Shamima Begum #2

New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Some, yes, but those who mostly would are busy with the Israel - Palestine war. Her case is also on such high levels, trying to platform her could come with consequences.
I don’t think that’s necessarily true, radicals will always platform those with the most clout, being pro Palestinian doesn’t always mean you embrace Islam in any way there’s lot’s of Christians think the murder of innocents is wrong regardless of any denomination, people like her would thrive off that cause though ,use it as an excuse to bolster the ranks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Latest appeal rejected on all counts.


They will "fight on" apparently. I would be fascinated to know who is funding these endless appeals.

For the moment at least though I will just say this.

Rot in your own consequences terrorist. And religious bigot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 19
They were saying on the news that it is far from a given she'll be able to appeal to the Supreme Court given the unanimity of the CA decision. Her lawyers only appear to have the morality argument now, rather than the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3
It's scary how many people are defending her online. Yes I understand she was 15 but it was the fact she was talking about things she had seen so casually and trying to justify the Manchester attacks. This was recently too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10
She strikes me as someone who wouldn't come back and just keep their head down. She seems to enjoy her "celebrity" status too much for that.
I agree she was a child but nothing she's done since appears to give any genuine indications of remorse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6
It is perhaps worth repeating that one of the reasons that she is able to continue to appeal is that the government chose to change the law so that citizenship is removed at the discretion of The Home Secretary without any due process before it takes place. When this change was introduced one of the concerns expressed by Parliament was that it would be used to deprive people of their citizenship while they were abroad thus making it extremely difficult to challenge the decision. The Home Secretary at the time, one Theresa May assured Parliament that such a power would be used only rarely and that any decision to deprive citizenship would have the right of appeal through UK courts with legal aid if appropriate. In fact deprivation of citizenship of people while abroad has been used rather a lot. It's also worth pointing out that plenty of people have been deprived of citizenship and challenged the decision trough the various courts but these rarely attract any interest in the media.

It's always interesting to read comments that other people should be denied due process or have their rights curtailed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 11
How many appeals should we fund? ..Until she gets the right answer 🙄
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 10
How many appeals should we fund? ..
The number that she is entitled to until she has exhausted the appropriate legal process for the issues involved. In this case Tribunal, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court and possibly the European Court of Human Rights. Same as anybody else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10
It is perhaps worth repeating that one of the reasons that she is able to continue to appeal is that the government chose to change the law so that citizenship is removed at the discretion of The Home Secretary without any due process before it takes place. When this change was introduced one of the concerns expressed by Parliament was that it would be used to deprive people of their citizenship while they were abroad thus making it extremely difficult to challenge the decision. The Home Secretary at the time, one Theresa May assured Parliament that such a power would be used only rarely and that any decision to deprive citizenship would have the right of appeal through UK courts with legal aid if appropriate. In fact deprivation of citizenship of people while abroad has been used rather a lot. It's also worth pointing out that plenty of people have been deprived of citizenship and challenged the decision trough the various courts but these rarely attract any interest in the media.

It's always interesting to read comments that other people should be denied due process or have their rights curtailed.
Depends how you define "quite a lot". There were over 1000 such deprivations in the period from 2010-2022.

.

But the vast majority of those, over 800, were cases were citizenship was obtained through fraud. That leaves just 200 in a twelve year period based on grounds of national security. Less than 20 a year. Sounds rare to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4
I would guess that she has some supporters who are helping with funds?
---
Is she still married? I’ve read her say no and him say yes. He claims she gets his wage from Isis while in the camp?
I think they are still married legally/religiously but since they haven’t seen each other in years she probably sees herself as single. In an interview he did, he didn’t seem to believe she had changed and said a lot of jihadi brides were portraying themselves as victims when they still believed in what went on.
As for the benefits she claimed his benefits as well as her own. I don’t know if that is still the case though.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Depends how you define "quite a lot". There were over 1000 such deprivations in the period from 2010-2022.

.

But the vast majority of those, over 800, were cases were citizenship was obtained through fraud. That leaves just 200 in a twelve year period based on grounds of national security. Less than 20 a year. Sounds rare to me.
Of those 1000 cases, about 920 happened from 2016 onwards and 676 from 2019 onwards so the average number per year that you calculate over the full 12 years is probably not very representative of recent years and belies what is clearly an increasing use of what was once an extremely rare sanction. But I agree it does depend on what you define as 'quite a lot'.

I was just trying to explain why she is still able to appeal the decision some 5 years after her citizenship was revoked and why she has access to Legal Aid even though she has ceased to be a British citizen.

For the avoidance of doubt I don't really care whether Shamima comes back to the UK or not. I don't think it will make much if any difference to 'national security' if she does and I don't think we are helping the Syrians or at least the Syrian Democratic Forces by leaving her (or the other women) there. I also think it makes us look quite a backward and petty country in comparison with those who have repatriated their citizens. But that's just my opinion. My real interest is following the legal arguments around the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6
I would guess that she has some supporters who are helping with funds?
---

I think they are still married legally/religiously but since they haven’t seen each other in years she probably sees herself as single. In an interview he did, he didn’t seem to believe she had changed and said a lot of jihadi brides were portraying themselves as victims when they still believed in what went on.
As for the benefits she claimed his benefits as well as her own. I don’t know if that is still the case though.
I don't know howbmuch I'd trust anything he says either though tbh

Don't some of those deprived of citizenship include the Windrush thing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3
I've seen some people report misogyny she was 15 a child. Shamima wasn't a passive little wife she sewed people into suicide vests and had an active role. She learnt how to use weapons. She was complicit in sexual enslavement of minority women whos only crime they didn't follow the same religion. Shamima chose to travel to Syria from a safe country to join a medieval cult. The yadizi women were brutally oppressed with no choice. shamimas choices are her own she made her bed bleeping lie in it. She's a traitor and pure evil. I'd back death by firing squad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 14
I've seen some people report misogyny she was 15 a child. Shamima wasn't a passive little wife she sewed people into suicide vests and had an active role. She learnt how to use weapons. She was complicit in sexual enslavement of minority women whos only crime they didn't follow the same religion. Shamima chose to travel to Syria from a safe country to join a medieval cult. The yadizi women were brutally oppressed with no choice. shamimas choices are her own she made her bed bleeping lie in it. She's a traitor and pure evil. I'd back death by firing squad.
They say the women were worse than their husbands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4
Oh and people saying it's racism Shamima lives. Sally Anne Jones a white British woman convert who joined ISIS was purposely targeted in a drone strike alongside her 12 year old radicalised son. She used her son as a human shield. Shamima should feel grateful she only had her citizenship stripped the authorities have been bleeping brutal to others. She should be grateful she's still breathing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Oh and people saying it's racism Shamima lives. Sally Anne Jones a white British woman convert who joined ISIS was purposely targeted in a drone strike alongside her 12 year old radicalised son. She used her son as a human shield. Shamima should feel grateful she only had her citizenship stripped the authorities have been bleeping brutal to others. She should be grateful she's still breathing.
Jack Letts was basically in exactly the same situation. Stripped of his citizenship. I’ve seen no such concentrated efforts to bring him back.

So yes it’s racism. Shamima’s supporters want her back ONLY because she is a brown skinned Muslim and therefore in their eyes she absolutely must be a victim on some sort and in some way. I’ve seen some of her supporters hark back to the bleeping crusades to show she is the victim of white middle aged men. I mean what the absolute fuckery is that! It’s racism of the worst kind. If she were a 55 year old white guy they would not care less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6