blonde poker forum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47229181



In an interview with the Times, Shamima Begum, now 19, talked about seeing "beheaded heads" in bins - but said that it "did not faze her".



Tell her we will take the baby into care if she wants but she can piss off IMO.

+1

She's just a youngster, most youngsters make silly mistakes sometimes.

Forgiveness & welcome home is in order IMO.

Didn't two of her own children die of malnutrition and she's pregnant with a 3rd child and

she said I want to come home so my child will be looked after ?

A bit late for that thought.

She's made her bed.....

Wouldn't call being a terrorist a silly mistake.  She can GTFO.

She would love to stay and slaughter more people if only it was like the good old days in 2015. No regrets. No forgiveness. How this merits a seconds thought I don't really know.

She was 15 and the victim of grooming.  She got married at 15, which would make her a victim of rape in this country.  I don't think we should take an interview in any murdoch paper at face value either.

Some surprising people a bit lacking in critcial thinking in this thread.  Not worthy of a second thought?  You have let yourself down here.  Daily mail readers obviously having a field day too. 

Surely we wait until she makes it out of Syria, and then let the law run its course?  Whether there is hope for her, I don't know.

I don't expect us to go and fetch her in the circumstances.

I don't think we should take an interview in any murdoch paper at face value either.


There is audio of the interview.


Unfortunately she doen't have dual nationality, so if she gets out of the camp and presents herself to British authorities, she will no doubt be allowed back to the UK. Then we just have the small cost of monitoring her 24/7, sigh.

There is selected clips from an interview of unknown length.  So we don'rlt really have an idea of the ratio of positive things to negative things she stated. She was 15 when she went there, and her life choices available once under ISIS control would be limited.

What do you think she has done? She made bad choices, but I don't think she comitted any terrorist acts, and I don't think anybody claims she has.   Whilst that likely makes her sympathetic towards terrorists, that doesn't make her a terrorist.  She probably has sime pretty unpleasant views, I accept that.  She is clearly a victim of a serious crime too; sure we'll get Tommy Robinson on soon giving his support, as he is big on supporting victims of grooming and child rape :/

Giving people a fair trial is one of those things that makes this Country great, not the jingoistic bullshit we hear too much these days.

Haha. I nearly prefaced with I'd like to feel more compassionate but based on what I read I didn't feel any. If there was any expression of humanity or empathy from her in the article id think differently. If the article proves to misrepresent her views I might be a bit less daily mail

Yup....tough shit.

When the Syrian government are slaughtering innocent children on a daily basis, bombing and poisoning civilians at will, I do agree this story isn't worthy of a second thought.

Having said that girls who shrug off heads in the dustbin caught my attention.

Sadly, Doobs is somewhat reflective of the erudite liberal saying that we listen to too much bullshit, when he and his ilk are the ones spouting it.

She may have been 15 at the time, but 15 today is the 25 year old of my generation. They have far more access to make informed decisions and also take their medicine.

Lets be under no illusion, these girls knew exactly the sort of national shit storm this would and did cause. At 15 they knew what they were doing. They were conniving enough to know what they were doing in order to get to Syria. I see she has already lost 2 children.

Forgiveness and second chances are all well and good, but this isn't one of those cases. This is just taking the piss. She knows damn well our country is a soft touch, because people like Doobs are prepared to wrap stupidity up as being forgiving and worthy of second chances. Let us not forget what ISIS stands for and the horrendous things they perpetrate.

I don't read any papers any more, so can't be tarred, but it winds me up that these same liberals hide behind slagging off everything the mail et al, print as being made up, or one sided. Sometimes it just is what it is. Blaming them for the way they report it, or not liking their methods doesn't alter the fact, it can't always be made up.

Its typically shallow, and actually a somewhat Mailish to then drag Tommy Robinson in to then add some extra sauce to the reply, to then make people feel awkwardly aligned to him if they don't agree.

Poor form.

Made the bed now lay in it for me.

What do we have to gain vs what do we have to lose makes it a no brainer.

If they were still ‘winning’ their war or on top would she have wanted to come back for her child? No
Chance.

It sums up our country at the moment, we are torn and lost.

It is probabpy best if we don't start calling each other stupid.

I think she should be tried for the crimes she has committed, nothing more, nothing less
As a British citizen, she has the rights of a British citizen, whatever her religion, skin colour or beliefs.  I have not once said she should be forgiven, but she should have a fair trial and the evidence should be l presented if it is thought she has committed a crime.   She shouldn't be blamed for all the crimes of ISIS, just the ones she committed.  

At 15, she was a child under British law.   Do you think it is ok for a 25 year old to have sex with a 15 year old, as 15 is the new 25, or is it rape?  Should we have one law for her and one law for the Rochdale victims on this?   What do you think?

I'm guessing as I never called you stupid, in fact the complete opposite, you think I am?!!

Oh, the law is the law. Its still rape, but she knows that as well(as I said they appear to understand a lot more than a "naive" 15 year old), and has probably "facilitated" the act...probably.

I'm not sure why you bring the Rochdale victims into this. they didn't then all decide to go off to Syria in the glare of publicity. I also want the villans to be hung drawn and quartered(no doubt your punishment would be a short sentence, some rehab and back in society before Xmas....)

I'm not blaming her for the crimes of ISIS, but I would draw a comparison with knowing about the crimes and lifestyle of Fred and Rose West, and then deciding you want to go and live with them. It hardly paints a picture of good honest folk who may have been manipulated now does it.

We can go back to some of the Brexit type discusions and ask, do we leave people who have never been fighting for ISiS/helping them etc,on the streets, or give money and a home and benefits to a woman who has?

I noticied you didnt comment on my thoughts of you making Tommy Robinson comparisons.....

"people like Doobs are prepared to wrap stupidity..."   

The Rochdale victims were groomed into relationships with much older men in their early teens, so was she.  I am not saying they both went to Syria, just that they were all groomed and raped under British law.   It doesn't matter if a 15 year old "consented".   If you accept that, then you should see her as a rape and grooming victim, just like they were. 

She is clearly still pretty naive given some of the things she said in the interview, so it is pretty unlikely she fully understood what she was doing 4 years ago. 

I didn't comment on your Tommy Robinson comment, as comparing what I do to what the Mail does is so ludicrous that I didn't think it was worthy of comment. 

If it isn't clear after I have said it twice already, she should get a fair trial and whatever punishment befits the crimes she has committed; nothing more, nothing less.  We have anti-terrorism laws, and terrorists are not usually given rehab and are not usually back home for xmas. 

I think it’s quite a good message to send that if you align and travel to be with the ideology of ISIS you should never be let back into the UK or face maximum criminal sanctions if you do.

Quite frankly fk her or anyone like her, zero fks given from me.

Other people in this thread are where I would predict them. We hardly need to post, cos we all know each others' views. You're the one I'm surprised at - it's the first time I can remember strongly disagreeing with your opinion.

Not sure if you have heard but we do let British jihadists back into the country having being on the opposing side of the conflict.......many many of them without trial.

I'm guessing the minority on here dont have an issue with that either....

JRM:

The presumption of innocence until proved guilty must apply to her as it does to anyone else” @Jacob_Rees_Mogg tells @afneil about Shamima Begum who left the UK to join the Islamic State, but wants to return


https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1096045001119653893

The age of consent in Syria is 15

I just think that it would be too dangerous to allow her to come back. How do we know she is not going to assist terrorists or radicalise to others?

I don't think she would even consider returning if things hadn't gone pear shaped for her.

I get the fair trial argument but even if found guilty I think any sentence we might hand down would be far too lenient, i.e. 9 years, out on licence in 3.

I also think that allowing her back would outrage and insult all those who have fought against or been victims of terrorism and would provoke a backlash against innocent Muslims.

I am aware that this is not the stance I would usually take and I fully respect the opinions of those who disagree.

I reserve the right to change my mind as further details emerge.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47248555

Sajid Javid ‘If you have supported terrorist organisations abroad I will not hesitate to prevent your return’

‘We must remember that those who left Britain to join Daesh were full of hate for our country’

I don't disagree with most of it, except the conclusion. I'm not sure it is even possible to refuse her entry if she is a British citizen and doesn't also belong to any other country.

