Brian Kirby Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-03-11 9:08 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-11 9:03 AM pelmetman - 2019-03-11 8:01 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Actually what you're saying is .......its someone else's problem not yours...........Typical halo polisher.......all gob and no actual stepping up to the plate *-) ......... So where would you have them go Dave, that isn't "all gob and no actual stepping up to the plate"? Never-Never Land - along with all the unicorns? :-D Go?.........There's no need for them to go anywhere.........they can stay where they are as far as I'm concerned *-) ........... It was THEIR choice to break the law and go to Syria :-| .......... Actions have consequences ;-) ........... So, "all gob and no actual stepping up to the plate". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted March 11, 2019 Author Share Posted March 11, 2019 Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted March 11, 2019 Author Share Posted March 11, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-03-11 8:56 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-09 7:27 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-09 6:33 PM jumpstart - 2019-03-09 4:07 PM Unfortunate for the child, not particularly sad for her,she made her choices ,has to live with it. Suppose you all will be sad for the youths out there knifing innocents next. Well they must have had a hard upbringing. But these are convenient assumptions, are they not? It seems it was known by her school and by the police that she was being radicalised before she left the UK, but that somehow her parents remained in ignorance. How/why? So yes, she made her choices - as a 15 year old child. Strange as it may seem, immature 15 year olds do, sometimes, do stupid things. She is British by birth. Who else should take legal responsibility for her? Should we just bequeath her to some other country to take responsibility for? Who should that be? Should we not, instead, get her back and then keep her exactly where we can see her, so that we know she is not a threat to us - or anyone else? That way, we might even learn something useful. Re stabbings, it is a little overly simple to assume all those who were stabbed were innocents. Clearly the perpetrators were not innocent, they wielded the knives. I don't think in either case it is a matter of feeling sorry for anyone. These events are real, and they are all taking place on a street somewhere near you. We need to understand what is going on in both cases, so that we can understand how to stop it. As has been said by a number of people, we can't just arrest (or legislate) our way out of trouble. We have to eliminate, or at least begin to disrupt, the underlying causes. We won't do that by merely making tough sounding statements. They weren't apparent in the same way 10 years ago. What has changed that they are apparent now? Gotta say as a 15 year old I wasnt a saint , indeed far from it but if beheading non-believers had been put to me or gloating over the Muslim Manchester bombings then I reckon I'd have known right from wrong ... Youd have been OK Brian if this young lady had been rehoused away from trouble next door to you or one of your loved ones in leafy East Sussex I suppose ... Some folk Who is speaking of re-housing? Not me. I have secure accommodation in mind, at least until her state of mind has been understood, so that a proper assessment of the risk she presents an be made. Even then she (and other returnees) should continue to be closely monitored until the authorities are confident that she presents no further threat. If current law does not permit that, then new law must be made for returnees. Should the UK export its general refuse to other countries, instead of dealing with it where it is created? So with people who have placed them selves "beyond the pale". Whether or not you like it, we (as have other countries) have to deal with these aberrant individuals at source, not palm them off to other, poorer, dysfunctional, war-torn, states. That may seem cheap now, but consider the potentially greater risk that may come back to us in the future. Given we try to educate criminals and paedophiles all the time without success she would have to be released at some point to of course like you say be monitored at great cost ... Now while she's been monitored she has to live next door to someone , would you happily be that someone with her next door to you and yours or as usual is it the usuals who get her Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 I believe it has yet to be shown that the UK was in a position to save that baby. Who knows whether it is true or overstated but Jeremy Hunt made the point yesterday that it was too dangerous to dispatch British officials into the Syrian camps?. Her own lawyer said that she was moved from the Al Hawi camp because she received death threats for speaking about her plight but not who from. I would like to know who from, particularly whether it was from former ISIS supporters or their victims now in the camps. We’ve also been told that she’s now in a camp near the Iraqi border. She would have had to be allowed to cross into Iraq or into Turkey to get to consular assistance. Both countries have been involved in fighting ISIS so the question is begged how ready they will be to allow her, even with her new-born baby across the border? UNHCR have camps in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. They’ve been receiving Syrian refugees but the latest to flee the conflict contain the harder core of ISIS followers so there are bound to be security concerns. It seems likely to be practical and diplomatic nightmare even if the UK was willing to take her and/or her baby back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 Violet1956 - 2019-03-11 10:31 AM I believe it has yet to be shown that the UK was in a position to save that baby. Who knows whether it is true or overstated but Jeremy Hunt made the point yesterday that it was too dangerous to dispatch British officials into the Syrian camps? . Her own lawyer said ............................... I really don't understand why we should consider " bringing " any of these people back. They had no trouble finding their way out there - so should have no trouble finding their way back - without taxpayers assistance. There doesn't appear to be any shortage of funds, for plane fares, if she has " her own lawyer " - ( maybe they all have their own lawyers ? ). The problem is that they are a risk to this country if they come back - but also a risk to this country if they don't come back - so we have to decide which is the greater risk. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? I dont think many people want her back, I dont particularly "want" her back. My point was we might "have" to have her back and others like her. As to where she lives I wouldnt want her living here but I never said it would be ok for someone else to have her either. If she chooses to come and live in Bottom Shagna there isnt much I could do about it is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 The lawyer is probably acting for free Malc. High profile cases raise his public profile so there are obvious advantages if he works in the immigration field. I also think it likely that the security problem makes it more difficult to cross these borders now that ISIS has been routed. She' been identified as an ISIS supporter. I've seen an article about disputes between refugees leading to violence in the camps because of known or suspected affiliation of some refugees to ISIS. We might not be so troubled about retribution but it remains a problem for the relief agencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted March 11, 2019 Author Share Posted March 11, 2019 Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 11:23 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? I dont think many people want her back, I dont particularly "want" her back. My point was we might "have" to have her back and others like her. As to where she lives I wouldnt want her living here but I never said it would be ok for someone else to have her either. If she chooses to come and live in Bottom Shagna there isnt much I could do about it is there? Hmmm well I know you've said she is our mess and we should clear it up ...Why is she our mess ??? Shes not my mess or the mess of anyone I know ... She chose a path to take and now wants to return to country she despises because her side lost ... Your giving the impression you want her back ... You say you dont "particularly"want her back which isn't a definite either way is it ... Your side stepping my question over wether youd be happy for her to live next door to ya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 747 - 2019-03-10 12:37 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-09 6:33 PM But these are convenient assumptions, are they not? It seems it was known by her school and by the police that she was being radicalised before she left the UK, but that somehow her parents remained in ignorance. How/why? I think a link was previously posted on this forum that her Father was closely linked to Mosques and Imams associated with terrorism and radicalisation. If she was radicalised, it was probably not done on the internet. But equally, it seems her father lives in Bangladesh, so presumably was not in day-to-day contact with the girl. It might be helpful to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM...…………...So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? But what happens to any other criminal under our system, Antony? Even proven mass murders eventually get released from prison. I assume you would be equally unhappy having even a good old West Yorkshire mass murderer living next door to you? But, due to the anonymity given to them, you might well have a released West Yorkshire paedophile living unknown next door to you. :-) What is so special about this stupid kid? What, apart from actually going to Syria, is her crime? Should Britain just cast her loose for someone else to deal with, or should we bring her (and the others) back to the country that issued their passports (and was lax enough to let them leave), take them into custody, interrogate them to gain what intelligence we can, and then set out to de-radicalise and re-integrate them - hopefully rather better than we presently achieve with most of the prison population? There is an obvious risk in releasing any criminal, whether on parole, or following the full term of their sentence. That is how our system works. Should these stupid kids be treated differently? Shipman was sentenced to life with a recommendation that he never be released. If these people show no sign of re-habilitation, why should they be treated any differently to him - assuming their actual crimes can be adequately proved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-03-11 12:55 PM 747 - 2019-03-10 12:37 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-09 6:33 PM But these are convenient assumptions, are they not? It seems it was known by her school and by the police that she was being radicalised before she left the UK, but that somehow her parents remained in ignorance. How/why? I think a link was previously posted on this forum that her Father was closely linked to Mosques and Imams associated with terrorism and radicalisation. If she was radicalised, it was probably not done on the internet. But equally, it seems her father lives in Bangladesh, so presumably was not in day-to-day contact with the girl. It might be helpful to know. Normally when British people go abroad and commit ( or are involved with ) crimes in other countries, we don't bring them back here to face our system of justice. It's not clear to me why that is being considered this time, for Brits who went out to Syria. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 antony1969 - 2019-03-11 12:38 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 11:23 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? I dont think many people want her back, I dont particularly "want" her back. My point was we might "have" to have her back and others like her. As to where she lives I wouldnt want her living here but I never said it would be ok for someone else to have her either. If she chooses to come and live in Bottom Shagna there isnt much I could do about it is there? Hmmm well I know you've said she is our mess and we should clear it up ...Why is she our mess ??? Shes not my mess or the mess of anyone I know ... She chose a path to take and now wants to return to country she despises because her side lost ... Your giving the impression you want her back ... You say you dont "particularly"want her back which isn't a definite either way is it ... Your side stepping my question over wether youd be happy for her to live next door to ya She is our mess because she is British and so would have been her now dead baby. I dont want her back but I recognise that we probably are obliged to have her back to face the music hence the "particularly". I Thought I said I wouldnt be that happy to have her living next door. Brian sums it up better than me though, how the hell do you know who is living next door to you anyway? Maybe she could be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society, maybe not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 malc d - 2019-03-11 1:21 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-11 12:55 PM 747 - 2019-03-10 12:37 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-09 6:33 PM But these are convenient assumptions, are they not? It seems it was known by her school and by the police that she was being radicalised before she left the UK, but that somehow her parents remained in ignorance. How/why? I think a link was previously posted on this forum that her Father was closely linked to Mosques and Imams associated with terrorism and radicalisation. If she was radicalised, it was probably not done on the internet. But equally, it seems her father lives in Bangladesh, so presumably was not in day-to-day contact with the girl. It might be helpful to know. Normally when British people go abroad and commit ( or are involved with ) crimes in other countries, we don't bring them back here to face our system of justice. It's not clear to me why that is being considered this time, for Brits who went out to Syria. :-| I think it is because there are offences in UK law that cover supporting terrorism abroad and we have jurisdiction to deal with them in the UK Malc. If she had been convicted of any offences in a Syrian court then they have the right in principle to deport her. The problem is that her citizenship has been revoked. Syria is in such disarray that I doubt that their authorities would prioritise collecting up all ISIS brides in refugee camps, put them on trial, and then put them on a plane back to the UK or to the other countries from whence they came. They just stick to torturing and raping women they have caught and suspected of being involved with terrorists in filthy jails. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/assad-prisons-women-syria-female-inmate-treatment-conditions-exclusive-life-jails-a7899776.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted March 11, 2019 Author Share Posted March 11, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-03-11 1:17 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM...…………...So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? But what happens to any other criminal under our system, Antony? Even proven mass murders eventually get released from prison. I assume you would be equally unhappy having even a good old West Yorkshire mass murderer living next door to you? But, due to the anonymity given to them, you might well have a released West Yorkshire paedophile living unknown next door to you. :-) What is so special about this stupid kid? What, apart from actually going to Syria, is her crime? Should Britain just cast her loose for someone else to deal with, or should we bring her (and the others) back to the country that issued their passports (and was lax enough to let them leave), take them into custody, interrogate them to gain what intelligence we can, and then set out to de-radicalise and re-integrate them - hopefully rather better than we presently achieve with most of the prison population? There is an obvious risk in releasing any criminal, whether on parole, or following the full term of their sentence. That is how our system works. Should these stupid kids be treated differently? Shipman was sentenced to life with a recommendation that he never be released. If these people show no sign of re-habilitation, why should they be treated any differently to him - assuming their actual crimes can be adequately proved? As far as we know she hasn't killed anyone or even assaulted anyone how are you going to keep her locked up indefinitely like Shipman who murdered God knows how many if she shows no sign of re-habilitation ??? What if she shows signs of supposed sorrow for what shes done as others do only then to re-offend , would you apologise to family members of anyone she might in the future slit the throat of ??? ... She is currently where she wanted to be in Syria so rot in Syria because while there she costs us nothing and poses no threat but if you want her back you must take responsibility if it goes t@ts up just like those like you