So Shamima Begum wants to come back

[srb7677]

The problem I have with this argument is simply that we are not party to all the facts. I believe she does have dual citizenship although I am not completely sure of that. There is an argument that she should be taken in by her husband's country since he still has his citizenship and is jailed in Holland. She has said nothing about divorce. As said before it seems that full knowledge of the details would apparently change our minds. I think in this particular case we have to bow to greater knowledge. On a purely humanitarian basis I agree with you but that cannot be the only consideration.

It is a weak argument. She was born and raised here and groomed here and has never set foot in Holland. And yes we might not be party to all the facts but she is nevertheless our moral responsibility and should be brought back, and all the facts laid out before a court of law - closed to the public if necessary if sensitive material from a national security perspective is involved - and sentenced if found guilty.

Let's not be cowards who run away from our responsibilities just because some of those we are responsible for have done bad things or are bad people.We have prisons for them. She deserves to be in prison, not at liberty in someone else's refugee camp

[Nick]

she was groomed here.

As far as I am aware there was no grooming? I believe her and her mates just decided it would be a good idea to leg it to Gaziantep and cross the border.

[srb7677]

She is married to a Dutchman, dead admittedly, but she is still entitled to a Dutch passport.

That is true but it is a very weak argument. She has never even been to the Netherlands. She was born and raised here, and yes - sadly - she was groomed here. She clearly ought to be our responsibility.

[Nick]

Would we after all allow foreign criminals to reside here just because their states revoked their citizenships

No, we did it because the EU wouldn't allow us to (Hamza). Thanks for that.

[Nick]

Because if not ours who else's?

She is married to a Dutchman, dead admittedly, but she is still entitled to a Dutch passport.

[T00ts]

I still think that since she was born and raised here and the enemy state she moved to was not a recognised entity, she is clearly our responsibility. Because if not ours who else's? Would we after all allow foreign criminals to reside here just because their states revoked their citizenships whilst they were here? Whatever she has done she is morally our responsibility. And if Sajid Javid has evidence of her involvement in terrible acts she should be put on trial for them. She may in any case simply be a naive kid who was groomed, damage which can be undone.

The problem I have with this argument is simply that we are not party to all the facts. I believe she does have dual citizenship although I am not completely sure of that. There is an argument that she should be taken in by her husband's country since he still has his citizenship and is jailed in Holland. She has said nothing about divorce. As said before it seems that full knowledge of the details would apparently change our minds. I think in this particular case we have to bow to greater knowledge. On a purely humanitarian basis I agree with you but that cannot be the only consideration.

[srb7677]

and you were only saying the other day about people having a different opinion.
How things change when you don't like another's.

There is a big difference between differing opinions with each person addressing facts and responding with facts of their own. But ignoring such basic facts that someone was born here, and raised here, and is clearly our responsibility more than anyone else's without any effective argument against those facts - no evidence that she wasn;t born and raised herem for example, nor any to suggest she should be the primary responsibility of anybody else - and yet continuing to emote that she should never come back anyway, is not debate. It is not engaging with the facts with a counter argument. It is not simply a difference of opinion. It is clearly someone emoting without engaging with the facts. Which is itself idiotic.

[srb7677]

I felt very strongly that she should return initially, but Sajid Javid's comment recently that if we knew what he does we would have made the same decision about her future was pretty compelling. As a mother I cannot imagine one of my daughters being left in the same position as Shamima but then I guess that they would not have been susceptible to the same 'grooming' that she and her friends were. I still can't quite reconcile leaving her where she is though. Have we given her a life sentence based on the activities of a minor?

I still think that since she was born and raised here and the enemy state she moved to was not a recognised entity, she is clearly our responsibility. Because if not ours who else's? Would we after all allow foreign criminals to reside here just because their states revoked their citizenships whilst they were here? Whatever she has done she is morally our responsibility. And if Sajid Javid has evidence of her involvement in terrible acts she should be put on trial for them. She may in any case simply be a naive kid who was groomed, damage which can be undone.

[T00ts]

I felt very strongly that she should return initially, but Sajid Javid's comment recently that if we knew what he does we would have made the same decision about her future was pretty compelling. As a mother I cannot imagine one of my daughters being left in the same position as Shamima but then I guess that they would not have been susceptible to the same 'grooming' that she and her friends were. I still can't quite reconcile leaving her where she is though. Have we given her a life sentence based on the activities of a minor?

[Nick]

No.

I am saying that anyone who cannot understand the basic facts I laid out, or in any way demonstrate them to be incorrect, but who still chooses to emote irrationally anyway, is an idiot.

I understand your POV but I don't agree, the case has been to court and she has had her U.K. citizenship removed. So actually you are wrong and we are right, we have the law on our side. Perhaps those that don't understand that are the idiots 😉.

[Streetwalker]

nds who is disagreeing
Reply
Notify
Mark unread
Send this topic
Print
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up

Whose problem and responsibility do you think she is if not ours?

I would say her families , wider society is not responsible for the behaviour of individuals .  As a responsible family they either leave their daughter to rot in a refugee camp or go and join her and try and find a life in a country more suited to their religious beliefs .  For me it says it all that they have chosen the former , they dont give a shite , so why should we ?

[cromwell]

No.

I am saying that anyone who cannot understand the basic facts I laid out, or in any way demonstrate them to be incorrect, but who still chooses to emote irrationally anyway, is an idiot.

and you were only saying the other day about people having a different opinion.
How things change when you don't like another's.

[srb7677]

What you're saying is that anyone with a different point of view is an idiot?

As long as we know.

No.

I am saying that anyone who cannot understand the basic facts I laid out, or in any way demonstrate them to be incorrect, but who still chooses to emote irrationally anyway, is an idiot.

[Nick]

Anyone incapable of understanding these obvious facts are the idiots.

What you're saying is that anyone with a different point of view is an idiot?

As long as we know.

[papasmurf]

She should be brought back here, put on trial for any crimes she may have commited and if convicted sent to jail.

I have been stating just that ever since the issue was raised. (She should however be debriefed by the security services first, which could take a long time.)