benefit are the Solicitors who rake in a fortune.

I'm not denying anyone their day in court, I just believe that it could be done with a lot more speed if Solicitors didn't benefit from delaying tactics.

[1882Clarets1882]

Are there a majority that believe she was groomed.....

Imo she was drawn to it like a moth to a candle, she wasn't bribed, threatened or coerced. She went looking for this, and she jumped in with both feet gladly. No remorse or regrets, she even tried to recruit others.
The change of stance was inevitable once she was captured, it doesn't mean we have to buy into it.

This.

[aggi]

Murderers, rapists, burglars only get one bite of the apple. If they appeal it is in extraordinary circumstances and with a valid reason for a retrial.

I'm not suggesting that Asylum seekers, or Begum are criminals, but the justice system they are relying on has the same authority. You also make it sound as if the filed motions are something new, that hadn't been discovered before. That's rubbish. they use the same arguments over and over again. The same refiling of the same motions, over and over again. They aren't reinventing the wheel with these motions, it's the same ones, and the sole purpose of the said motions is to drag the process out as long as possible. That doesn't serve justice, or the truth, the only people who benefit are the Solicitors who rake in a fortune.

I'm not denying anyone their day in court, I just believe that it could be done with a lot more speed if Solicitors didn't benefit from delaying tactics.

Isn't the success rate for asylum appeals really high, higher than 50% I think? I can't say I know too much about the system but the problem seems to be loads of incorrect decisions in the first place.

[JohnMcGreal]

The Usual Suspects on.this message board- " She was groomed. She was only 15. She cannot be held accountable for her own actions "


The then Home Secretary 2021 - " If you'd seen what I've seen , you'd know she's a threat to national security."

The court ruling February 2023 - " She's a threat to national security."

It's estimated that there are well over 400 former ISIS Jihadists who have returned to the UK in the last 7 years or so. So why didn't they all have their UK citizenship revoked? Are they all considered to be harmless to national security? Is Begum some sort of evil mastermind just waiting for a route back home to cause mayhem? Or is she just a convenient hate figure cultivated by a government and media desperate for distractions for their own failings?

I'm not comfortable with any UK citizen having their citizenship stripped regardless of what they've done. She's our problem. She should be put on trial and the punishment should be dished out accordingly.

[Jellybean]

I get the impression they have some confidential evidence that none of us are privvy to which renders her defence indefensible.

I wonder how many more appeals are allowed.

There was a good point made though in terms of if her parents and grandparents were all British, they couldn't render her stateless, it's only because her mum is Bangladeshi that they've been able to take her British citizenship away. Which seems wrong however I would be changing the rules so someone committing treason and joining a terrorist organisation can be made stateless!

[fatboy47]

Spent the biggest part of my working life helping teenagers who've been used and exploited by elements within our society.

I'd do everything I could to help this one for pretty much the same reasons, however much she's become red-top fodder and been used to provide a feeding frenzy for the dim-witted right.

[Jakubclaret]

Spent the biggest part of my working life helping teenagers who've been used and exploited by elements within our society.

I'd do everything I could to help this one for pretty much the same reasons, however much she's become red-top fodder and been used to provide a feeding frenzy for the dim-witted right.

All this as come about off her own making you've neglected to mention the dim-witted right you so eloquently refer to didn't force her to board a plane & join a terrorist organisation. You might not like it but in life you make your own bed sometimes you have to lie in it.

[Big Vinny K]

Anyone with an ounce of sense (and I know that rules out a few posters on this thread) knows that the only reason Begum is being treated as an exception is solely for political reasons.
This government knows that this is one of the very few decisions it has made in recent years that might carry favour with the few supporters it has remaining.
‘Feeding frenzy for the right” is a perfect summary of the situation and a welcome one day distraction for the clusterfuck of a mess this government has caused.

[Jakubclaret]

Anyone with an ounce of sense (and I know that rules out a few posters on this thread) knows that the only reason Begum is being treated as an exception is solely for political reasons.
This government knows that this is one of the very few decisions it has made in recent years that might carry favour with the few supporters it has remaining.
‘Feeding frenzy for the right” is a perfect summary of the situation and a welcome one day distraction for the clusterfuck of a mess this government has caused.

If she's an exception how many others can you name in similar circumstances have we allowed back into the country knowingly to set up residence?

[Big Vinny K]

If she's an exception how many others can you name in similar circumstances have we allowed back into the country knowingly to set up residence?

See the post above
And the point is nobody can name them because they weren’t used as political collateral.

[Rileybobs]

I have absolutely no sympathy for Begum and the situation she finds herself in. But to revoke her citizenship and make her somebody else’s problem, instead of bringing her back to face trial and punishment in the UK is cowardly.

Oh, and anyone using the term ‘woke brigade’ should have their citizenship revoked in my view.

[TheFamilyCat]

If she's an exception how many others can you name in similar circumstances have we allowed back into the country knowingly to set up residence?

And if she's not an exception how many others can you name in similar circumstances have had their citizenship revoked?

Must be hundreds of them, mustn't there?

[TheFamilyCat]

I have absolutely no sympathy for Begum and the situation she finds herself in. But to revoke her citizenship and make her somebody else’s problem, instead of bringing her back to face trial and punishment in the UK is cowardly.

Oh, and anyone using the term ‘woke brigade’ should have their citizenship revoked in my view.

Is "sandal wearer" ok though? Asking for a friend.

[Lip]

Not an ounce of sympathy for her.

[1882Clarets1882]

Populism, bigotry and the lynch-mob mentality are all alive and well, and thriving on UTC.

I despair sometimes.

Bigotry and the lynch mob mentality eh?

I think you'll find that when she was 5 years in excess of the minimum legal age for criminal responsibility, Begum chose to join a real and actual murderous death cult dripping with religious "bigotry" and a actual blood thirsty "lynch mob ".

[Jakubclaret]

See the post above
And the point is nobody can name them because they weren’t used as political collateral.

I'm quite sure if the begum incidents were frequent the press would be all over it having a field day they aren't because it rarely happens, she isn't being used politically or as any sort of exception, if anything due to the facts it's more plausible to suggest she's been made an example of to deter others doing the exact same thing. It's good we have a strong government in these particular seldom seen cases.

[Rileybobs]

Is "sandal wearer" ok though? Asking for a friend.

Only if prefaced with ‘venomous’.

[1882Clarets1882]

It's estimated that there are well over 400 former ISIS Jihadists who have returned to the UK in the last 7 years or so. So why didn't they all have their UK citizenship revoked? Are they all considered to be harmless to national security? Is Begum some sort of evil mastermind just waiting for a route back home to cause mayhem? Or is she just a convenient hate figure cultivated by a government and media desperate for distractions for their own failings?

I'm not comfortable with any UK citizen having their citizenship stripped regardless of what they've done. She's our problem. She should be put on trial and the punishment should be dished out accordingly.

That's fair enough John and you make some valid points. However the courts don't agree with you.

[Billy Balfour]

'Woke' has become the new 'snowflake'. Used way too often, and out of context, that it's become an outdated lazy insult.

[Cooclaret]

Why would we allow the individual back into a country she openly denounced?

Why would we allow the individual bank into the country when the cost of surveillance would be a large drain on the public purse?

Why would we allow the individual back into the country to be a figure head (knowingly or unknowingly) or a target for those who choose extremism?

[GodIsADeeJay81]

And if she's not an exception how many others can you name in similar circumstances have had their citizenship revoked?

Must be hundreds of them, mustn't there?

Screenshot_20230222_191929_com.android.chrome.jpg (244.36 KiB) Viewed 1070 times

Begum is the one who makes the most noise.
Also, we don't seem to be in a hurry to revoke it from the child abusers...

[Rileybobs]

Why would we allow the individual back into a country she openly denounced?

Why would we allow the individual bank into the country when the cost of surveillance would be a large drain on the public purse?

