YESTERDAY in TCW and on Twitter we asked whether you thought there was a moral obligation to bring the ‘ISIS bride’ Shamima Begum home. Your votes so far give a categorical NO in answer, with 97 per cent believing we have no such obligation, and it looks unlikely to change in the last hours left:
VOTE: Is there a moral obligation to bring Shamima Begum home?
— The Conservative Woman (@TheConWom) February 15, 2019
Our readers have vented their dismay too, with one acerbic observation following another. Is the whole affair is being carefully orchestrated? Who gains, Bart5i asked, but ‘the mendacious individual, her family, Islamists and their open borders facilitators. In short, those who would do us and our country permanent, irreversible harm’. Oaknash wondered ‘if the MSM is now softening us up for her return’.
Since Ms Begum still sympathises with ISIS, she must pose a risk to the majority in the UK who are non-believers, said some, while others questioned the grounds for sympathy on the basis that she has been ‘abused’ – by whom? Her parents? And how? Readers pointed out that she has expressed no regrets, the reverse in fact.
Several of you found the question of her citizenship deeply irritating. ‘She is not STATELESS,’ said Partisan, ‘she gave up her British nationality to join the Islamic State. We have no moral or legal obligation to her EXCEPT to treat her as an enemy combatant.’
Sir Harold Wilson disagreed: ‘As her citizenship has not been revoked, she continues to have the full rights (and responsibilities) of a UK citizen.’ And while the moral argument is clear, paul parmenter wrote, ‘the legal argument will no doubt be much more complicated, and it is quite possible this appalling young woman could yet return to the UK, and with a status encompassing innocent victim and heroic celebrity’. Having ‘long since lost faith in the chaotic moral swamp into which our legal system has steadily been pushed’, nothing, he wrote, would surprise him in this case.
To Royinsouthwest, however, these debates are all a case ‘of locking the stable door after the horse has bolted’. The problem we have to deal with is already here, whether or not Ms Begum returns to meet whatever the law has in store for her.
But it’s to 39 Pontiac Dream that the last word must go for raising a smile in this morass:
‘I think you got the answer to that yesterday and overwhelmingly. (ED: in response to Laura’s post)
‘The only people who are talking about her coming back are the bulk of the media and politicians. Surprise, surprise. I reckon 99 per cent of TCW readers would say on your bike to this girl.
‘There was one commenter, though, who highlighted that equally and comparatively dangerous ideologue that advocates cutting heads off non-believers, throwing people off buildings, burning people alive, and blowing up kids. Catholicism. Apparently, it’s just as dangerous as ISIS.
‘Not often but sometimes, TCW has its own bit of lefty lunacy. This one was a gem.’