She won’t have any useful information, she’s been an IS “wife” for a couple of years. What the **** would they have told her? She’s made her bed out there, she can bloody lie in it.
Last edited:
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] British IS Girl wanting to return to the UK
- Thread starter Miximate
- Start date
Utter tosh .... you could argue how much the impact has been but virtually everyone in the UK has been impacted in some way because of terrorism. From the IRA, through 7th July right up to Borough Market and Manchester it's had an impact on what we do and how we live our lives.
Delete.
Last edited:
On reflection I do know someone who was impacted. I’ll retract this.
Double post
KingKev
Well-known member
The people you know must never travel by plane, undertake cash transactions, use the internet or electronic communications, browse the internet or go to central London or major sports & entertainment events then. In fact they must pretty much never leave their houses as my life is impacted by terrorism on a pretty much daily basis...
Personally I think some people are simply overthinking this.
She left the country to join a force that was hostile to us. She knew there was a war but the glory of joining some mythical religious army seemed too tempting.
Fast forward four years and ISIS are on the verge of being crushed, she's had two babies die in squalor and has decided that maybe she should crawl back to good old Blighty to have her third, where we have a national health service and an infrastructure that forms some kind of safety net. The flip side of that of course is that we expect our citizens not to go to war against us when our democratically elected government does something we don't like.
A better idea might be for her to go and find a country similar to Syria, but relatively peaceful. Someone will find a bed for her and her kids I'm sure. They may not have a national health service or benefits system, but then we're not in the business of bailing out people who have gone off to fight us just because it's all gone wrong for them.
I don't give a toss what religion she is, I simply object to her or anyone else going off to war against this country. If it isn't treason, then it is certainly tantamount to renouncing UK citizenship, so she should no longer be our problem.
She left the country to join a force that was hostile to us. She knew there was a war but the glory of joining some mythical religious army seemed too tempting.
Fast forward four years and ISIS are on the verge of being crushed, she's had two babies die in squalor and has decided that maybe she should crawl back to good old Blighty to have her third, where we have a national health service and an infrastructure that forms some kind of safety net. The flip side of that of course is that we expect our citizens not to go to war against us when our democratically elected government does something we don't like.
A better idea might be for her to go and find a country similar to Syria, but relatively peaceful. Someone will find a bed for her and her kids I'm sure. They may not have a national health service or benefits system, but then we're not in the business of bailing out people who have gone off to fight us just because it's all gone wrong for them.
I don't give a toss what religion she is, I simply object to her or anyone else going off to war against this country. If it isn't treason, then it is certainly tantamount to renouncing UK citizenship, so she should no longer be our problem.
It is treason.
The only issue is whethere there are extenuating circumstances. If she had been a 15 year old single mum shoplifting, maybe. A fifteen year old school girl going to Syria to fight for terrorists, however......
Nevertheless the level of fulminating nastiness on this thread is quite something.
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
Very well said Sir!
I don't disagree with any of that. These cases always bring out the worst in casual racists and intolerant people as we can see on this thread. But just because that is all true, it doesn't mean it's right to let her back in. I'm fairly sure none of us want her and her kid at our own school gates do we?
nicko31
Well-known member
If she wants to come back to the UK, as a citizen of only one country that is her entitlement under International law. But the law will apply and she must face justice
I don't know where our home secretary is coming from, getting caught up in populist nonsense again
I don't know where our home secretary is coming from, getting caught up in populist nonsense again
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I wondered where her Dutch husband is. Is he dead, or still alive?
As you say, there are countries which are predominantly Islamic, such as Lebanon or Jordan, where she can settle, and her parents can visit her.
Blue Valkyrie
Not seen such Bravery!
It just isn't worth the risk that she might be an ISIS agent who learnt bomb making skills and is coming back here to use them.
Exile seems an appropriate sanction in this case.
Exile seems an appropriate sanction in this case.
We waved goodbye to politicians not getting caught up in populist nonsense years (decades) ago.
