Shamima Begum allowed back to the UK


Book Reviewer
In my experience (and I know a several lawyers) the concept of justice and law are strictly a matter of whether they can create sufficient bullsh!t to buy themselves a new Bentley or not.

A bunch of more amoral turds you will not find.
Don't you just love Google Ads? Admittedly this lass is attractive. It wasn't expected on this thread though..



Book Reviewer
I think you are correct. There will be a queue of legal eagles attempting to establish their credentials by taking on the case pro-bono. The ruling does not prevent her from appealing on her citizenship - I believe the SC ruling makes it clear that it is up to her to get to a place from which she can safely make the appeal and participate via video or other acceptable link. All that has been decided is that she cannot currently enter the Uk to participate in that Appeal. It is going to drag on for years...............but then, she is taking on the best 'kickers into the long grass' on the planet.
The hideous conceit is that this will be based on 'Human Rights' when it will in fact be a vanity undertaking and proof that some people are capable of the legal chicanery that will get this person back.

As a result, it will be an exercise in legal wit and a door-opener for future lucrative business. It has nothing to do with justice.

ETA: @RBMK nailed it while it was typing.


Back to argument does Begum have dual nationality? some good legal battle there?
I seem to remember that she's eligible for Bangladeshi citizenship but doesn't hold dual nationality so, the argument goes, stripping her UK citizenship would render her stateless.

Here's a thought, given she burned all her docs can she actually legally prove she is who she claims to be?

Shades of the Tichborne claimant. Tichborne case - Wikipedia
To be pedantic. 6 million Jews and about 7 million Gypsys, Communists, Gays, Jehovah's Witnesses and others.

If you listen the BBC, Sky, et al, they were all Jews
I knew my lefty socialist mate would be rabid with rage over this decision when I saw the headline, I wasn't wrong

View attachment 552735
Please stop posting pictures of her. She is FUGLY having fell out of the FUGLY tree and hit every branch on the way down...


Book Reviewer
TBH, I'm not against expelling journo's, not sure what that makes me :)
It looks pretty comfy where she is at present, safe, clean and dry with electricity and inevitably a satellite TV in the background.
A lot more than the displaced Yazidis and other refugees seem to have in that region.
From 1.28 onwards.



Book Reviewer
I knew my lefty socialist mate would be rabid with rage over this decision when I saw the headline, I wasn't wrong

View attachment 552735
During my time at the Computer Centre in the late 80s, I did an HND. There was a Business Studies module run by a retired head of Whitbread.

The only thing I remember from that module 35 years later is this.

If you fire an employee, he takes you to court for unfair dismissal and wins, stand by your decision. On no account take him (gender assumption) back. Pay the fines, but the situation will be intolerable if he comes back.

I do hope the Home Secretary did that module.
Last edited:
"It did not give the home secretary's assessment the respect which it should have received, given that it is the home secretary who has been charged by Parliament with responsibility for making such assessments, and who is democratically accountable to Parliament for the discharge of that responsibility," Lord Reed said.
"The Court of Appeal mistakenly believed that, when an individual's right to have a fair hearing... came into conflict with the requirements of national security, her right to a fair hearing must prevail."
He added: "But the right to a fair hearing does not trump all other considerations, such as the safety of the public."

That is interesting, but I'm not sure how to feel on it.

Whilst it's good to tell Begum to 'uck of to somewhere else, and when yo get there keep 'ucking off!, there is a precedent there that makes me concerned.

Imagine if you will May lost the election in 2017. Then that places Comrade Abbott in the HS role. Having her suddenly declare people a security threat, means they could theoretically be placed in front of a Star Chamber like court consisting of McDonnell and all the nasty little sods.
'Oh no, sorry, you don't get a fair trial, you're a threat to security my dear boy.'
'How'd you come to that idea?'
'Well you oppose us.'

It seems to be one of those powers that's great when you have sensible people in charge, but less so when you have the likes of Corbyn running the show.
Last edited:
Closely followed by profiles in The Guardian, on the BBC and a well paid consultancy job with Liberty gibbing of about Stop Search or something similar. She’s a terrorist and should be treated as such.
I won't ask A. Blair for advice

Latest Threads