I know, I posted a link to someone from Ireland in the same situation and we'll probably be taking her back...as we should because she's Irish

Good luck with that, Ireland.

I'm not up on Irish law, but we have a perfectly legal right to refuse her re-entry to the UK. And I really resent all the time and sympathy given to her when there are so many more worthy people going through hell in the world. That's not aimed at you Niamh, just in general.

I think you're mistaking alot of peoples opinions on taking her back as being sympathetic towards her when it's actually more to do with not passing your responsibilities as a country on to some other country to deal with

:laugh:

Honestly, I think we should take her back and put her in prison, solitary too so she cannot radicalise anyone else.

The problem I see with this argument, is that people shout about how murderers/rapists/any crime committed by people from a different country should equal deportation to that country. So, if we expect other countries to deal with criminals even though the criminals live here..surely we should do the same, rather than dumping our worst on others?

I also don't really get why this particular person has been focused on so much, given apparently we have let hundreds/thousands of Jihadis back (and dont veen keep check on them). I highly suspect its to take peoples minds off the ****show that is Brexit.

I think the problem is(from what i’ve heard) that we don’t have the laws to deal with her.Unless we can use the treason law?

I agree about all the other jihadi’s we’ve let back and the focus on this one case.
I think it’s something like 400 roaming our streets unmonitored.
However I don’t think letting more in helps the situation.

I mean if ever that law should apply, it should be in this type of situation, I would have thought?

I would too.But when this was being discussed on TV before and treason laws were mentioned,It was always kind of dismissed.
Maybe her lawyers could somehow prove that it’s not a crime against the crown?

They are bringing in a new law that if you travel to war zones unless you have good reason you could be liable to a 10 year jail term, not sure if that applies retrospectively though

https://www.scottishlegal.com/articl...error-hotspots

I wouldn't think they could make a new law, then apply it to people who have done so before the law was made? Not sure though.

The whole situation is ridiculous, as is the attention this one woman is getting. There has to be something we can do, and yes, surely the treason law would apply here..

...but then I guess there also has to be landmark cases which will get more attention and Shamina being one such case while the U.K. and other countries decide how this is to be dealt with...

This is not a new thing, other girls and women have returned to the uk and have faced no legal action.

This. Case is only in the headlines because she was in the headlines when she left the uk to join Isis.

I am happy for her to remain in Syria, completely stateless.

No one's been tried for treason since Lord Haw Haw after WW2. Acts of treason include "Helping Britain’s enemies" and I suppose could be considered, it carries a maximum term of life imprisonment (treason hasn't been punishable by death since the Crime and Disorder Act 1998). However, it's the British Nationality Act that's been used for Begum which allows stripping a person of their citizenship of the UK if it is for the greater good of the British public.

This will law will only apply in Scotland Cherie.

So Syria should deal with your citizens?

They have been dealing with them the last few years, mostly by gassing them and getting their Russian buddies to fire missiles at them.

We only have to deal with the ones they missed.

We didn't choose Syria, she did.

She still chose to go... and so did 40,000 other Westerners. I had no sympathy when they went, I have none now.

But why should Syria keep her?

You keep missing the point, the sympathy isn't for her, it's expecting other countries to deal with your citizens

if we are being pedantic, she was not made stateless by britain, she was made stateless by the coalition forces of which we were a part. Her chosen state was the caliphate. That was the one that welcomed her, married her and fed and clothed her.

I'm not missing the point, Niamh. I'm telling you we are within our rights under international law, to refuse her re-entry. Let the UN try them all as war criminals as the Geneva convention was so very breached by IS... then maybe they can stick them all in Guantanamo? I really don't care. And this is not just about Begum, I feel the same about every terrorist who left every Western country to fight for IS.

I agree with that.

The Caliphate isn't even a country though

if we are being even more pedantic, the Caliphate was never recognized as a state so