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

ohnonotgmail

ollkiller wrote: »

While she is 9 months pregnant. Sounds like something Isis would do. Are you no better than Isis?

Looking at some of the responses there are more than a few that are no better.

TheBoyConor

Mod-Banned

Hector Savage

ollkiller wrote: »

Have to ask, are you talking about the adult or the baby that's about to be born.

The baby thats about to be born - if that baby is brought up by her, he/she is doomed to be poisoned by her,.

Gimme A Pound

Hector Savage wrote: »

hmmm, forgive me for not feeling sympathy for someone that will be murdering British people on the streets in ~20 years time.

That's only gonna happen if the kid is raised that way, which can be stopped.

I'd have no issue with her coming to the UK to have the baby and then leaving again, sans baby. Don't give a sh1t about her but it's not the baby's fault.

DrumSteve

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Looking at some of the responses there are more than a few that are no better.

Fully agree on that point.

A pregnant 19 year girl who went to a war zone at 15 and had two kids die already. Had severed heads in a bin in her living room as a normal thing... of course she is going to be f*cked in the head.

That won't stop the usuals on here stranglewanking themselves in to infinity at the idea at causing her some harm.

Snake Plisken

Exactly Brendan!

https://twitter.com/spikedonline/status/1096091700278251520?s=19

Gimme A Pound

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Looking at some of the responses there are more than a few that are no better.

They'd only be no better than Isis if they carried out the same acts. Writing stuff on the internet is miles off. But I do agree that some of the stuff is real keyboard bad-ass stuff.

Deebles McBeebles

DrumSteve wrote: »

stranglewanking

Just on a more practical note, she is 9 months pregnant apparently and wants to have the baby in the UK but you can't fly in the 3rd trimester so....

ToBeFrank123

SoundsRight wrote: »

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

Our compassion only extends so far and certainly not to those who freely behead others or marry into and recruit for the cause. We don't need such people in the West because they only drag the west into the sewer.

If someone subscribes to our values by all means show them compassion. This woman and she's a woman now said she had no regrets. She would likely do it all over again if she had the chance.

If or when she shows remorse maybe then. No sign of that yet though.

end of the road

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

A life sentence to be served in South Georgia could be a compromise solution for returning jihadis.

i'd very much doubt it.
georgia would be well within it's rights to tell any country looking for them to take responsibility for foreign citizens where to go and i would hope that is exactly what they would do.

malinheader wrote: »

Only abuse here would be to the citizens the uk by letting her back in.

not letting her back to the country who is responsible for her would be an abuse to the citizens of many other countries, especially those of syria who have been through enough. britain and it's citizens aren't the only country that matter in the world.

valoren wrote: »

The Girl who cried Wolf.
She had one child and the baby died of malnutrition.
There's her first clue.
She had a second child and the baby....shock....died of malnutrition.
There's another clue.
She is now having a third child and...dagnamit....some common sense finally kicks in.
It finally clicks that the child will also die of malnutrition.
And now she want's to come back.
The moral imperative and dilemma is the safety of the child.
She's not a child anymore. She's an adult, a manipulative individual, believing that exploiting the dire prospects of her unborn child will allow her to weasel her way back to civilization.

So, let her back with one condition.
Give up the child, let it have a chance to live, give as much intelligence as you can and you'll be then sent back to your extremist buddies.
If you care about your child you'll accept that offer. The offer to save her child will thus be her decision. Take the offer and the child will live.

Don't, then the death of another of your children will be on your conscience and you can go **** yourself.

Sometimes an example has to be made of people particularly about the consequences down the line for those edging towards extremism.

and this nonsense wouldn't be making an example of someone. it would be simply dumping britain's problem on someone
else. it's not the job of others to clean up britain's mess.

malinheader wrote: »

I never mentioned using barbaric methods of killing which she is probably accustomed to.
But I'm pretty sure letting someone like this back in will at some point lead to another atrocity in the UK. Anyhow is it worth taking a chance. There is enough being monitored at this moment in time.

what about an atrocityin another country? or is britain and it's people the only people and lives who matter?

jim o doom wrote: »

From what I've read, if she is handed over to the Syrian government a beheading is a likely outcome, which means neither the UK nor the Kurds would have to deal with her. Sounds good to me.

yet no doubt you would jump up and down
when you hear of isis beheading people (something you would be right to do by the way)
a beheading sounding good to someone is quite worrying if i'm honest, regardless of whoever is the one possibly facing such.
and anyway syria has been through enough without it becoming a dumping ground for foreign terrorists.