say us Brexit types must take responsibility if team UK crashes ... Let her rot and those like her unless of course you want to put her up in leafy Sussex away from harm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted March 11, 2019 Author Share Posted March 11, 2019 Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 2:31 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 12:38 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 11:23 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? I dont think many people want her back, I dont particularly "want" her back. My point was we might "have" to have her back and others like her. As to where she lives I wouldnt want her living here but I never said it would be ok for someone else to have her either. If she chooses to come and live in Bottom Shagna there isnt much I could do about it is there? Hmmm well I know you've said she is our mess and we should clear it up ...Why is she our mess ??? Shes not my mess or the mess of anyone I know ... She chose a path to take and now wants to return to country she despises because her side lost ... Your giving the impression you want her back ... You say you dont "particularly"want her back which isn't a definite either way is it ... Your side stepping my question over wether youd be happy for her to live next door to ya She is our mess because she is British and so would have been her now dead baby. I dont want her back but I recognise that we probably are obliged to have her back to face the music hence the "particularly". I Thought I said I wouldnt be that happy to have her living next door. Brian sums it up better than me though, how the hell do you know who is living next door to you anyway? Maybe she could be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society, maybe not. Brilliant ... "maybe she can be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society , maybe not" ...Ye your right let's ship her back and take that risk ... After all it wont be Bottom Shagna that gets it ... As for integrating back into society have you seen the area shes from Barry if she goes back there ??? What is she integrating into , a community that does not integrate ... Good idea ... Mind in Barry world you say young female Muslims are becoming more westernized because you saw a Channel 4 programme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 Violet1956 - 2019-03-11 3:03 PM malc d - 2019-03-11 1:21 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-11 12:55 PM 747 - 2019-03-10 12:37 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-09 6:33 PM But these are convenient assumptions, are they not? It seems it was known by her school and by the police that she was being radicalised before she left the UK, but that somehow her parents remained in ignorance. How/why? I think a link was previously posted on this forum that her Father was closely linked to Mosques and Imams associated with terrorism and radicalisation. If she was radicalised, it was probably not done on the internet. But equally, it seems her father lives in Bangladesh, so presumably was not in day-to-day contact with the girl. It might be helpful to know. Normally when British people go abroad and commit ( or are involved with ) crimes in other countries, we don't bring them back here to face our system of justice. It's not clear to me why that is being considered this time, for Brits who went out to Syria. :-| I think it is because there are offences in UK law that cover supporting terrorism abroad and we have jurisdiction to deal with them in the UK Malc. Any ' offence ' she may have committed in the U.K. pales into insignificance to the ' offences ' carried out in Syria by the cult she chose to join. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 malc d - 2019-03-11 5:19 PM Violet1956 - 2019-03-11 3:03 PM malc d - 2019-03-11 1:21 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-11 12:55 PM 747 - 2019-03-10 12:37 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-09 6:33 PM But these are convenient assumptions, are they not? It seems it was known by her school and by the police that she was being radicalised before she left the UK, but that somehow her parents remained in ignorance. How/why? I think a link was previously posted on this forum that her Father was closely linked to Mosques and Imams associated with terrorism and radicalisation. If she was radicalised, it was probably not done on the internet. But equally, it seems her father lives in Bangladesh, so presumably was not in day-to-day contact with the girl. It might be helpful to know. Normally when British people go abroad and commit ( or are involved with ) crimes in other countries, we don't bring them back here to face our system of justice. It's not clear to me why that is being considered this time, for Brits who went out to Syria. :-| I think it is because there are offences in UK law that cover supporting terrorism abroad and we have jurisdiction to deal with them in the UK Malc. Any ' offence ' she may have committed in the U.K. pales into insignificance to the ' offences ' carried out in Syria by the cult she chose to join. :-| And what of the man who sanctioned this along with those who supported it? https://www.armscontrol.org/blog/2018-09-26/what-you-need-know-about-chemical-weapons-use-syria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 antony1969 - 2019-03-11 3:27 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 2:31 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 12:38 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 11:23 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? I dont think many people want her back, I dont particularly "want" her back. My point was we might "have" to have her back and others like her. As to where she lives I wouldnt want her living here but I never