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

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well when we are talking about incarcerating people then proscribed is the most important word.

Which is precisely why I backed the comment up with the possibility of incarceration for mental instability.


In other words, I don't really care whether they take her off the streets on legal, or mental capacity grounds. For that matter, I don't care if they take her off the streets "for her own safety".


I do care whether innocent Irish civilians are at risk because she is here - whether the risk comes from herself, or ISIS members seeking to silence her.


So, until/if it can be ascertained that she poses no risk to her neighbours/family/associates/acquaintances, or A.N other, I don't believe leaving her to roam the Country is an option.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

Which is precisely why I backed the comment up with the possibility of incarceration for mental instability.


In other words, I don't really care whether they take her off the streets on legal, or mental capacity grounds. For that matter, I don't care if they take her off the streets "for her own safety".


I do care whether innocent Irish civilians are at risk because she is here - whether the risk comes from herself, or ISIS members seeking to silence her.


So, until/if it can be ascertained that she poses no risk to her neighbours/family/associates/acquaintances, or A.N other, I don't believe leaving her to roam the Country is an option.

I would avoid a career in psychiatry if i were you.

skooterblue2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I would avoid a career in psychiatry if i were you.

I would avoid a career in security if I were you.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I would avoid a career in psychiatry if i were you.

Really? You might be surprised!


Having tried the dismissive angle, do you have any actual opinion to offer?
What do you think should happen to Ms Smith in the event of her return?

Boggles

skooterblue2 wrote: »

I said I had known other people who were up in front of Military courts and they were dealt with harshly. An associate of mine was back late for duty from a funeral and missed duties. You can be court martialed for very small infactions. Do you seriously think they are going to pass over a western soldier out there under suspicious circumstances? She also has no protection from the Geneva convention (if you seriously think it holds any weight) as she will be tried as a member of an international brigade. There are serious questions as to was she a combatant. If she was she can be tried by a military court. They can try her as POW for war crimes.

I am sending her two thumbs up and the best of luck with that one.

I have literally no idea what you are talking about.

AlekSmart

jmreire wrote: »

Maybe that would explain it so....Lisa was mentally unbalanced, and that was why she did as she did....According to her Friends, she definitely changed from a fun loving, enjoying a night out having a few beers type of "Normal Irish " individual to one who completely changed 360° to become almost reclusive....even her Muslim friends saw change in her. She became more Muslim than the Muslims themselves. Definitely, something happened to her. But in any case... she would not be the 1st person who was taken in by caliphate propaganda, only to discover what the caliphate promised and the reality were two entirely different things.

Perhaps in Ms Smith's case,it may be necessary to step back from the entire ISIS "thing",and instead focus on the greater issue of her new found devotion to her Prophet.

There is no Irish State agency that I know of,who can even begin to understand,explain or counter,the depth of committment,angry people such as Ms Smith may now carry for their new God.

This blind devotion can be used to justify,explain and further popularize,direct action against unbelievers and infidels wherever they are found......nothing to do with ISIS at all now.

skooterblue2

AlekSmart wrote: »

Perhaps in Ms Smith's case,it may be necessary to step back from the entire ISIS "thing",and instead focus on the greater issue of her new found devotion to her Prophet.

There is no Irish State agency that I know of,who can even begin to understand,explain or counter,the depth of committment,angry people such as Ms Smith may now carry for their new God.

This blind devotion can be used to justify,explain and further popularize,direct action against unbelievers and infidels wherever they are found......nothing to do with ISIS at all now.

Its always the new converts to Islam are more fanatical to prove themselves. They are always the odd ones. Ms O'Connor and Kalid Kelly are prime examples.

malinheader

Find it very hard that some people still think that scumbags that went to join or support ISIS have rights and should be taken back and carry on as if nothing happened . Some of the atrocitys these scum carried out and the torture and beheadings streamed live, how can anyone in their right mind make a case for these sick ba--tards.

skooterblue2

Boggles wrote: »

I have literally no idea what you are talking about.

Its ok, its alright. just go back to your weed with Endoftheroad.

Richard Hillman

malinheader wrote: »

Find it very hard that some people still think that scumbags that went to join or support ISIS have rights and should be taken back and carry on as if nothing happened . Some of the atrocitys these scum carried out and the torture and beheadings streamed live, how can anyone in their right mind make a case for these sick ba--tards.

You'll get contrarians in all fields

Gatling

malinheader wrote: »

Find it very hard that some people still think that scumbags that went to join or support ISIS have rights and should be taken back and carry on as if nothing happened . Some of the atrocitys these scum carried out and the torture and beheadings streamed live, how can anyone in their right mind make a case for these sick ba--tards.

