Forum Topic

begum- double standards

I am offering no opinion here. just questioningIn her defence it is often said Shamina Begum was too young to understand the situation  15 years oldWhy are children of 12 apparently being able to overule their parents as regards the covid jab?Why are children as young as 4 being allowed to change their gender?

Barbara Shillabeer ● 1881d48 Comments

"Sajid Javid says no one would let Shamima Begum return if they knew what he does"Then why the secrecy? Publish the information or even better put her on trial!

Ed Robinson ● 1881d

The bottom line is she left Britain to join a death cult so I don't understand why the debate goes on. She made her choice and should live with the consequences.

Jess Davis ● 1881d

" I don't understand why the debate goes on.."Because if she is guilty of offences she should be trialed not let loose around the world."Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done." As the saying goes.Surely people must question the lack of prosecutions following these conflicts?

Ed Robinson ● 1881d

The last one is the easiest - "gender" is a social construct, unlike "sex". Thus a 4 year-old may identify as any gender they like - why not, what's the harm? But no 4-year-olds are having actual sex change surgery or being prescribed puberty-delaying drugs in the UK.The 2nd one is also pretty simple; best advice from the Chief Medical Officer is that 12 year-olds have the vaccine. There are some irrational and/or  misguided parents opposed to it, but if the kids want to do what is best for them, and judged by the CMO to be best for the rest of us, the parents are overruled. Quite right too.The first one is quite complex; one can almost forgive Shamima Begum if she does not understand it because many adults don't either. At the age of 15, Shamina Begum was effectively "groomed" by Isis. But 15-year-olds are still judged to have some criminal responsibility and can be punished for their actions. So what degree of responsibility should she have been expected to have at the time? Some, but not totally that of an adult. These are quite complex judgements and best left to a court which has been provided with the requisite reports.

Michael Winstanley ● 1881d

Thank you Michael for a rounded response. My thoughts too.  The four year old and the British kids being encouraged to vaccinate aren't under a programme of radicalisation. I don't have a strong Begum view either Barbara.

Maxine Campbell ● 1881d

Michael, a you saying just removing Begum's UK citizenship is enough for someone that has apparently committed hideous crimes?

Ed Robinson ● 1881d

No not at all. I'd be happy to see Begum tried in a UK court. However, removal of her citizenship is unconstitutional and illegal under international law. As to "hideous crimes" - really? I thought women weren't allowed to do much more than the cooking in the Islamic State. But if she has, innocent til proven guilty is the way we work - try her.

Michael Winstanley ● 1881d

I think Mr Winstanley has this one well explained. Don't try and compare apples and oranges?

Michael Ixer ● 1881d

I agree with Michael W and Michael I.Let a court decide if she is innocent or guilty.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1881d

Which court Yvonne?No one is charging her as far as I know.Not the UK and not the ICC.The case against her have been about her UK citizenship not her criminal activities.

Ed Robinson ● 1881d

Bring her back here, try her and then chuck her in prison if found guilty.

Matt Palmer ● 1881d

As regards the UK, that is because the illegal removal of her citizenship has made it both impossible and unnecessary for her to be charged and tried in a UK  court for whatever crimes it is she is supposed to have committed. Does anyone know? I have seen her quoted as having spoken in favour of Isis'actions, not as having actually taken any actions herself. perhaps I have missed something. Has she (allegedly) done anything that might interest the ICC?One of the so-called "Beatles", Alexander Kotey is currently to go on trial in the USA. He is charged with torture and murder. As I understand it, he would have to travel from Turkey to the USA to stand trial. But we do not apparently want Begum to travel to the UK to stand trial.

Michael Winstanley ● 1881d

It's interesting though that she was wearing western clothing, showing arms and a little chest and her hair was uncovered when interviewed.

Maxine Campbell ● 1881d

Firstly, could I point out that my name is spelt with an I and not a Y.  I am known as "Ivonne with an I.!Then, to our subject matter.  I googled loss of UK citizenship and found that:"Deprivation of citizenship can take place under Section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981 and occurs when the applicant has committed fraud, false representations or concealment of a material fact. This can also occur if the Home Office deems it to be conducive to public good."or"If you have British citizenship, you can't usually be deported or lose your citizenship. You can't apply for citizenship if you've already been found guilty of a serious criminal offence." So, the HO has deemed that depriving her from her citizenship was conducive to pubic good.  The key word is applicant.Did she apply for a new passport? But, according to the second "definition", has she committed a serious criminal offence - this can only be decided by a court.Which court would try her?  I would suspect the same courts that have tried terrorists before.  Well, my answer is I do not know which court precisely, but the Old Bailey will perhaps have an answer?

Ivonne Holliday ● 1881d

Begum's citizenship is slightly complicated. I believe she has UK citizenship because she was born here. The UK government is bound by international treaty not to leave someone stateless. In Begum's case she has Bangladeshi parents which gives her son entitlement to duasl nationality. When the government rescinded her UK citizenship they said she could claim Bangladeshi nationality. However, to exercise her right to be a citizen of Bangladesh she would, under Bangladeshi law, have had to exercise her right to acquire Bangladeshi citizenship before she was 21 which she didn't do because, as far as I know, she didn't think that was necessary. So she is in effect stateless. I believe the UK courts have ruled she cannot return to the UK but she is still entitled to retain UK citizenship until the Home Offices case can be tested in court, which cannot happen while she can't return to the UK. (If I've got some legal technicalities wrong I'm sure someone will correct them. It all sounds a bit like a Kafka story ...)

Michael Ixer ● 1881d

It is Kafkaesque "par excellence"!!!!Have the UK courts rules she cannot return to the UK? I thought it was Sajid Javid who rescinded her passport but cannot recall any court case in absentia taking place.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1881d

The High Court agreed with the Hone Office that she would bve a danger if she returned but paused the case relating to her nationality:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-53428191

Michael Ixer ● 1881d

Apologies Ivonne for the name error.It still remains that there have been no real prosecutions for crimes that these people have alleged committed abroad. I find that not just strange but unacceptable.Removal of citizenship seems an insufficient punishment for the alleged crimes committed.Others have slipped back to the UK without prosecution too and it looks like some may regain their citizenship after it had been removed.https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jihadists-given-hope-return-syria-isis-vqzlr9zkw

Ed Robinson ● 1881d

Thank you Michael.I do not know why but the article states 2 March but not the year.  Why?Please, do not misunderstand me.  She must stand trial and proved guilty. At the moment, what I see, is a really stupid girl of 15 going off to a dream land that did not exist. Has she really been responsible for atrocities or was she just lured to the dream of an incredible husband and happy life?

Ivonne Holliday ● 1881d

No problems with the name error, may make it but at times it annoys me...  I often wonder if she is punished more for being a girl or a boy.I do not agree with this discrimination as I have always maintained that somebody should be appointed to a post for merit and not gender.A similar principle applies here.  Is she being punished for being a girl, or, heaven forbid, for being an easy scape goat?  Perhaps both are are the same.I am under no illusion that she may have been guilty, but I would rather she be proven to be guilty by a court and not hearsay.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1881d

Or should I say double standards?

Ivonne Holliday ● 1881d

Guilty of what? What is it she is supposed to have done? Can anyone tell me what crimes she is supposed to have committed? If you are under no illusion about it, presumably you have a clear idea. What did she do?She has been quoted in various media, from time to time, saying some shocking things. So has Katy Hopkins (and others). But otherwise, what is that Shamima Begum is accused of doing?Apologies if I am appearing simple, but I feel I must be missing something. Maybe there was a newspaper expose of her (alleged) crimes and I missed it.

Michael Winstanley ● 1881d

My understanding is the reasons for keeping her out of the UK are based on secret intelligence information indicating she may be a danger to public safety. The cynic in me wonders if the reason for keeping her away is that this information might not be sufficiently robust as evidence to bring a prosecution. I would assume that the CPS would look at some sort of offence such as assisting a terrorist organisation (ISIS)?(That's pure speculation on my part.)

Michael Ixer ● 1881d

Well Michael, if anything, I will always agree with you.But the damming indictment is, intelligence has not worked, or in fact, it has failed completely, with he evacuation from Kabul.Bearing this in mind, do you think that any intelligence against this young girl is robust?

Ivonne Holliday ● 1881d

"secret intelligence"is never robust that is why it is secret!The UK policy on Syria, just like Afghanistan is all over the place when you look across time!The reality is that the UK will hook up to extremists if their enemy is perceived to be our enemy.Syria and Afghanistan are a good example!

