Lisa Smith home.

Simmer down

Update on everyone's favourite Jihadi after the break on Newstalk.

JP Liz V1

https://www.thesun.ie/news/4818698/lisa-smith-married-four-times-leaving-jihad-syria/

jmayo

Allinall wrote: »

Were there terrorists in Rosslare?

Why didn’t you report it?

Well who knows what they were ?
As for the Irish Gardai or Army intelligence having a scooby about islamist terrorirsts, I wouldn't hold my breath.

And please don't anyone start coming out with shyte about they are well used to terrorists because of the troubles.
The same troubles that dissipated over 20 years ago, since which lots of officers would have retired and the same troubles that involved Irish/British people and not some totally different insular cultural backgrounds.

As for the weapon in question, she has been married nearly as many times as Liz Taylor at this stage.
And she seemed to have been upgrading each husband to a more fundamentalist version each time.
And yet she claims she isn't a threat to anyone ?

BTW people should keep an eye out for flights inbound to Baldonnel because I would bet there is no way they will try and bring her in through Dublin.
She will then disappear for a while only to resurface after of course she has had her chat with our islamist terrorist experts in Phoenix Park. :rolleyes:

jmreire

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

https://www.thesun.ie/news/4818698/lisa-smith-married-four-times-leaving-jihad-syria/

You have to say one thing for sharia law....getting married or divorced is very simple, compared to marriage / divorce in this part of the world..:D:D:D

Field east

jmreire wrote: »

You have to say one thing for sharia law....getting married or divorced is very simple, compared to marriage / divorce in this part of the world..:D:D:D

Two things beggars belief with regards to Lisa Smith
(1) she wanted to go to a real Islamic Practicing country , wear the Islamic garb asap, etc, etc,. Ireland was not for her with her newly found religion so why is she not refusing to be returned to ireland and protest accordingly. She is she not demanding to be sent to an Islamic state
(2) why is she not using her iislamic name - especially with regards to one above .

In summary, she has been visited by a few journalists/ reporters and they never referred , in their reports, two either of the two above points x - unless they are editing/ filtering what Lisa is saying to them

end of the road

Field east wrote: »

Two things beggars belief with regards to Lisa Smith
(1) she wanted to go to a real Islamic Practicing country , wear the Islamic garb asap, etc, etc,. Ireland was not for her with her newly found religion so why is she not refusing to be returned to ireland and protest accordingly. She is she not demanding to be sent to an Islamic state
(2) why is she not using her iislamic name - especially with regards to one above .

In summary, she has been visited by a few journalists/ reporters and they never referred , in their reports, two either of the two above points x - unless they are editing/ filtering what Lisa is saying to them

no islamic state will take her, so she would be wasting her time protesting and demanding to be sent to one.
if she is not using her islamic name, presumably it's because nobody will recognise any other name then her own name, given she likely hasn't changed it via deedpole. presumably that is the reason journalists don't refer to her by such name either.

jmreire

Field east wrote: »

Two things beggars belief with regards to Lisa Smith
(1) she wanted to go to a real Islamic Practicing country , wear the Islamic garb asap, etc, etc,. Ireland was not for her with her newly found religion so why is she not refusing to be returned to ireland and protest accordingly. She is she not demanding to be sent to an Islamic state
(2) why is she not using her iislamic name - especially with regards to one above .

In summary, she has been visited by a few journalists/ reporters and they never referred , in their reports, two either of the two above points x - unless they are editing/ filtering what Lisa is saying to them

It seems that ex isis members of whatever nationality, are not really welcome in any other Country, and it's hard to blame them, when their Country's don't want them back, and are only taking them under duress because they have to.
I'd say when in Muslim company, she will use her Islamic name ok, but otherwise,she will not be too anxious to draw attention to herself by using it in public, I could be wrong though about this. Have to wait and see for another while.

Field east

end of the road wrote: »

no islamic state will take her, so she would be wasting her time protesting and demanding to be sent to one.
if she is not using her islamic name, presumably it's because nobody will recognise any other name then her own name, given she likely hasn't changed it via deedpole. presumably that is the reason journalists don't refer to her by such name either.

Not being wanted by any state should not stop her from making a request to be extradited to one such state/s of her choosing. It would indicate her apparently very strong comittement to live in a state that practices sharia law

. She has very much gone out of her way to become a Muslim, wear the relevant clothes, go to a country/s where the ‘true ‘Muslim Faith is practiced - as per her understanding, etc , etc. my experience tells me that a persons muslim name is sacrosanct and over rides all other considerations. It is as much of a stamp of what you are as much as the garb worn by Muslim women. I , therefor , find it were difficult to understand that her Muslim name has not, even once , surfaced.

jmreire

Field east wrote: »

Not being wanted by any state should not stop her from making a request to be extradited to one such state/s of her choosing. It would indicate her apparently very strong comittement to live in a state that practices sharia law

. She has very much gone out of her way to become a Muslim, wear the relevant clothes, go to a country/s where the ‘true ‘Muslim Faith is practiced - as per her understanding, etc , etc. my experience tells me that a persons muslim name is sacrosanct and over rides all other considerations. It is as much of a stamp of what you are as much as the garb worn by Muslim women. I , therefor , find it were difficult to understand that her Muslim name has not, even once , surfaced.

Pretty academic at the moment, as when she arrives, she will be arrested. but even IF she did apply to another Islamic Country, and they accepted her, they would be in fact showing approval of isis. Not too many Islamic states want to be seen as supporter's of isis though. As for her name, as I mentioned earlier, when conversing with fellow Muslim's, she will use it, but otherwise? I'm not so sure..For any Journalists who interviewed her, they have mentioned her Islamic name for context, but then reverted to Lisa Smith, which the general public would be more familiar with.

end of the road

Field east wrote: »

Not being wanted by any state should not stop her from making a request to be extradited to one such state/s of her choosing. It would indicate her apparently very strong comittement to live in a state that practices sharia law

it shouldn't and won't stop her from making such a request, if she indeed has done so, but as i said no islamic country is going to take her, so her making such a request would be pointless, and i suspect she would be aware of that fact.

Field east wrote: »

. She has very much gone out of her way to become a Muslim, wear the relevant clothes, go to a country/s where the ‘true ‘Muslim Faith is practiced - as per her understanding, etc , etc. my experience tells me that a persons muslim name is sacrosanct and over rides all other considerations. It is as much of a stamp of what you are as much as the garb worn by Muslim women. I , therefor , find it were difficult to understand that her Muslim name has not, even once , surfaced.

her name in law over-rides any other name she may decide to take on, her name in law is lisa smith, unless she changes her name via the legal route then that won't change.
i would agree it is surprising her muslim name hasn't surfaced but realistically it carries no legal weight anyway.

Caquas

It’s astonishing that a former member of our defence forces can join the most barbaric army in modern times but when they are defeated and she decides to go home, she gets an escort and the Garda Commissioner ”invites” her to an interview

If she has broken no laws, then our Defence Acts need to be amended urgently. Not that any Irish politician will mention this because they are not real legislators. Remember every Jihadist in Ireland is morally obliged to train themselves for the battle against the West. Lisa has shown them how to get top class weapons training and maybe even a shot at the government jet!

unkel

Why the hell was a lot of effort and tax payers money used to bring a foreign child (and her terrorist Irish mother, who no doubt has committed horrible crimes) to Ireland? Makes no sense to me at all.

The Dutch government was challenged in court about their refusal to bring similar people "home", they won. They won't have to do anything. Let that jihad scum rot in hell is what I say. Hope they take her child off her and let her be adopted by normal caring and loving people, wherever in the world. Give her love and educate her about her evil mother.

tuxy

unkel wrote: »

The Dutch government was challenged in court about their refusal to bring similar people "home", they won. They won't have to do anything. Let that jihad scum rot in hell is what I say. Hope they take her child off her and let her be adopted by normal caring and loving people, where ever in the world. Give her love and educate her about her evil mother.

Are you saying Turkey tried to deport Dutch citizens and the Dutch won in an international count to prevent it?
Or was it when the Kurds were in charge of the prison camps because it's very different as the Kurds are not recognised as having a state.

Edit: I see it's only children in the Dutch case so for Irelands we could have taken Lisa back but refused the child as it has never been registered as an Irish citizen.

end of the road

unkel wrote: »

Why the hell was a lot of effort and tax payers money used to bring a foreign child (and her terrorist Irish mother, who no doubt has committed horrible crimes) to Ireland? Makes no sense to me at all.

because she is an irish citizen with no dual citizenship, so we have to take her back whether we want to or not.

unkel wrote: »

The Dutch government was challenged in court about their refusal to bring similar people "home", they won. They won't have to do anything. Let that jihad scum rot in hell is what I say. Hope they take her child off her and let her be adopted by normal caring and loving people, wherever in the world. Give her love and educate her about her evil mother.

from what i can find, and it's not much if i'm honest, it sounds like you are refering to the challenge to force the dutch government to repatriate children of isis fighters from the netherlands, to the netherlands?
if so, from what i did find, the court looks to have said that there is no need to bring back the mothers as part of the repatriations, not that they won't have to take back by-birth dutch citizens if any country decides to deport them to the netherlands.
it seems some of the parents only spent time in the netherlands so the netherlands won't have to take them back anyway, others will be by-birth dutch citizens and even if the netherlands refuses to take them back, a country would still have the right to deport them there anyway i would suspect.
others may have dual nationality, that probably gets complicated in terms of primary and secondary nationality (i use these terms to distingwish between by-birth and naturalised nationality) . so if someone is born in the netherlands but has another citizenship, while in theory the netherlands could remove their citizenship (note i don't know if they legally can actually do it in cases where the individual has been born there) things become complicated if the other country decides to challenge that or even strip the individual's citizenship as well (which they would have more of a right to i would suspect) given they are the secondary nationality.
if not born in the netherlands and have dual nationality then that's really a non-issue as the netherlands is not their primary nationality, as in nationality of birth.

paul71

raclle wrote: »

Our government will welcome this woman and her ideology back to society with open arms. I'll be absolutely shocked considering the things she's either done or witnessed. She's capable of anything and should be locked up or deported. Those people are animals!

Deported to where?

paul71

paul71 wrote: »

Deported to where?

No need for deportation. Revoke her citizenship and exile her. Let her find her own place in the world.. since it's obviously not Ireland. There's quite a few countries out there with a majority Muslim population where she would be better suited to live in, and they can decide to deny/accept her based on her history.

The idea of deportation is awkward because it's asking another country to take responsibility for her, and requires us to nominate such a country. Let her do that, as long as it's not Ireland.

BalcombeSt4

jmreire wrote: »

My point is, a democracy by its very definition..equal rights to all, every one has a voice, and a vote, Right? So under democratic rules, maybe I don't like your view's or what you are saying, but I will defend your right to hold these view's and speak as you wish.
Say there is an election,and your party ( or mine, ) set's out it's agenda ( the fact that this agenda is based on lies, promise's and fake new's etc. is ignored ) and it romps home with a comfortable margin. But then after awhile, the false image begins to wear off. Reality come's to the fore,the population, realises that it has been cheated and lied to, and react's.To counteract this the Govt imposes stricter and more repressive law's. And soon Democracy has gone out the window. Now my point is, in this case Democracy, by it's very nature, allowed itself to be destroyed. The above is a very brief and hypothetical example of what I mean. Personally, what I think about Democracy is that while it may not be perfect, it's the best we have come up with so far. But it is open to exploitation, and has been exploited in the past. And that is what I mean when I said that "Democracy will be the death of Democracy"

I understand what you mean, I suppose that is not impossible & it possibly could happen but I can't of any historical case were it has happened.

