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

Church on Tuesday

Fiftyfilthy wrote: »

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

You wouldn't be PM for long.

Gimme A Pound

The teenage edgelord carry-on of "I'd shoot her and don't care that she's nine months pregnant" brings nothing to the table. Be better than that.

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

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....

God yeah didn't even think of that.

DrumSteve

Fiftyfilthy wrote: »

Do it myself, not actually a big deal

LMAO.

Grayson

malinheader wrote: »

Why do people think it's ok for her to return, receive good medical care, have a court case lasting months probably. Be kept why case going on and then probably monitored round the clock, all at the expense of tax payers.
No Thanks. If it was going to happen in this country I wouldn't be to happy.

Think of the girls in Rotherham. They were groomed. If they had run off with one of the groomers would people here be complaining about them getting help?

This was a teenage girl who was groomed by a death cult. They were groomed by people who were professional groomers. The people who groomed them had one job and it was going after impressionable teenagers and grooming them.

I genuinely think this girl needs help. I'm not going to say that she's not a risk because she might be. She needs to be monitored. But she also needs the same kind of treatment that we would give to her if she had been conned into joining any other cult. She's essentially a grooming victim.

GinAndBitter

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.

Unborn children never do anything to anyone, that doesn't stop them from being killed because they are an inconvenience.

Fiftyfilthy

I’m not being edgy , couldn’t care about this edgy ness

Was asked a question and I answered honestly

malinheader

Grayson wrote: »

Think of the girls in Rotherham. They were groomed. If they had run off with one of the groomers would people here be complaining about them getting help?

This was a teenage girl who was groomed by a death cult. They were groomed by people who were professional groomers. The people who groomed them had one job and it was going after impressionable teenagers and grooming them.

I genuinely think this girl needs help. I'm not going to say that she's not a risk because she might be. She needs to be monitored. But she also needs the same kind of treatment that we would give to her if she had been conned into joining any other cult. She's essentially a grooming victim.

I totally object to the girls in Rotherham being used in an example to this case.
We all know that the girls in Rotherham could of been helped and who knows some saved if the powers that be had not decided to hide and keep it quiet for the sake of diversity .
I don't know the cultural background of every poster but cant believe having seen her interview and knowing the facts how many posters here would welcome her back.
Jesus on about inviting the fox into the hen house.

Gimme A Pound

Nobody normal genuinely wants to kill a baby that's about to be born. Hard man talk.

GinAndBitter wrote: »

Unborn children never do anything to anyone, that doesn't stop them from being killed because they are an inconvenience.

Early on, when a baby hasn't formed (and not always just because of mere inconvenience) - not almost nine months in.

end of the road

Amirani wrote: »

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

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

yes a mistake on my part but either way the point ultimately stands.
i do not believe britain can force another country to take on british citizens

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

nope, britain mismanaging itself is why it is in the mess it is in
and yes, if a person believes it's okay to kill this woman dispite being pregnant then it is reasonable to state that they don't have any moral high ground what so ever and that they aren't much better then isis.
throw in the assumption that the baby will turn out to be an extremist, presumably that is simply because the parents are muslim, and dispite it being unlikely the baby would remain with the mother anyway should she return, then i would think that the assumption of one stating such views not being any better then the group they hate would have more merrit again.

malinheader wrote: »

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.

well no, it's not end of. if you are a citizen of a country then you are a citizen of a country. if what you want to happen did happen, it would cause a ridiculous amount of problems. i'm not seeing why either the world as a whole, the middle east, or wherever should have to take responsibility for the problems of the west. being tough is locking extremists up for the rest of their life insuring they aren't a threat to anywhere.

malinheader

end of the road wrote: »

yes a mistake on my part but either way the point ultimately stands.
i do not believe britain can force another country to take on british citizens



nope, britain mismanaging itself is why it is in the mess it is in
and yes, if a person believes it's okay to kill this woman dispite being pregnant then it is reasonable to state that they don't have any moral high ground what so ever and that they aren't much better then isis.
throw in the assumption that the baby will turn out to be an extremist, presumably that is simply because the parents are muslim, and dispite it being unlikely the baby would remain with the mother anyway should she return, then i would think that the assumption of one stating such views not being any better then the group they hate would have more merrit again.




well no, it's not end of. if you are a citizen of a country then you are a citizen of a country. if what you want to happen did happen, it would cause a ridiculous amount of problems. i'm not seeing why either the world as a whole, the middle east, or wherever should have to take responsibility for the problems of the west. being tough is locking extremists up for the rest of their life insuring they aren't a threat to anywhere.

