Shamima Begum was cruel enforcer in Isil's morality police, say Syrian witnesses Watch

stoyfan
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#21
Report 6 days ago
#21
(Original post by Decahedron)
It is silly leaving UK born terrorists in foreign countries. They will fester and likely return under their own hateful steam.

What we should be doing is repatriating them and publicly executing them, mainly because it is cheaper than a drone strike.
Quite true.

The countries ripping up citizenships of terrorists, essentially making them stateless, is great n' all until a terrorist is stuck, on transit in the UK, and is not able to travel anywhere else because they don't have valid travel documents.

I just cannot believe how short-sighted people can be when they advocate to make terrorists stateless, but do not realise that if that happens, then the country that the terrorist just so happens to be in already, will be forced to deal with person. Even if that terrorist has no connection with that country.
Last edited by stoyfan; 6 days ago
0
reply
Decahedron
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#22
Report 6 days ago
#22
(Original post by stoyfan)
Quite true.

The countries ripping up citizenships of terrorists, essentially making them stateless, is great n' all until a terrorist is stuck, on transit in the UK, and is not able to travel anywhere else because they don't have valid travel documents.

I just cannot believe how short-sighted people can be when they advocate to make terrorists stateless, but do not realise that if that happens, then the country that the terrorist just so happens to be in already, will be forced to deal with person. Even if that terrorist has no connection with that country.
And it sets a very poor precedent that the children of immigrants can be treated as second class citizens. 2nd generation immigrants being told they don't belong is a very slippery slope, whats to say 3rd generation can't be included in that ruling.

Sajid could see himself getting deported under his own logic.
0
reply
AJ126
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#23
Report 6 days ago
#23
(Original post by stoyfan)
Quite true.

The countries ripping up citizenships of terrorists, essentially making them stateless, is great n' all until a terrorist is stuck, on transit in the UK, and is not able to travel anywhere else because they don't have valid travel documents.

I just cannot believe how short-sighted people can be when they advocate to make terrorists stateless, but do not realise that if that happens, then the country that the terrorist just so happens to be in already, will be forced to deal with person. Even if that terrorist has no connection with that country.
You mean as opposed to the UK having to deal with them? Syria's a Hellhole anyway.A few more terrorists there isn't going to make much of a difference.
0
reply
I'mComingOxford
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#24
Report 6 days ago
#24
that 'baby' she has is probably a bomb
0
reply
AJ126
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#25
Report 6 days ago
#25
(Original post by Decahedron)
And it sets a very poor precedent that the children of immigrants can be treated as second class citizens. 2nd generation immigrants being told they don't belong is a very slippery slope, whats to say 3rd generation can't be included in that ruling.

Sajid could see himself getting deported under his own logic.
Sajid didn't join a group committed to murder and destruction.He has worked his way up to become home Secretary and could feasibly one day be prime minister.He and people like malalal are exactly the sort of immigrants we want to come here.Living here is a privilege not a right.A privelege extended to her and her family which she has spat on.Frankly we don't need people who want to implement their backwards ideology here.
1
reply
AngryRedhead
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#26
Report 6 days ago
#26
Whilst this doesn’t surprise me if she was; the fact that she willingly left the UK to join this deplorable and depraved caliphate is enough grounds for either a severe jail sentence or death penalty in its own right. This just condemns her further
(Original post by BenK64)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ce-say-syrian/

For those who defended her right to come back to the UK, does this change your mind? She apparently carried around a kalashnikov rifle with her and strictly enforced islamic laws on other women. She received defensive military training in Al-Hisba, ISIL's feared and brutal morality police.

On the authenticity of the claims: 'Details of Miss Begum’s alleged role in Isil have come from two separate sources, including an anti-Isil activist group Sound and Picture, whose members lived under the jihadists’ rule and closely followed its members. Some of the information has been confirmed by Western intelligence, which is understood to be looking into the allegations as part of a criminal investigation.'