Why would we allow the individual back into the country to be a figure head (knowingly or unknowingly) or a target for those who choose extremism?

An equally valid question would be why should another country’s public purse pay for her upkeep?

[Devils_Advocate]

Screenshot_20230222_191929_com.android.chrome.jpg

Begum is the one who makes the most noise.
Also, we don't seem to be in a hurry to revoke it from the child abusers...

Just to flag that your graphic is slightly misleading in the context of this discussion. There's a fundemental difference between revoking somebody's citizenship who was not born in this country but had been granted citizenship compared with removing the citizenship of someone born in this country and making them stateless in the process.

I expect the number of people who have been made stateless through have their UK born citizenship status revoked is a lot less and probably very minimal.

[Billy Balfour]

Like I said upthread. I couldn't give a toss about her. She can stay there, or be brought back to the UK and put on trial. Either way, I'm not going to get arsed about it.

Want something to be concerned about that might actually have an impact on your own life and family? It's called China.

[Rileybobs]

Like I said upthread. I couldn't give a toss about her. She can stay there, or be brought back to the UK and put on trial. Either way, I'm not going to get arsed about it.

Want something to be concerned about that might actually have an impact on your own life and family? It's called China.

Difficult not to read that last sentence in a Donald Trump voice.

[Cooclaret]

An equally valid question would be why should another country’s public purse pay for her upkeep?

I’d agree with your point.

Unless, that country actively harbours extremism and further promotes and propagates that extremism outside its borders.

[Jakubclaret]

Not an ounce of sympathy for her.

I don't many have apart from half a dozen posters on here. The general consensus is that nobody wants her back & with damn good reason.

[karatekid]

Would she still want to come back if the IS caliphate had been succesfully set up?

[Jakubclaret]

Would she still want to come back if the IS caliphate had been succesfully set up?

That's a good question people aren't even thinking of that, she gambled on something being successful & when it failed she wants to come back, if that's not having your cake & eating it I don't know what is.

[Colburn_Claret]

Isn't the success rate for asylum appeals really high, higher than 50% I think? I can't say I know too much about the system but the problem seems to be loads of incorrect decisions in the first place.

If that was the case, precedents would have been set that solicitors can used for their next case. You start your next case where the last one finished. There are arguments to be had over the rights and wrongs of those decisions, but not for this point. It's about the time it takes, and the deliberate drawing out of these cases. Whether they win or lose, it shouldn't be taking years to come to an outcome. My whole argument here is that solicitors are milking the legal aid system, for their own benefit rather than their clients.

[ŽižkovClaret]

If she's a security risk, and proven to be so, lock her up, but lock her up in the UK, where she was born and where she is from.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Just to flag that your graphic is slightly misleading in the context of this discussion. There's a fundemental difference between revoking somebody's citizenship who was not born in this country but had been granted citizenship compared with removing the citizenship of someone born in this country and making them stateless in the process.

I expect the number of people who have been made stateless through have their UK born citizenship status revoked is a lot less and probably very minimal.

We can't make anyone stateless and it would appear that's still the case with Begum, although Bangladesh still contest this.

[Lancasterclaret]

Just clarifying here

I have no sympathy for what she has done, if its proved in a court of law that she did all this of her own back

I just want us to sort out our problem, rather than pretending its nothing to do with us, or doing it because it makes the likes of Wrongo happy

[Devils_Advocate]

We can't make anyone stateless and it would appear that's still the case with Begum, although Bangladesh still contest this.

Bangladesh have stated she is not eligible to apply for citizenship there so we effectively are making her stateless. To better clarify my comment though the graphic you shared includes people who were not born as UK citizens.

The volume of UK born single nationality citizens who have had their citizenship removed will be much much smaller and that would be the appropiate stat to highlight in this case.

It is not that Begum shouts louder than the others but that her case is much more unique and exceptional as she was born and raised in this country, has only ever held citizenship in this country and apart from a tenuos link to Bangladesh the govt are trying to push through, there is no other country she can apply for citizenship in.