Her statements seem naive rather than evil (though that is not necessarily a comfort, as she may be malleable by those with evil intentions in the future). She could be a sleeper with a long-term mission, but so could thousands of others. So far as I know, we aren't aware that she has ever even committed any crime - her journey may have involved some minor transgression and her support for a terrorist group is a serious issue, but we don't know of her actively doing anything other than being married to someone who is actively involved.

If she does return it might be appropriate to put her on some kind of register so folk know where she lives like they do with sex offenders. The hand-wringing liberals may be aghast but what if you came home to find the head of a loved one in the dustbin and a non-plussed teen shrugging over the garden fence?

Luke 15: 11-32

Lets hope she ends up next door to YOU, then we shall see quite how liberal you are about her as your curtain twitches every time you see her and any visitor she might get.....

Rather simple don't you think?   I struggle to raise more than a shrug when the fate of "the beatles" is discussed, but there are going to be huge variations in the motivations of those going to Syria.   Some will genuinely believe they were going for humanitarian reasons, some went intent on killing infidels.   She is somewhere imbetween.  Dare say Javid knows this, but has to play to the audience, and just putting lefties in a bad spot. Sure he knows that we also release people who have killed others after a few years, and some of those are going to reoffend.

Extremely simple, fk her......

Would you?

She was 15 when she left, was (legally) raped, & has lost 2 children by the age of 19 due to malnutrition & illness, & is pregnant now. Her life is a total mess.

At what age do we cut her some slack due to immaturity & youth?

Dangerous, very dangerous precedents........

As much as I despise all that she has done and supported during the last few years one thing still nags at my conscience; she was only fifteen years old when she left for Syria, as were her two friends, and who knows if she was the driving force of the three or just persuaded to go along for the ride by one of the other two.

Of course the "heads in the dustbin" comment was chilling, but it was most probably an everyday event and normalized in that specific environment where brain-washing was constant and she was at a particularly impressionable age.

I do have some sympathy especially for her parents if they are peaceful law-abiding citizens, but I wouldn't fancy her moving in next door.

I doubt any of the three girls were the driving force. Those responsible here and abroad target specific types of people who are vulnerable and impressionable.

I have sympathy for her parents, i have some sympathy for her, but I don't think she should be allowed to return.

Surely anyone who has any connection to ISIS should never knowingly allowed into the country?

It isn't as simple as that. I could turn it on it's head and ask at what age is she not a threat to thousands of innocent people?

Has she shown contrition? No.
Has she condemned ISIS? No.
Did she put her children in harm's way? Yes.


Our actions have to have consequences. Not just as punishment but also as a deterrent.

Genuine question. Would you personally take responsibility for any harm she caused or facilitated if she were allowed to return?

it is hard..i can sympathise that she was a 15 year old kid and choices made at that age can be easily influenced.. should we punish her for the rest of her life for a choice made literally as a child ?.. i dread to think of the horrors etc she has witnessed and the loss of two kids already and not even 20... she has obv realised she was wrong... however she is obv deeply radicalised and could actually pose a threat even if its just trying to influence others with her views as she was influenced.. it is easy to say fuck her she made her choice..and part of me feels this way... but she was a kid who made a terrible choice.. does she deserve a second chance ?

This should not even be a discussion IMO. No matter how its wrapped up it was treacherous at the very least.

She has condemned ISIS, she said they were corrupt, there was so much oppression and they deserved to lose.

It isn't a genuine question.

If I ask it in isolation, will it be genuine then?

This.

But yes, don’t let them return.

Ok, so what part of joining ISIS was it she was hoping it was like, that we should all feel sorry for her here?

Did she not know or read they were terrorists and she wanted some?

Get a life people. Some mistakes are for life.

Sometimes today’s terrorists turn into tomorrow’s freedom fighters.

What has she actually done? She is guilty of going to live somewhere else. And tacitly approving of the actions of others. And that's it? That's what's so terrible? So far as we know, she hasn't planted any bombs, shot anyone, spread hate on the internet, distributed seditious material, attended any dodgy gatherings or taken part in any terrorist activity at all. The hate we have seen spread on the internet on this topic and others has been by hard-line inflexible nationalists who are more dangerous to our society than she is.

Another line of thought here, especially with the way IS twist peoples minds.

She will have been totally convinced that it was the west/UK that killed her 2 other children, our actions/bombs/soldiers or whatever will be wholly to blame. As a young lady of any mindset with this driven into you will make you full of hate and wanting revenge. Maybe not straight away but at some point she is going to want vengeance.

big leaps there.

She seems to have blamed lack of medical facilities and malnutrition.   So the West ckearly isn't wholly to blame, if at all.

Very few people ever take vengence to any ectent, whilst she may be more likely, that is a long way from where you are.

Would you personally take responsibility for every criminal.that is released from prison? Do you think we should release previous offenders from prison?

Guessing the answer is going to be no and yes, so the first question isn't a genuine attempt to finding the flaws in your answer to the second.   

I am not sure I'd be that bothered with her living next door.   I suspect the downsides will be mostly around other parties such as press and people who wish her harm, rather than her blowing up my kids.

second thoughts are sometimes best.

apologies to anyone who saw the first version

You can’t in all seriousness claim that a nationalist bigot posting some garbage on the internet is more dangerous to our society than someone who has integrated herself into a terrorist network.  It’s a laughable comment.

I'm starting to think your Mint Trav personna is a wind up.

What constitutes. A bad person in your eyes?

The very fact she sees heads in dustbin and it doesn't faze her, alarms me somewhat, or maybe thats just a day in the life of Mint Trav..

Just as much as we have no video of her involved in anything, do you think she went over there to bake cakes and sew their socks?

As I said, I hope they relocate these people next door to you,won't be so liberal then, I'm sure.

When you were 18, bet you liked to act hard too.   At 18, how many of us would say, ywah thing A scared the shit out of me?  There was a thread here the other week where some bloke was ridiculed fot crying or similar.   Sure we are all comditioned to show weakness.

It was likely a long interview, and this is the answer to one question.   

Supposedly the full interview
https://www.reddit.com/r/syriancivilwar/comments/aqozr4/shamima_begum_the_interview_in_full/

Of course I do. I am seriously concerned about the direction we are going. I don’t have many very right-wing friends on Facebook, for example, but there are a few and the hatred in the links they put up is undermining our society and has the potential to lead to violence. I think that thousands of bigots spoiling for trouble is hugely more dangerous than one individual who moved into a terrorist group but isn’t known to have actively participated in anything. Obviously, you don’t.

That’s a silly comment, akin to the silly ‘you’d feel different if it was your house they burgled / daughter they raped’ etc.

You are so alarmed that she wasn’t fazed and by what you have decided she might do that you wish to take action against her. We don’t punish people for what we believe they are thinking or what we think they might do.

If tree-hugging liberals take the line that adolescents such as this girl are impressionable they must accept that this country contains millions of impressionable youngsters. Thus the message we deliver here will have a much greater bearing on the direction of our society than some bigots on Facebook. Let's not forgot that this is a War on Terror and when at war it's often not plausible to dance around the camp-fire joining hands and singing kumbaya my lord.

You have two sides in any war and one of our own has decided to join the opposition who happen to be heinous, evil, barbarians who love nothing more than slaughtering our women and children. She's cool with beheading and has no regrets. The message that we welcome her back and our taxpayers cover all costs of her life and bringing up her child is pretty offensive, particularly to those service personnel who have had limbs blown off or heads hacked off. All those impressionable youngsters will see that it's fine to flip flop this way and that because the country will always be there to bail you out should your decisions prove unfruitful. You don't need to have regrets or recount your views, we will be there for you no matter what. Think that's a dangerous message to send to poor impressionable young folk really, there's stronger rhetoric on a packet of fags these days.

There's a chance she's a plant determined to blow herself up at Marylebone station or she'll influence others around her or she'll change her mind again and hate on the country or any number of scenarios. If any bad stuff happens how could the bleeding-heart liberals justify risking our safety? Cos of some comments on Facebook and people do stupid stuff sometimes? I repeat this is a war. And in it I just imagine liberals stumbling around the rubble in Syria with white linen suits, panama hats and MCC club ties proclaiming "I say chaps let's stick to the Queensbury rules here". As usual there's no place for liberal theoretical fantasies in the real world.     

Correct - obviously I think joining a terrorist group which cuts people's heads off is worse than an idiot posting links on facebook that might incite violence.  Still, I suppose you don't get to show your righteousness if you don't take absurd viewpoints, so I understand why you are doing it.

Why is it a silly comment?

