Shamima Begum: East London schoolgirl loses appeal against removal of UK citizenship

[Bday Prang]

If she did get back in to the UK a life on  (enhanced) unemployment benefits is pretty much inevitable, at least until she accumulates the wealth and celebrity status which she is assured.   I would love to be a fly on the wall at one of her "back to work" interviews.  Particularly the bit where they ask about what life skills she has amassed during her life, and her strengths and weaknesses, and what she might bring to the table.  

[josephbloggs]

18 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

She’ll eventually win her case.

 

Stripping a person of their citizenship on the basis of their actions as a child will clearly not stand, not should it.

 

 

Nice to see one poster with some humanity and common sense.

[Bday Prang]

7 minutes ago, brianburi said:

It's not a problem, having just found extra money for Ukraine munitions and body guards for female Members of Parliament.

 

AN Daily Mail readers club out in full force today......... always good to hear the right wing nut jobs pov.... Farage for ever.....

Body guards for female MP's as a direct result of what ????   As a direct result of threats from people with a similar mindset to Begum.  

[josephbloggs]

16 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Then again, allowing her back will send a message that terrorists will be forgiven if they go abroad and commit terrorism and they can just come back to the UK as if nothing had happened 

What terrorism did she do?

[transam]

Just now, josephbloggs said:

What terrorism did she do?

Assist, did you know that folk who 'talk' terrorism on a PC can be taken to task......?

[johnnybangkok]

40 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

People who are not british citizens or who are in the process of having that privilege withdrawn should not be entitled to legal aid.  If that potentially leads to a "rocky road downwards for justice"  then so be it   I have no issues with that whatsoever.      Especially  considering that true british citizens who have become expats in Thailand for example have their pensions frozen , lose their ability to vote, and can be refused medical treatment on the NHS   All of which would be available to her if she returned to the UK. in fact to really rub salt in the wound, she would be entitled to jump any NHS queues for medical attention and no doubt get immediate access to NHS dental treatment as well

  Yes I have heard of pro-bono  now tell me where it was mentioned on the op  

Moving quickly past all of your strawman arguments with pensions, voting rights et al, you are arguing that someone shouldn't be awarded legal aid to contest the removal of their citizenship because they have already had it removed (what is actually being contested) or 'are in the process of having that privilege withdrawn'  The fact you cannot see the irony in what you are professing speaks volumes to your bias. UK law stands proudly on the world stage for it's fairness and accessibility and you cannot just arbitrarily choose who does/doesn't get legal aid because of your personal prejudices. And the fact you are quite so willing to throw the baby out with the bath water negates any sensible argument you may have had.

 

Oh and I mentioned pro bono because you insisted that all solicitors were just 'motivated solely by money'. The fact that pro bono exists completely negates that argument too. 

[josephbloggs]

2 hours ago, transam said:

I thought this story funny, more or less the same reason London has Sadiq Khan as Mayor.....😂

 

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/welcome-her-back-bethnal-green-203654133.html

It really bothers you that London has a brown mayor doesn't it/

[transam]

2 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

Moving quickly past all of your strawman arguments with pensions, voting rights et al, you are arguing that someone shouldn't be awarded legal aid to contest the removal of their citizenship because they have already had it removed (what is actually being contested) or 'are in the process of having that privilege withdrawn'  The fact you cannot see the irony in what you are professing speaks volumes to your bias. UK law stands proudly on the world stage for it's fairness and accessibility and you cannot just arbitrarily choose who does/doesn't get legal aid because of your personal prejudices. And the fact you are quite so willing to throw the baby out with the bath water negates any sensible argument you may have had.

 

Oh and I mentioned pro bono because you insisted that all solicitors were just 'motivated solely by money'. The fact that pro bono exists completely negates that argument too. 

You could put your cash forward, there is a go-fund-me to get her back here on the dole.....🤭

[transam]

Just now, josephbloggs said:

It really bothers you that London has a brown mayor doesn't it/

No, Mrs.Trans is brown, try again..........

[johnnybangkok]

2 minutes ago, transam said:

You could put your cash forward, there is a go-fund-me to get her back here on the dole.....🤭

More strawman. Please at least try to debate the points I made without resorting to nonsense.

[transam]

1 minute ago, johnnybangkok said:

More strawman. Please at least try to debate the points I made without resorting to nonsense.

I thought it was a good idea to support your obvious cause..........🤔

[josephbloggs]

1 hour ago, transam said:

She is being financially supported by a go fund me. If you watch this vid a lot will be explained, especially by a bloke who worked around the lady for a couple of years, it may shut a few up, here...

 

 

Wow, you actually posted a GB News clip as "evidence". Hilarious. You do know that is the most rabidly right wing piece of crap on British TV right? (Of course you do, it's why you watch it, no doubt along with Fox "News").

Edited February 25 by josephbloggs

[proton]

17 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Nice to see one poster with some humanity and common sense.