said it would be ok for someone else to have her either. If she chooses to come and live in Bottom Shagna there isnt much I could do about it is there? Hmmm well I know you've said she is our mess and we should clear it up ...Why is she our mess ??? Shes not my mess or the mess of anyone I know ... She chose a path to take and now wants to return to country she despises because her side lost ... Your giving the impression you want her back ... You say you dont "particularly"want her back which isn't a definite either way is it ... Your side stepping my question over wether youd be happy for her to live next door to ya She is our mess because she is British and so would have been her now dead baby. I dont want her back but I recognise that we probably are obliged to have her back to face the music hence the "particularly". I Thought I said I wouldnt be that happy to have her living next door. Brian sums it up better than me though, how the hell do you know who is living next door to you anyway? Maybe she could be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society, maybe not. Brilliant ... "maybe she can be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society , maybe not" ...Ye your right let's ship her back and take that risk ... After all it wont be Bottom Shagna that gets it ... As for integrating back into society have you seen the area shes from Barry if she goes back there ??? What is she integrating into , a community that does not integrate ... Good idea ... Mind in Barry world you say young female Muslims are becoming more westernized because you saw a Channel 4 programme Well if Syria will keep her then she can stay there then but she has to belong somewhere thats all I am saying and currently her only citizenship is British. Rabid Javid reacted without there being a recognised legal state for her to belong to or that would accept her so all I am saying is it will likely come back and bite him on the arse. You cannot make someone stateless. He needs to get his ducks in a row because she wont be the last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumpstart Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 Interestingly Ireland he’s just agreed to take back one of their female Isil simpathisers from Syria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted March 11, 2019 Author Share Posted March 11, 2019 Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 6:12 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 3:27 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 2:31 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 12:38 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 11:23 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? I dont think many people want her back, I dont particularly "want" her back. My point was we might "have" to have her back and others like her. As to where she lives I wouldnt want her living here but I never said it would be ok for someone else to have her either. If she chooses to come and live in Bottom Shagna there isnt much I could do about it is there? Hmmm well I know you've said she is our mess and we should clear it up ...Why is she our mess ??? Shes not my mess or the mess of anyone I know ... She chose a path to take and now wants to return to country she despises because her side lost ... Your giving the impression you want her back ... You say you dont "particularly"want her back which isn't a definite either way is it ... Your side stepping my question over wether youd be happy for her to live next door to ya She is our mess because she is British and so would have been her now dead baby. I dont want her back but I recognise that we probably are obliged to have her back to face the music hence the "particularly". I Thought I said I wouldnt be that happy to have her living next door. Brian sums it up better than me though, how the hell do you know who is living next door to you anyway? Maybe she could be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society, maybe not. Brilliant ... "maybe she can be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society , maybe not" ...Ye your right let's ship her back and take that risk ... After all it wont be Bottom Shagna that gets it ... As for integrating back into society have you seen the area shes from Barry if she goes back there ??? What is she integrating into , a community that does not integrate ... Good idea ... Mind in Barry world you say young female Muslims are becoming more westernized because you saw a Channel 4 programme Well if Syria will keep her then she can stay there then but she has to belong somewhere thats all I am saying and currently her only citizenship is British. Rabid Javid reacted without there being a recognised legal state for her to belong to or that would accept her so all I am saying is it will likely come back and bite him on the arse. You cannot make someone stateless. He needs to get his ducks in a row because she wont be the last. Shouldn't be a problem for her Barry ... His Holiness says Muslim countries should take the terrorist supporter in ... 50 countries or so to choose from to be hero worshipped in ... Crack on ... Mr Javid by the way has acted on what the majority in the country want ... https://news.sky.com/story/senior-muslim-leader-muslim-country-should-adopt-is-bride-shamima-begum-11660361 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