I'm guessing this has already been mentioned, but just in case.
There is a precedent, from 2016:-
Tareena Shakil jailed for six years for joining IS
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35460697
A mother who took her toddler son to Syria has been jailed for six years for joining the so-called Islamic State.
Tareena Shakil, 26, is the first woman from the UK to return from the self-declared caliphate to be convicted of the offence.
Sentencing her, Mr Justice Inman said she had shown no remorse and had known her son's future would ultimately be "as an IS fighter".
He told Shakil: "You allowed him to be photographed next to an AK47."
'Abhorrent'
Shakil, a former health worker from Birmingham, but formerly of Burton-upon-Trent in Staffordshire, admitted travelling to Syria but denied joining IS and encouraging acts of terrorism through messages posted on Twitter.
Why did Tareena Shakil face this charge?
Passing sentence at Birmingham Crown Court, the judge said: "Most alarmingly you took your toddler son to Syria knowing how he would be used.
"You embraced your role in providing fighters of the future."
There is a precedent, from 2016:-
Tareena Shakil jailed for six years for joining IS
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35460697
A mother who took her toddler son to Syria has been jailed for six years for joining the so-called Islamic State.
Tareena Shakil, 26, is the first woman from the UK to return from the self-declared caliphate to be convicted of the offence.
Sentencing her, Mr Justice Inman said she had shown no remorse and had known her son's future would ultimately be "as an IS fighter".
He told Shakil: "You allowed him to be photographed next to an AK47."
'Abhorrent'
Shakil, a former health worker from Birmingham, but formerly of Burton-upon-Trent in Staffordshire, admitted travelling to Syria but denied joining IS and encouraging acts of terrorism through messages posted on Twitter.
Why did Tareena Shakil face this charge?
Passing sentence at Birmingham Crown Court, the judge said: "Most alarmingly you took your toddler son to Syria knowing how he would be used.
"You embraced your role in providing fighters of the future."
pearl
Well-known member
The following are reported victims of Jihadi John:
• James Foley.
• Steven Sotloff.
• David Haines.
• Alan Henning.
• Peter Kassig.
• Syrian soldiers.
Haruna Yukawa and Kenji Goto
my thoughts are with them and their families and friends who have no idea where their remains are
• James Foley.
• Steven Sotloff.
• David Haines.
• Alan Henning.
• Peter Kassig.
• Syrian soldiers.
Haruna Yukawa and Kenji Goto
my thoughts are with them and their families and friends who have no idea where their remains are
No idea but I'll hazard a guess 'hate' isn't the answer.
ManOfSussex
We wunt be druv
Like it or not, she is our responsibility. She is a British citizen and that isn't going to be stripped from her. I really don't see why other countries should have an ISIS supporting British citizen dumped on them, as is being suggested by others on this thread, simply because we don't want her.
If she finds her way back here on her own accord, we let her back in and deal with her, not shirk our responsibilities as a country and leave it for others to do.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
I agree, I wouldn't want to let her and her poisoned mind back in, but we're supposedly fighting terrorism and injustice around the world because we are a democratic country that observes the rule of law.
The only discussion really is what do our laws allow us or require us to do.
You cannot make it up on the hoof because you have a situation you don't like or is undesirable.
It is actually hard to disagree with you, unless there was some mechanism in international law where going to war against a country could imply relinquishing citizenship of that nation. But no, this country will not be "shirking" anything. If she can't find somewhere else to go she will end up back here unfortunately. However she can have no complaints if she is mercilessly hounded wherever she goes, or God forbid somebody actually murders her or her child - and if it was a member of the family of Lee Rigby, or family of one of those poor kids at that Ariana Grande concert who did it, there would be many who would sympathise.
So maybe rather than talking about this country shirking it's responsibility (which it won't do if international law demands it), you should ask this woman not to shirk her own. And her responsibility is to f*ck off and at least try to find some country who won't mind having her.