In any case, the idea that she was 'just a housewife' is surely nonsense.
0
reply
username2427341
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#27
Report 6 days ago
#27
(Original post by BenK64)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ce-say-syrian/

For those who defended her right to come back to the UK, does this change your mind? She apparently carried around a kalashnikov rifle with her and strictly enforced islamic laws on other women. She received defensive military training in Al-Hisba, ISIL's feared and brutal morality police.

On the authenticity of the claims: 'Details of Miss Begum’s alleged role in Isil have come from two separate sources, including an anti-Isil activist group Sound and Picture, whose members lived under the jihadists’ rule and closely followed its members. Some of the information has been confirmed by Western intelligence, which is understood to be looking into the allegations as part of a criminal investigation.'

In any case, the idea that she was 'just a housewife' is surely nonsense.
She's a dumb girl for joining ISIS. She even said that she feels no remorse. When you're 15, you know what's right and wrong.
1
reply
Vikingninja
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#28
Report 6 days ago
#28
(Original post by Andrew97)
Always against her returning, still am.
(Original post by thestudent33)
She's a fool and she doesn't deserve to come back to this country
Gets even better knowing that taxpayer money is going toward legal aid for her court case.
0
reply
HumanBrian
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#29
Report 6 days ago
#29
Why don't they just execute her like all the other monsters? If she was Syrian born she would already be dead.
1
reply
Decahedron
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#30
Report 6 days ago
#30
(Original post by AJ126)
Sajid didn't join a group committed to murder and destruction.He has worked his way up to become home Secretary and could feasibly one day be prime minister.He and people like malalal are exactly the sort of immigrants we want to come here.Living here is a privilege not a right.A privelege extended to her and her family which she has spat on.Frankly we don't need people who want to implement their backwards ideology here.
Sajid isn't an immigrant and nor is Shamima, neither of them chose to come to the UK to get a better life, they were born here.

Would you be in favour of creating a two tier system for British citizens were one group are afforded more legal protections because they are not the 2nd generation immigrants. How about 3rd generation? Should they get the same rights as "natives"?

If someone wants to give up their citizenship then that is their prerogative. It is not up to the state to tell citizens that they can no longer be as such because they have become undesirable.
0
reply
Decahedron
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#31
Report 6 days ago
#31
(Original post by Vikingninja)
Gets even better knowing that taxpayer money is going toward legal aid for her court case.
I'm glad it is being fought in the courts, as a 3rd generation Irish immigrant this case sets a very worrying precedent that the government can strip citizens of their citizenship because their parents were immigrants.
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#32
Report 6 days ago
#32
(Original post by Decahedron)
If someone wants to give up their citizenship then that is their prerogative.
I am all in favour of having a 'radical Islam' channel at all ports and airports, where those espousing Islamism or the implementation of Sharia law in the western democracies give up their passports and renounce their citizenship. The state should take any and every opportunity to keep these dangerous people from our shores.
0
reply
BenK64
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#33
Report Thread starter 6 days ago
#33
(Original post by Decahedron)
I'm glad it is being fought in the courts, as a 3rd generation Irish immigrant this case sets a very worrying precedent that the government can strip citizens of their citizenship because their parents were immigrants.
Your assuming that if her parents weren’t immigrants she would’ve been let back in the UK, but on what basis? She committed treason. She lost her citizenship under the 1981 British nationality act- not because ‘her parents were immigrants’.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
stoyfan
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#34
Report 6 days ago
#34
(Original post by AJ126)
You mean as opposed to the UK having to deal with them? Syria's a Hellhole anyway.A few more terrorists there isn't going to make much of a difference.
By deporting them, you are essentially letting them roam free in whatever godamn country they ended up in. There is nothing stopping them from trying to enter other countries in order to carry out terror attacks. And no, it doesn't nessecarily have to be in Syria.
Last edited by stoyfan; 6 days ago
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#35
Report 6 days ago
#35
(Original post by stoyfan)
There is nothing stoppingth em from trying to enter other countries in order to carry out terror attacks.
Apart from the border forces of those other countries, of course. :rolleyes:
0
reply
AJ126
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#36
Report 6 days ago
#36
(Original post by Decahedron)
Sajid isn't an immigrant and nor is Shamima, neither of them chose to come to the UK to get a better life, they were born here.

