In response to Kathy Gyngell: BBC’s moral-high-ground field day over Begum’s dead baby,
Politically__Incorrect wrote: Strange isn’t it, how the same Lefties wringing their hands over a baby dead 3 weeks after being born would support the inalienable right of a woman to legally kill it 3 weeks before birth. I guess it’s because a foetus is less use as a political tool than a newborn infant.
John Smith wrote: None of Shamima Begum’s alleged three dead babies deserved to die. But she made the choice at 15 yrs 9 months to leave the UK and join our worst enemy. Only 3 months short of Leftists’ preferred voting age. She then had 4 years to leave the horrendous ISIS but only chose to leave when it was beaten. Otherwise Begum would have stayed, supporting the many murders, atrocities and beheadings. It was down to her and no one else.
Her father needs to look in the mirror as it was on his watch she was radicalised, purloined her sister’s passport and obtained funds to fly to Syria.
Not surprised hard Left Labour are on the side of our enemies and terrorists. Not a word about the many victims of ISIS including our own Manchester and London atrocities.
39 Pontiac Dream wrote: It wasn’t just the top 2 articles on yesterday’s BBC website – Javid criticised over Begum’s baby death and I apologise to the UK (Begum’s father) – that the Beeb ran.
They also had plenty of commentary on their news channel regarding this issue and how Javid should feel terrible for his decision.
Begum made her bed when she left to join ISIS and in that period, became impregnated 3 times with all pregnancies resulting in death. The buck stops with the mother and if she couldn’t take care of the children she had through choice, there’s no one to blame but her.
I fear, though, that the BBC, in using an infant death for propaganda, will seek to lobby successive governments for the rights of returning jihadists and their brides. The rest of the Left will follow suit.