Reviews and Books Galore

Well, she's in a refugee camp which probably has members of isis or, at best, people of a moderately extreme mindset.

I'd take her unrepentant attitude with a grain of salt.

Deebles McBeebles

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

If someone subscribes to our values by all means show them compassion. This woman and she's a woman now said she had no regrets. She would likely do it all over again if she had the chance.

If or when she shows remorse maybe then. No sign of that yet though.

That is very important IMO. No remorse, no regrets.

Richard Hillman

It's scenarios like this is why we need to review our UN Membership. We have our own Belarusian "Irishman" who wants to come back to ireland after a spell with ISIS. The UN was supposed to be a union of nations attempting to prevent war, not to interfere with countries laws and who they allow into the country

Church on Tuesday

The only real concern should be for the child she is carrying.

The minute it is delivered it ideally should be taken off her because, lets face it, she's hardly a fit mother now is she?

Probably won't happen though.

scamalert

if she got a bullet no one would miss her. hopefully British arent that stupid yet to let someone who will pi$$ muslim propaganda on the west culture back in, as best she deserves is a spot in a ditch.


should be some law where if one joins these savages they should be put out once they make appearance.

malinheader

SoundsRight wrote: »

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

I have not one bit of compassion for her or her kind.
Some compassion or remorse she showed in her interview.

ToBeFrank123

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

Well, she's in a refugee camp which probably has members of isis or, at best, people of a moderately extreme mindset.

I'd take her unrepentant attitude with a grain of salt.

Not buying it. She said some of what she experienced was horrific. So she hardly painted ISIS territory as a paradise which is generally the party line.

Saying she wanted to go back to the UK would be as big a crime in ISIS eyes as saying she regretted going.

The suspicion here is ISIS know the game is up in Syria and want to send as many followers as possible back to the west where they can either continue the fight or else raise a new generation.

Galwayguy35

SoundsRight wrote: »

I understand the desire to see this girl suffer. But we must be better than that. She wants to live in a western, Christian society. That's an admission that their Islamic fantasy is a failure.

No she wants the NHS to look after her kid.

Amirani

end of the road wrote: »

i'd very much doubt it.
georgia would be well within it's rights to tell any country looking for them to take responsibility for foreign citizens where to go and i would hope that is exactly what they would do.

The other poster said South Georgia, not Georgia...

They have to do whatever the British monarch tells them to do!

ToBeFrank123

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

No she wants the NHS to look after her kid.

Got it in one. These women had relative status in Syria, not much mind. If they had the chance to go back they would if it was relatively peaceful.

Lets be honest, once the Americans pull out of Syria, all the ISIS guys currently in hiding, will emerge from under their rocks and start up again.

Its always Whack a Mole in the middle east for the Americans.

Galwayguy35

I hope we aren't considering taking back the Russian or whatever he was that holds an Irish passport, although it wouldn't surprise me one bit if some gobsh1te in Government offers to do just that.

Hopefully the Kurds will let him swing before it happens.

Fiftyfilthy

ollkiller wrote: »

While she is 9 months pregnant. Sounds like something Isis would do. Are you no better than Isis?

I don’t care

Yes, better than isis, never started the beheadings and killings

They are brainwashed and hell bent on killing western people

I’d rather she be killed and her unborn

It will probably grow up hating the western world for killing its mum

As I say better safe than sorry


Also all this “no better than...”. Is a lot of ****. That’s what has the uk in a mess

Guy:Incognito

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

The armed forces of her majesty had no problem shooting 15 year olds.

That's lovely, but not an answer to the question

Ulysses Gaze

Grayson wrote: »

The other way of looking at it that she was groomed by a cult and lived in a cult for a number of years.
And that's what ISIS are, a death cult.
The groomed her and convinced her to move over there.

I think she should be allowed return to the UK. She's a UK citizen and the government should never refuse a citizen the ability to return. That doesn't mean that she couldn't be charged with stuff when she gets back, or that she shouldn't be monitored.

She'll get 10 years, serve 5 maybe and be out before she's 26.

Leave her rot where she is.

end of the road

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

People can't just be allowed to slip in and out of the heart of terrorist regimes as they see fit. What deterrent would it be to those who would join another ISIS type group in the future if they were accepted back easily?
Most of these people left with the understanding they would never be coming back and also with the understanding they despised Western culture and indeed all modern conveniences. And after a couple of years living in as close to the stone age as you can get, they come back looking for a bed in a modern hospital.

Its time for some people to decide once and for all if they want to live in the stone age or the modern age with everything it entails.

i can't see how not accepting them back would be a deterrent to people who are committed to joining terrorist groups, given as you said it yourself, most of those who went did so with the understanding that they would likely die out wherever they went.

Mint Sauce wrote: »

Heavly pregnant, last two kids died, I can understand why she might want to come back

So let her back, give birth, let the baby get the help he/she needs. Her, lock her up for treason, or send her back with GB Citizenship revoked to what ever hellhole she left.

She gave up her right to be British, the moment she joined IS.

she didn't give up her right to be british as it's not a right that can be given up in her case given she was apparently born in britain.
remember that isis is not a state, or a country. it cannot have citizens. it is a terrorist group and has absolutely no legitimicy. it is a death cult that is thankfully almost dead.

malinheader

end of the road wrote: »

Most of these people left with the understanding they would never be coming back and also with the understanding they despised Western culture and indeed all modern conveniences. And after a couple of years living in as close to the stone age as you can get, they come back looking for a bed in a modern hospital.

Its time for some people to decide once and for all if they want to live in the stone age or the modern age with everything it entails.

i can't see how not accepting them back would be a deterrent to people who are committed to joining terrorist groups, given as you said it yourself, most of those who went did so with the understanding that they would likely die out wherever they went.




she didn't give up her right to be british as it's not a right that can be given up in her case given she was apparently born in britain.
remember that isis is not a state, or a country. it cannot have citizens. it is a terrorist group and has absolutely no legitimi
cy. it is a death cult that is thankfully almost dead



.[/QUOTE]
It will never be dead if we keep giving its followers the fools pardon.




Time to get tough and as well as not letting anymore ISIS symphsises into the west start throwing some out.
If you follow the ISIS ideology you should not be classed as a citizen of a culture you want to wipeout.
End of.

ollkiller

Fiftyfilthy wrote: »

I don’t care

Yes, better than isis, never started the beheadings and killings

They are brainwashed and hell bent on killing western people

I’d rather she be killed and her unborn

It will probably grow up hating the western world for killing its mum

As I say better safe than sorry


Also all this “no better than...”. Is a lot of ****. That’s what has the uk in a mess

So you are cool with killing her with the outcome of killing her unborn 9 month old baby. Bravo. The unborn child has done nothing to anyone. That opinion is just sick.

And yes i do believe that it is right to be better than them. You can fight terrorism and still hold a moral ground. It's doesn't have to be mutually exclusive.

Fiftyfilthy

ollkiller wrote: »

So you are cool with killing her with the outcome of killing her unborn 9 month old baby. Bravo. The unborn child has done nothing to anyone. That opinion is just sick.

And yes i do believe that it is right to be better than them. You can fight terrorism and still hold a moral ground. It's doesn't have to be mutually exclusive.

Just as well I’m not pm then as that is exactly what I would do

zapitastas

Fiftyfilthy wrote: »

I don’t care

Yes, better than isis, never started the beheadings and killings

They are brainwashed and hell bent on killing western people

I’d rather she be killed and her unborn

It will probably grow up hating the western world for killing its mum

As I say better safe than sorry


Also all this “no better than...”. Is a lot of ****. That’s what has the uk in a mess

As long as someone else does the killing I suppose? Or would you like to get your hands dirty yourself?

Fiftyfilthy

zapitastas wrote: »

As long as someone else does the killing I suppose? Or would you like to get your hands dirty yourself?

Do it myself, not actually a big deal