Would you be in favour of creating a two tier system for British citizens were one group are afforded more legal protections because they are not the 2nd generation immigrants. How about 3rd generation? Should they get the same rights as "natives"?

If someone wants to give up their citizenship then that is their prerogative. It is not up to the state to tell citizens that they can no longer be as such because they have become undesirable.
Well she isn't British and it's clear she never thought of herself as such so why should we?Its not about where you come from but about the values you hold.Subjugation of women, homophobia, antisemitism and blind faith are not really values which belong here.With native Britain's we don't really get a choice they are already here.When it comes to first generation immigrants and their children it is surely our right to choose who lives here.As I say it's not about race I'm sure there are probably hundreds of refugees who are far more deserving than Shamina Begum.Only this morning I read about some nice Syrian refugees who have been waiting for years to get asylum.By all accounts they didn't feel the need to stitch suicide vests onto isis fighters.Its not about her race but her actions.
1
reply
generallee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#37
Report 6 days ago
#37
Welcome to the multicultural paradise.

We mustn't deprive actual ISIS terrorists of their citizenship and refuse to let them back (even though they themselves did so by tearing up their UK passports and going to live in the then extant Islamic Caliphate) because it would upset a society made terminally unstable and fragile by a combination of mass, uncontrolled immigration and identity politics.

So come on back, ISIS members. Sure you were pushing gays off buildings, raping and enslaving Yazidis, burning alive and and beheading captives on camera last week, but we won't hold that against you. You'll fit right back in here in Bethnal Green and Birmingham. Sreading your ideology amongst your co-religionists, there.

And if you actively decide to implement the plans of the exiled leaders of ISIS to strike (ie murder) the infidel (that's us) in their homelands, well that is just one of the by products of diversity.

And we must celebrate that.
3
reply
AJ126
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#38
Report 6 days ago
#38
(Original post by stoyfan)
By deporting them, you are essentially letting them roam free in whatever godamn country they ended up in. There is nothing stopping them from trying to enter other countries in order to carry out terror attacks. And no, it doesn't nessecarily have to be in Syria.
You mean as opposed to letting them roam free here? Our courts are not exactly known to be that tough on crime.Shes a woman, an ethnic minority, was a child and there is lots of talk about being brainwashed.Completely disregarding the fact that religion is brainwashing anyway.If she comes back here you can guarantee she won't be going to jail for a long time.5 years probably, maybe 10.All prisoners get released after half their sentence is done so she'd be out in 5 years.24 years old is definitely young enough to carry out a terrorist attack.A lot of terrorist fighters who have come back have actually been released.All you would be doing is bringing back a terrorist threat who isn't conceivably going to benefit this country in any way.So why bring her back?
0
reply
AJ126
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#39
Report 6 days ago
#39
(Original post by Decahedron)
I'm glad it is being fought in the courts, as a 3rd generation Irish immigrant this case sets a very worrying precedent that the government can strip citizens of their citizenship because their parents were immigrants.
Well if you decide to join a reformed IRA then yes you should have your citizenship removed.If you don't plan on doing that then you are good.
0
reply
stoyfan
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#40
Report 6 days ago
#40
(Original post by AJ126)
You mean as opposed to letting them roam free here? Our courts are not exactly known to be that tough on crime.Shes a woman, an ethnic minority, was a child and there is lots of talk about being brainwashed.Completely disregarding the fact that religion is brainwashing anyway.If she comes back here you can guarantee she won't be going to jail for a long time.5 years probably, maybe 10.All prisoners get released after half their sentence is done so she'd be out in 5 years.24 years old is definitely young enough to carry out a terrorist attack.A lot of terrorist fighters who have come back have actually been released.All you would be doing is bringing back a terrorist threat who isn't conceivably going to benefit this country in any way.So why bring her back?
Quite honestly I am worried for the prescendence that this carries. All we did was deport her, revoke her citizenship and told bangladesh that it is her problem now.

It can easily happen to the UK.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (314)
37.74%
No - but I will (64)
7.69%
No - I don't want to (62)
7.45%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (392)
47.12%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise