ISIS people returning thread - no Lisa Smith talk (21/12/19)

Questioning sacred Cows

No, she made her bed and should lie in it. This young woman chose to become an enemy of the UK and the West and has no right to call herself a U.K. citizen.

What’s the odds that when she is back in the U.K. she won’t start plotting terrorist attacks?

Madness.

super_furry

Let’s Stop Acting Like We Didn’t Join A Terror Cell When We Were Teenagers


http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2019/02/18/lets-stop-acting-like-we-didnt-join-a-terror-cell-when-we-were-teenagers/?fbclid=IwAR20Ly9zw4lJMiXWSULLW-uIFO1t2Gycw6KGGt9Hj9UFnL6-92DJriUvXPQ

jmayo

aloneforever99 wrote: »

Knowing what a terrorist is doing is better than not knowing what a terrorist is doing...

Knowing how a terrorist was recruited is better than not knowing...

Knowing why the propaganda persuaded her to run away is better than not knowing...

I genuinely don't know how to break this down any further for you.

Still pedalling the shyte about how it is safer for the UK if she is back and can be watched.

Except you refused to acknowledge my preceeding post where I blew that little theory out of the water what with the number of jidhadists and jihadist sympathisers that are in the UK already.

aloneforever99 wrote: »

Those who are against bringing her back are primarily motivated by revenge. That's understandable, but it's not a good basis for making a decision. It's emotive, but it's not smart.

Britain is safer knowing where she is, what she is doing and who she is associating with.

The most rational choice is to bring her back to the UK, try her for crimes committed, interrogate her regularly for intel and on release keep an extremely close eye on her - sign on twice a week for the rest of her life at the local police station.

Are you pulling the pi** now.
It has been offically acknowledged that Britain has something like 23,000 jihadists that they need to watch and you think that they can add to that and shure everything will be ok. :rolleyes:

Ever notice how all these attacks are carried out by people already known to the security services ?

ART6

Under international law she is a British citizen and so cannot be denied re-entry into the UK. She cannot be deported to another country for the same reason, so she must be repatriated. Once she is then the law comes into effect wherein she could be prosecuted for joining an illegal organisation and, by association, be guilty of crimes against humanity -- except that she insists that all she did was to marry an ISIS fighter and wasn't involved in any criminal acts under international law.That presents a problem for the authorities. Did the UK declare ISIS to be an illegal organisation? If they didn't then she did nothing wrong by joining it. That she said she was unmoved by severed human heads in a bin because decapitation was permitted by Islam is not a criminal offence, just an expression of opinion.


Some UK politicians, I note, are claiming that she should be charged with treason, but that surely is clutching at ancient hairs. What did she do when with ISIS that was treason against the UK? Did she fight against UK forces? Kill UK citizens? She claims not, and there is apparently no proof that she ever did.


Some say that she should be permitted to return, that her child should be taken into care, and that she should by some mysterious mechanism be "de-radicalised". Well, her child is innocent of any crime and by birth mother can claim British citizenship, which sounds fine but -- what if that child grows to become resentful of his mother's treatment and become himself radicalised? Then, how should the mother be de-radicalised when she could see no wrong in brutal murder, rape, brutality in the name of her beliefs? If she could ever be treated to the extent that she finally understood what she had done and witnessed, how would that affect her psychologically?


Therein lies the problem: the UK cannot refuse her entry, and cannot prosecute her for any crime. They can only let her in and let her go while taking her child into care upon the (doubtful) grounds that she is not a suitable mother. She can then become a heroine for radical Islam in a faith that reduces women to slavery because there is no indication of remorse from her, and she cannot be charged beyond all reasonable doubt as being a threat if she is simply a focal point for others.


I would imagine that throughout the UK there are many Muslim communities that are shuddering about the consequences of this and the other Jihadis that might be able to return to the UK as a right of citizenship. The community relations that they have created with their Christian friends over generations could be easily torn apart by just a few of those people sowing the deadly bacteria of religious fundamentalism.

jmayo

super_furry wrote: »

Honestly I wouldn't be against offering someone who was radicalised and recruited into ISIS as a teenager a second chance and a opportunity to return home if they showed remorse and a clear signal that they could be rehabilitated.

However, just listening to Shamima Begum being interviewed now, it's pretty clear that the only thing she regrets is that she's on the losing side and when she's still justifying the Manchester bomb attacks, I think it's fair enough to tell her to stay where she is.

Holy cr** can someone note the date and time please.
When devoid leftists and those of a very liberal bent around here are saying she should not be brought back.

