Shamima Begum - In or Out

[Deleted member 16999]

To be fair, it cuts both ways as we've seen in the thread. Some see people being hard on law as the usual (right wing)suspects, whilst others think that letting her back might be more of a Cherie Blair leftie stance.

Cherie Blair is good at her job. Not sure why that has to be considered political.

Totally agree, unfortunately some see good Barristers defending people in cases against Governments as left wing, not all, just some.

 

[Dando]

Why is everyone saying she was groomed? Is there proof apart from her lawyer who would say night is day. Maybe she was just a wrongun who decided that was the life she wanted

 

[SaintHacker]

I noticed there was a very thoughtful and balanced response from PhilTheFragger, who unless he has resigned his position is the ModFather.

.

Paul Weller won't be impressed to be told Phil has taken his crown

 

[chrisd]

I noticed there was a very thoughtful and balanced response from PhilTheFragger, who unless he has resigned his position is the ModFather.

Surely if this was a political thread he would have put the warning up then rather than posting in the thread? And that post was before the political aspects were raised.

I think that's our answer as to whether or not this is a political thread or not. As Amanda says, it's more morals.

Fragger for Prime Minister ????

Oh bugger, that sounds political ?

 

[Dando]

Fragger for Prime Minister ????

Oh bugger, that sounds political ?

it sounds bloody frightening

 

[rudebhoy]

I’ve already said I don’t see it as political either, but some posters are immediately scrutinised over what they write as other posters previously are ignored.

Dando tells us about “bed wetters” getting upset with a point he made, yet “bed wetters” is a term given to left wing do gooders, if she’s brought back (and I disagree) we must accept she should be given a fair trial and a fair defense, instead we get Cherie Blair mentioned, despite this having nothing to do with the subject.

Nobody, but nobody says a word about either comment being political and I see both comments coming from a right sided point of view.

It's quite simple, if you belong to the 'let her rot in hell, hangings too good" school of thought, you are merely stating your own personal opinion, but if you dare to question the decision to remove her citizenship, you are a bleeding liberal bed wetter who is committing the ultimate sin of "bringing politics into it"

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Begum's parents obtained their citizenship by birth, not descent. Therefore, Begum's parent's didn't have to register her birth at the nearest embassy or mission. However, Begum's children would have to be registered as she would have inherited by descent.

Cheers Bri ?

Looks like there is a lot of issues with the whole thing

I don’t think they have even got to the stage of appealing the Citizenship issues - the current ruling was about her being allowed to return to appeal that

It seems they are denying her being allowed due to the belief she is a danger to the country - the initial appeal allowed her to return so then government then went to the Supreme Court to appeal that - I’m not sure what’s next but IMO she should be allowed to appeal the decision to remove her citizenship and it also should be given back to her but she must make her own way back and then when she does return she faces any consequences then

It appears there are have been multiple countries who have found a way to allow the people who have been radicalised as a child bride to be reintroduced into the countries society

For me there is one thing harming her chances - her own attitude , the lack of remorse or feeling of wrong doing on her behalf.

 

[USER1999]

It's quite simple, if you belong to the 'let her rot in hell, hangings too good" school of thought, you are merely stating your own personal opinion, but if you dare to question the decision to remove her citizenship, you are a commie pinko who is committing the ultimate sin of "bringing politics into it"

Nope, you still don't get it. The first is an opinion, right, wrong, whatever.

The second is politics. Her citizenship has been revoked. The here's and why fores of that are irrelevant, unless you happen to be a lawyer. Questioning a decision made by the Home Secretary is politics.
Should she be allowed back, to stand in a UK court and ask for it back? That is opinion, and nothing to do with politics.

This post isn't about left or right wing, it's a post trying to point out something that to me is pretty simple. What is, or is not political.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

It's quite simple, if you belong to the 'let her rot in hell, hangings too good" school of thought, you are merely stating your own personal opinion, but if you dare to question the decision to remove her citizenship, you are a bleeding liberal bed wetter who is committing the ultimate sin of "bringing politics into it"

I’m certainly on the the '”let her rot in hell, hangings too good" side of the fence.??

But don’t understand why such opinions need justifying by putting others down.

 

[USER1999]

Cheers Bri ?

