Shamima Begum and Hoda Muthana

[ballettmaus]

Shamina Begum has never lived in Bangladesh and has apparently never done anything to avail herself of the rights and privileges of Bangladeshi citizenship.

She had no problem leaving the country she spent 15 years in to join a terrorist organization she hadn't lived with and move to a country she hadn't lived in either.

Actions have consequences. She isn't showing remorse. Why should British citizens have to live with the fear that she might attack them or possibly pay for her time in jail (assuming that British jails are funded with taxpayer money) and/or surveillance?

Sucks for Bangladesh though. Their citizens are just as innocent in all of this.

 

[hanca]

This is a pretty drastic step and could have ramifications in other cases. However I can only assume the Home Secretary has spoken with lawyers who are well versed in this type of thing so feel he has a right to take this step. I'm sure the Bangladesh government - if that is the citizenship the UK feel she also has - will be fighting this decision as well as her family. However I do feel her actions and words - especially her recent words - have brought this decision down on her head. Interestingly her son should still have UK citizenship as he was born prior to this decision.

Someone from the extended family may be able to bring up her child. As a mother she can choose, does she prefer to bring the child up herself but not in the UK, or does she want her child to have a better life but without her.

 

[taf2002]

I understand Begum's parents want to raise the child. The kindest thing she could do for her child is give her up to her parents. I just heard on CBS news 5 mins ago that the UK intends to strip her citizenship & that the US will let people come back but will immediately put them in jail & have them stand trial for whatever is appropriate in each case.

I don't know what Britain's laws are, but in the U. S. there is a law against giving 'aid and comfort' to a foreign enemy in times of war. Even if subject X expresses remorse, the deed has been done and the doer must face the music.

Unless your name is Jane Fonda.

 

[Anemone]

Situations to which there is just no good answer, and I am truly glad I am not the government officials having to make these decisions.
I do think most of the people in these cases, whether due to brainwashing or whatever, are a danger to the public in their country of origin. I think the risk of them continuing to aid the extremists, whether through material support or convincing others to join etc, is just too high. But if you deny them from returning to the country of which they are a citizen, then where do they go?
There is a small part of me that has a little sympathy for the fact that some of them made this decision as teenagers, when most of us are prone to making stupid decisions without thinking through the consequences. I have no such sympathies for the ones who made the choice to go as an adult. I really want to roll my eyes at the Canadian lady who willingly went there with her then 2 children, and now wants to return to Canada to raise them in a safe place. So why did you take them into a war zone to begin with?
I do feel for their babies/toddlers, because I think they are the truly innocent victims in this.

 

[Vagabond]

She had no problem leaving the country she spent 15 years in to join a terrorist organization she hadn't lived with and move to a country she hadn't lived in either.

Actions have consequences. She isn't showing remorse. Why should British citizens have to live with the fear that she might attack them or possibly pay for her time in jail (assuming that British jails are funded with taxpayer money) and/or surveillance?

Sucks for Bangladesh though. Their citizens are just as innocent in all of this.

If she weren't the daughter of immigrants, if she were the great-grand daughter of white Englishmen, she could not be stripped of her citizenship. For all we know, she may not even have been aware that she Bangladesh considered her to be a citizen.

Aren't you quick to criticize Trump's villainization of immigrants and minorities? Shamina Begum isn't even an immigrant to the United Kingdom. She is a natural born British citizen.

 

[Jot the Dot Dot]

If she weren't the daughter of immigrants, if she were the great-grand daughter of white Englishmen, she could not be stripped of her citizenship. For all we know, she may not even have been aware that she Bangladesh considered her to be a citizen.

Aren't you quick to criticize Trump's villainization of immigrants and minorities? Shamina Begum isn't even an immigrant to the United Kingdom. She is a natural born British citizen.

Read up on the case of 'Lord Haw Haw' , stood trial and executed for treason in Britain in the 40s. I'm not saying I'd wish such a final outcome on her. But tough justice has occurred on white British citizens.

 

[ballettmaus]

Aren't you quick to criticize Trump's villainization of immigrants and minorities? Shamina Begum isn't even an immigrant to the United Kingdom. She is a natural born British citizen.

Trump is making up facts about immigrants to villainize them. Begum is a member of ISIS and that is a known terrorist organization. She may be just a housewife but she does not regret her actions, she's unfazed when presented with beheading, she accepted that the Manchaster attack was retaliation for the bombings in Syria and has said that she was partly inspired to join ISIS by beheading videos. Aside from the fact that this is sick, she's condoning terrorism. I think there's a world of difference between her and the large majority of undocumented immigrants.

 

[rfisher]

This is such a complicated issue. On the one hand, these women aided enemies of the countries and families they left behind, but by refusing to let them return to their home country, we turn them into martyrs and insure their children will grow up to be jihadists. They do represent a potential threat. I honestly don't know what the best solution would be. There is no good solution or outcome so governments have to make the best decision for public safety they can.

 

[ballettmaus]

but by refusing to let them return to their home country, we turn them into martyrs and insure their children will grow up to be jihadists.

Unfortunately, there's a chance they grow up to be jihadists one way or another. Begum's child will be faced with their mother's twisted world view whether they grow up in Great Britain or elsewhere because Begum will raise the child. (And I'm not implying that the child should be taken away from her, I'm just saying that I don't think it matters where a child grows up as long as the parents teach them certain things).

 

[Jot the Dot Dot]

(duplicate post)

 

[allezfred]

Unless your name is Jane Fonda.

Jane Fonda opposed a war that turned out to be pointless. Not the same thing. Opposing your government to send its citizens off to die unnecessarily is an act of patriotism.

 

[LeafOnTheWind]

Jane Fonda opposed a war that turned out to be pointless. Not the same thing. Opposing your government to send its citizens off to die unnecessarily is an act of patriotism.

A lot of people did that. People thought Fonda went way beyond that though. It was her visit to Vietnam and participation in propaganda videos that crossed the line for them. She could have chosen a different source to voice her issues rather than that method.

I wasn't born yet so I only have others viewpoints on it. No matter what the end opinion she comes across as clueless to me and one if those idiots who did more harm than good to her cause by being a dumbass.

 

[allezfred]

A lot of people did that. People thought Fonda went way beyond that though. It was her visit to Vietnam and participation in propaganda videos that crossed the line for them. She could have chosen a different source to voice her issues rather than that method.

I wasn't born yet so I only have others viewpoints on it. No matter what the end opinion she comes across as clueless to me and one if those idiots who did more harm than good to her cause by being a dumbass.

Hundreds of civil rights groups from the US visited North Vietnam to see for themselves the damage caused to civilians by US air strikes. Your government (both Democrats and Republicans) lied to the American public about the Vietnam War for decades. Trying to justify what has been proved to be an unjustifiable war is the dumbass clueless position.

Anyway, whatever Jane Fonda did is in no way comparable to going off at 15 and joining ISIS, a movement with the goal of killing those who don’t practice the same religion.

 

[Vagabond]

Trump is making up facts about immigrants to villainize them. Begum is a member of ISIS and that is a known terrorist organization.

The law that is being applied to her is fairly new and is part of a much larger pattern of moves directed at immigrants and their descendents, particularly ones who are non-white and/or come from countries where there the dominant religion is Christianity.

There have been several white British people who actually went to the Levant to fight or otherwise support ISIS.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-32026985
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ish-caliphate-terrorism-jihadis-a8781056.html

Why should Begum be stripped of her citizenship and not they?

 

[taf2002]

Hundreds of civil rights groups from the US visited North Vietnam to see for themselves the damage caused to civilians by US air strikes. Your government (both Democrats and Republicans) lied to the American public about the Vietnam War for decades. Trying to justify what has been proved to be an unjustifiable war is the dumbass clueless position.

Anyway, whatever Jane Fonda did is in no way comparable to going off at 15 and joining ISIS, a movement with the goal of killing those who don’t practice the same religion.

I think it was. I lived thru those years so I think I can reply. I am not speaking to the legitimacy of the war but there is a difference between visiting a country to see for yourself & actually giving aid & comfort to the enemy. No matter what Washington does, the US soldiers in Viet Nam were mostly draftees & were blameless. They were not the enemy. Go to any VA hospital or Veteran's Hall & see if they think Jane was just protesting the war. She caused harm to the POWs & helped spread propaganda & as such she was a traitor to the US.

One of my 1st cousins & my boyfriend were killed in Viet Nam & my bro-in-law survived many air raids at his base in Thailand. I think my whole generation has some PSTD to some degree. You mention Viet Nam & I get flash-backs. If not for influence Jane Fonda would have spent years in federal prison.

 

[Vagabond]

(((((taf2002)))))

 

[Vagabond]

Anyone interested in the text of Jane Fonda's public statement while she was in North Vietnam can read the text here: https://ihffilm.com/jane-fonda-north-vietnam-essay-by-blaine-taylor.html

If these words were treasonous, and if actually going to North Vietnam was not an essential element of the crime, then millions of people living in the United States at the time were guilty of treason.

