By William Hallowell | Editor
Image credit: BBC
The Supreme Court has ruled against ISIS bride Shamima Begum’s appeal for the chance to fight to regain citizenship – this was the best possible outcome.
When she was fifteen, Shamima Begum ran off to Syria to join ISIS and become a jihadi bride. In the interest of national security and taking a firm stance against those like her, the best possible outcome from the Supreme Court was to rule against the opportunity to return to Britain – her birth country that she so willingly fled from to become a terrorist – and fight to regain her lost citizenship, stripped by then Home Secretary Sajid Javid.
It seems absolutely ludicrous that some have defended her. Whether she herself committed any acts of terror – be it shootings, beheading or bombings – she actively condoned these killings by joining the Islamic fundamentalist group and marrying one of its fighters. Opposers to this decision have instantly jumped on the bandwagon to call it ‘racist’, because of Begum’s Bangladeshi background. Whatever spin these sympathisers care to put on it, opposition to her return and the chance to reclaim British citizenship is not motivated by ‘racism’, ‘xenophobia’ or ‘islamophobia’ – it is motivated by the desire to keep the British public safe from further terrorist attacks.
If anything, this traitor’s return would directly cause an increase in islamophobia, particularly from the far-right. For her to return, it would give a chance to real hate groups to scapegoat all Muslims for acts of terror – which is of course not the case. This aside, she would be cause for genuine concern in regards to the safety of the public, and as far as the argument for ‘rehabilitation’ is concerned, we saw what happened with the London Bridge attacker in 2019; an Islamic extremist who was in rehabilitation having committed and been convicted of terror charges. This man was let free, rather than having been given a life sentence, and he then proceeded to stab multiple victims on London Bridge before being shot dead. Begum may not have committed any attacks of terror herself, but who is to say she may not influence the next attack or maybe even inspire it?
For the Supreme Court to have given any alternative ruling would have been a betrayal to the British public – not only would it potentially put the lives of innocent Brits in danger, but also set a dangerous precedent that could begin a narrow slope towards letting other ISIS fighters or Brits of any other terrorist group to have the chance to reclaim citizenship whilst living among us.
To the sympathisers who would welcome Begum back with open arms, I pose this question: would you be happy for her to be your next-door neighbour? – I would wager most would not. The majority who do oppose the Supreme Court’s ruling tend to lean towards the left and so of course, the game of identity politics ensues – all who support the Court’s ruling are presumably racist or Islamophobic in their eyes; but frankly, it has nothing to do with Begum’s skin colour, and everything to do with her traitorous behaviour by running away and joining an evil terrorist organisation that directly stands against the values and culture of the British people.