I am sure your opinion would be completely different if she was relocated next door to you.

Lets be clear. We have no evidence of what she has done herself, but as I said before, if she had shown a desire to move in with Fred and Rose, what do you think her motives would be?

It is lily livered people like you that are more dangerous to society, shouting "fair play for all", because we have no evidence. Then in a another heartbeat, shouting about your rights to privacy because we then have to put cameras everywhere to then gain this evidence.

Think about the people you put at risk but suggesting she should be allowed home.

How would you feel if she did blow herself up in some shopping centre? Or would you just put that down to "expressing herself"

Its actually people like you that get people like me mad, not videos stoking up racial hatred. They are just fools. Its the creeping liberalism, that is the biggest danger to our safety.

I’ve seen the way the propaganda works and that’s what will have been driven into her 100%. If she’s blaming lack of medical etc even more of a red flag for me. They’ll have been told that the west has prevented medical supplies, they regularly get shown videos of hospitals being bombed etc to strengthen the commitment against the west.

I agree few people ever take vengeance to any extent but It only takes 1...

Here's Jacob Rees Mogg's take on it. It's only 1m 22 secs, so an easy watch.


https://twitter.com/KeejayOV2/status/1096183550410481667

I find it hard to look objectively at posts by woodsey and mantis when they so often include pointless insults like 'tree hugging liberal' or 'PC wanker'.

Even a great man like him can be wrong sometimes....

"tree-hugging liberals" is simply the opposite of "hard-line inflexible nationalists"

Why, do you think Liberals actually hug trees as opposed to nationalists actually being hard-line and inflexible?

It’s trying to frame the argument/discussion in a way that favours the the ignorant. Something like ‘don’t expect empirical evidence or knowledge to count for anything here’.

Do you think all patriotic folk are hard-line and inflexible?

Fair to say some are.

Fair to say some liberals hug trees.  

I'm not sure how watching JRM for longer than several seconds can ever be an easy watch.

"If tree-hugging liberals take the line that adolescents such as this girl are impressionable they must accept that this country contains millions of impressionable youngsters."

So are you only worried about the views of the Liberals who hug trees or is that aspect irrevevant?

it's humorous, so relevant with regard to the overall chortlements impact of the statement.

difficult to be objective with posters who take such frivolities literally like ;)

chortlements though.

Postman Pat sums it up pretty well, imo.

Ah, the, "I was only joking" defence.

In that case, I refer you to my original statement.


http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=68377.msg2248767#msg2248767

I’m sure that some will find it difficult to watch. I wouldn’t want to have to live next door to those who disagree with him as strongly as some of the seemingly alt-right sympathisers who post here.

The Blonde alt-right truly are extraordinary. Anyone who says British and international law should be applied is lily livered. The man delivering the message is afraid of 19 year old girls from Bethnal Green. He also thinks people saying something and people thinking something is the same thing.

If you say seeing a severed head in a bin is no biggie...How likely is it that you actually think that? Does saying it make it more or less likely that you actually think it? (It’s nuanced this one)

Adz is an interesting one, ranges between: “I know nothing about anything”, it’s hard to dislike anyone who judges the appropriate level of their own humlility that well. We then get to hear that he knew exactly (in some respects) what was going on in the head of a 15 year old girl 4 years ago.

I don't claim to know what was going on in her head. But its pretty bloody obvious!!

She didn't go over there for a holiday, thinking England is a wonderful place and I leave here wishing the best for all her citizens, while I pop over to Syria and do some baking, whilst I pop out a few kids for some gun toting maniac who believes his god(one of thousands)is the one true god and has convinced him that killing everyone that doesn't believe in his god should die....

Or was she thinking something else, and she is now no longer a risk to society over here?



Anyway, lets forget about what she thinks or thought.

How do you think the people in this country who have lost family to the actions of ISIS would feel if we took this idiot back and stuck her in a nice council house, and gave her the usual set of benefits we seem do happy to "dole" out?

We don’t know and we have no meaningful info to help us guess. It’s the sort of spot where I like to look for more information.

True dat.

I remember JCorbs needing more meaningful info before condemning Russia over the Skripal poisoning.

Them poor fellas on the telly were clearly simple tourists enjoying the delights of Salisbury's 123m spire.

It’s just the thick British tabloid narrative vs empirically evidenced information. I’ll go back to not posting. If you ever realise how dumb you are, you’ll look back fondly on spots like this :-).

Not saying I cited any evidence (empirical or otherwise) today.

So you don’t know what was going on in her head, but then tell us it’s obvious what she was thinking.

Have you listened to Rees-Moggs answer from QT? Can you give a reasoned response as to why the approach he espoused is wrong?

She said in the interview that she went expecting to share a house with her friends; I think that was what was said at the time too.  We have little way of knowing how she went from that to marrying a stranger in 3 weeks.  We simply don't know what choices she really had. 

Before she left she was doing well at school; so I guess she isn't your typical school drop out heading for a life on the dole.  We just don't know right now.   

I can't be sure right now, but wasn't it you that acknowledged there were hundreds of people who likely fought in Syria that are walking free in this country.   Surely Sajid Javid should be focusing on them and not a new mother stuck in Syria that is likely to have never taken part in combat.   But politics, meh.

"There was a difference between the person running round northetn Iraq with a kalasnikov and three schoolgirls who had been duped into travelling to Syria"

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11461693/Sisters-of-the-missing-jihadi-brides-to-face-radicalisation-tests.html (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11461693/Sisters-of-the-missing-jihadi-brides-to-face-radicalisation-tests.html)

Remorse is a powerful tool in achieving forgiveness for ones actions...

I think the original point should really be the key point - What has she actually done?

The assumption should always be innocent until proven guilty. If she is a British citizen and she has broken any laws then she should be prosecuted and put on trial for them.

I have read elsewhere that the ISIS Brides were very valuable to their cause, there is at least a reasonable chance she has broken some laws; but if that is the case it's the rule of law that should be paramount.

You liberals just keep picking the bits that that you pull a few holes in but NEVER answer the big ones.

What do you think she went there for? What were her motives?

Knowing that she knew what we do, they surely weren't good intentions.

What do the families of those killed by ISIS feel. Should we put their feelings behind those of an idiot that went and wants to come back?

Please DOOBS/KUSH/TRAV/POPS stop picking your spots and answer the above. The bits that DO matter.

I don't know her motives, and neither do you, they were more likely to be religious than any intention of killing.  Many people don't think my way, your way, or the way we expect.

I expect many of those families want to see justice against their killers and not against some random that wasn't involved.  But that isn't a universal reaction.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/17/peter-kassigs-parents-statement-beheading-isis (https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/17/peter-kassigs-parents-statement-beheading-isis)

I think his parents showed enormous courage in the circumstances; there are many different ways to be brave.

Why are you against her coming back and facing a fair trial?

The problem with your questions are......they’re all things we don’t and can’t know. You like a guess though...and astoundingly, every time you guess, you guess the answer that is what you thought you already knew. So your guesses have no value.

I’m sure we all sympathise with any ISIS associated deaths.

At times like this we just need a good night out and some beauty

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbMG1v7qDqs

You have already answered that. Principally because we have no evidence of what she did or didn't do.

For the third time though, if you decide you want to go and live with killers and people who hate our way of life and have publicly stated they want us all dead, there comes a time you HAVE TO make some assumptions. It wasn't to make a frigging documentary.

Why waste any more tax payers money on her? Be that a trial or prison, and the cushy conditions that will inevitably go with it....

As someone that still believes in the death penalty, I doubt we are ever going to reach a mid point in our way of thinking....

Do you ever say thing sort of stuff to people in real life? I suspect not as you would have been filled in numerous times already  rotflmfao rotflmfao

I prefer to gather more information before making guesses about the IQ of people

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8440810/isis-british-family-syria-holiday-return/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1550311803

Hate when this happens

Playing devil's advocate here somewhat, but has the religious aspect been slightly overlooked here?

The idea of living in an ultra-orthodox caliphate might well have been a key selling-point in persuading deeply religious Muslims to travel to Syria.

Can a 15yr old be said to hold their own deeply religious views? The sense that these young people have been groomed and manipulated is very real.
We probably all held beliefs at 15 that we now see as being wrong. Even BigArz probably had some socialist tendencies in his teens.

We should continue to demonstrate our tolerance and to act as an example of all that is good in Western society. How else can we overcome the excessively intolerant nature of the ‘ultra-orthodox caliphate’.

I’m not suggesting that any specific individual should avoid investigation and possible prosecution for their actions btw. Just saying that before we exile this British citizen we better make damn sure that we have both a good reason for doing so, and a legal framework that allows us to do so.

The young lady is no longer pregnant - she has given birth to the child.

That'll mean a council-house then.. ;hide;

Her parents have already said that they want  her and the baby back at their home.

It's alright Dodgy Dave. Let's all get blown up before we judge anyone.

Quick enough to judge people on here, but prepared to see the best in an ISIS girl.

Says it all really

37 people killed by terrorists in our country since 2010. You do seem overly worried about us all being blown up.

https://fullfact.org/health/austerity-120000-unnecessary-deaths/ (https://fullfact.org/health/austerity-120000-unnecessary-deaths/)

Kush, you’ll be telling us that a democratically elected UK government is a bigger threat than ISIS next.

The document Kush posted stated in the opening paragraphs that the findings should be viewed with caution as no link had been proven.

I stopped reading at that point to be honest.

Seems odd to stop reading there. How will you get to know more? We measure people killed by terrorists in tens, we measure people killed by austerity in tens of thousands, the article is only pointing out that it’s hard to pinpoint how many tens of thousands.

No link being proven is obviously laughable, as discussed ad nauseam previously. If we doubt that, let’s try not having doctors/ambulances/hospitals/environmental regulation/police/fire service etc. We might save money....

The problem with a ‘threat’ is it means we have to predict the future, we’re all terrible at that. We could just count how many of our citizens they killed, even allowing for the inevitable gross inaccuracies, it’s interesting.

Ah yes, austerity. Forced upon us because of the Viv Nicholson Labour govt that you so cherish.

This isn't about austerity. Yes we understand the issues, and yes, probably far more people have been lost to it. However not because anyone WANTED to kill them.

You moan about me suggesting how people feel. It's no different to you quoting articles with no substance.

I don’t and never have cherished any government. What a strange thing to say.

The article linked contradicts my point, whilst also acknowledging the obvious truth of the massive numbers of austerity related deaths. Are we saying they didn’t know decimating public services would kill loads of people? Seems weird that they didn’t think of it, it’s kind of important.

Direct and indirect.

I have had to cut peoples salary before and hoped they could adjust to make things work. If they suffered, it was not intentional, but as a result of other factors out of my control.

I have never gone out to kill someone because they don't believe in the same things I do.

The amount of people actually killed by terrorists is a weird way to measure the threat of terror. Think we probably need to include all the foiled attempts and ongoing plots to gain an accurate appraisal. Actually if you consider how much dollar we spend on intelligence and preventative measures battling terror it would be a big boost to social services if funds were diverted. So I guess dealing with this troublesome ISIS sympathiser alone will cost needy families vital support. Buy hey we don’t know that she’s actually cut heads off so no worries.

Our Governments might make a complete pigs ear of things, do things we don’t like etc but they are elected by us in a democratic process.

ISIS however want to end of way of life, culture and democracy by any means.

You see what happens when they get some power - the outcome is horrific.

Implying some sort of comparison between the direct deaths from ISIS attacks and austerity is misguided and unnecessary IMO.

It is a good comparison, people are terrible at relative risks.   People losing their minds over this young woman, and people just shut kukushkin down over the link between austerity and the mortality rate.   The diesel/death link is pretty strong too, and I drive one.

Anyway, moving on.

There is a ten minute sky news interview with her on youtube.  I am on my phone and was defeated putting a link up.   I guess it could ve linked to me been unable to see any youtube link on my phone.

Amyway, it is an interesting watch.  She doesn't look in a good way mentally, but I expect that could just as easily be explained by a very recent birth.   She doesn't come across as some entitled young person just expecting a council house.   

It would be good if someone could put it up.

The interview can tug on my heartstrings all you like.

A line in the sand has to be drawn or suddenly it will be ok to join ISIS safe in the knowledge good old soft touch Blighty will let us back....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWcJHxmXD1Q

Just watch the bloody thing before commenting.

It isn't an interview that makes her look good.

I suspect the lines of people wanting to join ISIS in Syria right now will be pretty short.

I took my time in forming my opinions on people here. Gathered a lot of evidence via their posts and made a judgement about them.
There are a lot of folks here with whom I would happily sit and debate the issues of the day, despite our having different views.

Mantis, Doobs, Kukushkin all seem like the type of guy you can disagree with without animosity. MintTrav I know to be a genuine top guy who just has a misguided view on the EU (that is, for clarity, a JOKE)

Did you know what Islamic State were doing when you left for Syria? Because they had beheaded people. There were executions.

Yeah, I knew about those things and I was okay with it. Because, you know, I started becoming religious just before I left.

From what I heard, Islamically that is all allowed. So I was okay with it.

You didn't question that?

No, not at all.



She sounds great, bring her back

I think you missed the point Doobs.

Whilst the number of people killed directly by ISIS is low, the threat to our way of life, values and democracy by ISIS if unchecked is infinitely more important than the effects of the policies of a democratically elected government.

It would be interesting to know what you thought ISIS was actually going to do to threaten our way of life, values, democracy. Also I have no idea why it’s infinitely more important. One might kill people in large numbers, the other does. Why does it matter if we voted for it?

I kind of worded that wrong ^^, obviously ISIS isn’t going to kill British citizens in anything other than tiny quantities.

Just watched that SKY interview.

Hard to be sympathetic for her, tbh. Even after being given the opportunity to show some contrition and remorse, she still manages to come across as a desperate teen who simply realises that she's screwed up, big time, but hasn't the intelligence to disguise a transparent, self-serving "after all I've been through, I think I deserve a bit of sympathy" plea. She chooses to state that there's no proof that she's guilty of wrong-doing, rather than unequivocably stating that she was innocent of any bad deeds. She declares that all the online videos about ISIS were what impelled her to travel there - presumably the videos included the beheadings, execution by immolation and executions of homosexuals by throwing them off buildings: no real mention of religious purity. Despite all this, she claims she didn't know what she was getting into. I also noted that things only got notably tough for her "when we lost Raqqah"; a little slip in the cover story.

But then none of this is an excuse for leaving them at the mercy of the conditions in the refugee camp.

The law is such that she retains her UK citizenship, so if she can enlist the services of journos and family members to get her to the nearest consulate, then bring her back here. Let the due process of the law take its course. It's likely that there's a number of offences that she could be charged under; theft, travelling under false documentation, membership of a terrorist organisation and possibly more. Let the security services debrief her to determine whether she has any useful intelligence to reveal. And then let social services decide whether she is fit to keep her child in the event that she doesn't end up doing time in prison.

It's another shit-storm we could have done without, really. The last thing we need is another hugely divisive issue such as this.

All the above solutions are yet another drain on our resources, which will in turn see thousands more die in Kushs austerity driven UK in 2019 though......

Absolutely true. This whole storm-in-a-teacup is a joke when you consider that dozens of similar women and hundreds of men have already returned from ISIS and have carried on with their lives in Britain without any of this.

Sounds like we need a culling team!  ;snoopy'sguns;

ISIS ambitions were way beyond Iraq and Syria.

They wanted to destroy western civilisation.

You might laugh at that and say that’s a crazy statement but it’s true.

Wasn’t that long ago we saw a German state killing 6 million Jews.

Yes. I have watched the bloody thing. Thanks for wasting 7 minutes.

Still feel exactly the same.

People should have sympathy for me I didn't know what I was getting into......

Oh well.

It's fair to say we all want to promote religious tolerance and mutual respect in this country. It's also fair to say genuine Muslims have suffered because ISIS terror is carried out in their name.

Do you think hundreds of ISIS associated Muslims mixing freely in our society helps that situation? Do you think British people being wary of Muslims carrying rucksacks at the train station would be justified when say thousands of ISIS Muslims are in our midst? You guys talk about Facebook bigots destabilising our society but kinda ignore the effect on society and particularly the image of Muslims this strategy creates. Can't see the benefit to anybody really.

The truth of Godwin’s Law is confirmed once more. I’m surprised we got to page 8 given the starting point.

What does a Muslim carrying a rucksack at a train station look like?

A bit like a Catholic Brazilian electronics engineer.

Follow the arrows...

History is what it is.

Throughout history, there are plenty of examples of dictatorships and extremists running contries and much worse.

