Shamima Begum...

[biggbn]

Rufus Stone said:

biggbn said:

Great debate on LBC right now about this, David Davis particulalry impressive

Well there's a first.

Exactly what I thought. An ex MI6 chief suggested she would pose less of a threat, and cost the taxpayer less money, if she was brought back into the country and successfully deradicalised. I'd have thought he'd have know more than us lot of enthusiastic amatures!

[biggbn]

So, sorry to simplify ot to this level, but for those who think she is undoubtedly an enemy of the state and wishes us harm, would it be safer for us as a country to -

1. Abandon her in another country as a 'known' enemy, potentially lose track of her and thus allow her more leeway to visit harm upon us or...

2. Bring her back to our country, keep a close eye on her, deradicalise her and pitnetially use her to dissuade other youngsters in her position or, if needs be and the circumstances demand, charge, try and jail her thus keeping a known threat off of our streets and in plain sight?


Seems like a no brained, doesn't it? Why allow someone so many feel is a danger to visit danger upon us when she can be controlled?

If you don't think she poses any danger but just think fk her, she made her decisions...at a young age...and after potential grooming...so leave her to rot, well, that's a different argument.

[biggbn]

irc said:

Option 2 shows brave faith in deradicisation programmes.

https://www.thenationalnews.com/opinion/comment/th...

I think she poses a smaller risk if she, as a non UK citizen, is prevented from ever returning here.

One of the M16 heads strongly disagreed with this although I can understand why you might disagree with him

I'm assuming you missed, or ignored the part of my post that said charge, try and jail her as a UK citizen?

[biggbn]

pequod said:

biggbn said:

One of the M16 heads strongly disagreed with this although I can understand why you might disagree with him

I'm assuming you missed, or ignored the part of my post that said charge, try and jail her as a UK citizen?

I know you are man of love and peace, now, and I don't wish to bring you down with an unpleasant truth which may be too much for you to swallow, however (you knew there'd be one!) she is not a British citizen as of now, and possible never, ever, anymore.

Truth sometimes hurts, and I hate to be the bearer of bad news...

PQ

My point is we could grant her her citizenship then deal with the threat. Our security services are amongst the best in the world and I'd rather trust then to marginalise threat than any other country.

[biggbn]

eldar said:

The law is also to protect citizens. The possibility of Begum representing a direct or indirect threat to the general population must be considered.

The best protection may be to keep her away from our citizens.

Balance the rights of one person against the rights of millions.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thenationalnews.com/world/uk-news/2022/11/24/shamima-begum-revoking-citizenship-undermines-uk-counter-terrorism/%3foutputType=amp

This link suggests otherwise.

[biggbn]

eldar said:

biggbn said:

eldar said:

The law is also to protect citizens. The possibility of Begum representing a direct or indirect threat to the general population must be considered.

The best protection may be to keep her away from our citizens.

Balance the rights of one person against the rights of millions.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thenationalnews.com/world/uk-news/2022/11/24/shamima-begum-revoking-citizenship-undermines-uk-counter-terrorism/%3foutputType=amp

This link suggests otherwise.

A link from a UAE based paper, with repetition of quotes that have appeared repeatedly in this thread.

That link adds nothing to this debate.

That story and quotes are also in the Telegraph etc...and the quotes are from an MI6 head who, one would imagine, knows his brief so they are relevant to the debate. It's cool that we have different opinions, that's what stimulates debate

[biggbn]

JagLover said:

skwdenyer said:

We have laws, courts, judges, etc. to punish people who transgress. Not doing so simply sends out a message that UK rule of law is conditional. Very bad take. Bring her home, prosecute her, punish her. It is called the rule of law

For criminal acts there becomes the issue of obtaining proof in a foreign country where we have few means of obtaining evidence. A number of MPs proposed updating the treason laws a few years back to cover those wishing to join the likes of ISIS. If this had been done then she would step off a plane and be quickly arrested to likely serve a long prison sentence for treason.

....which would be the safest option if she is a threat.

[biggbn]

irc said:

Gecko1978 said:

Its possible encaged in terrorism as I recall talk of sewing suicide vests but will be honest and can't say if my memory is correct.

End of day she is not our problem anymore.

"The Bethnal Green schoolgirl tried to recruit younger women to join the jihadist group, according to reports.

According to the Sunday Telegraph, the 19-year-old played an active role in the organisation’s reign of terror and was allowed to carry a Kalashnikov rifle, earning herself a reputation as a strict “enforcer” of laws, such as dress code.

Allegations also emerged today that Ms Begum had been witnessed preparing suicide vests for would-be bombers."

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/shamima-begum-w...

So would she not be better in one of out jails policed by our security services than potentially running around doing whatever she wants? If she presents a live threat aren't we better to minimise it?

[biggbn]

irc said:

biggbn said:

So would she not be better in one of out jails policed by our security services than potentially running around doing whatever she wants? If she presents a live threat aren't we better to minimise it?

