Pogue Mahone
The caf's Camus.
Some people are making a big deal out of her being “unrepentant “. Don’t you think it’s possible her current circumstances might make it kind of tricky to slate the jihadists and swear allegiance to the Union Jack?
I’d bring the child but not her. She lost two kids by intentionally having them in a warzone in order to provide child soldiers to a sick regime. She’s not fit to raise children.To be fair the raising of the child will happen that way anyway. Would you not be better to bring her back with child and try to help educate both?
Doesn’t seem to be an issue for the vast majority of others currently trying to worm their way back ‘home’. Isn’t she being held by the SDF? Not much incentive to feign loyalty to the Caliphate in front of them.Some people are making a big deal out of her being “unrepentant “. Don’t you think it’s possible her current circumstances might make it kind of tricky to slate the jihadists and swear allegiance to the Union Jack?
This.How do we know it’s not some part of a tactical long game plan? That some day she will walk into a crowded place and blow herself up
They're detained by Kurdish forces I believe. There is no recognised country or law I guess, which is what makes it difficult.If any crimes have been committed, she should be arrested, charged, sent to trail and serve sentence (if found guilty) in that very country the same as any other British criminal who commits a crime overseas. The baby should be brought home and put into the care of either her family or social services if the family are found unfit.
I'd say she would be the least dangerous woman in Britain if she returns. She wouldn't be able to cough without the government knowing.How do we know it’s not some part of a tactical long game plan? That some day she will walk into a crowded place and blow herself up
They can’t literally watch her 24/7 for years. At some point their guard will go downI'd say she would be the least dangerous woman in Britain if she returns. She wouldn't be able to cough without the government knowing.
Does Britain even have an embassy in Syria anymore? She'd probably have to go into Turkey or Iraq to be issued a visa. I'm hoping both countries don't allow her in.The UK has stopped funding UK citizens who find themselves in difficulty in foreign countries but they will need to issue temporary travel documents and she will have to find her own way home or with the help of her family. Maybe the family will look after her baby while she serves any prison sentence or possibly it will go into foster care or be put up for adoption but I don't know if anyone else is aware of any case where a British Citizen has been stripped of their nationality.
I’d be all for her losing her citizenship though. She chose to leave and stands for/condones actions that go against the core values of the Western world.It's the law. That and her baby is a British citizen.
Completely disagree with this. You can't just go stripping people's citizenship because they do things you don't like. Especially when it comes to something as vague as 'going against core values'. I sure as feck don't trust this (or any) UK government with that much power.I’d be all for her losing her citizenship though. She chose to leave and stands for/condones actions that go against the core values of the Western world.
She lost her right to call herself British when she left for the caliphate
Like joining a terrorist organisation?Completely disagree with this. You can't just go stripping people's citizenship because they do things you don't like. Especially when it comes to something as vague as 'going against core values'. I sure as feck don't trust this (or any) UK government with that much power.
Morally maybe, but legally no. I think the government have already said they are not going to make her stateless.I’d be all for her losing her citizenship though. She chose to leave and stands for/condones actions that go against the core values of the Western world.
She lost her right to call herself British when she left for the caliphate
Agreed. It's a slippery slope.Completely disagree with this. You can't just go stripping people's citizenship because they do things you don't like. Especially when it comes to something as vague as 'going against core values'. I sure as feck don't trust this (or any) UK government with that much power.
Yup. The only circumstance I can think of that warrants it would be joining a hostile country during a time of war. Islamic State were never a recognized country and are not in a state of war against the UK as far as I'm aware.Like joining a terrorist organisation?
They were and are absolutely in a state of war with the UK.Islamic State were never a recognized country and are not in a state of war against the UK as far as I'm aware.
Not legally they aren't, otherwise you would have to recognise them as a state.They were and are absolutely in a state of war with the UK.
So states can only be in a state of war with other states? Well you learn something new every day I suppose. So the British government were never - legally - at war with the IRA?Not legally they aren't, otherwise you would have to recognise them as a state.