Of course politicians tells lies all the time to get themselves elected to positions of power. But I don't think the electorate would be that stupid to elect to power a political party who's speeches are full a great inspiring democratic rhetoric but are secretly plotting the end of democracy & the setting up of a terror police state.

The closet example I can think of is the November 1932 German elections were the Nazi's won the most sets but not a majority & formed a coalition government with the Conservatives & the Nazi's passed the Enabling Act which suspened civil liberties & later carried out the Night of the Long Knifes to consolidate their power, that was the end of Democracy. But the Nazis never talked about how much they loved Democracy, they were very open about their disdain for Democracy, Hitler wrote things in Mein Kampf like "Democracy will eventually lead Marxism", and other strange statements which expressed his disdain for any sort of Democratic rule.

I think something like a Nazi type party taking power could, I mean it has happened again inn South & Central America, usually with the backing of the US. A Fascistc President was voted into power in Brazil a few months ago, claiming the last brutal Military Junta in Brazil was too soft and that it should have killed about another 30,000 people. There's Fascist parties all over Europe some with very large followings, France had a very close call.
But all these people are clear what their intentions are about before they come to power, I don't see how a party that truely believed in Democratic principles could end Democracy.

malinheader

end of the road wrote: »

no islamic state will take her, so she would be wasting her time protesting and demanding to be sent to one.
if she is not using her islamic name, presumably it's because nobody will recognise any other name then her own name, given she likely hasn't changed it via deedpole. presumably that is the reason journalists don't refer to her by such name either.

Could she not just land in one of these Islamic states and look for asylum, even if she wasn't really fearful of her life. If the Islamic state decides no,she could appeal it for 5 or 6 or more years while being looked after in a centre, hostel or hotel. I'm sure the Islamic state tax payers wouldn't mind.

pjohnson

Letting her back to Ireland after what happened yesterday when Britain let its own terrorist roam free is just so damn Irish

suicide_circus

is it legal to make someone stateless?

malinheader

suicide_circus wrote: »

is it legal to make someone stateless?

She's not being made stateless. They are taking her back.

suicide_circus

malinheader wrote: »

She's not being made stateless. They are taking her back.

yes i know.

tuxy

suicide_circus wrote: »

is it legal to make someone stateless?

Ireland is one of the many signatories to the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.
My understanding is that because of this, yes we are legally bound under international law to not make any person stateless.

biko

Lisa Smith due to arrive back into Dublin this afternoon
https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/lisa-smith-due-to-arrive-back-into-dublin-this-afternoon-967545.html

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has said that plans have been put in place to care for Lisa Smith's child when she and her daughter are returned to Ireland.
https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/1129/1095996-lisa-smith/

swarlb

Just curious... but did anyone ever hear about Lisa Smith, BEFORE she asked to 'come home'...?

jmreire

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

I understand what you mean, I suppose that is not impossible & it possibly could happen but I can't of any historical case were it has happened.

Of course politicians tells lies all the time to get themselves elected to positions of power. But I don't think the electorate would be that stupid to elect to power a political party who's speeches are full a great inspiring democratic rhetoric but are secretly plotting the end of democracy & the setting up of a terror police state.

The closet example I can think of is the November 1932 German elections were the Nazi's won the most sets but not a majority & formed a coalition government with the Conservatives & the Nazi's passed the Enabling Act which suspened civil liberties & later carried out the Night of the Long Knifes to consolidate their power, that was the end of Democracy. But the Nazis never talked about how much they loved Democracy, they were very open about their disdain for Democracy, Hitler wrote things in Mein Kampf like "Democracy will eventually lead Marxism", and other strange statements which expressed his disdain for any sort of Democratic rule.