Expect answers of its the right thing to do ,were civilised ,we shouldn't dump our problems on others yada yada yada .
The same people don't want her and her friends living beside them ,but expect the rest of us to put up with her

end of the road

malinheader wrote: »

Find it very hard that some people still think that scumbags that went to join or support ISIS have rights and should be taken back and carry on as if nothing happened. Some of the atrocitys these scum carried out and the torture and beheadings streamed live, how can anyone in their right mind make a case for these sick ba--tards.

this is very easily done given.
1. they have rights, whether people like it or not.
2. the country of origin has an obligation to take back it's citizens. the west does not have a right to dump this problem on the syrians.
3. nobody has ever said these people should be able to carry on as if nothing happened. in fact plenty of people have said that ideally they should be locked up, however some also recognise that it is not as simple to do in our case given that isis is not a proscribed organisation in ireland.

malinheader

end of the road wrote: »

this is very easily done given.
1. they have rights, whether people like it or not.
2. the country of origin has an obligation to take back it's citizens. the west does not have a right to dump this problem on the syrians.
3. nobody has ever said these people should be able to carry on as if nothing happened. in fact plenty of people have said that ideally they should be locked up, however some also recognise that it is not as simple to do in our case given that isis is not a proscribed organisation in ireland.

Lock them up.not a chance of that happening as your last couple of sentences state.
Let them rot where they are. I'm sure the Syrians would do us a favour for a small fee.

end of the road

malinheader wrote: »

Lock them up.not a chance of that happening as your last couple of sentences state.
Let them rot where they are. I'm sure the Syrians would do us a favour for a small fee.

a small fee? i can't imagine they would for a big fee never mind a small 1. they owe the west nothing, and i can't imagine they will be doing us any favours, and rightly so.

malinheader

end of the road wrote: »

a small fee? i can't imagine they would for a big fee never mind a small 1. they owe the west nothing, and i can't imagine they will be doing us any favours, and rightly so.

Right so ,take them back to Ireland. ISIS is not proscribed in Ireland as you have said so as I said they walk around as nothing has happened. Are you agreed that this is what will probably happen. I know they owe the west nothing, that's why I proposed a fee.

skooterblue2

malinheader wrote: »

Lock them up.not a chance of that happening as your last couple of sentences state.
Let them rot where they are. I'm sure the Syrians would do us a favour for a small fee.

Why do we have to pay a small fee? Why dont we do what we did to the cossacks who fought with the Nazis? The allies let the Russian deal with them. Allow the Kurds to organise the courts

jmreire

skooterblue2 wrote: »

I said I had known other people who were up in front of Military courts and they were dealt with harshly. An associate of mine was back late for duty from a funeral and missed duties. You can be court martialed for very small infactions. Do you seriously think they are going to pass over a western soldier out there under suspicious circumstances? She also has no protection from the Geneva convention (if you seriously think it holds any weight) as she will be tried as a member of an international brigade. There are serious questions as to was she a combatant. If she was she can be tried by a military court. They can try her as POW for war crimes.

I am sending her two thumbs up and the best of luck with that one.

She is covered by the Geneva Convention's, and fully protected by them. Who do you think will escort her out of there? Believe it or not, but the Red Cross has a powerfull voice in that part of the world. Forget the government jet BS,,,,anything in the air over there is armed to the teeth, and dangerous.

skooterblue2

end of the road wrote: »

this is very easily done given.
1. they have rights, whether people like it or not.
2. the country of origin has an obligation to take back it's citizens. the west does not have a right to dump this problem on the syrians.
3. nobody has ever said these people should be able to carry on as if nothing happened. in fact plenty of people have said that ideally they should be locked up, however some also recognise that it is not as simple to do in our case given that isis is not a proscribed organisation in ireland.

A few things there... I would love you to talk about civil responsibilities. ie respect the country you live in, keep its laws and respect its rulers.

Yes you can remove citizenship, if you try to overthrow the state or are treasonous, you can have your citizenship remove usually reserved for cold war spies.

Why do we have to pay for them to be locked up? It cost fantastic money and afterwards their "debt to society is paid and they can re-enter civil society"? It costs about 300k a year to house a convict. lunacy.

Gatling

jmreire wrote: »

She is covered by the Geneva Convention's,

Under what part of the Geneva convention

ohnonotgmail

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Why do we have to pay a small fee? Why dont we do what we did to the cossacks who fought with the Nazis? The allies let the Russian deal with them. Allow the Kurds to organise the courts

You mean send them back to where they came from? I thought you didnt want her back in ireland?

skooterblue2

jmreire wrote: »

She is covered by the Geneva Convention's, and fully protected by them. Who do you think will escort her out of there? Believe it or not, but the Red Cross has a powerfull voice in that part of the world. Forget the government jet BS,,,,anything in the air over there is armed to the teeth, and dangerous.

The Geneva convention does not cover spies, mercenaries and International Brigades.

https://www.diplomaticourier.com/2012/11/23/are-private-military-companies-pmcs-exempted-from-geneva-conventions/

"Under international law and International Humanitarian Law, the outsourcing of military services is explicitly prohibited: Only members of armed forces can participate in hostilities. Moreover, state parties to the Geneva Conventions retain their obligations, even if some of the direct activities undertaken in their name are contracted out to PMCs."

skooterblue2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

You mean send them back to where they came from? I thought you didnt want her back in ireland?