Nazi Germany was just a more recent extreme version.

For us to assume we are immune from such extremists is naive.

You are invoking the nazis whilst trying to strip her of her citizenship? 

Bang out of order Doobs - I have not once commenting on the girl or what to do with her.

Re-read the thread - I expected better from you. Dont tar me with the same brush as others when I've not even commented on her.

If you want my take, I dont think we have a choice but to let her return if she wants to but put her on trial for whatever laws she has broken.

I've been thinking about this for a couple of days and this is the conclusion I've come to too.

Sorry Rick, I was mistaken.  It was a genuine mistake.

TBH after reading the Sky interview, she made me feel a bit uneasy.

I do believe when she left she was a naive 15  year old child, conditioned into a certain way of thinking. I dread to think of the life she has experienced in the years since and her mindset must be completely alien now.

However she is a British citizen and I believe we have allowed far worse back into this country with nothing akin to this controversy. The government needs to intervene, interview and come to a choice and put a stop to all the assuming and public courts.

From everything I have seen,read, listened to etc, the majority of people in this country don't want her allowed back in.

We all know what happens when there is a majority these days.....

Whining from sanctimonious lefties?

A People's Vote?

No, just whining to get one......  ;danafish;

I’m sure that the membership of the Little Sodoff Golf and Country Club are all but unanimous in their view. Equally certain is that the Mail and Express subscribers will be alongside you too.

The majority of people in this country though? Not so sure about that. Maybe we should hold a referendum?

The lilly livered do goodering Liberals in the country are in a minority on this, but shout the loudest about fairness, give her a chance etc.

Well....since her little baby has been born, she hasn't called it Dopey David, or Mark, Tony etc. No she has called it Jarrah. Apparently a very unusual Muslim name, so one that had to be researched I'd guess, or talked about in her enclave on a regular basis.

Jarrah was a jihadi warlord from back in the midsts of time who massacred Jews.

From what I gather, its pretty much the same as calling your kid Hitler/Goebells/Mussolini/Stalin etc....

Clearly she has learnt her lesson and STILL some idiots want to give her a second chance.

I am so glad I don't have children and have to explain to them that some people in this country continually want to give these people second chances, despite all the evidence presented to them.

"no, no, its what makes us better than them" Idiots.

I despair.

The lefties are lily livered  here?   You are the one who is so scared of this woman that you won't let her in the country, not I.

And here you again labelling us idiots, after calling me stupid the other day.  Just stop it.

Of course, she didn't say why she called him that name.  Even if we are assuming it was after this man, then maybe it wasn't because he massacred jews?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Jarrah_ibn_Abdallah (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Jarrah_ibn_Abdallah)

It looks like he fought some battles, some which were against jews, which is no surprise given where he lived.   Funny how The Sun describes this man vs against how they describe Churchill.   Can you imagine them writing "He named his son Winston after a man who massacred thousands of civilians in the Ruhr valley, tens of thousands in Dresden, starved millions of Indians to death and was complicit in nuking hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese?"   

So it is not really the same as calling your kid Hitler; but maybe if she'd called him Osama...

I don't think anyone here would want a country full of people like her, or see much likeable in her, but she is a UK citizen and she has the same rights as you.

It truly makes me mad that we let these people return after showing such evil intentions. If you live such a coseted life the closest you can associate with what these people might perpetrate is via an episode of 24, then more fool you.

Yes. I am scared of her. I don't want to go to a concert, or footy match etc and feel unsafe, do you?

She is hardly going to tell us why she has named him thus, but I think it's a pretty fair assumption, don't you really?

To be honest, if i acted the way she had, regardless of the law, I wouldn't expect to be welcomed back, no. We, or some of us, moan about austerity, but these type of people cause part of the drain on resources, but that seems to be ok to you. Wasnt her Father also a returning jihadi? Do we learn nothing?


As previous.

What do you say to the families of the people who have been killed by people with her beliefs then Doobs?

I suspect you don't know any, or have any returning jihadis living next door, to be quite so easy going.


I'm not going to run through the posts, but I suspect those of you that are so keen to see 'fair play', as you see it, done, are probably part of the same bunch that say we didn't know what we were doing when we voted for Brexit, and so we should all vote again?

Hmm

Well, speaking for myself, your suspicions are, once again, inaccurate.

By the way, given the comparatively small number of people killed by terrorists in this country it’s unlikely that any of us know any families affected by it. We’re also very unlikely to have a returning jihadi living next door for much the same reason.

When she returns and gets convicted of offences, even minor ones, she will never be able to travel anywhere outside the country again.

If she fancies a bit of pokers in Vegas, or taking in a performance of Puccini's Madam Butterfly at the Sydney Opera House or dabbling in some white-water kayaking in New Zealand she won't be able to. They'll take one look at her application for a visa and say firmly NOPE. We don't want your type in our country. What's wrong with every civilised country in the world? So judgemental, so barbaric, they should give her a second chance.

Yup. Very NIMBY.

Just remember someone has to live next door to her though.......stick to my "principles", as long as it aint me eh.......

Interesting thread.

Guess Bigadz if it was your daughter who’d be groomed by Muslims you’d have exactly the same view. She made her bed- let her rot?

Given various bits of news recently, a decent interval a d a better understanding of the overall position it's easy to take a more rational  view . It looks pretty likely that we will have to bring quite a few people back here that are currently detained over there. I wouldn't be in favour of making any special arrangements to bring this specific lady back but it's pretty clear that we would have to deal with her under law if she showed up.

If she doesn't show up under her own steam then it would seem to make sense to bring her back at a time when we will be bringing back quite a few people that are likely to be considerably more of a threat

I have never had kids for 2 reasons.

Mainly too selfish with my own time, but because I still believe in some fairly draconian principles, that sadly have been lost in today's society.

All are based around being a good citizen then no one can touch you.

No. I would wash my hands of her and not just change my opinion because she was my kid.

i feel we need to let her back and put her on trial for any crimes she may of committed, more importantly for myself is that the child is placed in care in a different family and his true identity is hidden obviously something happened in either this 15 year old girls family or social circle that allowed this to happen and every step needs to be taken to make sure it doesn't happen again as whoever influenced the young girl will certainly have an agenda to do the same with this innocent child.

Can tell you’ve not got kids. You can’t just wash your hands of your own flesh and blood.

Point is I get the concerns over security but can’t help but feel is this was a white girl who had been groomed by Muslim men things would be different.

Oh FFs, here we go

What a load of horse poop, I washed my hands of a brother for way less in the blink of an eye.....

I can also think of at least 4 people that have washed their hands of a child, one of them a pair of twins, once again for less than is the situation here.

Well played.  Wonder how the public would feel about a Muslim girl groomed by white terrorists?   Doubt the racist thickits could compute that one eh?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-6718019/Dont-let-women-wedded-terror-come-home.html

Woodsey and Adz could easily ghost for Piers. 

As expected

The crime of deserting your country and joining the opposition who kill your innocent citizens is a race issue how? I’d say it’s the same crime whatever the colour of your skin. Some posters are so racialist imo.

The handling of it by the media would be completely different

I pointed out how The Sun described the Muslim war hero earlier.   You find me a Sun story where they describe Churchill in a similar way then we'll believe there isn't no racism in the reporting of this.

bumped for Adz who missed me answering his question before

Liberals always pour scorn on what the Sun writes as utter bollox

Now they refer to said utter bollox to validate a faux point.

It’s not a race issue no matter what The Sun report.

If something is bollox it’s bollox.

So the actual point we’re establishing here is what’s in The Sun is bollox. Well done everybody. Next case.

Take away the number you first thought of..

Had to switch off after this.

Its very easy to play race card to these days when you can't/won't understand another point of view, and hope everyone is too scared to argue in case they get further tainted.

Sorry. What exactly do you think would be different? That we would be saying "poor girl, come on home and all is forgiven?"

I know it was a long time ago but that is almost exectly what happened to Patty Hearst.

I think I'm on your side in this in principle, although I do believe that we have to allow her back at the end of the day. After all, she's a Brit, it's our mess, we have to take responsibility)

However, you seem to think that people who don't agree with you "can't/won't understand another point of view"

Well I'm sure George and everyone else understands your point of view, they just don't agree.

It would be just as easy for them to say you don't/won't understand theirs.

I understand your point, but I think we both know it's not really about the agreeing with a principle or not, its the dragging the race card out when we don't agree that I disapprove of and was trying to make a point about in this instance.