747 Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-03-11 12:55 PM 747 - 2019-03-10 12:37 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-03-09 6:33 PM But these are convenient assumptions, are they not? It seems it was known by her school and by the police that she was being radicalised before she left the UK, but that somehow her parents remained in ignorance. How/why? I think a link was previously posted on this forum that her Father was closely linked to Mosques and Imams associated with terrorism and radicalisation. If she was radicalised, it was probably not done on the internet. But equally, it seems her father lives in Bangladesh, so presumably was not in day-to-day contact with the girl. It might be helpful to know. Your information regarding her Fathers whereabouts is at odds with what was said on this forum recently. One report is obviously wrong then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 antony1969 - 2019-03-11 7:17 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 6:12 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 3:27 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 2:31 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 12:38 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 11:23 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? I dont think many people want her back, I dont particularly "want" her back. My point was we might "have" to have her back and others like her. As to where she lives I wouldnt want her living here but I never said it would be ok for someone else to have her either. If she chooses to come and live in Bottom Shagna there isnt much I could do about it is there? Hmmm well I know you've said she is our mess and we should clear it up ...Why is she our mess ??? Shes not my mess or the mess of anyone I know ... She chose a path to take and now wants to return to country she despises because her side lost ... Your giving the impression you want her back ... You say you dont "particularly"want her back which isn't a definite either way is it ... Your side stepping my question over wether youd be happy for her to live next door to ya She is our mess because she is British and so would have been her now dead baby. I dont want her back but I recognise that we probably are obliged to have her back to face the music hence the "particularly". I Thought I said I wouldnt be that happy to have her living next door. Brian sums it up better than me though, how the hell do you know who is living next door to you anyway? Maybe she could be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society, maybe not. Brilliant ... "maybe she can be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society , maybe not" ...Ye your right let's ship her back and take that risk ... After all it wont be Bottom Shagna that gets it ... As for integrating back into society have you seen the area shes from Barry if she goes back there ??? What is she integrating into , a community that does not integrate ... Good idea ... Mind in Barry world you say young female Muslims are becoming more westernized because you saw a Channel 4 programme Well if Syria will keep her then she can stay there then but she has to belong somewhere thats all I am saying and currently her only citizenship is British. Rabid Javid reacted without there being a recognised legal state for her to belong to or that would accept her so all I am saying is it will likely come back and bite him on the arse. You cannot make someone stateless. He needs to get his ducks in a row because she wont be the last. Shouldn't be a problem for her Barry ... His Holiness says Muslim countries should take the terrorist supporter in ... 50 countries or so to choose from to be hero worshipped in ... Crack on ... Mr Javid by the way has acted on what the majority in the country want ... https://news.sky.com/story/senior-muslim-leader-muslim-country-should-adopt-is-bride-shamima-begum-11660361 Is that how it works now? Ministers simply carry out what the majority of the public wants and sod due process or legalities. Its not worked out so well so far with Brexit has it? What next? Public flogging and hanging because Brenda from Bristol thinks it will be fun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted March 12, 2019 Author Share Posted March 12, 2019 Barryd999 - 2019-03-12 11:07 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 7:17 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 6:12 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 3:27 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 2:31 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 12:38 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 11:23 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? I dont think many people want her back, I dont particularly "want" her back. My point was we might "have" to have her back and others like her. As to where she lives I wouldnt want her living here but I never said it would be ok for someone else to have her either. If she chooses to come and live in Bottom Shagna there isnt much I could do about it is there? Hmmm well I know you've said she is our mess and we should clear it up ...Why is she our mess ??? Shes not my mess or the mess of anyone I know ... She chose a path to take and now wants to return to country she despises because her side lost ... Your giving the impression you want her back ... You say you dont "particularly"want her back which isn't a definite either way is it ... Your side stepping my question over wether youd be happy for her to live next door to ya She is our mess because she is British and so would have been her now dead baby. I dont want her back but I recognise that we probably are obliged to have her back to face the music hence the "particularly". I Thought I said I wouldnt be that happy to have her living next door. Brian sums it up better than me though, how the hell do you know who is living next door to you anyway? Maybe she could be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society, maybe not. Brilliant ... "maybe she can be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society , maybe not" ...Ye your right let's ship her back and take that risk ... After all it wont be Bottom Shagna that gets it ... As for integrating back into society have you seen the area shes from Barry if she goes back there ??? What is she integrating into , a community that does not integrate ... Good idea ... Mind in Barry world you say young female Muslims are becoming more westernized because you saw a Channel 4 programme Well if Syria will keep her then she can stay there then but she has to belong somewhere thats all I am saying and currently her only citizenship is British. Rabid Javid reacted without there being a recognised legal state for her to belong to or that would accept her so all I am saying is it will likely come back and bite him on the arse. You cannot make someone stateless. He needs to get his ducks in a row because she wont be the last. Shouldn't be a problem for her Barry ... His Holiness says Muslim countries should take the terrorist supporter in ... 