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

TheValeyard

Gatling wrote: »

So new Isis bride /mum is asking people show her sympathy and support

Roger Hassenforder

Gatling wrote: »

So new Isis bride /mum is asking people show her sympathy and support .

Like the people she and her fellow Isis members showed while butchering people on an industrial scale

She was very dismissive of the head in the bin.
Probably another muslim though

raclle

Going by her interview how on earth could you leave someone like that back into normal society?

It would take years for her to be rehabilitated and that may never even happen.

TallGlass

She's a criminal. A British criminal. Id go as far as saying let the US lock her up.

Your letting a live bomb come back into the EU.

Fann Linn

raclle wrote: »

Going by her interview how on earth could you leave someone like that back into normal society?

It would take years for her to be rehabilitated and that may never even happen.

Just looking at that now on Sky. She doesn't give a fcuk and has no remorse. She's a cnut.

Boggles

TallGlass wrote: »

She's a criminal. A British criminal. Id go as far as saying let the US lock her up.

WTF?

She's a British Criminal so let America lock her up?

You didn't really think that one through did you?

TallGlass

TallGlass wrote: »

She's a criminal. A British criminal. Id go as far as saying let the US lock her up.

Your letting a live bomb come back into the EU.

Actually, she's not. Membership of IS wasn't a crime when she ran off so she can't be charged retrospectively. She also hasn't been charged with, never mind convicted of, any other crime such as treason or aiding terrorists. Bad as she might be, you can't go locking up people without any convictions in your own country, never mind expect other countries to do so on your behalf.

Also, as a British Citizen she is entitled to help and aid from her country. Now she's not entitled to have people risk their own lives to rescue her and bring her back, and she's not entitled to a heroines welcome on her return, and she's not entitled to immunity from prosecution for any other crime she's committed in the meantime, but that's how things stand at the moment.

TallGlass

Boggles wrote: »

WTF?

She's a British Criminal so let America lock her up?

You didn't really think that one through did you?

Yeah I did. She should be in a cell by herself day and night. Not some nice British prison. If America can find a way to get a lad from Ireland over due to Silk Road. I'm sure they'll find a way for this ****.

Either way. She's British. They can't revoke it. Next best thing is lock her up or red tape the **** out of her coming back or say shes from another country.

Boggles

TallGlass wrote: »

Yeah I did. She should be in a cell by herself day and night. Not some nice British prison. If America can find a way to get a lad from Ireland over due to Silk Road. I'm sure they'll find a way for this ****.

Why would America want to make her their problem?

TallGlass

Candie wrote: »

Actually, she's not. Membership of IS wasn't a crime when she ran off so she can't be charged retrospectively. She also hasn't been charged with, never mind convicted of, any other crime such as treason or aiding terrorists. Bad as she might be, you can't go locking up people without any convictions in your own country, never mind expect other countries to do so on your behalf.

Also, as a British Citizen she is entitled to help and aid from her country. Now she's not entitled to have people risk their own lives to rescue her and bring her back, and she's not entitled to a heroines welcome on her return, and she's not entitled to immunity from prosecution for any other crime she's committed in the meantime, but that's how things stand at the moment.

Who says it has to be membership of IS. I'm sure she has broken plenty of international laws let alone British terrorism laws. I'm sure there are laws introduced for the IRA that would be easily implemented here.

What do you want? Let her back in and let her run down the local Tesco or something. She's a lethal weapon. Let her in and something will happen eventually. Simple as that. I'm not saying lock her up for no reason. She's a very dangerous women.

backspin.

TallGlass wrote: »

She's a criminal. A British criminal. Id go as far as saying let the US lock her up.

Your letting a live bomb come back into the EU.

Send her to Guantanamo.

Perifect

I don't get why any Irish person is interested in this and I don't get why British people are showing so much hate towards the girl. She went overseas to assist a group in bombing and murdering innocents and others. British people are usually awarded medals for that sort of thing and sometimes given knighthoods!

TallGlass

Boggles wrote: »

Why would America want to make her their problem?

Why do America want people from Ireland or Mexico in that case? They've broken US laws. If the Brits can't lock her up let the US do it.

