Home page

In 2015, Shamima Begum was 15 and attending school in London. She became exposed to online grooming and was induced through by ISIS propaganda to become interested in joining ISIS. However, it has since transpired that the intelligence authorities in the UK knew that this was happening. Since the constitutional responsibility of a government is to prevent this sort of thing from happening, this was a major failing on the part of the British government. Even worse, Shamima's parents were not aware that this was happening and were not informed, by those monitoring these activities, that this was happening. If they had, the parents could have intervened to help her. As a result of this abandonment of duty of care and due process on the part of the government Shamima, together with two school friends, ended up leaving the UK as schoolgirls to join ISIS in Syria.

She has already asked to be allowed to return to the UK but was refused and her passport canceled and citizenship revoked by Sajit Javid the then Home Secretary. Shamima was interviewed in a refugee camp teeming with ISIL members so would not have been able to express anything negative about her experience for fear of reprisals. It is also evident that with live recordings she would not have been able to convey that reality to the journalists interviewing her. However, when these interviews were shown on television and reported upon, an ill-informed public interpreted her careful remarks to be a sign of non-repentance and even a sign that she felt justified in joining ISIL. Similar statements were made by MPs in the House of Commons. She was judged in the public media, today the least safe place for securing the facts and in the end the Home Secretary Sajid Javid stood in judgment and announced that an order had been made to strip her of her British citizenship.

The British Government have supported insurgents that made up segments of ISIL membership along with the USA and have funded generously the infamous group the "White Helmets" who are also part of ISIL with the job of generating false flag events and videos to place the image of the Syrian government in a bad light. A large part of the "success" of ISIL and a significant part of the propaganda including videos that circulated in the UK were funded generously by the USA. The upset created amongst Moslems of the ongoing indiscriminate murder to innocent Moslems in Iraq, Syria and Libya is well-established, so it is understandable that a young impressionable schoolgirl at 15, of the Moslem faith, might be drawn towards joining a group on the moral grounds of defending Islam. There were no provisions in the United Kingdom to safeguard the young from such propaganda so the prevailing situation was one of an inevitability that some young men and women of that faith, feeling a sense of duty, would join ISIL. Shamima's case is however serious because the authorities knew, before she left, that she was becoming a victim of this process.

This has particularly significant implications in that the intelligence agencies were complicit in monitoring processes that were directed against people of the Islamic faith. No matter what excuses and justification might be presented as this all being an issue of national security, at its root it was heavily discriminatory on racial and religious grounds.

Given the actual degree of involvement of the British and US government in "managing" insurgents who were linked to or members of ISIL its is clearly the case that the British government bears responsibility for the environment, thus created, leading to the encouragement of Moslems at impressionable ages to be motivated as Moslems to wish to do something to counter injustices they came to believe were being perpetrated against them. The argument that they were British citizens and Britain was part of the alliance fighting ISIL has very little relevance, when the White Helmets were putting out propaganda concerning "attacks" on ISIL-held zones reportedly about Moslem civilians being killed. Boris Johnson's enthusiastic support of the White Helmets using British tax payers money, through the Foreign Office, was always ill-advised and only contributed to the emotional pressure brought to bear on young Moslems in Britain.

However, until she is allowed to enter a court room with legal support, all that has been stated and prematurely acted upon by Sajid Javid, cannot be considered to reflect "British values" simply because she has not been given the opportunity, within an appropriate environment, to explain in more detail what led her to take this decision as a young schoolgirl. No matter what the outcome of such a court appearance would be, she has, so far, been treated unfairly.

Jeremy Hunt, the British Foreign Secretary stated, "Shamima knew when she made the decision to join Daesh, she was going into a country where there was no embassy, there was no consular assistance, and I'm afraid those decisions, awful though it is, they do have consequences." This recorded comment was, of course, absurd. It is very unlikely that as a 15 year old schoolgirl, acting on emotional impulse, Shamima would have been thinking about embassy and consulate arrangements in Syria.

It was only in April, 2019, that Shamima was granted Legal Aid, financial assistance to fight the revocation of her British citizenship. Hunt described the Legal Aid Agency's decision as "very uncomfortable", but said that the UK believes that people with limited means should have access to the resources of the state if they want to challenge the decisions the state has made about them. Shamima was therefore able to appeal against her being stripped of her citizenship and not being allowed a fair trial, both illegal in the context of international law. The decision was that she deserves the right to a fair trial in the UK.

The incompetence and overt cruelty of the assembled politicians referred to in this article, reflect badly on anything that might be held up as being in any way related to "British values". What values are we talking about? Her return representing a danger to the British public? There are currently many ISIL/Al Quaeda members in London walking around freely, managed by security agencies as "assets" waiting their next gig in a country destined for regime change. The record of so-called assets, under intelligence agency "control" shows that many have been involved in parallel activities which they do not report back to their Western controllers, or the controllers took no action. The most notorious example being 9/11. In comparative terms, the main potential source of danger to the British public is actually part of current government operations over which they have little control. It has been alleged that the Manchester Arena bombing appears to have been carried out by one of these assets, a member of the so-called, "Manchester gang" who worked in Syria for the UK and who in came to the UK in a Royal Naval ship. But Theresa May claimed the individual was unknown to the authorities and acting alone. The government, unknown to the British public, take many uncalculated risks with the lives of the public in this country, and yet will not let Shamima Begum secure justice and to be provided with a fair opportunity to return to her country and home.

The government's current concern is that the Shamima case will bring to light the fact that the British authorities monitored her grooming and allowed it to proceed so are therefore almost directly responsible for what became of her. Typically the main UK media are following the government line of briefing against her return and the odd groveling academic is appearing to condemn her in TV news sections. This scandalous behaviour is unfortunately par for the course for today's so-called "mainstream media". For the government, the less exposure over this shameful affair the better it will be for them and this is why the government will continue, in a pernicious and overtly discriminatory fashion, to appeal against the High Court decision recommending that she be allowed to attend trial in the UK.

It would be a far better demonstration of British "justice" to allow this court case to proceed in the UK and make a point to follow up with charges being brought against those were involved in allowing her grooming to proceed in the first place. The government has to terminate its image of extreme incompetence, highlighted by its continual stonewalling. It needs to do something decisive and to conform to the expectation of the community conscience with respect to providing a fair opportunity for a British citizen to make her case. This could go some way to helping improve the government's increasingly decadent image.