Cost a fair bit though . I think her threat is minimal while she is in Syria or home in Bangladesh.

If we start filing our jails with foreign nationals for crimes committed abroad we would need to build loads of them

And yet security experts say she is a bigger threat elsewhere. No offence brother but I think I'll listen to them. What an intersting discussion, I have learnt a lot. Take care all, gbn x

[biggbn]

pequod said:

biggbn said:

And yet security experts say she is a bigger threat elsewhere. No offence brother but I think I'll listen to them. What an intersting discussion, I have learnt a lot. Take care all, gbn x

Citation please, gbn?

One of the heads or ex heads of MI6 was all over several articles and the radio yesterday saying this. I did post some links. It was in the Telegraph and on LBC. He stated leaving her abroad would cost our country more to keep her surveilled and would be more dangerous. The most cost effective and safest thing to do was to bring her back and have her monitored in our own country by our own people whether she was tried and jailed or rehabilitated. Here is one of the articles.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/11/23/shamim...

[biggbn]

pequod said:

biggbn said:

One of the heads or ex heads of MI6 was all over several articles and the radio yesterday saying this. I did post some links. It was in the Telegraph and on LBC. He stated leaving her abroad would cost our country more to keep her surveilled and would be more dangerous. The most cost effective and safest thing to do was to bring her back and have her monitored in our own country by our own people whether she was tried and jailed or rehabilitated. Here is one of the articles.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/11/23/shamim...

Thank you.

I believe he is wrong with her assessment as a risk to the promotion of others who would do the same in the future. Surveillance in this country is at best, patchy, and if Ms Begum is restored to British citizenship, she will be provided with a new identity and will subsequently disappear into the mass of humanity which London provides... 8 million at the last count and growing daily?

The discussion I listened too suggested our intelligence service are amongst the best in the world and surveilling a known threat is easier than identifying a new one. I am NO expert and just trying to weigh up the options using rational logic.

[biggbn]

irc said:

biggbn said:

The discussion I listened too suggested our intelligence service are amongst the best in the world and surveilling a known threat is easier than identifying a new one. I am NO expert and just trying to weigh up the options using rational logic.

We don't need to watch her if she isn't in this country. The middle east is full (slight exaggeration) of terrorists and we don't watch them all.

The majority of UK terror attacks are by terrorists already living here. So if Begum isn't here her threat is minimal.

Again, I don't know you and that is not the advice being offered by an ex MI6 head. Known threats ARE watched overseas by the way, of the radio programme I listened to was correct. The British intelligence services list of people they surveil is extraordinary deep as it must be. The logic is that overseas the necessary surveillance and 'management' is much more difficult as its not our country, that much seems reasonable and sensible to me?

[biggbn]

pequod said:

biggbn said:

pequod said:

biggbn said:

One of the heads or ex heads of MI6 was all over several articles and the radio yesterday saying this. I did post some links. It was in the Telegraph and on LBC. He stated leaving her abroad would cost our country more to keep her surveilled and would be more dangerous. The most cost effective and safest thing to do was to bring her back and have her monitored in our own country by our own people whether she was tried and jailed or rehabilitated. Here is one of the articles.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/11/23/shamim...

Thank you.

I believe he is wrong with her assessment as a risk to the promotion of others who would do the same in the future. Surveillance in this country is at best, patchy, and if Ms Begum is restored to British citizenship, she will be provided with a new identity and will subsequently disappear into the mass of humanity which London provides... 8 million at the last count and growing daily?

The discussion I listened too suggested our intelligence service are amongst the best in the world and surveilling a known threat is easier than identifying a new one. I am NO expert and just trying to weigh up the options using rational logic.

Logic, and previous history, will tell you that should she be granted BritCitz she will be given protection and a new identity, should she return to our shores.

Which would enable us to keep very close tabs on her and whomever she is in contact with?

[biggbn]

irc said:

biggbn said:

Again, I don't know you and that is not the advice being offered by an ex MI6 head. Known threats ARE watched overseas by the way, of the radio programme I listened to was correct. The British intelligence services list of people they surveil is extraordinary deep as it must be. The logic is that overseas the necessary surveillance and 'management' is much more difficult as its not our country, that much seems reasonable and sensible to me?

It may be logical to you. To me it is logical that a terrorist in the UK can easily mount attacks on us. A terrorist in Syria has to get here first. Past border checks. There is no need for 24/7 surveillance to stop them.

I am just relaying what was said by someone who is an expert in their field brother man, what do I know?

[biggbn]

I am astonished we call ourselves a civilised society. I had been staying away from NPE but the desperate, vengeful thoughts of so many on this thread will now keep me away permanently. Peace and love one and all, gbn x

[biggbn]

86 said:

At least the courts can see sense on this one unlike the court of public opinion which now seems to be run by a lefty mob who shout and post abuse against anyone who doesn’t agree with them as they try to breakdown the bonds of democracy in this country. Shortly to get worse under Starmer who it appears uses the same tactics on the Speaker of Parliament.

Ah, the irony...