Ed Robinson ● 1881d

"intelligence information indicating she may be a danger to public safety"That most apply to getting on for half the Tory party.

Michael Winstanley ● 1881d

My feeling was that she had her nationality taken away by a new Home Secretary trying to make a mark taking a hard line and to dissuade others from following in her footsteps which drew more awareness and attention to the problem and hopefully did help to put others off doing the same.When I was a teenager Che Guevara was a poster pin up but that doesn't mean that we knew, wanted to know or understood anything about politics!  It also wasn't as easy then to just get on a plane to go somewhere and we weren't so independent at that age.  We didn't have any money and there were no credit cards or online bank accounts to buy flights with/from.  I remember someone older than me being crowd funded to run away from boarding school but that was probably just to go home or up to London - not to go abroad.Seeing the girls on film walking through the airport it just looked like they were off on a big adventure.  I feel it went horribly wrong for them and what she experienced including losing those three? babies/toddlers must have had consequences.I half heard the other day that a letter to the parents was found in a school bag after they had left.  Is that true?  As a parent that sort of communication with parents makes me mad.

Philippa Bond ● 1881d

Ed, Ivonne - my phrasing was a little tongue in cheek. Michael W - a good point!

Michael Ixer ● 1881d

Hi Barbara. I didn't realise it had now been decided that 12 year olds could overrule parental wishes over getting the vaccine?  If that is the case I certainly do not agree with it.  The age of consent for this should be 16 in my opinion. To allow a child of 4 to change gender is ridiculous.  Children go through many phases as they grow up and will change their mind a dozen times over all manner of things.  When my older Brother was about 3 he got it into his head that he wanted a dolls pram and had almighty tantrums until Mum got him an old secondhand one from the local junk shop (precursor to the charity shops), just to shut him up.  However he definitely didn't want to be a girl and soon got bored with it so pram and dolly was given away.  Thank goodness that happened 70 years ago when common sense prevailed.  These days no doubt there would be some paediatric health advisor wanting to refer him for therapy, or worse! "At the age of 15, Shamina Begum was effectively "groomed" by Isis."Nonsense. Begum was not a naive young girl who was totally innocent, then groomed online and radicalised by ISIS.Why/how did ISIS find and contact Begum in the first place?  It didn't happen accidentally or by a chance random online hit.  I have never been contacted online by a terrorist group, so why was Begum? I believe it happened because Begum and her two friends trawled the internet deliberately in order to make contact with Jihadi fighters. Using search terms like 'How can I become a Jihadi bride' or 'How can I support IS' would quickly connect with Jihadi terrorists looking for support and sex. There must have been months of research and planning undertaken by Begum and the other two in order to make the journey to Syria. Apparently it then took just 3 weeks for Begum to hook up with a Jihadi killer and get married. Begum knew exactly what these killers did and was "okay" with it.  A severed head in a bin was not shocking to her. The Manchester arena bombing was also "justified" but she now says she did not know that women and children were hurt. Really??  She has now apologised and says she made a mistake in joining the ISIS death cult. So that's alright then?  However she is now saying she lives in fear of ISIS.  Hopefully the killers will be reunited with her soon and then she can experience the terror that their victims did. Begum is now saying she can help the Govt in the fight against terrorism because she knows exactly how ISIS operate. Which proves she wasn't out there just being a housewife and having a jolly adventure.🙄This woman is a dangerous liar who will say anything to try and be repatriated but she should never be allowed back into the UK.  Let it rot in Syria.

Sue Hammond ● 1881d

Children being vaccinated against their parents wishes will be dealt with under the 'gillick competence" which statesChildren under the age of 16 can consent to their own treatment if they're believed to have enough intelligence, competence and understanding to fully appreciate what's involved in their treatment. This is exactly the same process that already allows some (deemed competent) children to have the HPV vaccine for example. It's been in use for decades without issue.and 4 year olds cannot change their gender.

Matt Palmer ● 1881d

Are you happy for your son to give consent if you did not want him to have the vaccine Matt?

Sue Hammond ● 1881d

Under a criteria that was established in 1985 and run without issue since then? yes."It lays down that the authority of parents to make decisions for their minor children is not absolute, but diminishes with the child's evolving maturity. The result of Gillick is that in England today, except in situations that are regulated otherwise by law, the legal right to make a decision on any particular matter concerning the child shifts from the parent to the child when the child reaches sufficient maturity to be capable of making up his or her own mind on the matter requiring decision."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillick_competence

Matt Palmer ● 1881d

So who decides whether the child is mature enough to make the required decision? The parent or the child? Ambiguous much?

