Shamima Begum – trafficked, or terrorist?

<div class=”bbp-reply-content”>

I don’t really understand why so many people seem keen to have someone who is known to have terrorist sympathies and a hate for this country want to welcome her back with open arms

</div>
<div class=”bbp-reply-content”>

I don’t really understand why so many people seem keen to have someone who is “known to have terrorist sympathies and a hate for this country” would want to have such a potentially dangerous criminal wandering at liberty without a trial or appropriate punishment.

</div>

How many Irish people feel the same about England ?. Quite a number I’d reckon.

In a real twist of irony I have just discovered that the man responsible for smuggling Shamima Begum into Syria was released from a Turkish jail last August 5 and is almost certainly now living safely in Canada:

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/spy-who-smuggled-teens-to-join-islamic-state-while-working-for-canada-could-be-returning-here

“Justin Trudeau, the prime minister, last month also did not deny Ottawa’s relationship with Al Rashed, saying that Canada’s spy agency must “be flexible and be creative” in the war against terrorists.”

Which is as much as any government is going to admit that someone was one of their spies.

“They have effectively been nabbing British children and trafficking them across the Syrian border for delivery to ISIS all in the name of intelligence gathering,”

So the Syrian man responsible for this now lives a secure life in the West whilst his 15 year old  British victim is denied her birth right and lives as a prisoner in a Syrian camp.

It is hard to imagine a greater example of hypocrisy and injustice.

Sounds like you might have more in common with ISIS than you think

I think sums it up quite neatly

Hello. This thread was forwarded to me by a colleague who is a regular member; his words being ‘this could do with your input’. So I’ve registered here to hopefully add some perspective that is quite clearly so far missing. I’ll start by saying that I am someone with Bangladeshi heritage, and like Shamima Begum, was born here and have lived here all my life. I’ve visited Bangladesh once in my life, as a child. So I’d like to lend a voice that so far seems absent from this particular discussion.

Like Shamima, I grew up in Tower Hamlets. I have worked in the borough particularly in Youth Services, so I’m more than aware of the myriad social and cultural issues affecting Bangladeshi people in London and the UK. As a person of colour, I have been subjected to racism my whole life, be it overt, insinuated or institutional. I have been attacked verbally and physically many times, simply for being me. This racism spiked noticeably following the events of September 11 2001, when many people of South Asian (not even necessarily ‘Muslim’) heritage suffered a huge increase in the racism that seems to be inherent in our society. The subsequent demonisation of Islam as orchestrated by Western regimes, particularly the UK and USA, has left a permanent damaging legacy on our world, and sown even deeper the seeds of division. Many minority communities have suffered increased prejudice and hostility in the last 20 years, particularly those where Islam is a major component of the culture. We’ve seen countless attacks on individuals and businesses, particularly women and children, by cowardly far-right fascists, spurred on by prominent populist ‘politicians’ such as Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson, and unforgivably, from the Labour party led by Tony Blair. This led to situations such as the Respect party gaining a foothold in Tower Hamlets, and to this day, what was once a watertight Labour stronghold, is now divided on ethnocultural grounds; many people from the Bangladeshi/Muslim communities no longer trust Labour to ensure a fairer, more just and equal society. This has unsurprisingly led to communities retreating within themselves, and becoming more defensive, as the very society and institutions charged with protecting their rights and freedoms has turned on them; much of the British press has labelled Muslims as a ‘threat’, innocent families with small children have had their doors kicked in by police in the dead of night, and trumped up ‘terrorism’ charges hurled at individuals who did little more than attend a mosque that a ‘suspect linked to terrorism’ might once have attended. It is worth pointing out that the Muslim communities themselves are very much against terrorism, and want nothing more than to live quietly and peacefully like anyone else. I myself worked with youths who were supposedly ‘at risk of radicalisation’, and found nothing more than typically angry disaffected young people who were witnessing opportunities and dreams slip away, as access to education became much more expensive, local services and amenities were cut, and the insidious racism that pervades our society acted as a barrier to personal development and progress. So no different to the same issues affecting many young people in all parts of the UK, but with an added element of fear and hatred aimed towards them. So it’s no wonder that some misguided and poorly nurtured individuals would seek other forms of guidance than what was on offer. I often encountered an attitude of ‘treat me like a terrorist, and I’ll act like one’ form young people who were sick of being demonised and stigmatised by authorities such as the police, who we know are institutionally racist from the core. The lack of justice over deaths of people of colour in police custody, for example, did nothing to hep foster more peaceful relations. I’ve been the victim myself of racist police harassment, and I know it happens to countless others. Small wonder then that some people might kick back against a system that is weighted very heavily against them. I am not attempting to excuse the actions of individuals, merely hoping to offer up an explanation for the anger and fear that lies at the root of why individuals may become ’radicalised’. A woefully inadequate education system in places like Tower Hamlets, can only makes things worse, as ignorance breeds fear. You cannot keep kicking someone and not expect them to react. Tower Hamlets is one of the most deprived areas of Europe, yet it also houses enormous wealth; the Canary Wharf area has seen trillions generated, yet very little ‘trickle down’. Large swathes of social housing has been bulldozed or sold off to make way for private developments. The wealth disparity is incredible; you have billionaires living within spitting distance of some of the poorest people in the country. Add in that spectre of racism, and you have the perfect breeding ground for resentment and hatred. In many ways, the ‘radicalisation’ of young people in that area has echoed many times throughout history; more recently with the rise of the far-right BNP on the Isle of Dogs, and subsequently with some individuals seduced by the glamour of ‘freedom fighters’ in faraway lands (the majority of cases referred to Prevent are I believe related to young white kids being radicalised by proscribed far-right/neo-Nazi organisations). The destruction and misery created by Western involvement in the Middle East, has only exacerbated anti-Western sentiment amongst those marginalised and demonised communities. Is it really any wonder?

