In the news

What kind of weird animal has a temporal opening and a third eye

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_fenestra
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parietal_eye

.

The whole Shamina Begum case is shit, she was manipulated by a Canadian security agent which I think makes it more complex.

What I don't like is:

She is left stateless, this is illegal under international law.
Her husband is in a Dutch jail, an Irish woman has been found guilty of offenses for joining ISIS, but the UK Home Office refuses to take her in and punish her?

That I find suspicious, perhaps the HO suspects the case would collapse, so rather than take the moral high ground here it is easier to just dump her on Syria.

Not everyone born in a country is going to be an angel, this is some sort of denial to deal with it if you ask me. Just push it out of sight and pretend it's nothing to do with anything.

Absolutely shameful. If she was White she'd have been back faster than you could say institutional Racism

You have no sympathy for a child who was trafficked and indoctrinated? OK.

The whole Shamina Begum case is shit, she was manipulated by a Canadian security agent which I think makes it more complex.

Not just that, the agent allegedly actively facilitated her smuggling into Syria.

If she was White she'd have been back faster than you could say institutional Racism

Also if she was male - there are hundreds of men walking the streets of the UK right now who actually fought and killed for IS who have come back and been prosecuted (or not). But her feminine wiles make her much more of a 'security risk' than them.

I'm not sure if the evidence tallies with it wouldn't happen if she was white or male
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Letts
But it's a pretty shitty and cowardly approach.

Bring her back, try her in court, send her to jail if found guilty. We shouldn't be fobbing off our problems on other countries.

But her feminine wiles make her much more of a 'security risk' than them.

I don't think it's that direct.

She wouldn't have gained such notoriety, had she not been a young girl. No doubt. But imo it was her media traction that got her citizenship removed.

Is she actually stateless though?

Sure but the undescribed headlines make it look like one of those weird "I slept with Elvis who was an alien" reports

perhaps the HO suspects the case would collapse, so rather than take the moral high ground here it is easier to just dump her on Syria.

I'm sure there is an element of that. But there is also the optics of taking a tuff stand, at a time when tackling Isis looked like it could well have been a prolonged and difficult task.

Indeed.
We have abdicated all responsibility and made her someone else's problem.

Is she actually stateless though?

She may be a Bangladesh citizen. She was born in the UK and has never been to Bangladesh though. If she turns up in Bangladesh and is prosecuted she is likely to be executed. The UK doesn't extradite people to death sentences.

Basically different rights for descendants of recent immigrants. The law is an arse and should be changed.

has never been to Bangladesh though

that's a bit of a non-argument, you can say that about almost any refugee seeking asylum in a country where they haven't been before but you wouldn't tell them to go back where they came from.

Revoking citizenship is totally different to people seeking asylum.

Declaring someone has citizenship by descent from wherever their parents or grandparents were born so should leave their current place where they are legally settled is terrifying. Unless you are an AfD politician.

I thought the whole thing now went through the courts and isn't just some off the cuff decision by some politician.

Edit: just to clarify, in my opinion in her case her age and the whole trafficking issue should have been considered and she shouldn't have lost the citizenship, but in the case of a adult I don't see it as such a big issue.

I thought Bangladesh said already they won't grant her citizenship?

So I suppose UK law does not have anything written around that scenario, hence she not stateless in law. Which doesn't help her exactly.

Prevent didn't help much to tackle extremism (often caused by people feeling they have no voice/chance/are socially isolated see also QAnon), not much on OMG internet bad when this happened, it all feels like it's "well she is not OUR (the media/some groups) kind of Brit so banishment it is"

And doesn't that exactly feed into the sort of social division ISIS etc. want? Of course, that hurts Muslims but well, it is not that extremists -of any kind- care about "their own people"

I thought the whole thing now went through the courts and isn't just some off the cuff decision by some politician.

It did. It's lawful. It's a shambles.

What went through the courts was an examination of a politician's executive fiat.

What the courts found was that the law gave him the right to issue that fiat, and that everything he should have considered was put before him. It can't also assess whether the decision was right, or even whether it made sense, or reveal any of the secret intelligence that supposedly supported his decision.

I don't think it's that unusual or is because she was of Bangladeshi heritage. You can't update
fundamental laws like that by just what's in the news cycle.
An Austrian friend of mine lost his citizenship because he joined the French Foreign Legion.
I looked it up and it's still the law and it's says explicitly even if it makes the person stateless.

It can't also assess whether the decision was right, or even whether it made sense, or reveal any of the secret intelligence that supposedly supported his decision.

Indeed. But I can bitch about it online.

Edit: my initial post was comparing the lack of responsibility we give minors, eg not voting, while at the same time holding them accountable for their actions as being ridiculous

An Austrian friend of mine lost his citizenship because he joined the French Foreign Legion.

If a Brit joins the French Foreign Legion, or any other foreign army, they would be committing a crime but it's punishable by fines and imprisonment.

Apparently it doesn't apply if you have dual citizenship. So presumably anyone with Bangladeshi ancestry can join the Bangladeshi army.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/feb/23/us-man-accused-of-making-18m-from-insider-trading-wife-remote-calls-working-from-home

This went bad for him (and her) in all kinds of ways.

She reported his dealings to her bosses at BP, which later fired her despite having no evidence that she knowingly leaked information to her husband. She eventually moved out of the couple’s home and filed for divorce.

Austria can also be in the wrong here?

There was an article that some Brits are more likely to be stripped of UK citizenship and they are more likely to be non-white and of some religions..the law is not applied equally potentially, though that is "just Home Office things".

I cannot help but think she's being made an example of, not by the legal system but by the Home Office bosses.

The UK courts have to rule within UK law and it is possible this is just how it works, the law on stateless is more a UN law and I know The Netherlands has also fallen foul of it at some point.

Don't twist it. As if I said - or would say - I have no sympathy for a trafficked child.

I've seen the interviews that she has given as an adult and that's the person I am really struggling to have sympathy for. She showed absolutely zero remorse - IMO, it's that subsequent behaviour, as an adult, that damaged her chances of being allowed back to the UK.

Maybe my views on this are too black and white?

Happy to be educated; the last thing I want to come across as is someone who reads the Daily Mail.