TallGlass

TallGlass wrote: »

Who says it has to be membership of IS. I'm sure she has broken plenty of international laws let alone British terrorism laws. I'm sure there are laws introduced for the IRA that would be easily implemented here.

What do you want? Let her back in and let her run down the local Tesco or something. She's a lethal weapon. Let her in and something will happen eventually. Simple as that. I'm not saying lock her up for no reason. She's a very dangerous women.

First of all, I'm not defending her and didn't imply I was, so don't put words in my mouth.

I'm pointing out that she has not been either tried or convicted of any crime and people are calling for her to be killed and her baby murdered, just in case. Or in your case, to be passed to another country and interred in solitude for the rest of her life, without being found guilty of ANYTHING.

Sounds totally reasonable.

Boggles

TallGlass wrote: »

Why do America want people from Ireland or Mexico in that case? They've broken US laws. If the Brits can't lock her up let the US do it.:rolleyes:

What US laws did she break?

TallGlass

Google it.

Simple. If your interested.

backspin.

Perifect wrote: »

I don't get why any Irish person is interested

Because this is a European problem. Islamism is a problem we are all facing due to the stupidity of western governments.

TallGlass

Candie wrote: »

First of all, I'm not defending her and didn't imply I was, so don't put words in my mouth.

I'm pointing out that she has not been either tried or convicted of any crime and people are calling for her to be killed and her baby murdered, just in case. Or in your case, to be passed to another country and interred in solitude for the rest of her life, without being found guilty of ANYTHING.

Sounds totally reasonable.

And it's totally reasonable to let her back in? Sure what could go wrong....

Boggles

TallGlass wrote: »

Google it.

Simple. If your interested.

I'm asking you?

Perifect

backspin. wrote: »

Because this is a European problem. Islamism is a problem we are all facing due to the stupidity of western governments.

Has she ever set foot here?

orourkeda1977

I don't know whether to laugh at her level of misdirection or to empathize for a completely different reason or to ignore her and let her suffer the consequences of her own stupidity.

It's difficult to get to the root of any issues on the basis of this article alone.

I'm no doctor or mental health professional but there could be some form of mental illness going on.

She may have been brainwashed, partly radicalised or was just a particularly naive, ill informed or inexperienced young woman.

The three kids at 19 is an obvious red flag.

stefanovich

She should be tried for treason and imprisoned for the rest of her life.

Child should be removed for her custody and should become a ward of the state.

FTA69

Giveaway wrote: »

The absolute numbers to observe is mind boggling. We are talking 10s of thousands that may physically take part in jihad, and 100s of thousands that would turn a blind eye or offer support. Contrast to the heigth of our own troubles, there was at most 200 active service members of the IRa and a cpl of thousand sympathisers.

200 people in the IRA and a couple of thousand of people sympathetic? Think your figures are off there mate.

end of the road

malinheader wrote: »

Don't mention Rochdale or Rotherham, were supposed to forget this happened.


For the sake of diversity.

that's an interesting development. when was this statement made and who within the british government or the relevant local authorities
or police forces made that statement?

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

If your argument is predicated on risk management, then surely you should have regard to first principles and eliminate the risk...?

i do . that is what my stance ultimately is

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

She'll serve little time in a British prison and will be out before.she is 25.

She will then suckle off the teat of the taxpayer for the rest of her life. As will the kids she will have.

And will also waste taxpayers money trying to launch legal challenges for her Dutch Jihadi husband to be allowed move to the UK.

that's just speculation, especially in terms of her unborn child or further children should she have them. and even if it did turn out to be true, it is ultimately irrelevant. britain still remains responsible for dealing with it's gihadis. the tax payer nonsense argument has no validity. to me it just screams not having an argument as to why british gihadis shouldn't be sent back to where they came from so the authorities responsible for dealing with them actually have to take up that responsibility.

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Leave her to the Syrians or Kurds to deal with.

why should the syrians or kurds have to clean up britain's mess? not their job. it's britain's job to clean up it's mess.

Perifect

FTA69 wrote: »

200 people in the IRA and a couple of thousand of people sympathetic? Think your figures are off there mate.

I think so. Besides, the British armed forces are far more comparable to ISIS than the IRA.

Galwayguy35

The problem for the Brits and to a lesser degree some other European countries is that in the not too distant future there are going to be hundreds of these fine ladies and their offspring looking to make their way back to Europe so the taxpayers can take care of them.

Chances are that Russian bollix with the Irish passport will want to send his wife and sprogs back here to live off our welfare state.

Gatling

end of the road wrote: »

why should the syrians or kurds have to clean up britain's mess? not their job. it's britain's job to clean up it's mess.

It's their job to seek justice and retribution against those who committed genocide in their country .

And on that another family turned up in another camp who somehow went on a family holiday to Turkey and somehow accidentally joined Isis for 5 years in Syria

Galwayguy35

Candie wrote: »

Actually, she's not. Membership of IS wasn't a crime when she ran off so she can't be charged retrospectively. She also hasn't been charged with, never mind convicted of, any other crime such as treason or aiding terrorists. Bad as she might be, you can't go locking up people without any convictions in your own country, never mind expect other countries to do so on your behalf.

Also, as a British Citizen she is entitled to help and aid from her country. Now she's not entitled to have people risk their own lives to rescue her and bring her back, and she's not entitled to a heroines welcome on her return, and she's not entitled to immunity from prosecution for any other crime she's committed in the meantime, but that's how things stand at the moment.

But yet you said earlier on the thread you wouldn't like her living next to you.

Odhinn

Gatling wrote: »

It's their job to seek justice and retribution against those who committed genocide in their country .

And on that another family turned up in another camp who somehow went on a family holiday to Turkey and somehow accidentally joined Isis for 5 years in Syria

Thats what happens when you fly ryanair, tbh.

end of the road

scamalert wrote: »

i cant believe people like end of road sympathize with her.

interesting, i dont remember stating anywhere that i sympathise with her. what i have said is that she is britain's problem to deal with which is the case. i have said britain should not be able to sherk it's responsibility in terms of dealing with her and should not be able to expect someone else to clean up after them. i don't see how that is an unreasonable stance. if there was a civil war here again and british citizens came over to join a rebel group which was trying to over-turn our democracy. how would we feel if after britain said to us "sorry lads our terrorists are your problem" . you have been through a lot but we can't be bothered to clean up our mess? i'd think much of the irish population would be annoyed over it and they would be right.

scamalert wrote: »

That said she's adult now, as someone mentioned no one will move her at this point, even after birth GB government isn't entitled to care for her or provide support to where she is.


without going keyboard warrior on this simple solution once she appears at any embassy is to strip her of uk passport, shes pakistani or smth so might as well seek refuge there.

she was born in britain i believe so she's british so that can't be done.

scamalert wrote: »

As if someone in government were to give green light i dont think theyd last long in their career. Given current situation with brexit and failed goverment as is, this would be seen as pouring jet fuel into fire to even consider having her on EU soil.

a green light wouldn't even need to be given. she's british so there is nothing britain can do to stop her returning. what they can do and what they are doing is not helping or providing support in terms of enabling her to return as they don't have consular staff in syria anyway. the tory government will be fine whether she comes back or not. it is brexit that will decide their fait. apart from the usual teeth nashers within british society most are unlikely to make this an issue given there are plenty of mechanisms to deal with the likes of her upon return.

scamalert wrote: »

As listening from interviews she seems washed to the point where she will be perfect recruitment poster for isis - as she described it its like advertised for young women being there.
it wouldnt take a genius to say shes radicalized and would be pain in the hole to have her surveid as opposed to sending message if you join terrorists your on your own.

the thing is that sending a message that if you join terrorists you are on your own, is unlikely to make any difference to the problem as the people willing to join terrorists believe they aren't coming back anyway and those who do want to go back will at some stage get back. that's why britain needs to be stopping them from going in the first place.

scamalert wrote: »

that's why no one will lift a finger to change anything, just news beating drum until it will be forgotten.

agreed. and it's why i believe this isn't going to be a major issue that will have any effect on the government regardless of the outcome at the end.