 

[attyfan]

Generally, giving "aid and comfort" to the enemy has been construed rather strictly -- it generally requires more than merely doing things that may provide some benefit to an enemy. For example, no one accuses medical personnel of treason for treating enemy soldiers. With regard to Jane Fonda -- I think it would be impossible to try her -- it would take forever to find enough impartial jurors.

 

[ballettmaus]

The law that is being applied to her is fairly new and is part of a much larger pattern of moves directed at immigrants and their descendents, particularly ones who are non-white and/or come from countries where there the dominant religion is Christianity.

But that's a different issue, isn't it? You said yourself that Begum isn't even an immigrant and they don't need to villainize her. She's doing plenty of that herself.

There have been several white British people who actually went to the Levant to fight or otherwise support ISIS.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-32026985
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ish-caliphate-terrorism-jihadis-a8781056.html

Why should Begum be stripped of her citizenship and not they?

I wasn't aware of that but I agree. If they use the law on her, they should use it on everyone they can use it on.

 

[Vagabond]

But that's a different issue, isn't it? You said yourself that Begum isn't even an immigrant and they don't need to villainize her. She's doing plenty of that herself.

I wasn't aware of that but I agree. If they use the law on her, they should use it on everyone they can use it on

You have completely missed the point. The law cannot be used on (white) people whose families are originally from the U.K. and do not hold dual citizenship. The only reason it can be used on her is that Bangladesh bestows automatic citizenship on the children of Bangladeshi citizens. Why, exactly, should Begum be stripped of her citizenship, when a white girl whose parents were British-born would not be?

 

[ballettmaus]

You have completely missed the point. The law cannot be used on (white) people whose families are originally from the U.K. and do not hold dual citizenship. The only reason it can be used on her is that Bangladesh bestows automatic citizenship on the children of Bangladeshi citizens. Why, exactly, should Begum be stripped of her citizenship, when a white girl whose parents were British-born would not be?

No, I misunderstood. I thought you were referring to others who also had dual citzenship. A comparison doesn't make sense to me otherwise. She has dual citizenship and that is the only reason they can strip her of her British citizenship.

I don't have a problem with a law that strips naturalized citizens of citizenship when they become dangerous criminal or members of a terror organization (And I say that as someone who's father holds dual citizenship and is about to become an immigrant and plans to hold dual citizenship in the near future as well). I don't think it's right that a law allows someone who isn't naturalized to be stripped of citizenship. But if that's legal then I can't say I feel much sympathy for Begum. Like I said before, she's condoning terrorism and agrees with ISIS's justifications.

At this point, all I can say is that I hope they will treat everyone the same and that when the same situation arises with a white member of ISIS they will also strip them of their citizenship.

 

[Lorac]

No, I misunderstood. I thought you were referring to others who also had dual citzenship. A comparison doesn't make sense to me otherwise. She has dual citizenship and that is the only reason they can strip her of her British citizenship.

I don't have a problem with a law that strips naturalized citizens of citizenship when they become dangerous criminal or members of a terror organization (And I say that as someone who's father holds dual citizenship and is about to become an immigrant and plans to hold dual citizenship in the near future as well). I don't think it's right that a law allows someone who isn't naturalized to be stripped of citizenship. But if that's legal then I can't say I feel much sympathy for Begum. Like I said before, she's condoning terrorism and agrees with ISIS's justifications.

At this point, all I can say is that I hope they will treat everyone the same and that when the same situation arises with a white member of ISIS they will also strip them of their citizenship.

Well apparently Bangladesh have claimed that Begum is not a Bangladeshi citizen and will not be allowed in the country:

Shamima Begum will not be allowed here, Bangladesh says

That would appear to leave her stateless which isn't allowed under international laws. Ball back in the Home Secretary's court by the looks of it.

I have noted that Shamina is now changing her tune in the latest interviews - saying how she made a big mistake when she was young and naïve. Someone must have finally told her that her lack of remorse wasn't going down well back in the UK - that and being told she was being stripped of her citizenship.

 

[taf2002]

Anyone interested in the text of Jane Fonda's public statement while she was in North Vietnam can read the text here: https://ihffilm.com/jane-fonda-north-vietnam-essay-by-blaine-taylor.html

If these words were treasonous, and if actually going to North Vietnam was not an essential element of the crime, then millions of people living in the United States at the time were guilty of treason.

