The Student Room Group

Shamima Begum's Son

I have seen the debates about the so-called ISIS bride. So what's gonna happen to the baby boy. He is definitely a British Citizen. That wee bairn needs then the protection of the British state just like any other citizen. And in the UK we don't let children pay for the crimes of their parents so isn't the right decision to repatriate one of our citizens here even of the cost is bringing his mother along so her terrorists arse can go to jail

Scroll to see replies

The kid it has had isn't British it is Syrian due to the fact it was born in Syria so we have no obligation towards it. The father was Dutch so on your basis the kid is Dutch so they can have it

Also she wouldn't go to prison she would be given a new identity along with her family and they would be relocated.
Reply 2
Original post by scorpion95
The kid it has had isn't British it is Syrian due to the fact it was born in Syria so we have no obligation towards it. The father was Dutch so on your basis the kid is Dutch so they can have it

Also she wouldn't go to prison she would be given a new identity along with her family and they would be relocated.

Home Office have said her son is British.
Reply 3
Original post by scorpion95
The kid it has had isn't British it is Syrian due to the fact it was born in Syria so we have no obligation towards it. The father was Dutch so on your basis the kid is Dutch so they can have it

Also she wouldn't go to prison she would be given a new identity along with her family and they would be relocated.

Actually since at the time of his birth his mum was a British Citizen so that makes the baby a citizen. But the point really though is the baby is innocent and is one our citizen and surely that should mean something shouldn't it?
Shamima herself was groomed from the age of 15. We castigated the asian grooming gangs and lionised the survivors. Shamima is still spouting the crap her abusers filled her with, but she was abused. Where is the equivalence? Oh hold on...she's brown and wears clothing that is her choice, but doesn't look like something from a (white) british shop....she's not like us....
Original post by pankaye
I have seen the debates about the so-called ISIS bride. So what's gonna happen to the baby boy. He is definitely a British Citizen. That wee bairn needs then the protection of the British state just like any other citizen. And in the UK we don't let children pay for the crimes of their parents so isn't the right decision to repatriate one of our citizens here even of the cost is bringing his mother along so her terrorists arse can go to jail

I agree that the baby deserves protection, he hasn't done anything wrong and shouldn't be subject to that kind of environment due to the terrible choices of his mother, so I have no issue with him being rescued. However, as for her I say leave her *** over there. Why should the tax payers have to pay to house her at her majesty's pleasure.
Original post by pankaye
Actually since at the time of his birth his mum was a British Citizen so that makes the baby a citizen. But the point really though is the baby is innocent and is one our citizen and surely that should mean something shouldn't it?

There is no dispute about the child being British. She can give the child up to an embassy and I think they will see it gets back to the UK. Social workers and lawyers will then be assigned and they will decide whats in the childs best interests.
Reply 7
Original post by 999tigger
There is no dispute about the child being British. She can give the child up to an embassy and I think they will see it gets back to the UK. Social workers and lawyers will then be assigned and they will decide whats in the childs best interests.

And if she doesn't give upntje child tongue embassy? If the only way to protect the little babe is to bring the mother along?
Original post by pankaye
And if she doesn't give upntje child tongue embassy? If the only way to protect the little babe is to bring the mother along?

Nope its her choice. She has no right to enter at the moment.
Reply 9
Always been entirely happy for the baby to come to Britain, as long as its mother isn't with it.
Original post by pankaye
And if she doesn't give upntje child tongue embassy? If the only way to protect the little babe is to bring the mother along?

Why is this such an issue now? What about her other children that died? Why werent they being rushed to the embassy when she was living with ISIS?
Original post by 999tigger
Why is this such an issue now? What about her other children that died? Why werent they being rushed to the embassy when she was living with ISIS?

👍


also, should the baby go to her parents? Given that there’s a video out there of her father with Abu hamzah. Annoyingly can’t find the link just now.....
Reply 12
Original post by 999tigger
Nope its her choice. She has no right to enter at the moment.

So the welfare of the baby (who is a Britiah Citizen and highly at risk of death) is not taken into consideration at all?
Original post by pankaye
So the welfare of the baby (who is a Britiah Citizen and highly at risk of death) is not taken into consideration at all?

You mean are we going to send the SAS into Syria to rescue it?
The welfare of the child will be taken into account when she delivers it up.
She could have done the same with her other two children, but she didnt because she was part of ISIS and satisfied they were winning. If she handed the child over to British authorities then they would see it was taken care of. There are plenty of children already in the UK that need taking care of.
Original post by 999tigger
Why is this such an issue now? What about her other children that died? Why werent they being rushed to the embassy when she was living with ISIS?


Because the children were with Isis... there was literally no way to get them
Original post by 999tigger
You mean are we going to send the SAS into Syria to rescue it?
The welfare of the child will be taken into account when she delivers it up.
She could have done the same with her other two children, but she didnt because she was part of ISIS and satisfied they were winning. If she handed the child over to British authorities then they would see it was taken care of. There are plenty of children already in the UK that need taking care of.


First off how is it fair that a innocent baby deserves to be raised as a terrorist or killed. Second off if it does become a terrorist it brings more problem to Britain. Third the baby's in a refugee camp not in the middle of isis' headquarters, the sas is not necessary
Original post by Prussianxo
Because the children were with Isis... there was literally no way to get them

Then they werent really the responsibility of the UK government. Shes the one that took herself there and has no regrets about it.
Suddenly now because they lost she wants to be british again. Anyway the rights of her child are in her hands.
Original post by pankaye
So the welfare of the baby (who is a Britiah Citizen and highly at risk of death) is not taken into consideration at all?

Explain to me how we are going to get that baby, since we have diplomatic relations with the country it’s in.
Original post by soylentsam
Shamima herself was groomed from the age of 15. We castigated the asian grooming gangs and lionised the survivors. Shamima is still spouting the crap her abusers filled her with, but she was abused. Where is the equivalence? Oh hold on...she's brown and wears clothing that is her choice, but doesn't look like something from a (white) british shop....she's not like us....

Don’t try and compare Rotherham, Huddersfield, Oxford etc with Begum.
Original post by 999tigger
Then they werent really the responsibility of the UK government. Shes the one that took herself there and has no regrets about it.
Suddenly now because they lost she wants to be british again. Anyway the rights of her child are in her hands.


Don't get me wrong I couldn't care less about shamina and she shouldn't be allowed back in the UK, but the baby is innocent

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending