O/T Shemima Begum - Legal Aid

So you don't like her then?

 

Tbf that's a poor analogy, I dont think a white girl being raped in Bradford as any comparrison to a young Muslim girl who turned her back on the west, who hates the west who longed for the ISIS ideology, I dont think a white girl in Bradford would want to sew suicide vests onto people, I get the feeling you feel for her, each to there own btw

 

Politics is always to do with matters like this. That's why there is debate. It's politics.

 

No mate, do you ?

 

Make sure to label my opinion as "bigoted" to make yours look even more progressive and virtuous.

 

Whoah there matey. It absolutely DOES matter that he'll lose. For a minister of state to take a course of action KNOWING that he is acting unlawfully is a terrible barometer of the state our politics and public life has descended to. It should be called out.

As for Ms Begum, she should have access to the means to defend her rights, notwithstanding that she has woefully abused both those rights and also the country that (in same times) stands up as guarantor of them. She should not be striped of her citizenship rights - even though she should be subject to the full rigours of the law should she choose to return.

It is the fact that this country upholds those rights (even if the Home Secretary seems oblivious to them) that separates us from the type of ghastly regimes that Ms Begum has so ill-advisedly chosen to support.

 

I feel sorry for these "jijadi nut jobs".
They must have had a terrible upbringing, to turn out now the way they have, going round grooming and brainwashing people.
They were no doubt groomed and brainwashed themselves into having to do such nasty things.
It shouldn't be the fault of the individual. They were all kids once. The average 14 year old has no concept of right or wrong. This is despite the criminal age of responsibility being 10 years of age.
We should direct our resources into helping these "jijadi nut jobs". No grooming, no problem.

 

Can't say I do from what I know. I do want proper procedure to be carried out though because I think that's what sets us apart as a civilized country. Once we start doling out arbitrary justice we are just as bad as the evil which you are referring to

 

Wrong. What about Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber" who unsuccessfully tried to blow up a transatlantic flight? He has dark skin virtue of having one Jamaican grandparent, but all his other roots are completely English. He was a petty criminal who was indoctrinated and converted to Islam while in prison. He's about as Arabic as I am.

 

Disagree . Politics is the right to freedom of speech , to debate a topic . The begum saga is legal .
Here's the law .......

No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.

"To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice. No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled . nor will we proceed with force against him . except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land. "

All there in black and white . If I was to add a political slant to the debate ; it looks like another giant screw up by the home office , up there with windrush . No matter though , it ll be the likes of me and you footing the bill which I'm going to guess will run into the millions.

 

These threads never end well.....or start well......and the middle is pretty poor as well.

 

I think we are at cross purposes on this. The issue is now a political issue regardless of the specifics of the law in my view so to suggest that there should be no left or right wing views expressed is a tad naive for me. I don't dispute the law ( which in our system should be the immediate domain of the judiciary) but I dispute the fact that legal issues like Begums cannot and should not be political as well

 

Sure , I agree . To debate such subjects is part of a healthy democracy , but those debates should only ever be used to change or amend laws in the future ; not to overrule current law .

 

Not true.

 

I like a bit of Magna Carta.

e.g.

- Heirs may be given in marriage, but not to someone of lower social standing.

- Don't worry about your debts to the Jews if you die.

- No one shall be arrested or imprisoned on the appeal of a woman for the death of any person except her husband.

- One German leader only may victoriously fight within the valley of the Dearne to enrich the lives of the peasants in red

(one of the above quotes may not be fully accurate)

 

I think it changed several years ago. Used to be for all, I remember a massive fuss being made about it (and rightly so).

 

Yes, I’ve read up more about it now thanks to Toby. However, if she doesn’t get it for those reasons then fair enough but just saying no regardless because people don’t like her isn’t good enough.

 

I think "austerity" was the justification. I reckon it changed about 2011.

 

I agree. However, part of me wants her to receive it but at the same time I hope she loses her fight.

 

I want her to get legal aid, succeed in regaining her citizenship then face trial for the full extent of the appropriate terrorism charges if/when she returns.

If she does get legal aid the headlines shouldn't be that it's a disgrace she got it, but that it's a disgrace that more people don't get it. But they won't be.