But the reality is that the vast majority of British Muslims do not want such war and division; we actually just want to get on with our lives the same as anyone else. Shamima’s parents, as far as I can tell, are typical of many Bangladeshi families in Tower Hamlets, including my own; just ordinary working class people trying to make their way and have a reasonably decent life. The reasons that lie behind Shamima’s decision to up and leave to ‘join ISIS’ are complex and have already been discussed on this thread, suffice to say it’s pretty safe to assume she was just a disaffected and disadvantaged child, with a silly romantic dream of something more glorious. Most teens have similar feelings, although admittedly most don’t act much upon such fantasies. But that’s really all it ever was for her; a fantasy. The reality has been that she’s been trafficked, sexually exploited (as a child) and has suffered unimaginable trauma in losing three babies, as well as the two friends she travelled with. The notion that she is in anyway a ‘terrorist’ or a ‘threat to national security’ is as much a fantasy as her dream of meeting a handsome dashing young freedom fighter and having a glorious life full of joy. To see it any other way is insane. It’s an individual tragedy that has been blown up for political purposes, nothing more.

As to the legal aspects; I know several people who work within the area of human rights legislation (including someone who was on the team that was successful in preventing the illegal Rwanda deportation flights), and all of them say that the Supreme Court ruling to deny her citizenship is illegal on many counts; not least the premise that Shamima had Bangladeshi citizenship. This has proven to be untrue, and any right-minded legal opinion will be highly critical of the failure of the so-called justice system to actually carry out its purpose. The Home Office has been at fault countless times, not least with the Windrush scandal; many of those cases are still ongoing at enormous expense to the UK taxpayers, and the majority of HO decisions regarding status are overturned on appeal, again at enormous public cost. This is not something that the majority of the UK press will publicise, of course. But peel back the layers, and we see the gradual determined erosion of our human rights and civil liberties. We’re seeing that now with attempts to prevent strike action and the right to demonstrate, for example. Make no mistake; this government has no intention of ever allowing us greater freedoms. The Shamima Begum case is nothing more than a political smokescreen, and many millions of pounds of public resources are being poured into ensuring that the government looks ‘tough’ on such cases. The next time you can’t get an operation because of government cuts, have a think about where your money is actually being spent.

Since I wrote the draft of this yesterday, the events near Liverpool serve as a shocking reminder of just how many people are being ‘radicalised’ by a government seeking to further drive a wedge between people, to set communities against each other, to divide and rule more effectively. It’s working. I am heartened by some of the comments here, and saddened by others. The overall tone though does seem very much in favour of justice, which I think is a growing sentiment amongst more people in the UK. We must seek that which unites, not divides us.

May peace be upon you.

Thank you for sharing your insight, and welcome to the forum. 🙂

Your insight is gratefully received.

Wa alaikum us-salam.

Thanks

Many thanks for the insight, excellent post.