Is it me, or does that have absolutely nothing to do with what I said?

Just said on the news they are stripping her of British citizenship

Wow!

I'm really surprised. I didn't think we would make anyone stateless.

Wow, just wow, if true.


(http://i.imgur.com/86fvmOn.jpg) (https://imgur.com/86fvmOn)

Great news

Racist!  rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao  ;)

I’ve already said I can see both viewpoints several times. For me whatever decision is taken it’s not easy.

My view is if this was a young white woman who was radacalised and her parents were pleading for her return the view from the public would be more balanced

I wouldn’t, I’d fuck her off just as quickly, a traitor is a traitor no matter what colour you are.

I ampleased the government is telling her to do one but I suspect they may lose a long drawn out appeals process of whether they are able to leave someone stateless.

Her husband is Dutch, they might want her

Won't be able to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights tho.

Another advantage of Brexit.   

Why are people so pleased; if the Government thinks it is ok to render her stateless, they also think it is OK to render you stateless?  

Is nobody worried that our elected home secretary has so little regard for the law?  

She really seems a strange person to break the precedent on.   There are far worse people in our prisons.  Do we deprive them of UK citizenship too?  

And maybe, just maybe, there are still some people who believe the Conservatives have good intentions; what happens when this new power is in the hands of someone who we don't trust?  

If you don't join ISIS you should be ok tho

All a bit odd though. According to the reports the Home Secretary wrote to the parents and asked them to let her know.

Is this the way we do things now?

Plus, this

Having made such a contemptible mess of Brexit, they need to pander to the far right more than ever. This is ideal for that.

It’s a truly extraordinary decision, if she doesn’t get interviewed in the camp by The Times, she in all likelihood comes home with a minimum of fuss. Now she’ll be the first ever to have their nationality rescinded. My first assumption was that she’d be coming home to face charges/potential incarceration. Seems like a very good chance she hasn’t broken a law of any consequence though. This government has done some extraordinary things, loads of it against the grain of so much of the progress of the last 75 years.

Need to read more but may not be breaking the law and would guess that the decision makers in this case would think they are on pretty certain ground

"In January 2014, the Immigration Bill 2013–14 was introduced to extend the powers of the Home Secretary to declare certain terrorism suspects stateless. The bill was initially blocked by the House of Lords in April 2014.[105] However, the Lords reconsidered their decision in May 2014, and the bill returned to the House of Commons before being set into UK law"

Someone else has already said that they base their opinions & views on facts rather than speculation, so I’ll just repeat that for the record. We don’t know the full facts behind the decision, but we DO know that she’s married, and that her husband is of Dutch origin. We also know that she’s of Bangladeshi heritage, but that she’s never been there. In neither case is she prevented from applying for a passport under those nationalities.

We also now know that the 1981 British Nationality Act is the legal basis of her UK nationality being rescinded; where the person has dual nationality, this law has been invoked in more than 100 other cases. The source is the BBC’s website.

Nonetheless, I too am surprised at the decision, and ambivalent about the consequences.

Over 400 men and women have been allowed to return and reintegrate into society after varying amounts of questioning/deradicalisation/prosecution, but our glorious government decides to make an example of one person. Irrespective of whether the decision is wrong, it is certainly inconsistent, and that is wrong.

The best I can say about Javid is that he is an opportunist picking on an easy target.

Of course that doesn't mean they are not pandering to the masses or, as Doobs points out, making a weird stand on this case versus many others they could or should have made a stand on.

Thanks for the info and clarification. Stretched for time atm and taking some information second hand on trust.

The last sentence sums up my view really - I try to find compassion but if I'm honest ambivalence is the best I can muster.

I'm obviously indifferent to mass suffering around the world in any kind of meaningful way as I stay here in my safe european home and do nothing of consequence to reduce suffering. A single radicalised, groomed, non repatriated refugee who doesn't get an easy passage back, who is being fed and watered in a camp that, to my knowledge, isn't being bombed daily isn't really going to make me lose sleep or protest the Government's stance on this.

Also don't feel so sentimental about death as many seem to - if she died over there I 'd just go and make a cup of tea I imagine and perhaps shake my head a little bit while drinking it but I wouldn't actually feel anything other than an urge to write a post that I didn't actually feel anything

We were obviously slow off the mark. Hopefully a precedent has now been set and we do the same with many of these people who have betrayed the UK. Filthy traitors need slinging out, let’s not waste money putting them in prison.

You make a good case for the renewed scrutinisation of others that have already returned and I hope the ones that deserve it get their due comeuppance for betraying the UK.

A couple of my mates are proper Labourites, and one even admits to voting Liberal, but they seem quite pleased to hear this too. Not just us Hitler Youth Kush....

I for one am very happy. As Mantis says, I have no great design to align myself to terrorists, so I feel quite calm about it.

The reality is we should have done more sooner, and changed the law long ago. I'm just glad for once Tommy common sense has prevailed. IMHOOC

You mentioned the T word, now you’re fucked Adzy  rotflmfao

Yo propaganda is a common tool in a war

So sure it's inconsistent and sure without all the publicity rah de rah but that's the very point

Now this is a well publicised case we can use it to our advantage by promoting this harsh lesson to millions of observers, hey look folks we don't high-five traitors who join evil terror groups

The desired effect is a big deterrent to many other potential crazies and many innocent lives saved.

Sorry that the looney lefties want to ditch this valuable propaganda and all it's benefits so the human rights of the individual terrorist are protected but hey ho.

You seem to misunderstand every single post. They (the government) are pandering to the far right, that doesn’t mean you are far right. It also doesn’t mean people with largely respectable political views won’t also think it’s good idea, hopefully only a small number of them though.

Since then several have had their UK citizenship revoked.   But until today, they were all dual nationals.   I am not saying I agree with those either, just in case people read it that way.

Rendering someone stateless breaks international law.

Just add for those who think you have to be a terrorist for the home secretary to revoke your citizenship:

What happens if the next home secretary is Jeremy Corbyn; who does he see as enemies of the state?  

What happens if the next coalition includes Sinn Fein, and as part of the power sharing agreement, they get home secretary.  

These are not far fetched, "what could happen in 50 years time?" type scenarios.

Funny that not wanting traitor terrorists milling around our society is far right politics now, lolz

Glad she didn’t pretend to have regrets and get back in to the country

It nearly goes without saying but nobody said that and I doubt anyone thinks it.

Whataboutery lolaments  rotflmfao

Do you ever make any decisions in work or life or do you constantly stall it based on the gazillion things that could but probably won’t happen? 50 years? (Brexit aside)  :o

Fuck me paraysis by analysis........

I think it's been clarified that they think she has dual nationality - although I have seen some legal twitterers say a lot of what has been done doesn't seem quite right, so there is a chance that some of it has been misrepresented and a chance this will all fail on appeal.

Yes, I noted that all the revokees so far were dual nationals but I couldn't figure out the tension (or not) between our law set down in the act mentioned and any international convention that we are signatories to. It's some good academic interest stuff for me though.

I don't think I'm naive but I trust our Government not to go mad and I don't envisage us becoming Stalinist in deeds even if we voted in a Tankie - just totally unsustainable here

Was talking about this earlier with my wife - got to be the most poorly advised/helped person ever.

One minute of , I was 15, radicalised, and I'm terribly sorry about the choices I made and she would have been on the next plane

She won't be able to return upon appeal because don't forget after Brexit EU flights won't be able to use our airspace and all the ports will be total gridlock.

Also medical supplies and baby formula will be unavailable.

So unless the child eats tinned peaches she prob have a better standard of life back in Syria.

 ;applause;

I try not to make any decusions at work that break the fucking law.   I think that is a pretty low bar for showing I am competent at what I do.

Home secretaries must not need to show competence to keep their jobs?  Won't be surprised if Grayling gets it in the reshuffle.

Well yes, but an experienced journalist working an angle/agenda versus what is clearly a not terribly bright and (arguably) naive 19 year old is no contest, and was always going to end badly for her.

Indeed.  When I see Doobs, Cuckoo and Mint squealing it just affirms I am comfortable with the Government decision as a rationale decent middle of the road citizen.

Yup fair shout  ;hattip;

Yep, without thinking it would get to this point i was pondering the pretty sick nature of the journalism in this case a couple of days ago.