I think something like a Nazi type party taking power could, I mean it has happened again inn South & Central America, usually with the backing of the US. A Fascistc President was voted into power in Brazil a few months ago, claiming the last brutal Military Junta in Brazil was too soft and that it should have killed about another 30,000 people. There's Fascist parties all over Europe some with very large followings, France had a very close call.
But all these people are clear what their intentions are about before they come to power, I don't see how a party that truely believed in Democratic principles could end Democracy.

But the bottom line is Democracy, by its very nature is open to abuse and it's own destruction..The German example with Hitler is a very good example.....and in more recent time's, ( and ironically ) again Germany, with the rise of the AFD party....( which has not gone away ). Sure, these parties are telling lies , they manipulate event's and give the voters what want to hear, and if they get elected, then the story changes, and what the electorate actually get, is often a far cry from what was promised, but by the time they realise what has happened...it's too late. And then the first victim will be Democracy. I agree that with truly democratic parties competing with each other, I don't think that it would be threatened, but when decidedly "undemocratic" force's decide to undermine democracy ( wolf in sheep's clothing ) That's when the chink in the armour show's...the weakest spot.

jmreire

suicide_circus wrote: »

is it legal to make someone stateless?

In Ireland anyway ( and most other Country's too ) it is illegal to make a person stateless. You cannot even deport some one, unless they have a State / Country to deport them to. Watch the UK TV series " Border Patrol" and you will see that even where they catch illegal immigrants,unless they can find their passport's, they cannot deport them.....ie: make them stateless, because without passport's, no Country is obliged to accept them. One of the reasons why most immigrant's destroy or lose their document's before declaring themselves.

biko

When she comes back she will become a rallying point for other extremists.

jmreire

unkel wrote: »

Why the hell was a lot of effort and tax payers money used to bring a foreign child (and her terrorist Irish mother, who no doubt has committed horrible crimes) to Ireland? Makes no sense to me at all.

The Dutch government was challenged in court about their refusal to bring similar people "home", they won. They won't have to do anything. Let that jihad scum rot in hell is what I say. Hope they take her child off her and let her be adopted by normal caring and loving people, wherever in the world. Give her love and educate her about her evil mother.

Whether it makes sense or not, is immaterial because Lisa and her Daughter, are Irish citizens, who are fully entitled to return home to Ireland. There is no choice because we are way behind the rest of Europe ( most of it anyway) when it comes to having Law's to deal with this kind of situation.In the best case scenario, they will find that she is in breach of the 2005 anti-terrorist law's, and prosecute her on those ground's. And IF and WHEN, that does come to Court, just imagine all the Legal Eagles picking holes in the prosecution case. We need urgently to upgrade our Law's to take into account cases like this, because for sure, Lisa will not be the last.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

No need for deportation. Revoke her citizenship and exile her. Let her find her own place in the world.. since it's obviously not Ireland. There's quite a few countries out there with a majority Muslim population where she would be better suited to live in, and they can decide to deny/accept her based on her history.

revoking her citizenship is not possible, what is it about this fact people refuse to get dispite it being explained a lot in the thread?
she is not of dual nationality, she is by-birth irish, therefore revoking her citizenship is against international law.The idea of deportation is awkward because it's asking another country to take responsibility for her, and requires us to nominate such a country. Let her do that, as long as it's not Ireland.[/QUOTE]

Deleted User wrote: »

The idea of deportation is awkward because it's asking another country to take responsibility for her, and requires us to nominate such a country. Let her do that, as long as it's not Ireland.

and revoking her citizenship essentially does the same thing, accept it now gives legitimacy to other countries to do the same when it comes to us or others wanting to actually deport naturalised people, who have committed criminality, back to their countries of origin, something no doubt you will be the first to come on here complaining about.
she will not be getting to nominate any country to take her, she will be coming back to ireland and people will have to grow up and deal with it.