If Begum had any belonging to any other country this would never have made the news but the reason it is making the news is because of the issue around statelessness and what precedent this could set for other people who a govt might want to get rid of

As I said the graphic your shared is totally out of context of this specific case

[Jakubclaret]

Just clarifying here

I have no sympathy for what she has done, if its proved in a court of law that she did all this of her own back

I just want us to sort out our problem, rather than pretending its nothing to do with us, or doing it because it makes the likes of Wrongo happy

We are under no obligation to sort anything out though the decision has already been made.

[Lancasterclaret]

We are under no obligation to sort anything out though the decision has already been made.

Well, no

You can see by this thread that the problem people have is that she's been dumped by us because we have found a loophole, rather than sorting out the problem at source (no votes in that kind of woke nonsense)

As a country, I'd rather we owned our mistakes

[Jakubclaret]

Well, no

You can see by this thread that the problem people have is that she's been dumped by us because we have found a loophole, rather than sorting out the problem at source (no votes in that kind of woke nonsense)

As a country, I'd rather we owned our mistakes

It's a can of worms nobody needs let sleeping dogs lie.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Bangladesh have stated she is not eligible to apply for citizenship there so we effectively are making her stateless. To better clarify my comment though the graphic you shared includes people who were not born as UK citizens.

The volume of UK born single nationality citizens who have had their citizenship removed will be much much smaller and that would be the appropiate stat to highlight in this case.

It is not that Begum shouts louder than the others but that her case is much more unique and exceptional as she was born and raised in this country, has only ever held citizenship in this country and apart from a tenuos link to Bangladesh the govt are trying to push through, there is no other country she can apply for citizenship in.

If Begum had any belonging to any other country this would never have made the news but the reason it is making the news is because of the issue around statelessness and what precedent this could set for other people who a govt might want to get rid of

As I said the graphic your shared is totally out of context of this specific case

Begum is the daughter of a Bangladeshi born national, she's entitled to it by default if I recall correctly.
However they also execute terrorists, which is why she wants to return here and not go there.
Personally I think she should face a court in the country where she committed her crimes, Jihadi Jack the english born and now only canadian is doing this after being captured.

[Devils_Advocate]

Begum is the daughter of a Bangladeshi born national, she's entitled to it by default if I recall correctly.
However they also execute terrorists, which is why she wants to return here and not go there.
Personally I think she should face a court in the country where she committed her crimes, Jihadi Jack the english born and now only canadian is doing this after being captured.

Its an old Pakistan law when Bangladesh was under their rule which Bangladesh now dispute and state amendments make this not the case. Its not clear either way but as Lancaster said looking for some loophole isnt to drop responsibility for our own citizen is not good. In the Jihadi Jack case he had dual nationality so it was a completely different situation

To be honest I think we are agreed in what we think should happen and Im certainly not bothered about disputing the finer detail of Bangladeshi imigration law.

I wasn't having a go with my original comment but just flagged that you stat was very misleading because virtually all the people in those numbers would either hold dual nationality or wil not have been born as a UK citizen.

Surely you can see that there is a big difference between revoking a citizenship we granted to someone as opposed to removing citizenship of someone UK born and bread who had never visited any other country and had only ever been a UK citizen?

[HahaYeah]

The Woke brigade are desperate to bring her back here but I think Bangladesh is the best place for her.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Its an old Pakistan law when Bangladesh was under their rule which Bangladesh now dispute and state amendments make this not the case. Its not clear either way but as Lancaster said looking for some loophole isnt to drop responsibility for our own citizen is not good. In the Jihadi Jack case he had dual nationality so it was a completely different situation

To be honest I think we are agreed in what we think should happen and Im certainly not bothered about disputing the finer detail of Bangladeshi imigration law.

I wasn't having a go with my original comment but just flagged that you stat was very misleading because virtually all the people in those numbers would either hold dual nationality or wil not have been born as a UK citizen.