If you are right and you might be, the middle of the road is much further right than it used to, we should all be ashamed that we let that happen.

Nope, middle of the road is where it's always been, just JCorbs with his terror sympathiser racialist ways has dragged the left way left

I'm a bit older than you and in the 60s/70s/80s even - the middle of the road was much, much (and one more much) further right than it is now. One of the huge mistakes of the left (imho) is to brand fairly mainstream views as right wing. It's become pretty meaningless and is much more to do with left wing dogma than where the right is.

I definitely think you have a point but it gets a little bit lost in the fact that Britain was very racist and intolerant through that period. We had to move on from that, often, it seems some people want to go back.

What becomes of her days old son - does he remain a British citizen?

He isn't one, but could become one in more normal times

If you are born abroad, you are not automatically a British citiizen.   I worked with a person who decided with his wife (both British citizens) to have their baby in the land of their parents.   I don't know if it is resolved yet, but suspect they should have done some better research.

He’s going to grow up to despise this country

This was exactly my take on two interviews. In the first meeting with The Times' Anthony Loyd she could not really have been prepared at all with the 'right answers', although his questions were leading enough for her to arrive at them if she'd taken his implied direction. By the time she met the SKY broadcaster, you'd think she'd have realised what she needed to say to gain some measure of public sympathy here. Then again, I guess high quality PR advisers are a little thin on the ground in Syria's refugee camps. I felt that the SKY interviewer tried really hard to get her to show remorse and contrition, but she completely failed to spot his leading questions. Shows how mentally drained she must be.

Those were the days.

No Kush. YOU don't understand MY post.

You say that we are pandering to the far right, is an absolute load of bollocks. Men and Women and probably trans people of all colours and creed and political views have been saying she shouldn't be allowed to come back. Its general weight of opinion, not just the far right. That was my point.

And this is the point where, when I used to respect what you say, I have lost any respect for you.

I definitely think you have a point but it gets a little bit lost in the fact that Britain was very racist and intolerant through that period. We had to move on from that, often, it seems some people want to go back.


We are now so tied up with, Can't say this, cant say that, how can you possibly make such a daft statement? There maybe some push back in certain quarters, but I see instances every day of people who agree with insensitive statements on a range of topics, but still raise their eyebrows when someone else says it, such is the nature of the PC world we live in now  We are actually going the other way and it feels we are having the right to have strong opinions knocked out of us, if anything.

I do wonder what sort of environment you live and work in to think that agreeing to stop this girl makes us all far right wingers?

You do misunderstand. I said the government are pandering to the far right. That does not mean that it is my opinion (this should be more obvious than it appears to be) that everyone who agrees with their decision is aligned or associated with the far right.

I live in a small Herts village, I work for the government and I socialise mostly in London. I don’t think any of that prohibits me from being a good judge of government behaviour and where certain actions sit on the political spectrum.

From everything you write it’s absolutely clear to me that what you think is far right is probably more centre right. You are just so far left that your opinion is completely skewed.

She struck me as a classic sociopath in her interview, kind of the perfect target for stuff like this...

It's a totally miserable situation I can't come to an opinion on it, on the one hand you have someone who has actively supported and i imagine contributed to serious terrorism, for whom is going to cost a lot of money to take care off...

Then on the other hand you have a heavily pregnant 19yr old girl, who will be left in possibly the most dangerous place in the world. Part of the UKs ideology is that won't happen to UK citizens...

its horrible, makes me so sad there is enough hate in the world that this stuff can happen.

I kinda feel like the greater good might be to refuse here, set a precedent that might need setting. Politically its another impossible spot, I hate Theresa May and think this government is horrible but fuck they have run pretty terrible.

Nah. I didn't misunderstand. Nothing to misunderstand. Are you saying Sadiq listened to a Tommy Robinson video and made this decision? That is the implication. Not that he listened to the massive general outpuring of anger that we could fall for the pathetic cat calls of a horrible human being, now trying to get the best for herself.

Pretty foolish if it is, and thats the way it read.

Reality is the far left under JCorbs is the current danger regrading racism.

Has there been a massive general outpouring though?

You have the usual media whipping up a frenzy, you have the usual Facebook fakenews, funnies, nutters.

You have some politicians trying to use it to their advantage.

I refuse to believe that any of that represents many people in this country.

How balanced. Like most things the reality of the specific situation becomes a sideshow to the main event of 2 tribes lining up against each others views and approaches.

When I have mates that don't even tell you which way they vote on election day, suddenly set wots app on fire with talk of it. Its a pretty good gauge.

The fact that so many people are on Social media, again gives a pretty good marker to the general tones.

The fact we have more than a few pages, tells a story etc etc etc.

How many people have to be on the news for it to be a story that we as a nation have an opinion on?

With your ability to discern a person’s political position from their contribution to a poker forum i’m sure you don’t need your mates to tell you how they voted. Although given your mis-call on mine maybe you do.

Regardless, Facebook and WhatsApp aren’t the place for a genuine appraisal of the public mood.

No you're correct.

Too many loud mouths liberals give the impression they have greater numbers on their side..... ;D

Now normally I would agree about being too reliant on Soc Med not being a good basis to gauge opinion.

However, I have just read a Telegraph post about the latest Interview with our poor victim.

254 comments, and NOT ONE, showing any sign of disagreeing with her treatment. Some astonished, but not critical of what has happened. NOT ONE.

I would humbly suggest you get a mixture of strong enough views that even those with some sympathy towards her would raise their head. But no, so far not one.

To me, that suggests in this case our interpretation of the nations mood is pretty spot on, and those on here, are in a very small minority thinking she should be wasting taxpayers money getting a well deserved trial etc....

I think easiest thing now is for someone with a Hereford accent to pop over dressed as a bush and she come to a timely end. Then bring the kid back and put in with a new Muslim family to raise far away from the girls current family, will end things alot quicker & cheaper.

I do get that there is a lot of support for your position. But I don’t think 254 comments on the Telegraph website is in any way representative of the entire country.

This may all be wishful thinking on my part, because I don’t really want to believe that we have become so insular and selfish that we can’t handle this without taking the extreme route. Who’s next to lose their citizenship?

Do you have a list?

But Adz, 254 is a tiny sample and people who comment on the Telegraph website are not representative of Telegraph readers let alone the whole country!

Just to be clear, I have no issue what so ever with her being stripped of her citizenship. I wouldn't even have an issue with the Roshambo proposed solution.

I am not interested in how old she is, the fact she has a child, or whether she is a British Citizen or holds Dual Citizenship. I am not interested in her race or religion.
She is a traitor and security risk to the country.
Anyone who meets those two criteria should be banned from ever returning to the country.
That however is just my personal opinion.

I find it strange when you guys think you know what the whole country is thinking.

What is this normally of which you speak?

Yah it's a tiny sample.

We would need to do extensive research to conclude traitor terrorists are not popular in this country.

Do men like beer and football? Do women like shopping? These mysteries just cannot be fathomed by mere guesswork and a few comments in The Telegraph.

I find your comments very odd at times.

You want to pick me up more on grammar, or nit pick when you know exactly what I mean.



Most people seem to get the rather frustrated way I communicate. I don't have the great wordsmithery of so many on here, but you seem to always try and twist an odd word here or there as above, to what end, or what you are trying to prove I dont know.

If you want to argue or debate, crack on.

Abso nothing to do with grammar or wordsmithery (God forbid) just a joke on the 'agree' part of your post. Surely agreeing isn't your normal thing.

No offence intended.

Oh hi Manti

 :kiss:

I like your comparison between men liking beer and football and the full spectrum of what people think should happen to this young lady.

Is it possible for a human to not have a nationality?

Hey mate,

Yes your probs right,

If we looked into it deeper we'd find many who want to build her a gingerbread house with unicorns and rainbows in the back garden

Then put her in the oven?

Happened to Tom Hanks at that airport.

So much sense in one post. This exactly.

adz is on skynews at the minute going bonkers.

Nah, been busy golfing.

Was it a good blow up then?

Links?

No idea who thee guy was but he sounded like you and Woodsey after 20 pints of Stella going off on one.

I’d be in a ditch after about 12!  ;djinn;

Oh

The idea that a government can ‘run bad’ makes sense only inasmuch that they keep getting 75BBs in pre as 40/60 dogs, and they aren’t Ali Mallu winning any of them.