50 countries or so to choose from to be hero worshipped in ... Crack on ... Mr Javid by the way has acted on what the majority in the country want ... https://news.sky.com/story/senior-muslim-leader-muslim-country-should-adopt-is-bride-shamima-begum-11660361 Is that how it works now? Ministers simply carry out what the majority of the public wants and sod due process or legalities. Its not worked out so well so far with Brexit has it? What next? Public flogging and hanging because Brenda from Bristol thinks it will be fun? Given you want ministers to do what the minority of Brexit voters voted for I'd say your a tad confused Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 antony1969 - 2019-03-12 11:20 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-12 11:07 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 7:17 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 6:12 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 3:27 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 2:31 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 12:38 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 11:23 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? I dont think many people want her back, I dont particularly "want" her back. My point was we might "have" to have her back and others like her. As to where she lives I wouldnt want her living here but I never said it would be ok for someone else to have her either. If she chooses to come and live in Bottom Shagna there isnt much I could do about it is there? Hmmm well I know you've said she is our mess and we should clear it up ...Why is she our mess ??? Shes not my mess or the mess of anyone I know ... She chose a path to take and now wants to return to country she despises because her side lost ... Your giving the impression you want her back ... You say you dont "particularly"want her back which isn't a definite either way is it ... Your side stepping my question over wether youd be happy for her to live next door to ya She is our mess because she is British and so would have been her now dead baby. I dont want her back but I recognise that we probably are obliged to have her back to face the music hence the "particularly". I Thought I said I wouldnt be that happy to have her living next door. Brian sums it up better than me though, how the hell do you know who is living next door to you anyway? Maybe she could be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society, maybe not. Brilliant ... "maybe she can be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society , maybe not" ...Ye your right let's ship her back and take that risk ... After all it wont be Bottom Shagna that gets it ... As for integrating back into society have you seen the area shes from Barry if she goes back there ??? What is she integrating into , a community that does not integrate ... Good idea ... Mind in Barry world you say young female Muslims are becoming more westernized because you saw a Channel 4 programme Well if Syria will keep her then she can stay there then but she has to belong somewhere thats all I am saying and currently her only citizenship is British. Rabid Javid reacted without there being a recognised legal state for her to belong to or that would accept her so all I am saying is it will likely come back and bite him on the arse. You cannot make someone stateless. He needs to get his ducks in a row because she wont be the last. Shouldn't be a problem for her Barry ... His Holiness says Muslim countries should take the terrorist supporter in ... 50 countries or so to choose from to be hero worshipped in ... Crack on ... Mr Javid by the way has acted on what the majority in the country want ... https://news.sky.com/story/senior-muslim-leader-muslim-country-should-adopt-is-bride-shamima-begum-11660361 Is that how it works now? Ministers simply carry out what the majority of the public wants and sod due process or legalities. Its not worked out so well so far with Brexit has it? What next? Public flogging and hanging because Brenda from Bristol thinks it will be fun? Given you want ministers to do what the minority of Brexit voters voted for I'd say your a tad confused Not confused at all. We shall see if it comes back and bites Javid on the arse but it seems to me he has acted illegally and if he has done that just to gain public support just like Brexit it will backfire on him when he cannot deliver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted March 12, 2019 Author Share Posted March 12, 2019 Barryd999 - 2019-03-12 11:57 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-12 11:20 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-12 11:07 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 7:17 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 6:12 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 3:27 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 2:31 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 12:38 