That's your view. So do you think if you support an ideology like ISIS you should be classed as a citizen of a western culture . Because I don't.

And i would give the kurds the permission to deal with her as they want.
Don't think she would get much monitoring over there.
That's my opinion.

Gatling

end of the road wrote: »

throw in the assumption that the baby will turn out to be an extremist, presumably that is simply because the parents are muslim,

that the baby will turn out to be an extremist, presumably that is simply because the parents are muslim

No because both parents are extremists and part of the worse terror group we've ever seen ,
The child will be raised being told about his heroic father who likely butchered men ,women and children himself ,and he should follow in his footsteps ,

She is a terrorist nothing more and nothing less and deserves everything coming to her ,

Let the Kurds deal with her

DEFTLEFTHAND

She was/still is a stupid kid who made a massively stupid life altering decision on a whim. Probably after been chatted up by some Jihadi on the internet, teenagers are easily influenced.

I'd say give her a second chance. Let her home to her family.
The stories she can tell may even dissuade further radicalisation amongst British teens. She could become a spokeswoman of sorts.

Turbohymac

Definitely Britain shouldn't waste any taxpayers money on her. And coming back to Britain with her current beliefs would only lead to hundreds of teenagers being influenced by her warped thoughts on other human beings and races /religions..
This person has lost respect towards others let her rot out there in her refugee camp..I can only feel sorry for some of the other occupants of the camp who are stuck there with her..
At least they didn't get to make choices.
But she clearly did..NO second chances for these murderers.
Look back over the last 2 years around France and Germany..far too many innocent lives taken by similar people.

She's still a zealot, still dangerous or at least holds dangerous views that she'd welcome the opportunity to decimate. She should be considered a risk, monitored closely, learned from, and offered an opportunity to redeem herself. She is still a British citizen, and still a teenager. I'd be of the same mind if a nineteen year old lad was in the same position.

If any other fifteen year old commits a crime, they're not held responsible for the rest of their lives. She (as far as I know) ran off to IS before it was a crime to be a member of that organization, so it can't be applied retrospectively, and I'm not sure that she has committed treason as described in law.

As has been said, IS is a cult. Unless you believe that thousands of thousands of young men are simply savage killers by nature, then you have to accept that they've been brainwashed and depersonalized, as cults are wont to do to their recruits. I don't believe that vast numbers of young men and substantial numbers of young women are thirsty to take part in beheadings because that's just how they are, but it is how they've been moulded by that cult.

It's not surprising she's so dispassionately described the beheadings, since she's probably still in need of deprogramming and is quite likely traumatized underneath. She's seen two babies die of malnutrition, a trauma that would numb anyone. People can be successfully deradicalized, and there is a case worth arguing that she - along with the young male fighters - were young enough and impressionable enough to be given another chance, provided they show remorse and understanding after they've been given the standard care after escaping any cult.

I wouldn't want her next door, and I wouldn't trust her to mind my cat. I wouldn't put anyones life at risk to go save her, but if I was PM and she turned up at the border, I'd let her in. Not because she's shown remorse or because it's not a big deal, but because there's a tiny baby about to be born who is completely innocent who deserves a chance at and in life in spite of it's parents bad decisions. She is a secondary consideration to me, but she's still a teenager and there is hope for her too.

Roger Hassenforder

Candie wrote: »

She's still a zealot, still dangerous or at least holds dangerous views that she'd welcome the opportunity to decimate. She should be considered a risk, monitored closely, learned from, and offered an opportunity to redeem herself. She is still a British citizen, and still a teenager. I'd be of the same mind if a nineteen year old lad was in the same position.

If any other fifteen year old commits a crime, they're not held responsible for the rest of their lives. She (as far as I know) ran off to IS before it was a crime to be a member of that organization, so it can't be applied retrospectively, and I'm not sure that she has committed treason as described in law.

As has been said, IS is a cult. Unless you believe that thousands of thousands of young men are simply savage killers by nature, then you have to accept that they've been brainwashed and depersonalized, as cults are wont to do to their recruits. I don't believe that vast numbers of young men and substantial numbers of young women are thirsty to take part in beheadings because that's just how they are, but it is how they've been moulded by that cult.

It's not surprising she's so dispassionately described the beheadings, since she's probably still in need of deprogramming and is quite likely traumatized underneath. She's seen two babies die of malnutrition, a trauma that would numb anyone. People can be successfully deradicalized, and there is a case worth arguing that she - along with the young male fighters - were young enough and impressionable enough to be given another chance, provided they show remorse and understanding after they've been given the standard care after escaping any cult.

I wouldn't want her next door, and I wouldn't trust her to mind my cat. I wouldn't put anyones life at risk to go save her, but if I was PM and she turned up at the border, I'd let her in. Not because she's shown remorse or because it's not a big deal, but because there's a tiny baby about to be born who is completely innocent who deserves a chance at and in life in spite of it's parents bad decisions. She is a secondary consideration to me, but she's still a teenager and there is hope for her too.

If you wouldnt want her next door, is it not unfair to expect others to have her next door though?

If she'd shown any remorse, i'd be for trying to rehabilitate her. But no.
Fcuk her.

She didnt nick a few sweets in the local Tesco or joyride in a car. She eloped to one of the ( if not the) most evil organizations we've ever seen. she wants to return to a Western society anathema to those of IS, because muh baby.
Give the baby up for adoption, and let the Kurds to as they want.
Parents have a lot to answer for as well.

suicide_circus

it's not rehabilitation she needs, it's reverse brainwashing. I'm talking full on clockwork orange therapy.

Roger Hassenforder

suicide_circus wrote: »

it's not rehabilitation she needs, it's reverse brainwashing. I'm talking full on clockwork orange therapy.

She may not be brainwashed. Just "deeply religious"

Full on Clockwork orange something else required

Ursus Horribilis

She's also not very bright. If she'd lied through her teeth and said she had made a terrible mistake, had seen unspeakable horrors and had come to her senses, she'd be on a plane home as we speak.

end of the road

malinheader wrote: »

That's your view. So do you think if you support an ideology like ISIS you should be classed as a citizen of a western culture . Because I don't.

it's not my opinion. it's fact and it is international law that if someone is born in and are a citizen of a particular country then that country is responsible for them as they are from that country. if that country is in the west then the person is a western citizen whether they or you like it or not

malinheader wrote: »

And i would give the kurds the permission to deal with her as they want.

the kurds don't want your permission to do anything. they want the west to take back it's terrorists out of their country. they don't want to clean up the mess or problems of other countries.

malinheader wrote: »

Don't think she would get much monitoring over there.
That's my opinion.

that's the problem. where she is she is a greater potential risk then if she is locked up back in her country of origine.

ToBeFrank123

A senior police officer in the UK rightly pointed out she would need to be carefully watched ie 24/7 for her own protection, from far-right attacks or else ISIS elements looking to recruit her in some way.
The police do not have the resources for that.
She's better off staying where she is and making some kind of life out there.

If she was used as a propaganda tool over there, she will be used as one again in the west. And god knows what lunatics she will inspire.

AllForIt

Apparently the UK are bound by international law to have her back as she is of UK citizenship. Should she have been of dual citizenship then it would be different.

I am not inclined to look at this issue as one of moral correctness or sympathy towards her. I would perhaps if it weren't for the seriousness of the issue in respect of this issue with ISIS. Were it some one-off case where say she was groomed and aided a serial killer in foreign lands, in other words some isolated case, then I may be inclined to take a more sympathetic view.

However when it comes being involved in conflicts that directly effect the security of the UK, where terrorist activities have already been perpetrated then I think in this instance the security of the country must be put first over her personal welfare. Therefore I think there should be a change in international law that allows the UK gov to put the security of their country over her personal rights.

And I think it sends out a terrible signal to others who intend to get involved in similar activities that they might feel that they have the option to be treated so sympathetically in a country they don't seem to have much allegiance too. Even thought she may very well be prosecuted in the UK, even then, she'll be treated a lot better than the way she ever treated anyone in the countries she went out to fight in or would be treated if she were captured there.

Odhinn

Candie wrote: »

She's still a zealot, still dangerous or at least holds dangerous views that she'd welcome the opportunity to decimate. She should be considered a risk, monitored closely, learned from, and offered an opportunity to redeem herself. She is still a British citizen, and still a teenager. I'd be of the same mind if a nineteen year old lad was in the same position.

If any other fifteen year old commits a crime, they're not held responsible for the rest of their lives. She (as far as I know) ran off to IS before it was a crime to be a member of that organization, so it can't be applied retrospectively, and I'm not sure that she has committed treason as described in law.

As has been said, IS is a cult. Unless you believe that thousands of thousands of young men are simply savage killers by nature, then you have to accept that they've been brainwashed and depersonalized, as cults are wont to do to their recruits. I don't believe that vast numbers of young men and substantial numbers of young women are thirsty to take part in beheadings because that's just how they are, but it is how they've been moulded by that cult.

It's not surprising she's so dispassionately described the beheadings, since she's probably still in need of deprogramming and is quite likely traumatized underneath. She's seen two babies die of malnutrition, a trauma that would numb anyone. People can be successfully deradicalized, and there is a case worth arguing that she - along with the young male fighters - were young enough and impressionable enough to be given another chance, provided they show remorse and understanding after they've been given the standard care after escaping any cult.

I wouldn't want her next door, and I wouldn't trust her to mind my cat. I wouldn't put anyones life at risk to go save her, but if I was PM and she turned up at the border, I'd let her in. Not because she's shown remorse or because it's not a big deal, but because there's a tiny baby about to be born who is completely innocent who deserves a chance at and in life in spite of it's parents bad decisions. She is a secondary consideration to me, but she's still a teenager and there is hope for her too.

The prophet (PBUH) was big on cats, so she'd probably be ok.


Seriously though, she was 15 and groomed online (afaik). Whatever she might need, its not adult level punishment.

malinheader

end of the road wrote: »

it's not my opinion. it's fact and it is international law that if someone is born in and are a citizen of a particular country then that country is responsible for them as they are from that country. if that country is in the west then the person is a western citizen whether they or you like it or not



the kurds don't want your permission to do anything. they want the west to take back it's terrorists out of their country. they don't want to clean up the mess or problems of other countries.



that's the problem. where she is she is a greater potential risk then if she is locked up back in her country of origine.

I seriously fear there is no hope left for the west.
Hard to win or even survive when you play by the rules and your opponents have no rules and can really use your weakness to their advantage. Its loopholes like these that will cause the UK alot more harm than good.

Saying that I still think given the go ahead the kurds could save the UK alot of hassle with there ISIS citizens.

malinheader

Odhinn wrote: »

The prophet (PBUH) was big on cats, so she'd probably be ok.


Seriously though, she was 15 and groomed online (afaik). Whatever she might need, its not adult level punishment.

Ffs. 100 lines.or grounded for a week.

rafatoni

Betch she is helped and brought out of there by britain.. no doubt about it..

malinheader

rafatoni wrote: »

Betch she is helped and brought out of there by britain.. no doubt about it..

Plenty of sympathisers in the UK to fund her homecoming .money won't be a problem.

Wibbs

Odhinn wrote: »

Seriously though, she was 15 and groomed online (afaik). Whatever she might need, its not adult level punishment.

I'd tend to agree. Though she'll need some very careful handling and watching. The earlier guff in the thread about killing her baby. What the actual fcuk?

Infini

Honestly I've no sympathy for her. It was widely known how dangerous, stupid and downright repulsive these Darwin Award State animals were before they got the shíte kicked out of them and promply purged. She wanted to live in stupid country she can stay there. I've no wish to see death on her but neither would I see anyone like her back either. She supported or still supports a group of regressive animals that rape, murder and destroy for nothing more than the belief of their twisted imaginary friend. Noone can have sympathy for her while she's like that it's little more than crocodile tears now.

ToBeFrank123

Odhinn wrote: »

The prophet (PBUH) was big on cats, so she'd probably be ok.


Seriously though, she was 15 and groomed online (afaik). Whatever she might need, its not adult level punishment.

She is now 19 (an adult) and says she regrets nothing. At what age does personal responsibility kick in?

end of the road

malinheader wrote: »

I seriously fear there is no hope left for the west.
Hard to win or even survive when you play by the rules and your opponents have no rules and can really use your weakness to their advantage. Its loopholes like these that will cause the UK alot more harm than good.

Saying that I still think given the go ahead the kurds could save the UK alot of hassle with there ISIS citizens.

oh i'm sure they could but why would they and why should they? not their problem.