She cant come back if she has no citizenship.

jmreire

Gatling wrote: »

Under what part of the Geneva convention

As a defeated combatant ( if she was a fighter ) or a person made vulnerable due to the war. All the ex isis members who are held in Kurdish camps are covered by the Conventions. They have already been visited and accessed by the Red Cross, and the Red Cross is supplying food, shelter and medicine to them. Google :' ICRC President Dr. Maurer visits Al-Hol and Hassakeh camps in Syria.

ohnonotgmail

skooterblue2 wrote: »

She cant come back if she has no citizenship.

so you didnt mean to say that she should be sent back to her own country? I'm a bit confused now because you mentioned the cossacks and they were sent back to their own country. can you clarify what you meant by that analogy as you seen to have it completely backwards.

And she still has citizenship and the irish government cannot remove her citizenship as she only holds irish citizenship.

ohnonotgmail

jmreire wrote: »

As a defeated combatant ( if she was a fighter ) or a person made vulnerable due to the war. All the ex isis members who are held in Kurdish camps are covered by the Conventions. They have already been visited and accessed by the Red Cross, and the Red Cross is supplying food, shelter and medicine to them. Google :' ICRC President Dr. Maurer visits Al-Hol and Hassakeh camps in Syria.

it is an interesting question as to whether she is covered. If she was being held by syria then she would be covered as syria are signatories. The kurds are not signatories though i suspect they are just playing nice and letting the red cross in.

Gatling

jmreire wrote: »

As a defeated combatant ( if she was a fighter )

If .

so your not sure



Thought she was an emigrant ?

skooterblue2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so you didnt mean to say that she should be sent back to her own country? I'm a bit confused now because you mentioned the cossacks and they were sent back to their own country. can you clarify what you meant by that analogy as you seen to have it completely backwards.

And she still has citizenship and the irish government cannot remove her citizenship as she only holds irish citizenship.

I never said anything like that. I suggest that as she is in the charge of SDF/Kurdish Military, it is a matter for them. I believe that once you leave your own country for a foreign power that we are in conflict with, negates your right to citizenship.

Citizenship has been removed from Irish Citizens but it happens at cabinet level. She should have thought long and hard before she went over Syria for a laugh.

jmreire

skooterblue2 wrote: »

The Geneva convention does not cover spies, mercenaries and International Brigades.

https://www.diplomaticourier.com/2012/11/23/are-private-military-companies-pmcs-exempted-from-geneva-conventions/

"Under international law and International Humanitarian Law, the outsourcing of military services is explicitly prohibited: Only members of armed forces can participate in hostilities. Moreover, state parties to the Geneva Conventions retain their obligations, even if some of the direct activities undertaken in their name are contracted out to PMCs."

Believe me skooterblue.....the Red Cross is extremely active in Syria.....they are looking after the isis members in the camps. Just as they have been looking after the war-wounded and vulnerable people since the war there started. Of course the signatories to the Conventions are also bound by them too....In Syria, its the National Society. " Syrian Red Crescent" Who are in this case supported by the ICRC in Geneva.

skooterblue2

jmreire wrote: »

As a defeated combatant ( if she was a fighter ) or a person made vulnerable due to the war. All the ex isis members who are held in Kurdish camps are covered by the Conventions. They have already been visited and accessed by the Red Cross, and the Red Cross is supplying food, shelter and medicine to them. Google :' ICRC President Dr. Maurer visits Al-Hol and Hassakeh camps in Syria.

Its not as simple as "fighter". You have regular armies, militias, Mercenaries, International Brigades and Spies. The latter three classes are either not covered or grey areas.

end of the road

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Why do we have to pay a small fee? Why dont we do what we did to the cossacks who fought with the Nazis? The allies let the Russian deal with them. Allow the Kurds to organise the courts

the kurds are not being stopped from doing anything. if they want to set up courts to try isis members then they will do so but it will be their decision and they won't be forced to do it.

skooterblue2 wrote: »

A few things there... I would love you to talk about civil responsibilities. ie respect the country you live in, keep its laws and respect its rulers.

Yes you can remove citizenship, if you try to overthrow the state or are treasonous, you can have your citizenship remove usually reserved for cold war spies.

Why do we have to pay for them to be locked up? It cost fantastic money and afterwards their "debt to society is paid and they can re-enter civil society"? It costs about 300k a year to house a convict. lunacy.

civil responsibilities are covered by laws and punishments where required. you can only remove citizenship where a citizen is a naturalised citizen. removing citizenship from a birth citizen is illegal under international law.
we have to pay to lock them up because they pose a danger. it's about 90 k per prisoner a year and most of that cost is likely in terms of the running of the prison.