Sounds expensive.I'd say she would be the least dangerous woman in Britain if she returns. She wouldn't be able to cough without the government knowing.
This sort of sympathy is what encourages terrorists worldwide. My own country is currently suffering from the aftermaths of a ghastly attack by a suicide bombing brainwashed youth cnut.I'm really not sure how I feel about it.
On the one hand I completely get the emotional reaction, but on the other hand I kind of think she's in her own way a bit of a victim. She seems stupid and unrepentant, but she was a 15 year old girl when she went and has been subjected to four years of grooming and brainwashing and we know little about how she was radicalised to the extent that she went.
I don't know how far that should be taken in to mitigation though, most of us have done stupid things at that age. Few of us have joined a death cult.
Same with us. We’ve ruled out intervening in any way on bringing them home, and would prefer if they don’t come back, but haven’t actually outlined what they will do if they do come back. Thankfully none have attempted to as yet, and hopefully they never do.I seem to remember thinking we took a stance of ‘leave it for now, and should they show up here we’ll have to deal with it in some way’. Imo it’s the lesser of evils for the government. Technically they’re still Norwegian citizen, but hopefully we won’t lift a finger to bring that plague back here.
Seems a fair few won’t be coming back to the UK....legitimately.More than 150 suspected jihadists and criminals have been stripped of their citizenship and banned from returning to the UK, it has been reported.
Ministers stepped up the “deprivation orders” amid fears that the collapse of Islamic State would lead to an influx of militants from Syria, according to the Sunday Times.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ed-150-jihadists-and-criminals-of-citizenship
Let's not get in to what encourages terrorists worldwide. It's a debate we've had on here before and it's one that will derail the thread.This sort of sympathy is what encourages terrorists worldwide. My own country is currently suffering from the aftermaths of a ghastly attack by a suicide bombing brainwashed youth cnut.
Zero tolerance for terrorists. Shoot them on sight, whether they are 10, 15 or 50 years old. Women and kids who get brainwashed are far too gone to come back, and it would be better to put them out of their misery.
This piece of work should rot in ISIS land for sure.
I'm more curious about the thought process of the ones who think she shouldn't. On what basis? It's an absolutely ridiculous stance. A country can't ban their citizens from returning. It's unheard of. I think the only situations you can be stripped of your nationality is if you're naturalized (this can happen in the US, although rare) or, in the case of some (rare) countries that don't allow dual citizenship, so they'll remove yours if you become a citizen of another country.I would love to know that rational logic / thought process of those 16% thinking she should be allowed to return.
If any crimes have been committed, she should be arrested, charged, sent to trail and serve sentence (if found guilty) in that very country the same as any other British criminal who commits a crime overseas. The baby should be brought home and put into the care of either her family or social services if the family are found unfit.
In some countries, joining a terrorist organisation or fighting in a foreign conflict were not criminal offences at the time when most individuals travelled to Syria.
Several countries have since introduced new laws which, however, cannot be applied retrospectively.
Even in countries where such actions have long constituted criminal offences, authorities struggle to gather the evidence needed to build a strong criminal case.
Knowing that somebody joined IS or committed atrocities in Syria from an intelligence perspective is one thing.
Being able to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law is another.
Spot on.If any crimes have been committed, she should be arrested, charged, sent to trail and serve sentence (if found guilty) in that very country the same as any other British criminal who commits a crime overseas. The baby should be brought home and put into the care of either her family or social services if the family are found unfit.
And I am curious about the thought process that thinks this even remotely a sensible thing to say.I'm more curious about the thought process of the ones who think she shouldn't. On what basis? It's an absolutely ridiculous stance
I'd rather have a terrorist back, really.
I may be slightly wrong I'm not an expert in international law, but I believe technically yes.So states can only be in a state of war with other states? Well you learn something new every day I suppose. So the British government were never - legally - at war with the IRA?
Do all the ISIS declarations of war and attacks, and the fact that British troops have been involved in fighting them over in Syria and Iraq, count for nothing then when we’re weighing up the legalities here?