FabSwingers.com
 

Quick Links

Search forum subjects:
 

Forums

» The Lounge
» Swingers Chat
» Virus
» Swinging Support and ...
» Swinging Club Discuss...
» Introductions
» Stories and Fantasies
» Fabswingers.com site ...
» Site help
» Chat room feedback/di...
» Mobile Web App feedba...
» Swinging Club/Event a...
» Meet Requests and Par...
» UK
» Ireland
» France
» Spain
» Politics
» USA
» Canada
» Australia
» New Zealand
» London
» Scotland
» Wales
» World Wide
» Bikers
» Camping
» Games

FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Should we let Shamina Back in?

Should we let Shamina Back in?

Jump to: Newest in thread

 

By *r-Oreo OP   Man  over a year ago

Birmingham

After watching a recap from yesterday's interview with Shamina, I feel a bit sorry for her. Although I don't think we should let her back in..

But I feel sorry because she was a victim, she was young whe she left, she was radicalised. The system didn't do enough to protect her from the influence of those radical ideals.

What do you think?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Going what Javid said the intel (which he couldn't divulge) would suggest she may still pose a risk to national security. On this basis, even as a soppy liberal I would have to agree she stays where she is.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *r-Oreo OP   Man  over a year ago

Birmingham

That is fine but we need more information to be able to decide for ourselves.

It's not as black and white as it seems

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *heGateKeeperMan  over a year ago

Stratford

Yes. She is British born and educated. If she is to be held accountable for her actions, that should be here.

She’s not the brightest spark, and I don’t think calling out the PM is the best move but it is what it is

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *r-Oreo OP   Man  over a year ago

Birmingham

Bringing her here , you run the risk of her radicalising the younger generation.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *offiaCoolWoman  over a year ago

Kidsgrove

Busman already has a thread running asking the same question.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Overall any form of child grooming is the same thing. We can't pick and choose which people deserve help based on the type of grooming they have had. The only concerning thing is when you are exposed to that level of violence, you can become desensitized and may lack compassion, empathy or ability to reconnect with others. This in any human being is a dangerous thing.. we might not understand what she did but we can understand that she was a child.

The government think they are sending a message to anyone who dares to do what she did but really they are sending a message that children are responsible for their own grooming. If they have evidence let her stand trial and face the consequences.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Bringing her here , you run the risk of her radicalising the younger generation."

A) I don't trust Sajid.

B) I don't believe any politician should be allowed to circumvent the law because they allegedly know stuff others don't. That is a very very dangerous path to take. For a start it was the justification for the second Iraq war which along with killing tens of thousands is the direct cause of this whole situation. If politicians hadn't been allowed to make decisions on secret (and made up) information, there would likely never have been an organisation called ISIS.

C) If she's that bad, what is wrong with having that come out in a free and fair trial?

Mr

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Sorry, hit reply to the wrong thread- should have been the one about Sajid.

Mr

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *angerous123Man  over a year ago

Leeds

Of course, she's British

Not letting her in is pure gesture politics

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman  over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"Bringing her here , you run the risk of her radicalising the younger generation."

Will she ? How ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *lenderfoxMan  over a year ago

Leeds

She was groomed as a child, it's a no brainer she should be allowed to return

There was a story about a young man convicted of extremist behaviour who was told to read Classics rather than facing a custodial sentence. Screams of double standards

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *TK421-Man  over a year ago

Cheltenham

She was a child... Radicalised.

God I know what I was like at 15. You wouldn't recognize me now.

So we are basically not into helping a victim who's one of ours? Frankly it doesn't matter if she's ours or not she's a victim. You will always be more alert around her...

Bring her back. She could be so useful in the war on terror too.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

No

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Definitely a NO

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *iamondCougarWoman  over a year ago

Norfuck! / Lincolnshire

It’s a difficult debate - she has probably witnessed scenes the rest of us only see in horror films.

Even if they did allow it she would have to live the rest of her life in a secure place for her own safety.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

No.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *mizhereMan  over a year ago

Thame Area

No thank you

I’ve watched this a few times now and watched the body language experts who do the criminal tests

Body language and tone still a real risk to our security

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *hetalkingstoveMan  over a year ago

London


"Of course, she's British

Not letting her in is pure gesture politics "

Exactly.

She's our problem, and we should deal with her.

Too many people seem to think this question is "should we be nice to her", or something. It's not about being kind to her, it's about not dodging our responsibility.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *immyinreadingMan  over a year ago

henley on thames


"Going what Javid said the intel (which he couldn't divulge) would suggest she may still pose a risk to national security. On this basis, even as a soppy liberal I would have to agree she stays where she is.

"

Wouldn’t having her under lock and key in the uk be safer?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *immyinreadingMan  over a year ago

henley on thames


"Of course, she's British

Not letting her in is pure gesture politics

Exactly.

She's our problem, and we should deal with her.

Too many people seem to think this question is "should we be nice to her", or something. It's not about being kind to her, it's about not dodging our responsibility. "

Agreed.

And use the justice system and if that means she is imprisoned, fine.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

When I read the title I thought it said...

Should we let stamina back in...

I was like... What did I do to get chucked out in the first place haha

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *immyinreadingMan  over a year ago

henley on thames


"No thank you

I’ve watched this a few times now and watched the body language experts who do the criminal tests

Body language and tone still a real risk to our security "

And she won’t be a threat of any sort if she is not brought back to the uk to face the legal system here?

Hoping she will just go away is not the answer

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Should we let Shamina Back in?

Yeh go on then

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *immyinreadingMan  over a year ago

henley on thames


"She was a child... Radicalised.

God I know what I was like at 15. You wouldn't recognize me now.

So we are basically not into helping a victim who's one of ours? Frankly it doesn't matter if she's ours or not she's a victim. You will always be more alert around her...

Bring her back. She could be so useful in the war on terror too. "

Agreed. Sad that some people are happy hiding behind the hole office decision to take away her passport, rather than look at the realities of the situation, that this was a British kid.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *orkcouple101Couple  over a year ago

york

Not even in an urn...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *immyinreadingMan  over a year ago

henley on thames


"Not even in an urn..."

That’s uncalled for.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *actilemale4uMan  over a year ago

London

Looks more fuckable without the burka

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andyfloss2000Woman  over a year ago

ashford


"Not even in an urn..."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ora the explorerWoman  over a year ago

Paradise, Herts


"Looks more fuckable without the burka"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ancsduoCouple  over a year ago

Morecambe

She was 20 years old when she made the comment that the Manchester arena bombings were justified.

That isn't a child.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *traight_no_iceMan  over a year ago

Stoke

Definitely not. Should Isis was still in power, she would not want to leave them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ickdasterdly51Man  over a year ago

Lingfield

A quick search on the web showed a 2019 Financial Times article which said that of 900 people who travelled to fight for ISIS over 40% have returned which I make 360. There's probably more now. I loathe ISIS and all who support it. However I'm struggling to see why this girl who was a child of 15 when she left and hasn't as yet been accused of any crime is being treated differently. Much as though I can't even remotely support her behaviour I feel that as a country we need to 'own our shit', take her back and if necessary charge her for her crimes. But equally do the same for all other returning fighters. I do feel that there's a certain section of society who are relishing picking on a young dark skinned girl whilst turning a blind eye to others who have probably done worse.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *heRazorsEdgeMan  over a year ago

Wales/ All over UK


"A quick search on the web showed a 2019 Financial Times article which said that of 900 people who travelled to fight for ISIS over 40% have returned which I make 360. There's probably more now. I loathe ISIS and all who support it. However I'm struggling to see why this girl who was a child of 15 when she left and hasn't as yet been accused of any crime is being treated differently. Much as though I can't even remotely support her behaviour I feel that as a country we need to 'own our shit', take her back and if necessary charge her for her crimes. But equally do the same for all other returning fighters. I do feel that there's a certain section of society who are relishing picking on a young dark skinned girl whilst turning a blind eye to others who have probably done worse.

"

This

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *immyinreadingMan  over a year ago

henley on thames


"A quick search on the web showed a 2019 Financial Times article which said that of 900 people who travelled to fight for ISIS over 40% have returned which I make 360. There's probably more now. I loathe ISIS and all who support it. However I'm struggling to see why this girl who was a child of 15 when she left and hasn't as yet been accused of any crime is being treated differently. Much as though I can't even remotely support her behaviour I feel that as a country we need to 'own our shit', take her back and if necessary charge her for her crimes. But equally do the same for all other returning fighters. I do feel that there's a certain section of society who are relishing picking on a young dark skinned girl whilst turning a blind eye to others who have probably done worse.

"

Word perfect

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Bringing her here , you run the risk of her radicalising the younger generation."

This

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *wistedTooCouple  over a year ago

Frimley

Lol. No. Stupid idiot made her choices. Sorry but with all that’s been happening around the world lately, I wouldn’t trust her with a bag of shopping let alone people’s safety. She’s radicalised and that is her own fault. First thing you do when some idiot says “you wanna fight the country that helped raise you?” is contact the police. Instead, she - and yes she was old enough to know better - chose otherwise.