Parkland

I mean i believe she'd have fucked up in any set of circumstances but just so happens TM has prime minister'd during a period where no single person alive or dead would have been able to do a successful job.

Maggie would have got us what we wanted. ;scarymoment;

It is an amazing situation they’ve created (the Conservatives did it all themselves), where the 2nd half of that sentence is true. @Adz Maggie would never have done something as ridiculous as the referendum, so it’s redundant but she’d have exactly as much control over the outcome as May.

Standard Kush

Tories did it all themselves. Let me guess, the Tories did it to Labour too? Surely they did it to themselves too??????

I'm pretty sure you aren't old enough to remember Maggie if you make that comment so easily. Junker would have shit himself......

The current situation vis a vis the EU is very much Tory made. Given that they have been in government’ for the past 9 years it’s hard to pin the blame on anyone else domestically.

Maggie wouldn’t have got us into this position, but she’d have made a far better fist of resolving it if called upon .

They called the referendum, Brexit is the crisis that makes being PM an impossible job. I remember Maggie well, I even grudgingly admired some things about her, she couldn’t have done anything about this.

The current situation is Tory made?

They called the referendum?

What actually happened was the Tories presented their General Election manifesto with a pledge to hold a referendum.

So the people of the UK who voted for this pledge created the situation and called the referendum. Then the people of the UK reinforced that decision in the referendum itself.

Trying to twist this situation into a political party scenario blatantly ignores the will of the people.

Sure thing the Tories have contributed to the current situation but equally responsible are the negligent opposition, divisions across all parties and Euro hardliners.

It was actually the Lib-Dems(who?) who insisted on the Referendum as a condition of their support to form the coalition with Cameron.

Mantis 10 Kush 0

Was it?

Not according to this
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/what-is-brexit-why-is-there-an-eu-referendum-a7042791.html

I really don't believe Maggie would have done a "good job" handling brexit negotiations, this is no reflection on her, I'm sure she would be a much better and tougher negotiator than TM, but a "good job" of handling brexit just doesn't exist, it is 100% truly absolutely impossible, I fully believe this.

The situation isn't Tory made or Labour made, the UK political system is in dissaray and it's the fault of all parties, the system is falling to pieces and there is no sign of anyone fixing it any time soon.

Assuming you're talking about the referendum on Proportional Representation, this is correct.  If it's about the EU referendum then that was 100% Cameron.

 rotflmfao rotflmfao

Where's Wally?

https://www.conservatives.com/manifesto2015


I'll help you:

"We are clear about what we want from Europe. We say: yes to the Single Market. Yes to turbocharging free trade. Yes to working together where we are stronger together than alone. Yes to a family of nation states, all part of a European Union – but whose interests, crucially, are guaranteed whether inside the Euro or out. No to ‘ever closer union.’ No to a constant flow of power to Brussels. No to unnecessary interference."

Guys, have we got the Politics thread & the IS schoolgirl threads mixed up?

Dave, I am pretty sure you ain't old enough to know. It can only be through hyperbole that you know Maggie?

Dave is the youngest looking guy in his 40s.  He knows.

Fair enough I must have got them mixed up.

I now feel almost as old as Teeks.

I just sometimes can't believe what I am reading. Be rest assured, what you have seen in the media is there to make us think she shouldn't come back. But I for one think she and her baby should be coming home at the earliest opportunity.

Even from those small snippets from the media, I genuinely think she realises she has made a mistake. You can see in one interview she is close to tears, she has in another admitted she wants to change & if you add it all up, IMO, it's pretty clear to me that she regrets it & knows she has fucked up. Whilst all of this is happening, nobody really know what her role was whilst she was in Sryia, and I for one think her going to Syria to help ISIS is horrid, she should be coming home.

There is also an argument that if she does come home, she probably will be jailed, but also potentially rehabilitated. This could potentially help us understand why and how people are turning to ISIS and other groups. That is surely a positive for everyone in the future. There are plenty of people who have been rehabilitated.

In all of this, is still an innocent baby. Bring her come, lock her up, give the child a future, and hope that she can turn her life around too.

We all make mistakes (however big this one is).

Saw this status earlier on twitter and instantly thought of this thread.

(https://i.imgur.com/hvznCJB.png)

What we should be trying to do more than anything else is prove ourselves wrong, I know plenty of people know this but you wouldn’t think it from this or the political thread. I’m enjoying reading and listening to Jordan Peterson, William Buckley Jr and even Ben Shapiro atm.

I dont know about Thatcher no, my point was no reflection on her as a politician, my point is I dont believe ANYONE living or dead could handle brexit "well" i believe that it is impossible and given that i believe its impossible by extension i dont believe Maggie could have done it :)

I might be wrong but I really don't think I am !

I don't know if this has been said but I cba to read through all of this :p

What bothers me about this story is how much attention it has got and how angry it has made people. What a waste of time, and what a fantastic scapegoat our government has found. Brexit going to shit, all sorts of social/economic problems and what is it that people have got all up in arms about? Some kid who none of us know, who will almost certainly affect none of our lives, and whether she should be allowed to come home or not, an issue that we have absolutely no say in. The majority have even managed to completely miss the issue here, which is that our government has decided to revoke her human rights as a citizen of the UK. Barely any discussion had on the ramifications of this, just a load of divisive fear-mongering hatred. Why? Why are these people not getting angry about frozen public sector pay, for example, which affects fuck knows how many people on a daily basis and seems to be universally accepted is wrong by everyone except the people who make that decision? Makes me despair for the human race, that we are this fickle, this determined to allow ourselves to be divided, this easily manipulated.

We didnt miss the ‘main issue’. Some just didnt give a shit whilst others did.....

Wonder how much more dollar we could give nurses if we didn’t have to prosecute and incarcerate all these irrelevant terror lovers.

If we didn’t need surveillance and protection against terror prob be a much bigger public purse.

Indeed this, and whilst it may not affect the vast majority of us, what about those poor families that have been affected by the actions of these terrorists. I am sure they would gladly work with 2% less in their pay packet to know their family are safe rather than dead.

solid value for money; 2% of everybody's paypacket to deal with this fuck up.

Would be interesting to see the difference in cost between improsining and/or monitoring "ISIS Bride" vs the costs of the inevitable legal action and then having to imprison/monitor "ISIS Bride" bride anyway.   Dare say there won't be any payrises for nurses as a result of this. Still, at least Sajid Javid gets to look tough, albeit at the expense of looking intelligent.

I don't claim to research my comments though. ;)

But your research is still as good as though who google the answer they are looking for.....  ::)

A far better solution would be to honour Sajids ruling and keep this known terrorist sympathiser out of our country and not get involved in civil/legal battles full stop. But, of course, some people want her  to get a fair trial, just to establish what we already know. Sigh...

The thing is, her having a fair trial is the only thing that ensures that you and I would get one too should we ever need it.

It will be a sorry state of affairs if the government or the public for that matter start deciding who is and who is not entitled to a fair trial.

During her fair trial what evidence could you present about her activities in Syria? What Syrian witnesses could you call to the stand?

If you cannot investigate properly, cannot present accurate evidence, cannot present witnesses, if the crimes took place in another country...what exactly would be fair about the trial?

So we should go with Guilty until proven Innocent when we feel like it?

Don't you think there should be some evidence of a crime being committed before people get a sentence passed on them?

Do you not think the very fact she went to aid and abet these scumbags is crime enough.

Do people never get jailed or punished for intent?

I think we all have enough evidence to know what the intent is.

Yes, I understand the point about, wouldn't I like a fair trial, but if I don't show the clear intent that this woman has, then I would expect a fair trial.

Let us not forget, she also wiped her hands of this country, claiming what a shite place it is, no juctice, fairness etc. Why disappoint her?

There are different principles in a war situation as opposed to a normal society situation

"Our targets provide some fantastic reactions and conversations... bringing out the inner child in all," a spokesperson said.


Fuck me! Is this what they think children should be like?



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47386100

No surprise to see Adz agree with your simplistic point, Mantis.

Imagine how much if every business didn’t hide their true revenues, if super rich taxed more, coperation tax, Mp’s lower salary, lower benefits, etc, etc.

Completely simplistic to even to think this.

I imagine if we tax the super rich more they’d move to another country and we’d be overall worse off

“Every” business hides their revenues?  I love the fact the person that wrote this accuses someone else of being simplistic.

That’s the point I’m making. It’s simplistic to think like this.

Doesn’t read like that but fair enough.