Research shows the importance of family connections with reintegration and de-radicalisation . There is a strong case for her returning to family in Australia based on that alone . If there is true consideration for the well-being of her children that would be a priority .

Many more will seek to return home . No doubt other countries will face the same dilemma .

It will be interesting to see how this unfolds and how New Zealanders will react . We have only heard our leaders response , the question remains if it Is representative of the people .

I am the same as you. I just don't know what to think. I mean they can interview her, but she could lie and hide her true loyalties.

Just heard that UK is not allowing Shamima Begum to return to the UK.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56209007

thanks for posting the article delightful

if I read that right .. they are pausing her appeal ... citing public safety ... but have not ruled on her citizenship .

The Supreme Court has had her British Citizenship revoked so she will not be allowed to pursue her appeal.

I have to ask ... is her husband or men in ISIS still around her ...or communicating with her ... thats pretty tricky ... I think someone in a professional hearth should talk to her and maybe make a over all a valuation...
... that may help her or not with her children ... where she wants to be at...

I have heard the USA has for some restriction on Australia but not sure why ... something about them having a acct on fb...

in this case at-least public safety has been prioritised .. Thanks for the update delightful

hi mystical .. Found this article ...her husband is Identified as being from the Netherlands and on their terrorist watch list ...,seems he Is being held in a kurdish detention centre in. Syria and wants to return home also .
http://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/03/world/europe/dutch-isis-fighter-shamima-begum-husband.html

There is no doubt that children and women of Isis are radicalised . Children at a very young age are exposed to extreme violence and trained as rebel soldiers .

Terrorism is not age or gender specific ., I remember watching hurt locker and the scenes portraying women /children as suicide bombers . Sadly that is also a scary reality .

If a woman marries a man knowing he's a bank robber, that's intent and would be guilty in a court of law as a accessory to or depending on the state;

i.g. STATE of GEORGIA, has addressed such issues with [had to relook it up] O.C.G.A. 16-2-20 which provides that:

(a) Every person concerned in the commission of a crime is a party thereto and may be charged with and convicted of commission of the crime.
(b) A person is concerned in the commission of a crime only if he:
- (1) Directly commits the crime;
- (2) Intentionally causes some other person to commit the crime under such circumstances that the other person is not guilty of any crime either in fact or because of legal incapacity;
- (3) Intentionally aids or abets in the commission of the crime; or
- (4) Intentionally advises, encourages, hires, counsels, or procures another to commit the crime.

I can tell you based on my reading and some researching that most people get in trouble based on subsections (3) and (4) in the STATE of GEORGIA but there are other STATES with similar Statutes/laws. These elements can be/are very broad and almost can be a basis to convict based solely on "guilt by association".

The Georgia Court of Appeals has also explained the definition of party to a crime in the case of Jordan v. State, 281 Ga. App. 419 (2006). The Court held that "A participant to a crime may be convicted although he is not the person who directly commits the crime. A person who intentionally aids or abets in the commission of a crime or intentionally advises, encourages, hires, counsels, or procures another to commit the crime may be convicted of the crime.


Considering this would be most related to (a)renouncing of Citizenship, you don't just get that back in any country, especially here in the US. And in the US there is a significant difference between being a US Citizen, and an American when it comes to legal definitions and Status. You do NOT want to be anything of a "Citizen" You want to be an American, An Italian, A Greek, A Cambodian, A Equadorian.. etc

Breaking down what a citizen is in much of Europe and North America is far simpler in the westernized world. Despite opposition of popular opinions; the United States Of America is still a British colony, and under Roman Catholic laws and judicial cannons.. And under Roman Catholic Law definitions of a Citizen - is a member of a body of politic that pledges their allegiance in exchange for protection.

I don't know how you or other folks reading this post feel about it but that seems rather reciprocal in nature to me. Right? Here's where it the Citizenry starts to fall apart for me and many others.

Since 1858 in the U.S. Not one but all of the supreme courts have ruled that the police have no "statutory duty", which means it's NO WHERE in their job description whatsoever, to protect the citizens [you and I], from murderers and marauders despite how monstrous that may seem. Their job is to protect the establishment and enforce the rule of law. Full Stop.

That pretty much ends the STATES role to protect you. Which if they have no duty to protect you.. are you really a "Citizen". And without any Citizens, does an actual "Body of Politic" actually exist at that point?

The most recent accounts of these rulings that have been upheld is as recent as 1987 and I believe 1992. and again in 2004.

So in my mind, i'd ask you and anyone else who feels like being a Citizen?


I knew this topic would get more interesting

hi panda .... I think I will Need to reread your posts a few times before commenting on the citizenship and protection matter .. laughing .. legal definitions are a language of their own !!!!

I will make one comment now though .. would you class “crime” and “terrorism “ under the same definition legally??? Seems there has been more of a shift in the last few years with how terrorism is viewed and controlled .

The stooopid government of my country,
is probably already drawing up her her amnesty papers.

ISIS members don't recognise the existence of other countries or entitities but their own. They voluntarily gave up their previous citizinships when they decided to join their evil cause. Allowing them back and giving them the previligaes they revoked is like thanking them for their service and terrorism in the Middle East.
I don't understand how they are given a better treatment than the one Nazis had after the defeat of Nazi Germany. Do people believe they are less dangerous?! The only thing they should be offered is a rope and a scaffold

Children complicate the issue . It is not that clear cut

i've always thought blowing yourself up for a cause was not all it's cracked up to be, maybe she grew up. Let her in, interrogate the heck out of her and see what happens. that someone would want to leave isis after a while shouldn't be a shock to anyone.
Maybe forgive her for turning states evidence on her ex and his cronies, isn't that what we do?