Sack her off and leave her to her life over there.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *wistedTooCouple  over a year ago

Frimley


"A quick search on the web showed a 2019 Financial Times article which said that of 900 people who travelled to fight for ISIS over 40% have returned which I make 360. There's probably more now. I loathe ISIS and all who support it. However I'm struggling to see why this girl who was a child of 15 when she left and hasn't as yet been accused of any crime is being treated differently. Much as though I can't even remotely support her behaviour I feel that as a country we need to 'own our shit', take her back and if necessary charge her for her crimes. But equally do the same for all other returning fighters. I do feel that there's a certain section of society who are relishing picking on a young dark skinned girl whilst turning a blind eye to others who have probably done worse.

"

It’s nothing to do with her skin. That’s a blatant generalisation. It’s to do with her choices. She made them. Everyone else who went? Same thing. They became a part of something demented and should be stuck with it. It’s nothing to do with her race though. A bunch of “light skinned people” made the same choice and they can fuck off too.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *tooveMan  over a year ago

belfast

Nope. Let her stay where she is n

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *tooveMan  over a year ago

belfast


"A quick search on the web showed a 2019 Financial Times article which said that of 900 people who travelled to fight for ISIS over 40% have returned which I make 360. There's probably more now. I loathe ISIS and all who support it. However I'm struggling to see why this girl who was a child of 15 when she left and hasn't as yet been accused of any crime is being treated differently. Much as though I can't even remotely support her behaviour I feel that as a country we need to 'own our shit', take her back and if necessary charge her for her crimes. But equally do the same for all other returning fighters. I do feel that there's a certain section of society who are relishing picking on a young dark skinned girl whilst turning a blind eye to others who have probably done worse.

Word perfect "

Not perfect. Nonsense.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *heRazorsEdgeMan  over a year ago

Wales/ All over UK


"Lol. No. Stupid idiot made her choices. Sorry but with all that’s been happening around the world lately, I wouldn’t trust her with a bag of shopping let alone people’s safety. She’s radicalised and that is her own fault. First thing you do when some idiot says “you wanna fight the country that helped raise you?” is contact the police. Instead, she - and yes she was old enough to know better - chose otherwise.

Sack her off and leave her to her life over there."

I doubt they opened with “wanna fight the country that helped raise you?”…. IS had a very sophisticated online grooming operation to lure in young impressionable recruits

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andyfloss2000Woman  over a year ago

ashford

Just wonder how we would think if it was our 15 year old that was sucked into this madness? X

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"A quick search on the web showed a 2019 Financial Times article which said that of 900 people who travelled to fight for ISIS over 40% have returned which I make 360. There's probably more now. I loathe ISIS and all who support it. However I'm struggling to see why this girl who was a child of 15 when she left and hasn't as yet been accused of any crime is being treated differently. Much as though I can't even remotely support her behaviour I feel that as a country we need to 'own our shit', take her back and if necessary charge her for her crimes. But equally do the same for all other returning fighters. I do feel that there's a certain section of society who are relishing picking on a young dark skinned girl whilst turning a blind eye to others who have probably done worse.

"

I noticed you slipped in “dark-skinned girl” in there to try and identify those who don’t want her back into the country as racists – I’m surprised you didn’t also add something about “if she was a white girl no-one would argue” or something like that. If she was white, yellow, purple or polka-dotted, I would still not want her back. Lest we forget, just a few Isis atrocities. November 2015 Paris attacks (130 killed including children), July 2016 Nice truck attack (86 killed including children), June 2016 Atatürk Airport attack (45 killed including children), the March 2016 Brussels bombings (32 killed including children), and the May 2017 Manchester Arena bombing (22 killed including children). If this foul creature so much as fried a falafel for anyone remotely connected with any of these, then she aided and abetted an illegal terrorist organisation and is an accessory to these horrendous acts of violence against innocent people.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman  over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"She was 20 years old when she made the comment that the Manchester arena bombings were justified.

That isn't a child.

"

She didn't say they were justified.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

I think its a really difficult situation and we can't really demand other countries take their citizens back when we don't want them if we refuse to take ours and wash our hands.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman  over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"Bringing her here , you run the risk of her radicalising the younger generation.

This

"

Anyone can radicalise ....... it's not a strong point.. and it's simple conjecture.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Looks more fuckable without the burka"

Totally unacceptable comment!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *s1066Man  over a year ago

Swansea

Absolutely no chance.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *orny PTMan  over a year ago

Peterborough


"Bringing her here, you run the risk of her radicalising the younger generation."

Can you ever trust a traitor? No

She might be putting on the crocodile tears to recruit more terrorist of the future.

If she has any remorse, which I doubt, then the security services will have a lot of questions that need answering.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *traight_no_iceMan  over a year ago

Stoke


"She was 20 years old when she made the comment that the Manchester arena bombings were justified.

That isn't a child.

She didn't say they were justified.

"

She said it is a fair justification.

(I guess what people call an eye for an eye).

Asked about the Manchester Arena attack in 2017 in which 22 people - some of them children - were killed in a bombing claimed by IS, she said: "I was shocked. I didn't know about the kids, actually. I do feel that is wrong. Innocent people did get killed."

She compared the attack to military assaults on Syria, saying: "It's one thing to kill a soldier, it's fine, it's self-defence. But to kill people like women and children just like the women and children in Baghuz who are being killed right now unjustly by the bombings - it's a two-way thing really because women and children are being killed back in the Islamic State right now.

"It's kind of retaliation. Their justification was that it was retaliation so I thought, okay, that is a fair justification."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47276572

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Bringing her here, you run the risk of her radicalising the younger generation.

Can you ever trust a traitor? No

She might be putting on the crocodile tears to recruit more terrorist of the future.

If she has any remorse, which I doubt, then the security services will have a lot of questions that need answering."

Whilst I accept it is possible she could be a risk, I personally believe she would be so heavily monitored and secondary we don't need her here for people to be radicalised. At least if she's here she can be kept an eye on.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Of course, she's British

Not letting her in is pure gesture politics

Exactly.

She's our problem, and we should deal with her.

Too many people seem to think this question is "should we be nice to her", or something. It's not about being kind to her, it's about not dodging our responsibility. "

Well anything we do to her will be being nice to her. No prison we can put her in will be worse than the refugee camp she is living in.

And the camp is better treatment than any prisoner that isis captured would recieve.

Im afraid at 15 you should have the grounding to understand right from wrong. Its not like isis wasn't already being portrayed as a terrorist organisation, groomed or not she knew what she was joining.

She could have attempted to leave much like she left her parents if she didnt agree with what they were doing.

She constantly referred to the uk as your country not my country, she hasnt changed. Just wants a platform to incite and recruit.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

she needs a sniper bullet to head only tax money I'll wanna use on her

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andyfloss2000Woman  over a year ago

ashford


"she needs a sniper bullet to head only tax money I'll wanna use on her"

WOW!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"she needs a sniper bullet to head only tax money I'll wanna use on her"

Seriously!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *orny PTMan  over a year ago

Peterborough

To say that she's just a child, is deeply patronising, wrong and playing into her twofaced lies.

I've just checked this on the Army's website.

Quote:

HOW OLD DO I NEED TO BE TO JOIN THE REGULAR ARMY?

To join as a soldier you must:

You must be at least 16 years old to join the Army as a soldier.

You can start your application when you're 15 years and 7 months.

Be enlisted before your 36th birthday

If you're under 18, you'll also need parental consent to join

---------------

So the Army/British Government agree that at 15+ you can make choices, that could one day take you into battle and face the horrors, by starting the application process (subject to Mummy & Daddy's approval).

So if 15 and a bit is OK to want to join the Army, then it's old enough to be treated as a grown up, when getting involved with the likes of ISIS.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back."

Absolutely!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andyfloss2000Woman  over a year ago

ashford


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back."

Agreed! X

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *moothshaftMan  over a year ago

Coventry

Let her back in so I can give her one, then send her back!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Let her back in so I can give her one, then send her back!! "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back."

Any proof of your claims of racism? No? Just trying to stir the pot then. Stop trying to turn an accessory to mass murder into a martyr. Thanks.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *atcoupleCouple  over a year ago

Suffolk - East Anglia

No No No.

Simple. Leave her out there. We have the best country in the world, free health, free benefits, housing, jobs, opportunities, free education, security under the law (not to be underestimated), tolerance, fantastic places to see and things to do. We have it all.

If anyone turns their back on all this , then that's their problem but don't come back.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Of course she is a risk, she is indoctrinated into a death cult

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *hrissieTV/TS  over a year ago

Colchester

Let's ask the families of the Manchester bombings and see what they say.

I'll take a guess _ the answer is No.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *traight_no_iceMan  over a year ago

Stoke


"Just wonder how we would think if it was our 15 year old that was sucked into this madness? X"

She is not our 15 year old anymore. Our 22 year old has lost the priviledges she had while at ISIS. What if she has not regretted one single bit, even now and all we see is an act?

Do you see any evil in her when she (20 years old) said this?

"When I asked her about 3 actions I am not allowed to use in the forum) of Yazidi women by IS, she said 'Shia do the same in Iraq'."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47276572

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back.

Any proof of your claims of racism? No? Just trying to stir the pot then. Stop trying to turn an accessory to mass murder into a martyr. Thanks."

Grayson I never mentioned racism, maybe bias would be more appropriate. I say this because a white wife of a terrorist was on GMB talking of her experience she was returned to normal by councilling, don’t even think she done jail time

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *nabelle21Woman  over a year ago

B38


"Overall any form of child grooming is the same thing. We can't pick and choose which people deserve help based on the type of grooming they have had. The only concerning thing is when you are exposed to that level of violence, you can become desensitized and may lack compassion, empathy or ability to reconnect with others. This in any human being is a dangerous thing.. we might not understand what she did but we can understand that she was a child.

The government think they are sending a message to anyone who dares to do what she did but really they are sending a message that children are responsible for their own grooming. If they have evidence let her stand trial and face the consequences."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Huge Risk if they did. It's a no from me

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Huge Risk if they did. It's a no from me"

She's more of a risk if we don't.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back.

Any proof of your claims of racism? No? Just trying to stir the pot then. Stop trying to turn an accessory to mass murder into a martyr. Thanks.

Grayson I never mentioned racism, maybe bias would be more appropriate. I say this because a white wife of a terrorist was on GMB talking of her experience she was returned to normal by councilling, don’t even think she done jail time "

Your claim alluded to her being treated differently due to comparative skin colour. If she was white British, she would never have gone to Syria to join Isis in the first place. And I have just as much proof for that claim as you do for yours.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

You may want to watch interviews with her (available on YT) in which she has no regrets and claims to have had a good time with IS and mentions that she wouldn't have had a chance to find a man like her husband in the UK. She is saying those things as an adult not a child.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *r-Oreo OP   Man  over a year ago

Birmingham


"You may want to watch interviews with her (available on YT) in which she has no regrets and claims to have had a good time with IS and mentions that she wouldn't have had a chance to find a man like her husband in the UK. She is saying those things as an adult not a child."

But when she went, she was a child..

I'm not saying she's a Saint but doesn't she deserve a fair hearing

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *r-Oreo OP   Man  over a year ago

Birmingham


"Just wonder how we would think if it was our 15 year old that was sucked into this madness? X

She is not our 15 year old anymore. Our 22 year old has lost the priviledges she had while at ISIS. What if she has not regretted one single bit, even now and all we see is an act?

Do you see any evil in her when she (20 years old) said this?

"When I asked her about 3 actions I am not allowed to use in the forum) of Yazidi women by IS, she said 'Shia do the same in Iraq'."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47276572

"

How can we say we are a civilised nation without giving her a fair hearing. I'm not saying she should or shouldn't be let back in

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Ask all the poor innocent families who have been victims of isis attacks if she should be allowed back in and I’m sure you will get a resounding no , she knew what she was doing and now wants sympathy playing the I was too young I didn’t know what I was doing card , she’s still a danger and should never be allowed back anywhere near the UK a complete danger to this country

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back.

Any proof of your claims of racism? No? Just trying to stir the pot then. Stop trying to turn an accessory to mass murder into a martyr. Thanks.

Grayson I never mentioned racism, maybe bias would be more appropriate. I say this because a white wife of a terrorist was on GMB talking of her experience she was returned to normal by councilling, don’t even think she done jail time

Your claim alluded to her being treated differently due to comparative skin colour. If she was white British, she would never have gone to Syria to join Isis in the first place. And I have just as much proof for that claim as you do for yours."

Sally Anne-Jones was white and went to Syria. There were others also from all over the word.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Ask all the poor innocent families who have been victims of isis attacks if she should be allowed back in and I’m sure you will get a resounding no , she knew what she was doing and now wants sympathy playing the I was too young I didn’t know what I was doing card , she’s still a danger and should never be allowed back anywhere near the UK a complete danger to this country "

But thats not how the law works, if victims could dictate punishment we would still have hanging.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *uke olovingmanMan  over a year ago

Gravesend

Nope... Britain wasn't good enough to stay in when she went off seeking Isis glory ...why should we pick up the pieces of her sorry arse now

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *host63Man  over a year ago

Bedfont Feltham

Yes because I woukd rather have her where we vacant observe her and find out what she knows than being recruited by another terrorist group and coming here by other means and blowing herself up in a busy St.

If she feels she has nothing to lose then you have a bigger problem

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *hristopherd999Man  over a year ago

Brentwood

Once a terrorist always a terrorist

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *itzi999Woman  over a year ago

Slough


"After watching a recap from yesterday's interview with Shamina, I feel a bit sorry for her. Although I don't think we should let her back in..

But I feel sorry because she was a victim, she was young whe she left, she was radicalised. The system didn't do enough to protect her from the influence of those radical ideals.

What do you think? "

Definitely NO!

She will come back and radicalise others.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Once a terrorist always a terrorist"

Like Nelson Mandela

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"After watching a recap from yesterday's interview with Shamina, I feel a bit sorry for her. Although I don't think we should let her back in..

But I feel sorry because she was a victim, she was young whe she left, she was radicalised. The system didn't do enough to protect her from the influence of those radical ideals.

What do you think?

Definitely NO!

She will come back and radicalise others. "

Well not letting her back is a great recruitment for terrorist groups. They will say " doesn't matter if your born here, you will never be accepted and treated differently, because of your colour".

Think that will resonate with a lot more than she ever could.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *icecouple561Couple  over a year ago
Forum Mod

East Sussex


"Once a terrorist always a terrorist

Like Nelson Mandela"

Good point, very well made!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ickdasterdly51Man  over a year ago

Lingfield

To me there are two issues to this argument. Firstly what we think of her as a person and her actions and secondly what we think of the British governments actions in withdrawing citizenship.

Personally I think her actions were reprehensible and there is a good argument to says that even at 15 she should have known the difference between good and evil. However there is general agreement that she was groomed and radicalised at a young age so I'll leave it to people more expert than me ( and most people on here) to decide whether that is a valid reason for her actions and whether a deradicalisation program would be beneficial to us all.

However I think the government is wrong to wash their hands of her. Our border force allowed three under age unaccompanied British passport holding girls to leave Britain for Turkey without raising an eyebrow. As far as I'm aware Syria have no interest in charging her with crimes, if they do them I've no problems with her facing justice with as fair trial.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"To me there are two issues to this argument. Firstly what we think of her as a person and her actions and secondly what we think of the British governments actions in withdrawing citizenship.

Personally I think her actions were reprehensible and there is a good argument to says that even at 15 she should have known the difference between good and evil. However there is general agreement that she was groomed and radicalised at a young age so I'll leave it to people more expert than me ( and most people on here) to decide whether that is a valid reason for her actions and whether a deradicalisation program would be beneficial to us all.

However I think the government is wrong to wash their hands of her. Our border force allowed three under age unaccompanied British passport holding girls to leave Britain for Turkey without raising an eyebrow. As far as I'm aware Syria have no interest in charging her with crimes, if they do them I've no problems with her facing justice with as fair trial. "

To me this about the law. Are we a country that stands by its law.

Or are we a country where politicians can treat a individual differently because of pressure created media stirred up public frenzy.

Though a abhorrent individual Shamina may be. A much more abhorrent Anjum Chowdary and others like him, are walking about free in this country. They are a much greater threat. Remember he is the groomer going around grooming people like her.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Once a terrorist always a terrorist

Like Nelson Mandela

Good point, very well made!"

One person's terrorist is another

person's freedom fighter

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ob198XaMan  over a year ago

teleford


"Once a terrorist always a terrorist

Like Nelson Mandela

Good point, very well made!

One person's terrorist is another

person's freedom fighter"

Isis is about a number of things but freedom is certainly not one!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ean counterMan  over a year ago

Market Harborough / Kettering

Personally no, don't let her back in but then you think about how many are coming over in dinghies every day and we don't send them back (like we should). If she was allowed back in she would be watched like a hawk but how many of these illegal immigrants have radical views? We won't be able to watch all of them!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

home grown terrorism is a bigger threat than people trying to flee war zones.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back.

Any proof of your claims of racism? No? Just trying to stir the pot then. Stop trying to turn an accessory to mass murder into a martyr. Thanks.

Grayson I never mentioned racism, maybe bias would be more appropriate. I say this because a white wife of a terrorist was on GMB talking of her experience she was returned to normal by councilling, don’t even think she done jail time

Your claim alluded to her being treated differently due to comparative skin colour. If she was white British, she would never have gone to Syria to join Isis in the first place. And I have just as much proof for that claim as you do for yours.

Sally Anne-Jones was white and went to Syria. There were others also from all over the word."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back.

Any proof of your claims of racism? No? Just trying to stir the pot then. Stop trying to turn an accessory to mass murder into a martyr. Thanks.

Grayson I never mentioned racism, maybe bias would be more appropriate. I say this because a white wife of a terrorist was on GMB talking of her experience she was returned to normal by councilling, don’t even think she done jail time

Your claim alluded to her being treated differently due to comparative skin colour. If she was white British, she would never have gone to Syria to join Isis in the first place. And I have just as much proof for that claim as you do for yours.

Sally Anne-Jones was white and went to Syria. There were others also from all over the word."

Well, in the name of equality, I hope Shamima Begum gets the same treatment as Sally Anne-Jones - she certainly deserves it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andyfloss2000Woman  over a year ago

ashford


"Personally no, don't let her back in but then you think about how many are coming over in dinghies every day and we don't send them back (like we should). If she was allowed back in she would be watched like a hawk but how many of these illegal immigrants have radical views? We won't be able to watch all of them!!"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ustyshowoffCouple  over a year ago

Cyprus


"she needs a sniper bullet to head only tax money I'll wanna use on her"

Mark

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back.

Any proof of your claims of racism? No? Just trying to stir the pot then. Stop trying to turn an accessory to mass murder into a martyr. Thanks.

Grayson I never mentioned racism, maybe bias would be more appropriate. I say this because a white wife of a terrorist was on GMB talking of her experience she was returned to normal by councilling, don’t even think she done jail time

Your claim alluded to her being treated differently due to comparative skin colour. If she was white British, she would never have gone to Syria to join Isis in the first place. And I have just as much proof for that claim as you do for yours.

Sally Anne-Jones was white and went to Syria. There were others also from all over the word.

Well, in the name of equality, I hope Shamima Begum gets the same treatment as Sally Anne-Jones - she certainly deserves it."

There’s no educating people like you

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *asycouple1971Couple  over a year ago

midlands

Nope.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back.

Any proof of your claims of racism? No? Just trying to stir the pot then. Stop trying to turn an accessory to mass murder into a martyr. Thanks.

Grayson I never mentioned racism, maybe bias would be more appropriate. I say this because a white wife of a terrorist was on GMB talking of her experience she was returned to normal by councilling, don’t even think she done jail time

Your claim alluded to her being treated differently due to comparative skin colour. If she was white British, she would never have gone to Syria to join Isis in the first place. And I have just as much proof for that claim as you do for yours.

Sally Anne-Jones was white and went to Syria. There were others also from all over the word.

Well, in the name of equality, I hope Shamima Begum gets the same treatment as Sally Anne-Jones - she certainly deserves it.

There’s no educating people like you "

Yes there is, I'm very well educated thank you. By your support for this creature, you seem to show very little sympathy for all the children that Isis have murdered - why is that?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Bringing her here, you run the risk of her radicalising the younger generation.

Can you ever trust a traitor? No

She might be putting on the crocodile tears to recruit more terrorist of the future.

If she has any remorse, which I doubt, then the security services will have a lot of questions that need answering.

Whilst I accept it is possible she could be a risk, I personally believe she would be so heavily monitored and secondary we don't need her here for people to be radicalised. At least if she's here she can be kept an eye on. "

Heavily monitored at cost to the British public. So no thank you. Leave her there. Not our problem anymore. She made her bed, let her lie in it…

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman  over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"Let's ask the families of the Manchester bombings and see what they say.

I'll take a guess _ the answer is No."

She didn't bomb the Manchester Arena.

This kind of comment is akin to me being held responsible for I.R.A atrocities committed by some Irish bloke cos I ran off to Ireland and married someone from the I.R.A. when I was a teenager.

She can only be held responsible for what she has done.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman  over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back.

Any proof of your claims of racism? No? Just trying to stir the pot then. Stop trying to turn an accessory to mass murder into a martyr. Thanks.

Grayson I never mentioned racism, maybe bias would be more appropriate. I say this because a white wife of a terrorist was on GMB talking of her experience she was returned to normal by councilling, don’t even think she done jail time

Your claim alluded to her being treated differently due to comparative skin colour. If she was white British, she would never have gone to Syria to join Isis in the first place. And I have just as much proof for that claim as you do for yours.

Sally Anne-Jones was white and went to Syria. There were others also from all over the word.

Well, in the name of equality, I hope Shamima Begum gets the same treatment as Sally Anne-Jones - she certainly deserves it.

There’s no educating people like you

Yes there is, I'm very well educated thank you. By your support for this creature, you seem to show very little sympathy for all the children that Isis have murdered - why is that?"

Grayson, granted the comment about your education was rude and uncalled for but calling someone unsympathetic to murdered children and then asking them to explain THAT which you have placed upon them simply to demonise them not only weakens your argument but strengthens theirs.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andare63Man  over a year ago

oldham


"Huge Risk if they did. It's a no from me

She's more of a risk if we don't. "

So she is a risk then?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andyfloss2000Woman  over a year ago

ashford


"Let her back in, de-brainwash her OR have her pay her debt to society in the country of her birth if she was White British they’d already have her back.

Any proof of your claims of racism? No? Just trying to stir the pot then. Stop trying to turn an accessory to mass murder into a martyr. Thanks.

Grayson I never mentioned racism, maybe bias would be more appropriate. I say this because a white wife of a terrorist was on GMB talking of her experience she was returned to normal by councilling, don’t even think she done jail time

Your claim alluded to her being treated differently due to comparative skin colour. If she was white British, she would never have gone to Syria to join Isis in the first place. And I have just as much proof for that claim as you do for yours.

Sally Anne-Jones was white and went to Syria. There were others also from all over the word.

Well, in the name of equality, I hope Shamima Begum gets the same treatment as Sally Anne-Jones - she certainly deserves it.

There’s no educating people like you

Yes there is, I'm very well educated thank you. By your support for this creature, you seem to show very little sympathy for all the children that Isis have murdered - why is that?"

She is not a creature??

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andare63Man  over a year ago

oldham

I found her westernised look, her body language and the lack of emotion when questioned on the deaths of her three children very iffy to say the least.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *r-Oreo OP   Man  over a year ago

Birmingham

Should she be allowed in at least to have a fair hearing. Then They can decide what to do with her hehe

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *r-Oreo OP   Man  over a year ago

Birmingham

Should she be allowed in at least to have a fair hearing. Then They can decide what to do with her hehe

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *uddy laneMan  over a year ago

dudley

A wolf in sheep's clothing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

What she did as a young, groomed and radicalised 15yr old shouldn't have stripped her of her citizenship and prevented her from returning. What she has done and also what she has supported in the years since most certainly should. Apparently our intelligence services have files on her documenting her involvement which we aren't privvy to, and nor should we be. That's the nature of their business. Our duly elected government have ruled and that should be the end of it. If it transpires that its the wrong decision at a later date then they should be held accountable. I mean they won't, just look at Blair, but they should.

It's not up to "we the people" to second guess every decision our government make and demand to see all the evidence. It just doesn't work like that. So like it or lump it, for now, she's not coming back. And I for one am OK with that. Sorry if that hurts anyone's sensibilities. Peace & love xx

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ed VoluptaWoman  over a year ago

Wirral.

[Removed by poster at 17/09/21 18:55:19]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ed VoluptaWoman  over a year ago

Wirral.


"What she did as a young, groomed and radicalised 15yr old shouldn't have stripped her of her citizenship and prevented her from returning. What she has done and also what she has supported in the years since most certainly should. Apparently our intelligence services have files on her documenting her involvement which we aren't privvy to, and nor should we be. That's the nature of their business. Our duly elected government have ruled and that should be the end of it. If it transpires that its the wrong decision at a later date then they should be held accountable. I mean they won't, just look at Blair, but they should.

It's not up to "we the people" to second guess every decision our government make and demand to see all the evidence. It just doesn't work like that. So like it or lump it, for now, she's not coming back. And I for one am OK with that. Sorry if that hurts anyone's sensibilities. Peace & love xx"

Agreed. It's is NOT up to us.

The govt, in stripping her citizenship, did not act illegally, as she has/can apply for Bangladeshi citizenship ship. This has been challenged in court & refused. People have their citizenship removed a lot more than you realise. It's not just her.

The Home Office have a file of credible evidence detailing her direct links to terrorist atrocities so, while I agree she was groomed at a young age, she is very not just the "baby making" ISIS puppet she is portrayed as. She was and - according to intel - is still a serious threat.

Furthermore, as I said on yesterday's thread & no one responded, the killers of Jaime Bulger were deemed legally responsible for their actions at the age of 10. Despite their defence being they were brainwashed by "video nasties". I certainly draw a parallel here.

So no. I do not think she should be allowed into the country, not should we have anything else to do with her. She is no longer a British Citizen.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"After watching a recap from yesterday's interview with Shamina, I feel a bit sorry for her. Although I don't think we should let her back in..

But I feel sorry because she was a victim, she was young whe she left, she was radicalised. The system didn't do enough to protect her from the influence of those radical ideals.

What do you think?

Definitely NO!

She will come back and radicalise others. "

I dont buy that is an argument because if she's going to radicalise people she will do it wherever she is.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Once a terrorist always a terrorist

Like Nelson Mandela"

Exactly.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Huge Risk if they did. It's a no from me

She's more of a risk if we don't.

So she is a risk then? "

Of course she is. Anyone the expresses the views that she has is a risk however we do not live in a society where we strip people affairs citizenship because of their belief system. She needs to be brought back here where she can face Justice and be monitored and hopefully rehabilitated, we can't just wash our hands of someone because we dont like them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Huge Risk if they did. It's a no from me

She's more of a risk if we don't.

So she is a risk then?

Of course she is. Anyone the expresses the views that she has is a risk however we do not live in a society where we strip people affairs citizenship because of their belief system. She needs to be brought back here where she can face Justice and be monitored and hopefully rehabilitated, we can't just wash our hands of someone because we dont like them. "

She didn't break any laws here so there is no justice for her to face. She is simply undesirable and has been refused permission to return. Citizenship is not a right, it's a privelage.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Huge Risk if they did. It's a no from me

She's more of a risk if we don't.

So she is a risk then?

Of course she is. Anyone the expresses the views that she has is a risk however we do not live in a society where we strip people affairs citizenship because of their belief system. She needs to be brought back here where she can face Justice and be monitored and hopefully rehabilitated, we can't just wash our hands of someone because we dont like them.

She didn't break any laws here so there is no justice for her to face. She is simply undesirable and has been refused permission to return. Citizenship is not a right, it's a privelage. "

Actually you are wrong citizenship is a right because she was born here she is a British citizen she's not been granted British citizenship. She doesn't have duel nationally or citizenship in any other country.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Huge Risk if they did. It's a no from me

She's more of a risk if we don't.

So she is a risk then?

Of course she is. Anyone the expresses the views that she has is a risk however we do not live in a society where we strip people affairs citizenship because of their belief system. She needs to be brought back here where she can face Justice and be monitored and hopefully rehabilitated, we can't just wash our hands of someone because we dont like them.

She didn't break any laws here so there is no justice for her to face. She is simply undesirable and has been refused permission to return. Citizenship is not a right, it's a privelage.

Actually you are wrong citizenship is a right because she was born here she is a British citizen she's not been granted British citizenship. She doesn't have duel nationally or citizenship in any other country. "

You may want to fact check that. That was in actual fact the basis for her removal of citizenship, which was challenged and upheld.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Huge Risk if they did. It's a no from me

She's more of a risk if we don't.

So she is a risk then?

Of course she is. Anyone the expresses the views that she has is a risk however we do not live in a society where we strip people affairs citizenship because of their belief system. She needs to be brought back here where she can face Justice and be monitored and hopefully rehabilitated, we can't just wash our hands of someone because we dont like them.

She didn't break any laws here so there is no justice for her to face. She is simply undesirable and has been refused permission to return. Citizenship is not a right, it's a privelage.

Actually you are wrong citizenship is a right because she was born here she is a British citizen she's not been granted British citizenship. She doesn't have duel nationally or citizenship in any other country.

You may want to fact check that. That was in actual fact the basis for her removal of citizenship, which was challenged and upheld. "

You may want to check it she does not have citizenship in any other country. That is why the decision made is actually illegal.

She can apply for citizenship to Bangladesh because her mother was born there. A very quick Google search will tell you you are wrong and she does not have citizenship in any other country and was born here. Bangladesh have refused to take her as she is not and has never a citizen or even stepped foot in that country. So no she is in effect stateless which is against the law.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *estcountryDadBodMan  over a year ago

Exeter

I’m not qualified to know whether it’s possible but my view is if she can return home and held under terrorism charges and can stand trial as such then that should be her right as a ‘citizen’. Guilty then she is charged accordingly, aquited then released accordingly.

If not and she can just merge back into society without consequence then no, she made a choice and can’t just waltz back home as it didn’t go as she wanted.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship. "

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk! "

It has nothing to do with us what other countries do, that's a matter for them. Shamima's citizenship was revoked within the legal framework outlined above. It was/is felt that she is a threat to national security for reasons unknown to us. Doing the "right thing" for one person may not best serve the interests of the many. We can dance around in circles and never agree, you and I, but the fact is no laws have been broken or she would be here now.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

I would also argue that she ceased to be "our problem" by her renouncing the country she grew up in and joining a terrorist organisation hell bent on its destruction, and staying there and assisting it with no remorse well in to adulthood.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"I would also argue that she ceased to be "our problem" by her renouncing the country she grew up in and joining a terrorist organisation hell bent on its destruction, and staying there and assisting it with no remorse well in to adulthood. "

So the 375 men that are known to have returned to the uk after being known to have fought in Syria you have nothing to say about that just a female who was 15 years old when she was radicalised.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk!

It has nothing to do with us what other countries do, that's a matter for them. Shamima's citizenship was revoked within the legal framework outlined above. It was/is felt that she is a threat to national security for reasons unknown to us. Doing the "right thing" for one person may not best serve the interests of the many. We can dance around in circles and never agree, you and I, but the fact is no laws have been broken or she would be here now. "

So what next somebody says something we don't like whilst in another country and we strip them of their citizenship because in theory that all she has done.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"I would also argue that she ceased to be "our problem" by her renouncing the country she grew up in and joining a terrorist organisation hell bent on its destruction, and staying there and assisting it with no remorse well in to adulthood.

So the 375 men that are known to have returned to the uk after being known to have fought in Syria you have nothing to say about that just a female who was 15 years old when she was radicalised.

"

I wasn't asked about them in the original post. I have very strong views on them as it happens - though I have a feeling they may be at odds with yours.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk!

It has nothing to do with us what other countries do, that's a matter for them. Shamima's citizenship was revoked within the legal framework outlined above. It was/is felt that she is a threat to national security for reasons unknown to us. Doing the "right thing" for one person may not best serve the interests of the many. We can dance around in circles and never agree, you and I, but the fact is no laws have been broken or she would be here now.

So what next somebody says something we don't like whilst in another country and we strip them of their citizenship because in theory that all she has done. "

Clearly that's not all she's done or our intelligence services wouldn't have files on her and she wouldn't have been refused her citizenship.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk!

It has nothing to do with us what other countries do, that's a matter for them. Shamima's citizenship was revoked within the legal framework outlined above. It was/is felt that she is a threat to national security for reasons unknown to us. Doing the "right thing" for one person may not best serve the interests of the many. We can dance around in circles and never agree, you and I, but the fact is no laws have been broken or she would be here now.

So what next somebody says something we don't like whilst in another country and we strip them of their citizenship because in theory that all she has done.

Clearly that's not all she's done or our intelligence services wouldn't have files on her and she wouldn't have been refused her citizenship. "

They have all so made it clear in those files they have no clear evidence of her being directly involved in terror offences. I'm not saying she's a sweet innocent young girl who was done nothing wrong but what I am saying is she needs to be brought back here and closely monitored and if she has done something wrong brought to Justice and face a proper trial.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk!

It has nothing to do with us what other countries do, that's a matter for them. Shamima's citizenship was revoked within the legal framework outlined above. It was/is felt that she is a threat to national security for reasons unknown to us. Doing the "right thing" for one person may not best serve the interests of the many. We can dance around in circles and never agree, you and I, but the fact is no laws have been broken or she would be here now.

So what next somebody says something we don't like whilst in another country and we strip them of their citizenship because in theory that all she has done.

Clearly that's not all she's done or our intelligence services wouldn't have files on her and she wouldn't have been refused her citizenship.

They have all so made it clear in those files they have no clear evidence of her being directly involved in terror offences. I'm not saying she's a sweet innocent young girl who was done nothing wrong but what I am saying is she needs to be brought back here and closely monitored and if she has done something wrong brought to Justice and face a proper trial. "

And my point is she shouldn't go through the British justice system, she hasn't broken any laws here. If you were caught shoplifting in Spain you wouldn't be deported to stand trial in Southwark court. She was a member of an international terror organisation

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk!

It has nothing to do with us what other countries do, that's a matter for them. Shamima's citizenship was revoked within the legal framework outlined above. It was/is felt that she is a threat to national security for reasons unknown to us. Doing the "right thing" for one person may not best serve the interests of the many. We can dance around in circles and never agree, you and I, but the fact is no laws have been broken or she would be here now.

So what next somebody says something we don't like whilst in another country and we strip them of their citizenship because in theory that all she has done.

Clearly that's not all she's done or our intelligence services wouldn't have files on her and she wouldn't have been refused her citizenship.

They have all so made it clear in those files they have no clear evidence of her being directly involved in terror offences. I'm not saying she's a sweet innocent young girl who was done nothing wrong but what I am saying is she needs to be brought back here and closely monitored and if she has done something wrong brought to Justice and face a proper trial.

And my point is she shouldn't go through the British justice system, she hasn't broken any laws here. If you were caught shoplifting in Spain you wouldn't be deported to stand trial in Southwark court. She was a member of an international terror organisation "

Then you can't have it both ways! you can't say she hasn't broken any laws here but we won't have her back anyway just in case she has in another country. So my point stands we can't just strip people of their Citizenship because we dont like what they say.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk!

It has nothing to do with us what other countries do, that's a matter for them. Shamima's citizenship was revoked within the legal framework outlined above. It was/is felt that she is a threat to national security for reasons unknown to us. Doing the "right thing" for one person may not best serve the interests of the many. We can dance around in circles and never agree, you and I, but the fact is no laws have been broken or she would be here now.

So what next somebody says something we don't like whilst in another country and we strip them of their citizenship because in theory that all she has done.

Clearly that's not all she's done or our intelligence services wouldn't have files on her and she wouldn't have been refused her citizenship.

They have all so made it clear in those files they have no clear evidence of her being directly involved in terror offences. I'm not saying she's a sweet innocent young girl who was done nothing wrong but what I am saying is she needs to be brought back here and closely monitored and if she has done something wrong brought to Justice and face a proper trial.

And my point is she shouldn't go through the British justice system, she hasn't broken any laws here. If you were caught shoplifting in Spain you wouldn't be deported to stand trial in Southwark court. She was a member of an international terror organisation

Then you can't have it both ways! you can't say she hasn't broken any laws here but we won't have her back anyway just in case she has in another country. So my point stands we can't just strip people of their Citizenship because we dont like what they say. "

It's not having it both ways. What I'm saying is, it's irrelevant what laws she's broken in a foreign country. It's not about laws. It's about her being a member of an international terror organisation and a threat to national security, which the authorities believe and obviously can prove to those with the correct clearance. Not you or I. And on THAT basis she's had her citizenship stripped legally. It's not for you or I to debate as we don't have all the facts. We can have our differing opinions but we don't make the decisions. Our elected government do.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk!

It has nothing to do with us what other countries do, that's a matter for them. Shamima's citizenship was revoked within the legal framework outlined above. It was/is felt that she is a threat to national security for reasons unknown to us. Doing the "right thing" for one person may not best serve the interests of the many. We can dance around in circles and never agree, you and I, but the fact is no laws have been broken or she would be here now.

So what next somebody says something we don't like whilst in another country and we strip them of their citizenship because in theory that all she has done.

Clearly that's not all she's done or our intelligence services wouldn't have files on her and she wouldn't have been refused her citizenship.

They have all so made it clear in those files they have no clear evidence of her being directly involved in terror offences. I'm not saying she's a sweet innocent young girl who was done nothing wrong but what I am saying is she needs to be brought back here and closely monitored and if she has done something wrong brought to Justice and face a proper trial.

And my point is she shouldn't go through the British justice system, she hasn't broken any laws here. If you were caught shoplifting in Spain you wouldn't be deported to stand trial in Southwark court. She was a member of an international terror organisation

Then you can't have it both ways! you can't say she hasn't broken any laws here but we won't have her back anyway just in case she has in another country. So my point stands we can't just strip people of their Citizenship because we dont like what they say.

It's not having it both ways. What I'm saying is, it's irrelevant what laws she's broken in a foreign country. It's not about laws. It's about her being a member of an international terror organisation and a threat to national security, which the authorities believe and obviously can prove to those with the correct clearance. Not you or I. And on THAT basis she's had her citizenship stripped legally. It's not for you or I to debate as we don't have all the facts. We can have our differing opinions but we don't make the decisions. Our elected government do. "

Well then you have answered your own question she has committed a criminal offence here by being a member of a terrorist organisation so therefore can stand trial and face charges.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk!

It has nothing to do with us what other countries do, that's a matter for them. Shamima's citizenship was revoked within the legal framework outlined above. It was/is felt that she is a threat to national security for reasons unknown to us. Doing the "right thing" for one person may not best serve the interests of the many. We can dance around in circles and never agree, you and I, but the fact is no laws have been broken or she would be here now.

So what next somebody says something we don't like whilst in another country and we strip them of their citizenship because in theory that all she has done.

Clearly that's not all she's done or our intelligence services wouldn't have files on her and she wouldn't have been refused her citizenship.

They have all so made it clear in those files they have no clear evidence of her being directly involved in terror offences. I'm not saying she's a sweet innocent young girl who was done nothing wrong but what I am saying is she needs to be brought back here and closely monitored and if she has done something wrong brought to Justice and face a proper trial.

And my point is she shouldn't go through the British justice system, she hasn't broken any laws here. If you were caught shoplifting in Spain you wouldn't be deported to stand trial in Southwark court. She was a member of an international terror organisation

Then you can't have it both ways! you can't say she hasn't broken any laws here but we won't have her back anyway just in case she has in another country. So my point stands we can't just strip people of their Citizenship because we dont like what they say.

It's not having it both ways. What I'm saying is, it's irrelevant what laws she's broken in a foreign country. It's not about laws. It's about her being a member of an international terror organisation and a threat to national security, which the authorities believe and obviously can prove to those with the correct clearance. Not you or I. And on THAT basis she's had her citizenship stripped legally. It's not for you or I to debate as we don't have all the facts. We can have our differing opinions but we don't make the decisions. Our elected government do.

Well then you have answered your own question she has committed a criminal offence here by being a member of a terrorist organisation so therefore can stand trial and face charges. "

Well technically she didn't commit the crime until she joined them in Syria but sure why not. The point is she ISN'T a British citizen anymore - legally, so therefore she should NOT be let back in. That was the OP's question.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *traight_no_iceMan  over a year ago

Stoke


"Just wonder how we would think if it was our 15 year old that was sucked into this madness? X

She is not our 15 year old anymore. Our 22 year old has lost the priviledges she had while at ISIS. What if she has not regretted one single bit, even now and all we see is an act?

Do you see any evil in her when she (20 years old) said this?

"When I asked her about 3 actions I am not allowed to use in the forum) of Yazidi women by IS, she said 'Shia do the same in Iraq'."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47276572

How can we say we are a civilised nation without giving her a fair hearing. I'm not saying she should or shouldn't be let back in "

Sure. But where? In the UK? She is not allowed back.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ich_ChesterMan  over a year ago

Chester

At 15 she knew what she was doing, she chose to go to Syria, she chose to do what she did whilst in Syria.

My answer is no, if she comes back it makes a mockery of the judical system

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *traight_no_iceMan  over a year ago

Stoke


"Once a terrorist always a terrorist

Like Nelson Mandela

Good point, very well made!"

I am not so sure. Even though I am not a proponent of such practices, Mandela, his efforts and his aim can not be compared to that of ISIS.

ISIS were fighting against whom? Essentially against anyone who was not supporting ISIS. These guys were killing for fun and were happy to show it to the world.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *traight_no_iceMan  over a year ago

Stoke


"To me there are two issues to this argument. Firstly what we think of her as a person and her actions and secondly what we think of the British governments actions in withdrawing citizenship.

Personally I think her actions were reprehensible and there is a good argument to says that even at 15 she should have known the difference between good and evil. However there is general agreement that she was groomed and radicalised at a young age so I'll leave it to people more expert than me ( and most people on here) to decide whether that is a valid reason for her actions and whether a deradicalisation program would be beneficial to us all.

However I think the government is wrong to wash their hands of her. Our border force allowed three under age unaccompanied British passport holding girls to leave Britain for Turkey without raising an eyebrow. As far as I'm aware Syria have no interest in charging her with crimes, if they do them I've no problems with her facing justice with as fair trial.

To me this about the law. Are we a country that stands by its law.

Or are we a country where politicians can treat a individual differently because of pressure created media stirred up public frenzy.

Though a abhorrent individual Shamina may be. A much more abhorrent Anjum Chowdary and others like him, are walking about free in this country. They are a much greater threat. Remember he is the groomer going around grooming people like her."

I believe because Anjum Chowdary is such a high profile case should he step out of the UK, the government will not allow him back. Same as they did many years ago with Omar Bakri.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Once a terrorist always a terrorist

Like Nelson Mandela

Good point, very well made!

I am not so sure. Even though I am not a proponent of such practices, Mandela, his efforts and his aim can not be compared to that of ISIS.

ISIS were fighting against whom? Essentially against anyone who was not supporting ISIS. These guys were killing for fun and were happy to show it to the world.

"

I agree. Nelson Mandela was only labelled a terrorist by the South African government of the time, the instigators of apartheid, and by a small number of right-wing governments around the world. He wasn't even tried for terrorism offences, he was jailed for life for "conspiring to overthrow the state". Isis have committed, and still do commit on a much smaller scale, some horrendous atrocities against humanity. These include - binding and blindfolding men suspected of being homosexual and pushing them off the roof of a high building, binding people and setting light to them, locking them in cages and slowly lowering them into water, slow decapitation using small blades and suicide bombing of public places full of innocent people. This is what Shamima Begum chose to leave her home for to join and support. She deserves nothing from this country.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Once a terrorist always a terrorist

Like Nelson Mandela

Good point, very well made!

I am not so sure. Even though I am not a proponent of such practices, Mandela, his efforts and his aim can not be compared to that of ISIS.

ISIS were fighting against whom? Essentially against anyone who was not supporting ISIS. These guys were killing for fun and were happy to show it to the world.

I agree. Nelson Mandela was only labelled a terrorist by the South African government of the time, the instigators of apartheid, and by a small number of right-wing governments around the world. He wasn't even tried for terrorism offences, he was jailed for life for "conspiring to overthrow the state". Isis have committed, and still do commit on a much smaller scale, some horrendous atrocities against humanity. These include - binding and blindfolding men suspected of being homosexual and pushing them off the roof of a high building, binding people and setting light to them, locking them in cages and slowly lowering them into water, slow decapitation using small blades and suicide bombing of public places full of innocent people. This is what Shamima Begum chose to leave her home for to join and support. She deserves nothing from this country."

Nelson Mandela was the US terrorist watch list until 2008. Margaret Thatcher also has been quoted as calling him a terrorist. He supported volience for his political beliefs.

Is it the media grooming everybody's attitudes.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

I'd say no she made her choice and that's that we are to soft on terrorists as it is, you have to eradicate evil end off!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ermite12ukMan  over a year ago

Solihull and Brentwood

Nope. She made her decision when she thought ISIS was the best thing since sliced bread. Now it's toast.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *alandNitaCouple  over a year ago

Scunthorpe


"Nope. She made her decision when she thought ISIS was the best thing since sliced bread. Now it's toast."

So... you're saying that toast is the best thing since sliced bread?

Seriously though, personal opinions are unlikely to come into it. There will be a legal analysis and a court will decide what is going to happen. It is irrelevant what we think

Cal

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ermite12ukMan  over a year ago

Solihull and Brentwood


"Nope. She made her decision when she thought ISIS was the best thing since sliced bread. Now it's toast.

So... you're saying that toast is the best thing since sliced bread?

Seriously though, personal opinions are unlikely to come into it. There will be a legal analysis and a court will decide what is going to happen. It is irrelevant what we think

Cal"

Totally agree with you about personal opinions not mattering a jot. Something for Boris, the foreign secretary and several courts, probably all the way upto the highest court in the land. As you pointed out.

Just a shame that we can't say. "Er no." "We are not going to throw money away on a lady that didn't give a rat's ass about her country while everything was wonderful for ISIS." Would be a warning to others, that way, if something like another caliphate pops up again.

Instead of lining the pockets of lawyers that are not really that broke. Let's instead hand the money we were going to defend her with. To the NHS to help with the covid pandemic, currently. imho.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *estivalMan  over a year ago

borehamwood


"In the UK, someone can have their citizenship stripped by the home secretary, for the following reasons:

It is "for the public good" and would not make them stateless

The person obtained citizenship through fraud

Their actions could harm UK interests and they can claim citizenship elsewhere.

Also, I believe there were issues with her actual citizenship status due to her parents. Being born in a country does not give one automatic citizenship.

It doesn't make it right and we can't expect other countries to take their citizens back when we won't take ours. We are expecting another country and to take on our problem when she has never stepped foot inside that country so we are risking her coming here but would quite happy for another country to take the risk!

It has nothing to do with us what other countries do, that's a matter for them. Shamima's citizenship was revoked within the legal framework outlined above. It was/is felt that she is a threat to national security for reasons unknown to us. Doing the "right thing" for one person may not best serve the interests of the many. We can dance around in circles and never agree, you and I, but the fact is no laws have been broken or she would be here now.

So what next somebody says something we don't like whilst in another country and we strip them of their citizenship because in theory that all she has done.

Clearly that's not all she's done or our intelligence services wouldn't have files on her and she wouldn't have been refused her citizenship.

They have all so made it clear in those files they have no clear evidence of her being directly involved in terror offences. I'm not saying she's a sweet innocent young girl who was done nothing wrong but what I am saying is she needs to be brought back here and closely monitored and if she has done something wrong brought to Justice and face a proper trial.

And my point is she shouldn't go through the British justice system, she hasn't broken any laws here. If you were caught shoplifting in Spain you wouldn't be deported to stand trial in Southwark court. She was a member of an international terror organisation

Then you can't have it both ways! you can't say she hasn't broken any laws here but we won't have her back anyway just in case she has in another country. So my point stands we can't just strip people of their Citizenship because we dont like what they say.

It's not having it both ways. What I'm saying is, it's irrelevant what laws she's broken in a foreign country. It's not about laws. It's about her being a member of an international terror organisation and a threat to national security, which the authorities believe and obviously can prove to those with the correct clearance. Not you or I. And on THAT basis she's had her citizenship stripped legally. It's not for you or I to debate as we don't have all the facts. We can have our differing opinions but we don't make the decisions. Our elected government do.

Well then you have answered your own question she has committed a criminal offence here by being a member of a terrorist organisation so therefore can stand trial and face charges. "
erm she aint a british citizen no more so no we dont have to put her on trial,im hoping the syrian goverment might like to make an example of her after all she was a member of a group who tried to take over there country

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"A quick search on the web showed a 2019 Financial Times article which said that of 900 people who travelled to fight for ISIS over 40% have returned which I make 360. There's probably more now. I loathe ISIS and all who support it. However I'm struggling to see why this girl who was a child of 15 when she left and hasn't as yet been accused of any crime is being treated differently. Much as though I can't even remotely support her behaviour I feel that as a country we need to 'own our shit', take her back and if necessary charge her for her crimes. But equally do the same for all other returning fighters. I do feel that there's a certain section of society who are relishing picking on a young dark skinned girl whilst turning a blind eye to others who have probably done worse.

"
agree

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

I personally don't think she should be allowed back in

She went there as a teenage girl to support Isis and terrorism

She once said she doesn't regret going there and now all of a sudden she regrets it and was groomed

We only have her word that she was groomed

She was quite happy to support a group that wants to wage war on this country and now she wants back in

Is that because she wants to come and take full advantage of our benefit system so she can send money back to help fund further attacks

She has never shown any signs of regret and was even smiling about it in one interview I've seen

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ewfie02Couple  over a year ago

Ayrshire

Three words.

No no and no

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *icecouple561Couple  over a year ago
Forum Mod

East Sussex


"I personally don't think she should be allowed back in

She went there as a teenage girl to support Isis and terrorism

She once said she doesn't regret going there and now all of a sudden she regrets it and was groomed

We only have her word that she was groomed

She was quite happy to support a group that wants to wage war on this country and now she wants back in

Is that because she wants to come and take full advantage of our benefit system so she can send money back to help fund further attacks

She has never shown any signs of regret and was even smiling about it in one interview I've seen"

As a 15 year old would you have arranged to travel to a foreign country with two friends with absolutely no help or input from anyone else? Could you have laid hands on enough money to buy plane tickets?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *den-Valley-coupleCouple  over a year ago

Cumbria

Bring her home then prosecute her for treason.....

30 years in prison would be good.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *icolerobbieCouple  over a year ago

walsall


"After watching a recap from yesterday's interview with Shamina, I feel a bit sorry for her. Although I don't think we should let her back in..

But I feel sorry because she was a victim, she was young whe she left, she was radicalised. The system didn't do enough to protect her from the influence of those radical ideals.

What do you think?

Definitely NO!

She will come back and radicalise others.

Well not letting her back is a great recruitment for terrorist groups. They will say " doesn't matter if your born here, you will never be accepted and treated differently, because of your colour".

Think that will resonate with a lot more than she ever could."

It will actually send a clear message to anyone thinking of going abroad to fight for Terrorists will be stripped of their passports and end up in the tragic state that she is now in.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"It’s a difficult debate - she has probably witnessed scenes the rest of us only see in horror films.

Even if they did allow it she would have to live the rest of her life in a secure place for her own safety. "

And who would pay for that ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"After watching a recap from yesterday's interview with Shamina, I feel a bit sorry for her. Although I don't think we should let her back in..

But I feel sorry because she was a victim, she was young whe she left, she was radicalised. The system didn't do enough to protect her from the influence of those radical ideals.

What do you think?

Definitely NO!

She will come back and radicalise others.

Well not letting her back is a great recruitment for terrorist groups. They will say " doesn't matter if your born here, you will never be accepted and treated differently, because of your colour".

Think that will resonate with a lot more than she ever could.

It will actually send a clear message to anyone thinking of going abroad to fight for Terrorists will be stripped of their passports and end up in the tragic state that she is now in. "

But they might not go abroad and become the terrorist from within.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

I'd have no problem in bringing her back because she would be monitored and restricted to the hilt. However I do have a problem in where she would be located, I cannot see any county wanting her there...

Prison or secure unit, she still wouldn't be 'safe' and then that would cause more outrage from sympathisers

And as said above who would pay for it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"I'd have no problem in bringing her back because she would be monitored and restricted to the hilt. However I do have a problem in where she would be located, I cannot see any county wanting her there...

Prison or secure unit, she still wouldn't be 'safe' and then that would cause more outrage from sympathisers

And as said above who would pay for it. "

Am not arguing for her return, because I sympathise with her. Just on the legal grounds and treating her as a soft target to appease a mob.

I don't care if she's not safe here or something happens to her. On who pays for it. We pay for keeping horrendous individuals like the killers of Lee Rigby in prison what difference is one individual going to make.

This may contradict my arguments for letting Shamima Begum return. But I don't think we are tough enough on terrorists. People like Anjum Chowdary should be locked away for much longer than a few years.

I also think our secret services should be more proactive and be allowed to neutralise terrorist who are planning attacks without having enough evidence to prosecute them in a court of law.

I know we go down the path of police state argument and accountability. But its better than waiting for them to attack.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"I'd have no problem in bringing her back because she would be monitored and restricted to the hilt. However I do have a problem in where she would be located, I cannot see any county wanting her there...

Prison or secure unit, she still wouldn't be 'safe' and then that would cause more outrage from sympathisers

And as said above who would pay for it.

Am not arguing for her return, because I sympathise with her. Just on the legal grounds and treating her as a soft target to appease a mob.

I don't care if she's not safe here or something happens to her. On who pays for it. We pay for keeping horrendous individuals like the killers of Lee Rigby in prison what difference is one individual going to make.

This may contradict my arguments for letting Shamima Begum return. But I don't think we are tough enough on terrorists. People like Anjum Chowdary should be locked away for much longer than a few years.

I also think our secret services should be more proactive and be allowed to neutralise terrorist who are planning attacks without having enough evidence to prosecute them in a court of law.

I know we go down the path of police state argument and accountability. But its better than waiting for them to attack."

I never said you were did I? My comments weren't aimed at anyone, these are my thoughts on the situation....The downfalls of letting her back in the country

As for her safety, I agree I Don't particularly care, but she has a lot of sympathisers who would use it to put more negativity onto the country, it I shit the UK doesn't need or want

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"It’s a difficult debate - she has probably witnessed scenes the rest of us only see in horror films.

Even if they did allow it she would have to live the rest of her life in a secure place for her own safety.

And who would pay for that ? "

The taxpayer In the country where she was born and let's be honest radicalised, why should we expect another country that she's never even stepped foot in to pay for her.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"It’s a difficult debate - she has probably witnessed scenes the rest of us only see in horror films.

Even if they did allow it she would have to live the rest of her life in a secure place for her own safety.

And who would pay for that ?

The taxpayer In the country where she was born and let's be honest radicalised, why should we expect another country that she's never even stepped foot in to pay for her. "

Why ? She turned her back on her Country so deal with it , no good crawling back when things go tits up & wanting sympathy, I wish her well in her present location

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andare63Man  over a year ago

oldham

Wokism at its finest on this thread

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Wokism at its finest on this thread "

The new buzzword…

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Wokism at its finest on this thread

The new buzzword…"

That’s without the “e”

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Wokism at its finest on this thread

The new buzzword…

That’s without the “e” "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *icknmix500Man  over a year ago

South Gloucestershire

Definitely No

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *eedsmale36Man  over a year ago

Leeds


"After watching a recap from yesterday's interview with Shamina, I feel a bit sorry for her. Although I don't think we should let her back in..

But I feel sorry because she was a victim, she was young whe she left, she was radicalised. The system didn't do enough to protect her from the influence of those radical ideals.

What do you think? "

She looks hot now, just saying

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *eedsmale36Man  over a year ago

Leeds


"I personally don't think she should be allowed back in

She went there as a teenage girl to support Isis and terrorism

She once said she doesn't regret going there and now all of a sudden she regrets it and was groomed

We only have her word that she was groomed

She was quite happy to support a group that wants to wage war on this country and now she wants back in

Is that because she wants to come and take full advantage of our benefit system so she can send money back to help fund further attacks

She has never shown any signs of regret and was even smiling about it in one interview I've seen

As a 15 year old would you have arranged to travel to a foreign country with two friends with absolutely no help or input from anyone else? Could you have laid hands on enough money to buy plane tickets?"

I’m pretty sure he Dad was photographed at rallies with that Choudry cunt !

I’m guessing he knew of her plans

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andare63Man  over a year ago

oldham


"Wokism at its finest on this thread

The new buzzword…

That’s without the “e” "

Absolutely and said in my finest, broadest Northern accent

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Yes, if she can drive a lorry ... Or perhaps not

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ophieslutTV/TS  over a year ago

Central

Yes

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Wokism at its finest on this thread

The new buzzword…

That’s without the “e”

Absolutely and said in my finest, broadest Northern accent "

Baa

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *andare63Man  over a year ago

oldham


"Wokism at its finest on this thread

The new buzzword…

That’s without the “e”

Absolutely and said in my finest, broadest Northern accent

Baa"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *odgerMooreMan  over a year ago

Carlisle


"Yes, if she can drive a lorry ... Or perhaps not "

Have to Make sure she’s learning how to drive a truck and park it or it will be 9/11 all

Over again!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Dear Shamima Begum

I hear you want to come home.

Do you know who else wanted to come home? The victims of the Manchester bombing, they all wanted to go to a concert and come home.

They will never come home again.

They will never walk through the doors of their homes to greet their loved ones because a member of the terrorist group you support took their lives.

They lay dying wishing they were at home.

This isn’t your home anymore, you gave up the right to call it home when you left with the sole purpose of facilitating attacks on your home.

So it wasn’t all rosy in Syria? Tough. You’ve made your bed.

We don’t want you here, your bad judgment at 15 is one thing but your lack of remorse now is quite another.

You deserve nothing but to stay where you are and I hope every second of it is unbearable for you.

It won’t come close to what these victims went through or their families since.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *pslad99Man  over a year ago

colchester

No way

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

If she joins fab

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Dear Shamima Begum

I hear you want to come home.

Do you know who else wanted to come home? The victims of the Manchester bombing, they all wanted to go to a concert and come home.

They will never come home again.

They will never walk through the doors of their homes to greet their loved ones because a member of the terrorist group you support took their lives.

They lay dying wishing they were at home.

This isn’t your home anymore, you gave up the right to call it home when you left with the sole purpose of facilitating attacks on your home.

So it wasn’t all rosy in Syria? Tough. You’ve made your bed.

We don’t want you here, your bad judgment at 15 is one thing but your lack of remorse now is quite another.

You deserve nothing but to stay where you are and I hope every second of it is unbearable for you.

It won’t come close to what these victims went through or their families since."

Shamima Begum blew up the Manchester gig? I had no idea.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Dear Shamima Begum

I hear you want to come home.

Do you know who else wanted to come home? The victims of the Manchester bombing, they all wanted to go to a concert and come home.

They will never come home again.

They will never walk through the doors of their homes to greet their loved ones because a member of the terrorist group you support took their lives.

They lay dying wishing they were at home.

This isn’t your home anymore, you gave up the right to call it home when you left with the sole purpose of facilitating attacks on your home.

So it wasn’t all rosy in Syria? Tough. You’ve made your bed.

We don’t want you here, your bad judgment at 15 is one thing but your lack of remorse now is quite another.

You deserve nothing but to stay where you are and I hope every second of it is unbearable for you.

It won’t come close to what these victims went through or their families since.

Shamima Begum blew up the Manchester gig? I had no idea."

She supported the group who did

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ed VoluptaWoman  over a year ago

Wirral.


"Dear Shamima Begum

I hear you want to come home.

Do you know who else wanted to come home? The victims of the Manchester bombing, they all wanted to go to a concert and come home.

They will never come home again.

They will never walk through the doors of their homes to greet their loved ones because a member of the terrorist group you support took their lives.

They lay dying wishing they were at home.

This isn’t your home anymore, you gave up the right to call it home when you left with the sole purpose of facilitating attacks on your home.

So it wasn’t all rosy in Syria? Tough. You’ve made your bed.

We don’t want you here, your bad judgment at 15 is one thing but your lack of remorse now is quite another.

You deserve nothing but to stay where you are and I hope every second of it is unbearable for you.

It won’t come close to what these victims went through or their families since.

Shamima Begum blew up the Manchester gig? I had no idea."

Apparently, the Home Office have intel that linker her to it.

For this - and other reasons - I'm afraid I support her citizenship being revoked. X

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

 

By *ora the explorerWoman  over a year ago

Paradise, Herts

My answer is no. I’m not arguing the toss with anyone either. Just answering the question.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

  

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

After looking carefully at all the arguments, I have no idea.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

4 great reasons to join:

Free to use, not just free to join. Free cams, pics, search, mails.

We show small ads so you don't have to pay.

Run by swingers, for swingers, for free.

Only takes a minute or two to get started.

Join today

Copyright © 2006-2024 Fabulous Entertainment | Link to us | @fabswingers on twitter | Sexual Health | Safer Meets
Terms | Privacy Policy | FAQ | 2257 Exemption Statement | Report Content | Glossary | Contact | Mobile Web App

0.3281

0