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 11:23 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 9:55 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-11 8:41 AM antony1969 - 2019-03-11 4:34 AM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 10:26 PM antony1969 - 2019-03-10 9:09 PM Barryd999 - 2019-03-10 8:50 PM yeah I said I think we should have em back to lock em up and make use of them not give them a house next to me. Our mess, our problem. Ye but after you "make use of them" whatever that means your guna have to house em ... You'd be OK to have em next door wunt ya ??? ... Prolly stand out in your whites only village with them funny brown faces but you'd be quite happy they wouldnt pose a risk and welcome em in ??? Depends if you can de-radicalise them and maybe teach them the error of their ways but if someone is British and has no other citizenship its still our problem as you cannot make them stateless. How would you feel if say Iran say as an example suddenly decided to send some of its undesirables to the UK cos it didnt want them anymore? Iran , Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Pakistan etc etc already have given us many "undesirables" though not to your village Barry ... So you want her back but it depends on wether she can be de-radicalised or seem to have been de-radicalised before you decide if you want her living next door to you ??? So while your deciding she has to live next door to someone in some community somewhere just not yours but you want her back ... Typical I dont particularly want her back but we probably have no choice and if she is guilty of terrorism crimes she needs to face the music and get locked up. The authorities can use that time to gleam useful information as to how she was radicalised and attempt to de-radicalise her but she is still our problem. Plus had they flown her back straight away that baby may (or may not) have survived. So she serves her time if any and comes out deradicalised or not to live next door to someone who doesn't want her ... You say we have to have her back and you want her but you dont want her living next door to you but its OK for someone else to have her ??? I dont think many people want her back, I dont particularly "want" her back. My point was we might "have" to have her back and others like her. As to where she lives I wouldnt want her living here but I never said it would be ok for someone else to have her either. If she chooses to come and live in Bottom Shagna there isnt much I could do about it is there? Hmmm well I know you've said she is our mess and we should clear it up ...Why is she our mess ??? Shes not my mess or the mess of anyone I know ... She chose a path to take and now wants to return to country she despises because her side lost ... Your giving the impression you want her back ... You say you dont "particularly"want her back which isn't a definite either way is it ... Your side stepping my question over wether youd be happy for her to live next door to ya She is our mess because she is British and so would have been her now dead baby. I dont want her back but I recognise that we probably are obliged to have her back to face the music hence the "particularly". I Thought I said I wouldnt be that happy to have her living next door. Brian sums it up better than me though, how the hell do you know who is living next door to you anyway? Maybe she could be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society, maybe not. Brilliant ... "maybe she can be taught the error of her ways and integrated into society , maybe not" ...Ye your right let's ship her back and take that risk ... After all it wont be Bottom Shagna that gets it ... As for integrating back into society have you seen the area shes from Barry if she goes back there ??? What is she integrating into , a community that does not integrate ... Good idea ... Mind in Barry world you say young female Muslims are becoming more westernized because you saw a Channel 4 programme Well if Syria will keep her then she can stay there then but she has to belong somewhere thats all I am saying and currently her only citizenship is British. Rabid Javid reacted without there being a recognised legal state for her to belong to or that would accept her so all I am saying is it will likely come back and bite him on the arse. You cannot make someone stateless. He needs to get his ducks in a row because she wont be the last. Shouldn't be a problem for her Barry ... His Holiness says Muslim countries should take the terrorist supporter in ... 50 countries or so to choose from to be hero worshipped in ... Crack on ... Mr Javid by the way has acted on what the majority in the country want ... https://news.sky.com/story/senior-muslim-leader-muslim-country-should-adopt-is-bride-shamima-begum-11660361 Is that how it works now? Ministers simply carry out what the majority of the public wants and sod due process or legalities. Its not worked out so well so far with Brexit has it? What next? Public flogging and hanging because Brenda from Bristol thinks it will be fun? Given you want ministers to do what the minority of Brexit voters voted for I'd say your a tad confused Not confused at all. We shall see if it comes back and bites Javid on the arse but it seems to me he has acted illegally and if he has done that just to gain public support just like Brexit it will backfire on him when he cannot deliver. It seems to you he has acted illegally ... He has right to exclude anyone involved in terrorism and if he believes their presence would not be good for the safety of British public ... Do you somehow believe that this women after saying what she's said about beheadings , the Manchester bombings , having no regrets in going to Syria etc etc is not a danger to the British public ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.