I’ve avoided this thread up to now, glad I opened it on this page and what a great summation from @brownperson. Glad to use the upvote button.

Can you explain how wanting her to face the consequences of any crimes she might possibly have committed is the same as “to want to welcome her back with open arms”?

Can you also perhaps explain why she should be treated completely differently to someone whose parents were both born in the UK? Because you know that is exactly what you are saying.

Obviously you believe that British born citizens whose parents were born overseas are  second class British with less rights.

Are there other disadvantages do you believe that British citizens born to foreign parents should face?

Edit: Can you also explain this as well please?

a hate for this country

What is that based on? Anyone who leaves the UK proves that they hate it? Anyone who commits a crime proves that they hate the UK?

Or does this only apply to black and brown Brits?

In order

The Supreme Court has ruled that removal of her UK citizenship was legal. UK legal due process has been followed all the way to the highest court in the land. If she wants to take it further then goto the ECHR and argue her case. You say you want her to be tried in the UK yet want to ignore the ruling of the Supreme Court. You can’t pick and choose which parts of UK justice apply to her and which don’t, its an all or nothing decision.

No it’s not. It’s about someone with dual nationality. Personally I think the whole concept of dual nationality is fundamentally wrong but that’s another mater.

Not at all it’s about citizenship not where you are born. As I have already said I think it’s fundamentally wrong that people can hold dual nationality. Take your pick, the nationality of your parents or where you are born. One or the other, not both

No going to Syria to join ISIS, a known terrorist organisation who want to destroy the UK other western democracies,  is hardly demonstrating even a liking for the country you were born in is it?

I don’t care what colour the persons skin is. If someone chooses to leave the UK to go and join a known terrorist organisation and can, as per the Supreme Court ruling, be legally prevented from doing so then that’s fine with me.

The Supreme Court has ruled that removal of her UK citizenship was legal. UK legal due process has been followed all the way to the highest court in the land.

is that correct? I thought the Supreme Court ruled on her return to take part in her appeal not the actual appeal itself;

”<span style=”font-size: 0.8rem;”>The Supreme Court held that Ms Begum cannot return to the UK to pursue her appeal against deprivation of her citizenship. It considered that the national security concerns raised by the Secretary of State outweigh her right to a fair and effective hearing. It further held that there was no evidence as to whether the national security concerns could be managed upon Ms Begum’s arrival in the UK. As such, significant weight must be afforded to the Secretary of State’s assessment of the national security concerns. Further, when an individual’s right to a fair hearing comes into conflict with the requirements of national security, the right to a fair hearing will not necessarily prevail – it does not trump all other considerations.</span>

The result is that Ms Begum’s appeal against the deprivation of her citizenship will be stayed until she can play an effective part in it, without the safety of the public being compromised. This was acknowledged by the President of the Supreme Court as “not a perfect solution”.”

Begum v Secretary of State for the Home Department

You seem hopelessly naive about how effective brainwashing of a 15 year old can be.

I also really am more interested in what international law says about stripping of citizenship , especially as I hold two passports., and so can my kids.  Personally I think they UK court decision is dodgy and politically biased.  It doesn’t reflect well on the UK at all.

If you’re that convinced she’s commited a crime bring her back and try her.  How you can try someone who was 15 for complex political crimes isn’t clear to me, but you seem convinced.

Nice input brown person, thanks. I did mention earlier on this thread how the reason Shamima Begum could have her citizenship removed was because of changes introduced by Tony Blair and David Blunkett post 9/11. It was a cynical attempt to tap into growing  islamophobia and tabloid driven bigotry.

And you are absolutely right to point out that it is part of a much more complex drive to sow division, reduce freedoms and rights, and consolidate the power of the wealthy elite. As you point out they are prepared to pour millions into political stunts like the Rwanda fiasco, rather than spending it on something worthwhile, because of the potential political capital.

The pandering to islamophobia is also part of a post-soviet United States attempt to establish full spectrum global dominance. Getting the public on side was absolutely imperative.

The plan was to attack the weakest first and then progressively  tackle more challenging foes………. Afghanistan…. Iraq….. Libya…… Syria….. Iran

However it all went a bit tits up and they lost control of the situation. Afghanistan seemed easy initially but 20 years later we are back where we started, Iraq was a nightmare from the start. By the time we get to Libya the decision has been made no more boots on the ground, and instead just use western air forces to give air support to islamic extremists such as Al-Qaida in Libya. With Syria the aim is to simply feed an unwinnable civil war in which Muslims relentlessly kill each other. Iran is now off the radar.

The legacy of all that isn’t great. And Shamima Begum is just collateral damage in a geopolitical situation which hasn’t brought peace and stability but instead fed violence and growing islamophobia.

@BrownPerson.

Well said.

And clearly brainwashing or grooming affects middle aged men too. They are perhaps not as savvy as they believe.

No going to Syria to join ISIS, a known terrorist organisation who want to destroy the UK other western democracies, is hardly demonstrating even a liking for the country you were born in is it?

ISIS is not attacking the UK. It was attacking the Syrian government, which the UK is firmly opposed to.

You say you want her to be tried in the UK yet want to ignore the ruling of the Supreme Court.

You appear to be oblivious to the fact that it is politicians who decide what the law is in such matters. The Supreme Court decided that stripping Shamima Begum of her British citizenship was lawful because of changes introduced by a previous Labour government, which allowed British born citizens to stripped of their citizenship. Before that no one could be stripped of their citizenship unless it had been obtained through fraudulent means.

The fact that it is lawful does not make it right.

You appear to be oblivious to the fact that it is politicians who decide what the law is in such matters. The Supreme Court decided that stripping Shamima Begum of her British citizenship was lawful because of changes introduced by a previous Labour government, which allowed British born citizens to stripped of their citizenship. Before that no one could be stripped of their citizenship unless it had been obtained through fraudulent means.

The fact that it is lawful does not make it right.

Isn’t that how democracies are supposed to work? Parliament and government legislate and create laws that are then applied by the courts? What are you suggesting as an alternative?

There are lots of things that are lawful but not right such as tax avoidance, non- Dom status and myriad of other things. The solution is changing the law to ones the majority agree with not saying the court is wrong

saying the court is wrong

I don’t have an opinion on whether the court is wrong, although I suspect that it might well be. That is why there are what is known as “appeals’ in the UK justice system, and occasionally unfortunately also miscarriages of justice.

What I have said, and which don’t seem to understand, is that the courts in these cases have to implement laws decided by politicians.

Politicians are not always right. And I, not alone, believe no British born citizen should ever have their citizenship removed. No matter where their parents were born.

You obviously disagree and feel that it is perfectly acceptable to strip them of their birthright if their parents happen to have been foreign.

Since I can’t see you arguing the same in cases where the parents are both British born I have to assume that you are primarily driven by bigotry.

You obviously don’t believe that every British citizen is equal, it is dependent on the status of their parents.

The reality has been that she’s been trafficked, sexually exploited (as a child) and has suffered unimaginable trauma in losing three babies, as well as the two friends she travelled with.

This is just my observations from people in media where comments are made available.

The trauma of losing three babies will stay with her for the rest of her life, so are many who lose their love ones due to terrorist attacks.  This trauma will stay for a very very long time.

In my opinion, she will not be able to return until such time as the terrorist group she was associated with is totally dismantled etc but even after that I don’t think many will forgive her.  This is partly because of who she once “represented” (terrorist group) without her even knowing (she thought she was walking the right path but others disagree), it is not what she believes in but the belief (not mainstream) she represents that makes her “unwanted”.

People who lose their love ones in any form of terrorist attacks will simply not be forgiving for a very, very long time.

From a religious perspective (my belief system at least), this will continue for many future lives and until such time as the cosmic condition permits, those who lose their love ones, to meet with their love ones again (in different lives) and only at that moment will forgiveness be given.

She needs to beg for forgiveness from deep inside herself first before she begs others (others see her as direct or indirect cause) to take her back.   This also means “doing time” to contemplate who she is and the trauma associated with everyone involves for a period of time.  Her insistence to return within a short period of time will never work.  She will only be able to return when the day she understands her and others’ trauma.

A sad situation for all.

Since I can’t see you arguing the same in cases where the parents are both British born

Which is the key issue really – we either strip British citizenship from anyone we disapprove of, or we don’t do it all.

To only do it to “foreigners” is blatantly nationalistic/racist.

What I have said, and which don’t seem to understand, is that the courts in these cases have to implement laws decided by politicians.

Politicians are not always right

I whole heartedly agree the politicians get most things wrong but what’s the alternative? Get rid of politicians and replace them with what? Ideally get ‘honest’ politicians? I can’t see that happening in my lifetime as the system is based on grace and favour going back hundreds of years.

I also agree that no one should be left stateless, but in this case the Supreme Court has decided that she isn’t

I also agree that no one should be left stateless,

You are completely missing the point, which is that everyone should be treated equally irrespective of their parents nationality. Whether someone is left stateless is actually secondary to that imo.

So if you are going to strip people of their British citizenship then at least be evenhanded about it – why wasn’t Ronnie Biggs, for example, stripped of his citizenship? He clearly “hated” Britian, he committed a crime against the Crown, was given a staggering 30 year prison sentence (more than a you get for murder or rape) lived the life of Riley abroad for 36 years, and yet never had his British citizenship withdrawn. Instead the UK was desperate to get him back here to face justice, why? He could have applied for Brazilian nationality and have never been allowed back.

Shamima Begum has less rights than Ronnie Biggs had because her parents were Bangladeshi. That isn’t justice and it is certainly racism.

And the Supreme Court have not said that Shamima Begum is not stateless, they have ruled that her appeal cannot be heard whilst she is outside the UK. She is definitely stateless now that her British citizenship has been removed.

I whole heartedly agree the politicians get most things wrong but what’s the alternative?

I haven’t said that politicians get most things wrong. I said sometimes they do. The alternative? Well that’s obvious – get it right. In this particular case the next Labour government should pass legislation which makes clear that no British citizen can ever have their citizenship withdrawn, whatever the nationality of their parents.

That was how the law stood when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister, I don’t see any reason why it shouldn’t be the law when Keir Starmer is prime minister.

You can’t leave people stateless, it’s contrary to international (and natural) law. Hence the bullshit pretence that Shamima Begum was Bangladeshi really.

But even dual nationals should not be vulnerable to having their citizenship stripped against their will, let alone without due process. That negates the entire concept of what citizenship means.

Thank you for that useful and informative post @brownperson

But the reality is that the vast majority of British Muslims do not want such war and division; we actually just want to get on with our lives the same as anyone else.

I think most reasonably intelligent people know this. It’s not about Islam, or people with a certain skin colour. It’s about ‘being a dick’. See also Westboro Baptist Church. Dicks. But nobody’s saying Christianity or white people are to blame. It’s just them, being dicks.

In my opinion, the worst types of people for stoking division are the virtue-signalling righteous backslappers (as another poster succinctly put). Everything is a race issue with them, because then there’s an opportunity to wade in and shout “racism!” or “Islamophobia!” where non exists. And for what reason? Why stoke up such nasty division? Who the **** knows? Self-esteem issues, following the herd, or my personal theory – they’re trying to atone for bulling a black or asian kid at school back in the 70’s/80’s and are now on some personal crusade to unmask the racism in, well, everything. And if that pushes us all further apart then so be it. It’s more important that THEY ARE RIGHT.

I just do not get how you can deny this is racist and islamophobic and that you can blame those of us that point it out for stoking division

What a weird logical contortion

the worst types of people for stoking division are the virtue-signalling righteous backslappers

You are quite correct, I always thought the worst people for stoking division were the Tommy Robinson morons or the idiots protesting against asylum seekers in Liverpool, or maybe just your run of the mill gammons but no I now realise it’s the lefties, the woke, snowflakes and those fighting racism and islamaphobia who are dragging us all down with their vile propaganda.

Thank you for the valuable insight and the psychological analysis you managed to throw in as well.

Talk of the devil…

😆

Here’s a weird logical contortion. Two fat middle-aged blokes get into a fight over parking. One’s a white butcher, the other a taxi driver and also imam at the local mosque. To most people it’s just two bald blokes fighting over a comb. But in your world it’s ‘a racist and islamophobic’ incident’ right? Yeah mmm

Nope based on that it’s two blokes fighting over a parking space.

I always thought the worst people for stoking division were the Tommy Robinson morons or the idiots protesting against asylum seekers in Liverpool

Yes, you are correct. They are to blame too. But there’s not that many of them anymore thank god. There are literally millions of idiots stoking division for their own pathetic selfish reasons.

I have no problem criticising people who claim racism at any given opportunity, you know the ones who constantly bang on about the electorate being all stupid racists, and the political correct/woke nonsense which vilifies people calling them racist for using the “wrong” words, or alledgedly voting incorrectly in referendums.

But much as I might dislike all that nonsense I despise racism even more.

I don’t necessarily despise the individuals that need to be challenged, engaged, and explained how racism is a threat to us all, as it sows divisions, hatred, and violence. It is used as a tool to manipulate by people with their own agenda – everyone loses.

Quite apart from the fact that it is moronic on every level – how the **** can anyone hate someone that they don’t even know purely because of the colour of their skin or the country they were born in? FFS

And for me the worse form of racism is the racism which is used as a tool by the state. The denial of Shamima Begum’s birthright, her British  citizenship, because her parents were Bangladeshi is straightforward bigotry and racism. She would not have been denied her birthright if her parents had been the same as most people on this forum. Simple as.

I don’t think there is any country in Europe which is more multicultural, tolerant, and less racist than the UK. I truly believe that it is something which Brits have a genuine reason to be proud of. Despite the fact that obviously racism does exist and there is still much to do, as last night’s events proved. In many European countries the situation is far more dire.

Sadly however, in line with many other European countries, the UK’s immigration and nationality laws are inherently racist.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/22/shamima-begum-judges-to-rule-if-removal-of-uk-citizenship-was-lawful

Despite Sky’s headline:

https://news.sky.com/story/shamima-begum-is-about-to-find-out-if-shes-allowed-back-into-the-uk-how-did-she-get-to-this-point-12816397

The special immigration appeals commission will not determine whether Begum can come back to the UK – several British women detained in north-east Syria retain British citizenship but have not been repatriated.

I don’t understand why the facts behind this case are constantly being misrepresented, including by major news providers such as Sky News.

Also worth noting is this:

Most of Britain’s allies have repatriated their nationals from north-east Syria, including the US and other European countries. Last month, Spain became the latest country to start repatriating families of IS fighters from Syrian refugee camps, with two Spanish women and 13 Spanish children arriving at Torrejón military airbase near Madrid.

As is this;

The case has highlighted how Britain is out of step with its allies on the issue of citizenship, being the only country frequently to remove it, apart from Bahrain. A report last year found that 464 people had been stripped of British citizenship since rules were relaxed in 2006.

The issue predates recent Tory governments and it would come as no surprise to me if it was found to be lawful under UK laws. I guess whether it complied with international laws and obligations might be a different matter.

What is certain imo is that it is frankly disgraceful. And that there is probably a lot of truth in this:

Sajid Javid, was accused by the former director of public prosecutions of England and Wales, Lord Macdonald, among others, of revoking her citizenship to bolster his ambitions to be prime minister.

I don’t understand why the facts behind this case are constantly being misrepresented, including by major news providers such as Sky News.

Ahem:

What is certain imo is that it is frankly disgraceful. And that there is probably a lot of truth in this:

culture war stuff like this is all they have left really

Three things;
1. Her decision was made as a child.
2. Allowing a govt to remove nationality is giving them a weapon they’re going to misuse at some point.
3. She was groomed by professional seducers.

Whether she’s a bad one or not is irrelevant.

Johnny Mercer on Sky News this morning saying there’s a lot more detail about the case that has been kept hidden, and Javid made his decision based on all the facts. I must admit, I’m struggling to conceive anything this young woman must have done in between her three pregnancies which makes her such a diabolical ongoing threat to the UK.

What I’m fairly certain of is that there will be other British nationals who travelled to Syria and Iraq to join ISIS who have now drifted back home with no repercussions.

Sajid Javid made an example of her to score points with the Daily Mail.

So, her court case rejected.

Boils down to whether the Home Secretary has the powers to remove citizenship (he/she does) than whether the decision in this case is fair given her circumstances. They said they didn’t have the authority to evaulate whether or not she actually poses a national security risk.

So a sitting Home Secretary can simply say the magic words ‘National Security’ and strip you of your citizenship with no opportunity for you to challenge that.

Dystopian.

Difficult to feel anything but sorry for her. Even if she believed she was going to fight for a just cause, she was still a child then. Now 8 years later she has buried 3 children and is stuck in a camp in N Syria.
Maybe if we don’t want to keep making enemies we should show a bit more compassion.

Unexpected but fantastic ruling. Rot in hell.

Unexpected but fantastic ruling. Rot in hell.

No, please… don’t be coy. tell us what you really think….

daveylad
Free Member
Unexpected but fantastic ruling. Rot in hell.

Just curious who are wanting to rot in hell here?