Shamima Begum - In or Out

[IanM]

Oh…… shall I close the thread then? ?

Go on Fraggers.........you know you'll be locking it at some point. Someone will go full ranty-pants soon enough!

You forgot one thing for alternative 1. They like to be referred to as they/them.

And doubtless, several other possible alternatives for number 2!


Maybe my recent experience about pronouns is one for another thread.

 

[Dando]

Go on Fraggers.........you know you'll be locking it at some point. Someone will go full ranty-pants soon enough!



And doubtless, several other possible alternatives for number 2!


Maybe my recent experience about pronouns is one for another thread.

Don’t get me going on pronouns. My daughter had decided they are non binary and have changed their name

 

[Ethan]

In my opinion, the UK should let her return and:

1. Imprison her if she has been convicted of any crimes
2. Prosecute her if they think she has committed any crimes for which she has not been tried
3. Let her back into society but surveil her if they think she may be a serious risk
4. Let her back into society and leave her be if they don't think she is a serious risk

 

[Imurg]

In my opinion, the UK should let her return and:

1. Imprison her if she has been convicted of any crimes
2. Prosecute her if they think she has committed any crimes for which she has not been tried
3. Let her back into society but surveil her if they think she may be a serious risk
4. Let her back into society and leave her be if they don't think she is a serious risk

Ref..#4
Do you see a possibility of her meeting, shall we say, a sticky end if she's let loose and not watched..?
Does she need to be under surveillance for her own safety?

 

[RichA]

Save everyone the bother of further discussion

1) If you think she's done nothing wrong - you are a lefty snowflake and possibly even a vegan!

2) If you think she has done something wrong - you are a racist bigot and might even play golf in long socks.

Being young and impressionable is no defence....if you play cricket, but it might be ok for support of Terror Groups!

Or a third option, if you really don't like arguments...
Nobody reading this forum knows all the evidence. The commission get to hear the secret stuff, know the relevant law and will make a decision based on the actual evidence rather than guesswork based on what the media have published.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Ref..#4
Do you see a possibility of her meeting, shall we say, a sticky end if she's let loose and not watched..?
Does she need to be under surveillance for her own safety?

Prob one of the most realistic ends as well - if she did come back and was free then I suspect she would be placed somewhere in the UK where the risk of that would be as low as possible- you would hope that someone wouldn’t carry out any sort of retribution

 

[KenL]

Oh…… shall I close the thread then? ?

No you should not, even if it is a political thread!

 

[PhilTheFragger]

No you should not, even if it is a political thread!

It was a light hearted throwaway comment Ken

But if it crosses the line ………..

 

[Beezerk]

Prob one of the most realistic ends as well - if she did come back and was free then I suspect she would be placed somewhere in the UK where the risk of that would be as low as possible- you would hope that someone wouldn’t carry out any sort of retribution

Send her up to Scotland ??

 

[KenL]

Send her up to Scotland ??

She'd be fine here. Nice house, plenty cash and everything for free. ?

 

[KenL]

Ref..#4
Do you see a possibility of her meeting, shall we say, a sticky end if she's let loose and not watched..?
Does she need to be under surveillance for her own safety?

No, I don't.

 

[ColchesterFC]

In my opinion, the UK should let her return and:

1. Imprison her if she has been convicted of any crimes
2. Prosecute her if they think she has committed any crimes for which she has not been tried
3. Let her back into society but surveil her if they think she may be a serious risk
4. Let her back into society and leave her be if they don't think she is a serious risk

If she's committed crimes then they will have been in Syria, aside from possibly joining a banned/terrorist organisation. Shouldn't she be prosecuted under Syrian law where the offences took place? And then if she is convicted and serves her sentence there she should return to the UK to be prosecuted for any crimes under UK law.

 

[SocketRocket]

In my opinion, the UK should let her return and:

1. Imprison her if she has been convicted of any crimes
2. Prosecute her if they think she has committed any crimes for which she has not been tried
3. Let her back into society but surveil her if they think she may be a serious risk
4. Let her back into society and leave her be if they don't think she is a serious risk

Why should the UK have to cover the cost of her returning and any subsequent imprisonment. She made her decision to be a part of an organisation who created genocide, we don't need that type of person here.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

In my opinion, the UK should let her return and:

1. Imprison her if she has been convicted of any crimes
2. Prosecute her if they think she has committed any crimes for which she has not been tried
3. Let her back into society but surveil her if they think she may be a serious risk
4. Let her back into society and leave her be if they don't think she is a serious risk

Option 3 is staggeringly expensive and labour intensive. Lord knows who many people are involved in surveillance right now.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Why should the UK have to cover the cost of her returning and any subsequent imprisonment. She made her decision to be a part of an organisation who created genocide, we don't need that type of person here.

If she is allowed to return there is no doubt one of the red tops will pay for her to return

Option 3 is staggeringly expensive and labour intensive. Lord knows who many people are involved in surveillance right now.

Option 3 is already carried out on no doubt hundreds of people around the country already

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Option 3 is already carried out on no doubt hundreds of people around the country already[/QUOQUOTE
Absolutely. You wouldn't want to add to the cost and labour burden unless you had to though.

 

[SocketRocket]

If she is allowed to return there is no doubt one of the red tops will pay for her to return

Will they pay for her Prison costs. Not a chance.

I thought it was the Red Tops that were suggesting she never comes back. More likely to be the Guardian.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Will they pay for her Prison costs. Not a chance.

I thought it was the Red Tops that were suggesting she never comes back. More likely to be the Guardian.

That’s the justice system - prison costs come from the government.

And there is no doubt that red tops will trip over themselves to “get the story” - Daily Mail will prob win

 

[Ethan]

If she's committed crimes then they will have been in Syria, aside from possibly joining a banned/terrorist organisation. Shouldn't she be prosecuted under Syrian law where the offences took place? And then if she is convicted and serves her sentence there she should return to the UK to be prosecuted for any crimes under UK law.

Why should the UK have to cover the cost of her returning and any subsequent imprisonment. She made her decision to be a part of an organisation who created genocide, we don't need that type of person here.

Crimes under UK law.

 

[GuyInLyon]

The Supreme court in the UK rejected her appeal. I don't think we are part of the European system any more so I don't know where she goes to next.

Probably the European Court of Human Rights. That's a non-EU body and the UK was one of the original treaty signers.

Now this is funny...