 

He's another part of the problem like all the other soppy hand wringers who have led the UK to the appeased dhimmi status it is in now. Some will always grovel before the Islamist assault on our culture and values and feeling all virtuous, tolerant and liberal for it!

[transam]

Just now, josephbloggs said:

Wow, you actually posted a GB News clip as "evidence". Hilarious. You do know that is the most rabidly right wing piece of crap on British TV right? (Of course you do, you probably love it along with Fox "News").

That's according to you, a left wing junky, of which I don't take much notice of. You took no notice of the guy talking about his work and the lady in Syria then....?  

[shackleton]

Wise decision no more to be said 👌 

[Wobblybob]

2 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

So she has a "legal team" including a QC.  none of whom will be working for free, it should be revealed publicly  exactly how much this has cost and exactly who is paying for it.  There should be a special tax levied on all muslims in the UK ( and their apologists) to help recover the costs of this and all the atrocities committed in the name of islam.

 

It has cost the tax payer 5 million for her legal fees to date and rising.🥴

[Bday Prang]

2 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

Moving quickly past all of your strawman arguments with pensions, voting rights et al, you are arguing that someone shouldn't be awarded legal aid to contest the removal of their citizenship because they have already had it removed (what is actually being contested) or 'are in the process of having that privilege withdrawn'  The fact you cannot see the irony in what you are professing speaks volumes to your bias. UK law stands proudly on the world stage for it's fairness and accessibility and you cannot just arbitrarily choose who does/doesn't get legal aid because of your personal prejudices. And the fact you are quite so willing to throw the baby out with the bath water negates any sensible argument you may have had.

 

Oh and I mentioned pro bono because you insisted that all solicitors were just 'motivated solely by money'. The fact that pro bono exists completely negates that argument too. 

There is no sensible argument for wanting to allow her back into the uk. There is no sensible argument for spending millions debating the matter either. The UK is, thanks to our home grown liberal lefties . a laughing stock in the eyes of the rest of the world, and has been identified by islamist extremists as a very legitimate and very soft target.

     Desperate times require desperate measures., plenty of "human rights" were suspended as a result of a recent pandemic, no reason why a few more can't be suspended, in response to the terrorist threat, and for people behaving like Begum. after all they are not too big on human rights in the countries these traitors choose to  emigrate  too   The removal of free legal aid for all foreigners would be a great start, and something we really could be proud of

     Anybody that  thinks lawyers are not motivated by money is clearly delusional.  The UK has little to be proud regarding the legal aid system ,  penniless scum who make up the majority of miscreants  get free legal representation,  Large corporate bodies have no problem affording the extortionate costs involved , but the average man in the street is not entitled to any assistance in that respect, and in most instances selling his house and using his life savings would not even scratch the surface. even relatively wealthy people have rendered themselves bankrupt paying for legal representation

     So an islamic extremist rapes your daughter his legal team is free for him in fact your taxes pay for it   you daughters legal team assuming she has a job and is a productive member of society ii not free in fact you would have to sell your house  just to raise a deposit    Of course you are fine with that state of affairs

[Bday Prang]

13 minutes ago, Wobblybob said:

It has cost the tax payer 5 million for her legal fees to date and rising.🥴

jesus Christ almighty.  now at least I know why it has not been widely broadcast.  

For a lot less than  that sort of money  she could have simply disappeared or met with an unfortunate accident, the muzzers would have done her in themselves for far less

Ps the sad emoji I am about to stick on your post is to illustrate how I feel about this, it is in no way a criticism of you 

Edited February 25 by Bday Prang

[Bday Prang]

38 minutes ago, proton said:

He's another part of the problem like all the other soppy hand wringers who have led the UK to the appeased dhimmi status it is in now. Some will always grovel before the Islamist assault on our culture and values and feeling all virtuous, tolerant and liberal for it!

Soppy handwringers, and virtue signalling tolerance ?     Admittedly words I have used my self when describing such people, but I genuinely believe those words are fast becoming somewhat inappropriate.  Worryingly the time is quickly approaching where words like "treasonous" ,  " traitor" and "threat to national security" would be more accurate. and where holding such views would render one liable to severe penalties, I would suggest imprisonment followed by exile to a suitably intolerant muslim country, where they can enjoy the benefits ( or otherwise) of the culture and values they would be happy to see inflicted on  the UK and every other western democracy. 

           

[stevenl]

33 minutes ago, Wobblybob said:

It has cost the tax payer 5 million for her legal fees to date and rising.🥴

Could be. Source please.

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Could be. Source please.

Begum's legal challenges are thought to have cost the taxpayer about £5million already, and if her case ever reached the Supreme Court, this figure could soar to more than £7.5million, according to legal costs expert Paul Fulcher

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11177619/Shamima-Begum-jihadi-bride-case-set-cost-taxpayers-5m-experts-warn.html

[stevenl]

13 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Begum's legal challenges are thought to have cost the taxpayer about £5million already, and if her case ever reached the Supreme Court, this figure could soar to more than £7.5million, according to legal costs expert Paul Fulcher

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11177619/Shamima-Begum-jihadi-bride-case-set-cost-taxpayers-5m-experts-warn.html

From the sun, https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/26147959/shamima-begum-cost-millions-legal-bills/

"Her fight to return home has already cost more than £250,000 in legal aid, with experts estimating that could hit as much as £7million if she now takes her case to the Supreme Court.

 

Paul Fulcher of The Legal Costs Experts told The Sun: “I can see this reaching £7million.

 

“It can only get higher with the way this case it going. It’s a huge cost to the taxpayer.”"

 

From your link, which is from 2022 so costs will have risen,

"Legal experts believe that the cost of the case – in which Begum received legal aid – has already cost more than £2million.'

 

The text you're quoting I don't see in your link, which would be impossible anyway since your link is from 2022. Your article has been updated a few days ago, but nowhere does it say what has been updated.

Edited February 25 by stevenl

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, stevenl said:

From the sun, https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/26147959/shamima-begum-cost-millions-legal-bills/

"Her fight to return home has already cost more than £250,000 in legal aid, with experts estimating that could hit as much as £7million if she now takes her case to the Supreme Court.

 

Paul Fulcher of The Legal Costs Experts told The Sun: “I can see this reaching £7million.

 

“It can only get higher with the way this case it going. It’s a huge cost to the taxpayer.”"

 

From your link, which is from 2022 so costs will have risen,

"Legal experts believe that the cost of the case – in which Begum received legal aid – has already cost more than £2million.'

 

The text you're quoting I don't see in your link, which would be impossible anyway since your link is from 2022.

So you asked for a source, one was provided then you find your own, why waste others time?

[herfiehandbag]

3 hours ago, transam said:

So why didn't she walk away at say 18/19.....?  😉

I somehow doubt that was an option!

[jayboy]

4 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

 

Nothing has replaced the British legal process, hence this case is still ongoing appeal after appeal at the expense of the British taxpayer,

 

You and many others on this forum have ignored the great point of principle at stake here.It is perfectly possible to hold this individual in contempt and yet insist she has a right to her nationality.Some will be surprised by the author of what follows.

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/shamima-begum-shouldnt-have-lost-her-british-citizenship/

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

So you asked for a source, one was provided then you find your own, why waste others time?

Nowhere in your link does it mention your quoted text.

I shouldn't have to ask for a link anyways, it should have been given already.

[Bday Prang]

1 hour ago, josephbloggs said:

Wow, you actually posted a GB News clip as "evidence". Hilarious. You do know that is the most rabidly right wing piece of crap on British TV right? (Of course you do, it's why you watch it, no doubt along with Fox "News").

Just stop there for one minute and consider what you have just written.    To describe anything broadcast on UK television as "rabidly right wing" is totally  ridiculous and exactly the sort of baseless rubbish normally heard coming out of the mouths of blue haired students majoring in gender studies,  the same sort of people that want to ban clapping at university and replace it instead with "jazz hands" gesticulations for fear of triggering the more sensitive amongst us.

[transam]

1 minute ago, Bday Prang said:

Just stop there for one minute and consider what you have just written.    To describe anything broadcast on UK television as "rabidly right wing" is totally  ridiculous and exactly the sort of baseless rubbish normally heard coming out of the mouths of blue haired students majoring in gender studies,  the same sort of people that want to ban clapping at university and replace it instead with "jazz hands" gesticulations for fear of triggering the more sensitive amongst us.

Yep, sad really, but Corbynites do that sort of thing......🥴

[Bkk Brian]

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Nowhere in your link does it mention your quoted text.

I shouldn't have to ask for a link anyways, it should have been given already.

[Bday Prang]

11 minutes ago, stevenl said:

From the sun, https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/26147959/shamima-begum-cost-millions-legal-bills/

"Her fight to return home has already cost more than £250,000 in legal aid, with experts estimating that could hit as much as £7million if she now takes her case to the Supreme Court.

 

Paul Fulcher of The Legal Costs Experts told The Sun: “I can see this reaching £7million.

 

“It can only get higher with the way this case it going. It’s a huge cost to the taxpayer.”"

 

From your link, which is from 2022 so costs will have risen,

"Legal experts believe that the cost of the case – in which Begum received legal aid – has already cost more than £2million.'

 

The text you're quoting I don't see in your link, which would be impossible anyway since your link is from 2022. Your article has been updated a few days ago, but nowhere does it say what has been updated.

If it has cost £5 it is still £5 too much ,  why are you being so pedantic, its obvious to all that her legal bill will resemble a telephone number,  an international one at that. how much do think a QC charges,   i won't be providing a link but i will tell you they are not on minimum wage