That text is not the only speech she made. That gushing about the beauty of N. Viet Nam & the gentleness of the young girls, etc could have been said of Nazi Germany. Was the world supposed to let Hitler go on his merry way because the countryside & the youth was beautiful? What did that have to do with the issue? The same could have been said about S Viet Nam. And Nixon didn't start the war, actually it was Kennedy who 1st sent advisers to help the French who were already fighting. Then Johnson escalated the war & both he & Nixon kept sending more troops.

As troops finished their tours & came home people at home were calling them baby killers & spitting on them. People like me from military families found that pretty hard to take, esp when you were a gold star family. No one I knew wanted to go. It was either go or be imprisoned or flee to another country. So what Jane did was a slap in the face to decent people. She was pretty much viewed as a traitor at the time. Did she fit the traitor definition? In my mind yes. YMMV

 

[MacMadame]

I think it was. I lived thru those years so I think I can reply.

I lived through that time and I completely disagree that Fonda did anything traitorous and most certainly didn't give aid and comfort to the enemy in anyway that would hold up in court.

ThSo what Jane did was a slap in the face to decent people. She was pretty much viewed as a traitor at the time. Did she fit the traitor definition? In my mind yes. YMMV

My mileage definitely varies. I think she became a scapegoat.

Also, there were definitely people fighting in Vietnam who chose to go and wanted to go. They weren't all draftees.

 

[taf2002]

I lived through that time and I completely disagree that Fonda did anything traitorous and most certainly didn't give aid and comfort to the enemy in anyway that would hold up in court.


My mileage definitely varies. I think she became a scapegoat.

Also, there were definitely people fighting in Vietnam who chose to go and wanted to go. They weren't all draftees.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think I'm a lot older than you. Weren't you a small child during the war? BTW I agree that there were career military who wanted to go & even some of the grunts. But the bulk of them were draftees.

 

[el henry]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think I'm a lot older than you. Weren't you a small child during the war? BTW I agree that there were career military who wanted to go & even some of the grunts. But the bulk of them were draftees.

Since when does this [ETA: age] matter?

But since you seem to believe it does, I will not cite myself, but Spousal Unit. His Vietnam lottery draft number was ETA:[ in the 60s, just realized the specific number could be linked to PII. Oops]Ended up 4F, thank God. His father was career Navy who flew combat missions in WWII and Korea.

He (and his late father, were he still here) could not disagree with you more about your opinion of Jane Fonda. He in no way thinks she was a "traitor". Neither did his father. Your opinion is your opinion, and of course you should make whatever argument you think supports it. But a claim that whether you were an adult during the Vietnam War somehow means you must have that opinion, or makes that opinion more valuable?

It simply doesn't.

 

[MacMadame]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think I'm a lot older than you. Weren't you a small child during the war?

You are wrong. I was not a small child during the war. I was a teenager and my family was very interested in current events.

Btw, Jane Fonda at that time (and later) did a lot of work with groups to help veterans. She gave both time and money to Vietnam Veterans Against the War in particular. But other groups as well.

I think it's crazy that some vets hate her more than they hate the North Vietnamese who tried to kill them. Or the politicians that put them there and lied about what was going on.

 

[mjb52]

Did anything happen to the citizenship of the members of the Cambridge Five who ended up living in the Soviet Union (Burgess/Maclean/Philby I think)? Not the same thing exactly but I'm curious. Perhaps there was no reason to even think about it as none of them presumably intended to come back!

 

[Japanfan]

I lived through that time and I completely disagree that Fonda did anything traitorous and most certainly didn't give aid and comfort to the enemy in anyway that would hold up in court.

My mileage definitely varies. I think she became a scapegoat.

I don't recall the Fonda story particularly well and don't know what year in which it occurred - but I would have been all of 12 in 1970 - which didn't stop me from seeing 'Woodstock' and loving it (if there was an age restriction, the theater in my home town didn't enforce it).

My impression was that Fonda was admirable and strong. Now this may be ill-founded, and reflect the fact that I was very anti-war (in alignment with the zeitgeist of the times as emphasized in the film 'The Strawberry Statement', which impacted my worldview along with 'Woodstock'.) and was a rebel who saw Fonda as a fellow rebel. It may also be ill-founded because I did not watch news at the time and had no knowledge about the details that characterized the war.

But, that impression did come from somewhere.

 

[purple skates]

I am too young to know what happened (I think I was 12 when the war ended), but according to my father (too old for Vietnam) and my uncle (served during Vietnam), she is a traitor of the worst kind. I would say (anecdotally) that a majority of Vietnam Vets that I know through the American a Legion agree with that opinion.

I don’t have an opinion on her beyond that she made some great workout tapes and videos.