Yet there are still some that are making excuses.

BTW super_furry the issue some of us have been harping on about around here for years is that this girl is by no means an isolated case in muslim communities throughout Europe.
There is a very dangerous mindset held by a scary percentage that condones attacks and that actually supports jihadists and fundamentalists.
The hiding of mass terror suspects in the likes of Molenbeek is a warning.

And what is really worse is that it isn't just held by some ones from a very backward culture that have turned up over the last few years, but by ones that have been born and bred in Europe.
Ones that have gone through western education systems and have been able to see throughout their lives what freedoms a western way of life can bring.

If we can't prevent this mindset in the offspring of somewhat integrated immigrants what fooking hope have we for the future for the children of immigrants who don't particularly want to integrate from the off.

We are sowing the seeds for mayhem for our children.

Tea drinker

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Married into and enjoyed living within an organization that mass murdered Syrian and Iraqi soldiers, burnt alive and drowned POWS, beheaded innocent people for minimal crimes, threw gays off buildings, raped and enslaved young girls, mass murdered old women and many male Yazidis. She admits to not regretting anything and thinks all their actions were justified. Whether she personally killed someone is a moot point. The average female concentration camp guard is unlikely to have personally killed someone, but they were an important part of a bigger organization.

All great points, but you can be sure they UK citizens will be forced to once again swallow their pride to accept her back. She will be made out to be the anti christ and the more this happens the more you can be assured the UK will take her back. Trump claiming EU having to take her back if US leaves is a logical fallacy - she can be handed over to Syrian Army anytime but the reality is will never happen as it again proves NATO horrific failure and backing the wrong side.
Hundreds of innocent EU citizens killed on EU soil as a result of failed NATO war and "the boy's coming home" from Syria, Iraq and Libya, all trained by NATO.

jmayo

ART6 wrote: »

I would imagine that throughout the UK there are many Muslim communities that are shuddering about the consequences of this and the other Jihadis that might be able to return to the UK as a right of citizenship. The community relations that they have created with their Christian friends over generations could be easily torn apart by just a few of those people sowing the deadly bacteria of religious fundamentalism.

And what the fook about all the other communities who have had to suffer the attacks coming from people within the muslim communities?

Ah the poor pets in the muslim community might have to fooking face up to the fact that they have produced utter scum who want nothing more than to go out and slaughter others just because they don't believe in their medieval sky fairy.

The muslim communities have long known about the hate preachers, they have known about the demonising of western culture, the demonising of western freedoms for women and homosexuals.
And as hsure as fook they knew about the grooming gangs preying on young vulnerable white working glass girls.

Muslim communities held marches where they quite openly chanted their hatred for Britain, carried ISIS flags, chanted about killing people for daring to draw a cartoon, chanted about killing Salman Rushdie.

Of course everytime someone out of their community hacks someone to death in the street, is found to be slaughtering people in the Middle East, planning bomb attacks, carrying out bomb attacks, they always turn out to have been really nice mornal folks who just started getting religious.
Yeah it all happened overnight. :rolleyes:

old_aussie

awec wrote: »

Bring her back, look after the child and give it every chance in life.

And give her a long holiday at her majesty's pleasure.

At a cost of millions to the tax payers.

Leave the terrorist bitch there and spend the money on people in need.

Why should the people that her ideology wants to destroy, pay to raise her little jihadi.

donegal_man

Asked a Muslim lad who works along with me his opinion today. After thinking about it for a moment he said, "I wouldn't want her kid in school with either of my two."

FTA69

old_aussie wrote: »

At a cost of millions to the tax payers.

Leave the terrorist bitch there and spend the money on people in need.

Why should the people that her ideology wants to destroy, pay to raise her little jihadi.

Cos she's a British citizen and the responsibility of the UK. The Kurds have said they want to repatriate these people. They have given everything in order to defeat ISIS, why should they now have to pay to house a load of foreign idiots?

ToBeFrank123

She's allegedly named her new son after a warlord from the 7th century who liked massacring infidels.

This woman far from being innocent is about as big a threat you can get to the west.

I don't believe she has for a minute turned her back on isis. As some have said hardcore brainwashed followers like this are intent on continuing the fight once they return.

Do we wait for another Bataclan, Nice or Manchester or do we say no, you people are unworthy of western citizenship? I'd argue the latter.

Being a member of isis should mean an automatic ban from the west and stripping of citizenship. Only liberal lefties would argue otherwise.

old_aussie

FTA69 wrote: »

Cos she's a British citizen and the responsibility of the UK. The Kurds have said they want to repatriate these people. They have given everything in order to defeat ISIS, why should they now have to pay to house a load of foreign idiots?