Surely you can see that there is a big difference between revoking a citizenship we granted to someone as opposed to removing citizenship of someone UK born and bread who had never visited any other country and had only ever been a UK citizen?

I merely provided information about the numbers of revoked citizenships, it seemed fairly relevant despite your claims to the contrary.

Do we know she's never visited Bangladesh?
My family/friends of Pakistani/Indian descent have all visited the respective countries, to help maintain close links with their extended families and cultural heritage over there, it's normal for them to do that.

In regards to taking away citizenship of someone born here, it doesn't matter so long as it hasn't left them stateless.

[Devils_Advocate]

I merely provided information about the numbers of revoked citizenships, it seemed fairly relevant despite your claims to the contrary.

Do we know she's never visited Bangladesh?
My family/friends of Pakistani/Indian descent have all visited the respective countries, to help maintain close links with their extended families and cultural heritage over there, it's normal for them to do that.

In regards to taking away citizenship of someone born here, it doesn't matter so long as it hasn't left them stateless.

Yes we do know she'ss never visited Bangladesh and its a world of difference in terms of removing citizenship of someone born here compared with someone being granted citizenship and having it revoked.

The reason this is such a high prifile case and reached the highest courts in the land is because of how unique and exceptional it is and is fundementally different to the majority of the cases incleded in the stats you shared

If it makes no difference show me the number of UK born citizens who do not hold dual nationality who have had their citizenship revoked

[Stanbill05]

Bigotry and the lynch mob mentality eh?

I think you'll find that when she was 5 years in excess of the minimum legal age for criminal responsibility, Begum chose to join a real and actual murderous death cult dripping with religious "bigotry" and a actual blood thirsty "lynch mob ".

Exactly this. Too young, must have been groomed is nonsense. I'm surprised legal age for criminal responsibility hasn't been mentioned before. It doesn't matter what attracted her, she will have known it was very wrong and did it anyway. She now needs to take her medicine, including, as it's been judged legal, loss of citizenship. For something as serious as this, I'm comfortable with how it's playing out.

[elwaclaret]

The only way to deal with this honestly is to ask yourself would you be happy with her living next door to you?

Some believe first in rehabilitation, others that examples have to be made to prevent precedent. Which becomes a major issue which nobody seems to be considering… would you have been so indisposed had it been the IRA who were unleashing a new wave of terror on the mainland?

If the answer is no and you still welcome her back you are posturing. I’m far from sure one way or the other, glad it’s not my job.

[Devils_Advocate]

The only way to deal with this honestly is to ask yourself would you be happy with her living next door to you?

Some believe first in rehabilitation, others that examples have to be made to prevent precedent. Which becomes a major issue which nobody seems to be considering… would you have been so indisposed had it been the IRA who were unleashing a new wave of terror on the mainland?

If the answer is no and you still welcome her back you are posturing. I’m far from sure one way or the other, glad it’s not my job.

Nobody wants her living next door to anyone but some think she should be tried in a UK court for crimes she committed against our country

If a UK IRA member bombed somewhere in England killing people and then fled to Spain what out of the 3 options would you want the UK to do

A) Revoke their citizenship and leave them in Spain
B) Bring them back to the UK to live next door to you
C) Bring them back to the UK and prosecute them for their crimes?

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Part of the problem is she wouldn't get a whole life tariff in jail, we all know she'd be out eventually to carry on spreading her warped ideology

[elwaclaret]

Nobody wants her living next door to anyone but some think she should be tried in a UK court for crimes she committed against our country

If a UK IRA member bombed somewhere in England killing people and then fled to Spain what out of the 3 options would you want the UK to do

A) Revoke their citizenship and leave them in Spain
B) Bring them back to the UK to live next door to you
C) Bring them back to the UK and prosecute them for their crimes?

You are asking the wrong person. I am not making a call in any direction. I have enough problem wading through the myth of British history as I was taught to understand it… I don’t need any more webs in my brain, thanks all the same.