Sue Hammond ● 1881d

They are assessed under the Gillick competence by a healthcare professional who will then decide if the child is 'Gillick competent'.Why the outrage? it's been in place since 1985.

Matt Palmer ● 1881d

I'm not outraged Matt because I don't have kids, I am just curious.  I wonder what would happen if the parent disagrees with the healthcare professional's decision?

Sue Hammond ● 1881d

From what I saw about it on the news last night the healthcare professional has final say. I can see the logic in it, I think my son is fairly mature and seems to understand enough to be able to make his own decision (he's 12.5) but i can completely see that some of his friends are less mature and maybe it should be up to their parents to decide.The closer the child is to 16 the more their opinion counts over their parents views on some sort of scale.

Matt Palmer ● 1881d

With the Begum case what people are forgetting is that the UK bombed Syria and supported a bunch of extremist groups.This was all done because of the UK's global "police" role.Fast forward a few years and the UK can't even bring to trial one of its former citizens.Billions of pounds have now been committed for Aid to Syria.As unusual, no government minister or MP has been held to accountable for the financial cost never mind the human cost of their war!Perhaps something to think about before giving government any more power.

Ed Robinson ● 1880d

With the Begum case what people are forgetting is that the UK bombed Syria and supported a bunch of extremist groups.This was all done because of the UK's global "police" role.Fast forward a few years and the UK can't even bring to trial one of its former citizens.Billions of pounds have now been committed for Aid to Syria.As unusual, no government minister or MP has been held to accountable for the financial cost never mind the human cost of their war!Perhaps something to think about before giving government any more power.

Ed Robinson ● 1880d

The quality of mercy is not strained;It droppeth as the gentle rain from heavenUpon the place beneath. It is twice blest;It blesseth him that gives and him that takes:'T is mightiest in the mightiest; it becomesThe throned monarch better than his crown:His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,The attribute to awe and majesty,Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings;But mercy is above this sceptred sway;It is enthronèd in the hearts of kings,It is an attribute to God himself;

Caroline Whitehead ● 1880d

With the Begum case, what people are forgetting is that they know next to nothing about her. What they think they know they have got mainly out of a tabloid - the kind you put on the floor of a cage and even the animal feels dirtier.

Michael Winstanley ● 1880d

I can see 3 types of people having a valid contribution to make on this decision Matt, children, parents and  healthcare professionals. The weight given to the views of each will vary according to the individual circumstance of the potential vaccinee. Why it should be anyone else's concern I really do not know.

Michael Winstanley ● 1880d

So funny.🙄 However Sajid Javid knows a lot more than all of us, even a know-all like you. Must be hard for you to accept.😩

Sue Hammond ● 1880d

So we must base our opinions about Shamima Begum on something that Savid Javid may or may not know - but isn't telling us!

Caroline Whitehead ● 1880d

...sorry 'Sajid'.

Caroline Whitehead ● 1880d

Javid claims to know things but does not show the rest of us the respect of telling us what we actually knows. Thus we are expected to blindly follow his opinion without knowing on what it is based. One does not need to know very much to see the problem in that. One would have to know very little to be prepared to accept it, without questioning it."Willful ignorance" is the technical term, ie deliberately remaining ignorant.I am not a "know-all", but I do, like anyone else, know a lot about a lot of things. Unlike a lot of people though, I try not to make pronoucements on a subject I know next to nothing about. In those circumstances I prefer to ask questions instead, so as to further my understanding.

Michael Winstanley ● 1880d

Caroline. I base my opinion on Begum's actions and her statements, plus Javid's greater knowledge of the situation when he was Home Secretary. You can base your opinion on whatever you like.

Sue Hammond ● 1880d

It's not always about knowledge and facts - although they are obviously important! Sometimes one has to assess motives. It would seem to me it's a lot more convenient for the government to have Begum where she is in Syria rather than her being in a UK court challenging their decision on her nationality and possibly her possibly winning her case and having her UK citizenship reinstated?

Michael Ixer ● 1880d

Good to see the panelists on Question Time last night, besides the two main party reps that will obviously take the whipped view, support the case for bringing her to trial.

Ed Robinson ● 1879d