Martyr them all.

GinAndBitter

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

She's allegedly named her new son after a warlord from the 7th century who liked massacring infidels.

This woman far from being innocent is about as big a threat you can get to the west.

I don't believe she has for a minute turned her back on isis. As some have said hardcore brainwashed followers like this are intent on continuing the fight once they return.

Do we wait for another Bataclan, Nice or Manchester or do we say no, you people are unworthy of western citizenship? I'd argue the latter.

Being a member of isis should mean an automatic ban from the west and stripping of citizenship. Only liberal lefties would argue otherwise.

Like calling your child Hitler for feck sake. These people are very ill.

malinheader

FTA69 wrote: »

Cos she's a British citizen and the responsibility of the UK. The Kurds have said they want to repatriate these people. They have given everything in order to defeat ISIS, why should they now have to pay to house a load of foreign idiots?

Don't think to many would miss them or complain if they wernt exactly housed. If you get my drift.

old_aussie

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Wether or not britain or its citizens want to take her back is irrelevant. She has a right to return to the UK as a UK citizen.

Let the islamic terrorist bitch pay for her own tickets to return.

She didn't have much trouble paying for tickets to get to the killing fields.

Do the right thing bitch and martyr yourself.

GinAndBitter

malinheader wrote: »

Don't think to many would miss them or complain if they wernt exactly housed. If you get my drift.

They should "take care of her"

old_aussie

Maybe China's on to something.

Plumbthedepths

9mm rounds are fairly cheap as opposed to round the clock surveillance. Just saying.

JP Liz V1

Let her back in and then arrest her

malinheader

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Let her back in and then arrest her

Arrest her for what

Gatling

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

9mm rounds are fairly cheap as opposed to round the clock surveillance. Just saying.

Noose is cheaper and environmentally friendly and can operate 24/7

Gatling

malinheader wrote: »

Arrest her for what

Membership of a terrorist organisation is the likely only offence she could be charged with

nice_guy80

If she was an Irish citizen I would expect her to be allowed back in the country and try to rebuild her life and provide for her child.
Yes, she made a huge mistake. She'll have to live with that

Gatling

nice_guy80 wrote: »

If she was an Irish citizen I would expect her to be allowed back in the country and try to rebuild her life and provide for her child.
Yes, she made a huge mistake. She'll have to live with that

Not like we don't already have Isis supporters here already why would you want her back her under any circumstances

JP Liz V1

malinheader wrote: »

Arrest her for what

Terrorism?

kravmaga

SoundsRight wrote: »

Because we have compassion. If we lose our values, then the enemy has won.

Bring her back to your house, she can stay with you

Roger Hassenforder

Gatling wrote: »

Noose is cheaper and environmentally friendly and can operate 24/7

Its certainly reusable

malinheader

Gatling wrote: »

Membership of a terrorist organisation is the likely only offence she could be charged with

Probably. What would she get 10 out in 5 for this.

end of the road

Gatling wrote: »

According to her she watched a few videos and decided she wanted in .
Husband if not already dead is well known to his and other security forces,

Still doesn't explain how bringing her back to the UK is in the best interest of the UK and keeping the UK safe ,

All this can be found out in Syria with no restrictions on interrogation techniques

except it can't be found out because no restrictions on interrogation techniques means the information is unreliable as someone being tortured is likely to simply say what they think the torturer might want to hear. restrictions on techniques means more chance of reliable information.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

She and other captured ISIS followers in the region are imprisoned and thankfully have no access to phones or the internet. I think that is the best way to keep everyone in the west secure as these people use the internet to communicate and plan attacks.

We do know what she and others are doing. Living in a prison camp in the middle east. That's good enough for most of us. The west should pay the Kurds, our only trustworthy allies in the region and the people who did most of the fighting and dying fighting ISIS, to keep these people locked up indefinitely.

hold on, i thought one of the reasons people don't want her back in the uk is that the tax payer would have to pay for her? so why should the tax payer pay for the kurds to do britain's dirty work and take on britain's terrorists when they have enough problems of their own?

Chisler2 wrote: »

She never had a passport. She left the UK using her SISTER'S passport. On this evening's 6.00pm news on BBC she said she intends to bring up her (now 2-day-old) son as a Muslim.

none of that changes anything. she still remains british.

malinheader

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Terrorism?

See this is the problem we debated earlier. How are they going to find out what to try her for. How do we find out what she has done or not done. Realistically she could land in UK and not serve one day of a sentence.