Looks like there is a lot of issues with the whole thing

I don’t think they have even got to the stage of appealing the Citizenship issues - the current ruling was about her being allowed to return to appeal that

It seems they are denying her being allowed due to the belief she is a danger to the country - the initial appeal allowed her to return so then government then went to the Supreme Court to appeal that - I’m not sure what’s next but IMO she should be allowed to appeal the decision to remove her citizenship and it also should be given back to her but she must make her own way back and then when she does return she faces any consequences then

It appears there are have been multiple countries who have found a way to allow the people who have been radicalised as a child bride to be reintroduced into the countries society

For me there is one thing harming her chances - her own attitude , the lack of remorse or feeling of wrong doing on her behalf.

I am no legal expert, clearly, but if some one is, can they explain the following?

Why does she need to be in the UK, or another country, where she will be able to communicate better with her legal team at present? The issue initially, is a citizenship one. This is a point of UK law. I can't see what her personal input is going to be on this (or even if it is relevant). It either is, or is not legal to remove citizenship. This is not just about her case, but a point of law.

Once that is resolved, then her citizenship needs to established, and then any legal matters related to prosecution for potential illegality would obviously require her side of the story.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

An observation, might disappoint a few, but Cherie Blair hasn't done human rights cases for a few years now.

 

[USER1999]

An observation, might disappoint a few, but Cherie Blair hasn't done human rights cases for a few years now.

She used to be in employment law back in the day, which wouldn't be particularly useful in this case either.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Why are people getting wound up by my reference to Cherie Blair? I referenced lawyers LIKE her, not necessarily her in particular. My point was that if Begum is brought back to this country for trial no doubt it would end up in the High Court and the biggest beneficiaries would be the mega expensive barristers who would milk the system of millions of pounds. Money that I personally would rather see spent on what I consider to be more worthy causes.

 

[Pathetic Shark]

Fragger for Prime Minister ????

Oh bugger, that sounds political ?

Jeez free incontinent pants for people who have had their second jab, tax relief for people with high handicaps and 120% difference in match play.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Why are people getting wound up by my reference to Cherie Blair? I referenced lawyers LIKE her, not necessarily her in particular. My point was that if Begum is brought back to this country for trial no doubt it would end up in the High Court and the biggest beneficiaries would be the mega expensive barristers who would milk the system of millions of pounds. Money that I personally would rather see spent on what I consider to be more worthy causes.

In all fairness, you weren’t the first to mention her, however, if she is brought back (and I for one don’t want that) then she should be given a fair trial and fair representation.

Cherie Blair is a socialist, known for being more left wing than her husband, so singling her out by you and and another, I questioned whether choosing her as an example it had any political connotations, which I accept from your first reply, didn’t from you.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Why are people getting wound up by my reference to Cherie Blair? I referenced lawyers LIKE her, not necessarily her in particular. My point was that if Begum is brought back to this country for trial no doubt it would end up in the High Court and the biggest beneficiaries would be the mega expensive barristers who would milk the system of millions of pounds. Money that I personally would rather see spent on what I consider to be more worthy causes.

2 or 3 posters mentioned her, I can't be bothered to trawl through all 9 pages to confirm. People use her as a bogeyman and seem to dislike her whatever she does, good or bad. She hasn't practised in that field for quite a few years now so whilst she did represent Begum at some point I believe she hasn't for some time and so shouldn't be in the equation.

 

[Hobbit]

In all fairness, you weren’t the first to mention her, however, if she is brought back (and I for one don’t want that) then she should be given a fair trial and fair representation.

Cherie Blair is a socialist, known for being more left wing than her husband, so singling her out by you and and another, I questioned whether choosing her as an example it had any political connotations, which I accept from your first reply, didn’t from you.

Horses for courses Paul. If I was up in court for something cuddly I'd want her defending me. Couldn't give a toss about her politics.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Horses for courses Paul. If I was up in court for something cuddly I'd want her defending me. Couldn't give a toss about her politics.

I’d be happy with anyone of her level and wouldn’t care about gender, race or political persuasion.

 

[Dando]

2 or 3 posters mentioned her, I can't be bothered to trawl through all 9 pages to confirm. People use her as a bogeyman and seem to dislike her whatever she does, good or bad. She hasn't practised in that field for quite a few years now so whilst she did represent Begum at some point I believe she hasn't for some time and so shouldn't be in the equation.

If you think she hasn’t practiced those
fields for a few year then you’ll be mistaken

 

[Deleted member 16999]

2 or 3 posters mentioned her, I can't be bothered to trawl through all 9 pages to confirm. People use her as a bogeyman and seem to dislike her whatever she does, good or bad. She hasn't practised in that field for quite a few years now so whilst she did represent Begum at some point I believe she hasn't for some time and so shouldn't be in the equation.

No she didn’t mate! Internet rumours.

https://fullfact.org/online/shamima-begum-cherie-blair/