Jail costs money.. many terrorists have been groomed in prison.
This surely doesn't count as a clear cut case though?
She has travelled out of the UK to join the ISIS. The bar for association with terrorists shouldn't need to be as high. She doesn't really have a defence, she travelled in her own free will and married a member of the ISIS.
Again, at 15 years old. The idea of a fifteen year old moving to Syria, getting married and having a child of her own free will is rather flawed. In fact the marriage and pregnancy part is outright abuse by the UK's standards.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The child will most likely not end up with her if she were to come back as she would possibly be sentenced.
If she comes back, the kid staying with her shouldn't be an option.
Tough shit.
But at 16 she would have been fine? Because after all that is then adulthood.
According to you, the problem with her was joining this particular caliphate, not the abstract concept of one. This particular caliphate is about as dead as the Nazi state of 1945. So I'm not sure about the "no end in sight" - the ISIS thread here suggests that the end is literally in sight.
I know that's likely, but it's also quite likely she'll have more isn't it?
Regardless of what you might have felt as a 15 year old, the reality is that they are more vulnerable than fully grown adults, which is why we have various laws protecting them. We have laws against marrying and impregnating fifteen year olds for a reason and the logic behind those laws doesn't dissapear just because the victim also got convinced to move to Syria at the same time.
It’s nowhere near as dead as Nazi Germany unless you believe everything Trump says. Everybody thought ISIS (ISI then) was dead from 2008-2011, yet when circumstances changed they were able to re-emerge stronger than ever. They’ll have been preparing for this scenario for years. There are already worrying reports about a comeback in Iraq (see here, here and here). Actually defeating ISIS requires some level of justice, reconciliation and good governance taking hold in eastern Syria and north-west Iraq in the coming years, so I’m sure you’ll understand why there are few grounds for optimism there.
She doesn't sound like the sharpest tool in the shed.
You bring some interesting balance to this thread which is always good.
Seems like someone has had a word with her since the first interview and she’s going for the sympathy angle. It’s infuriating though how these interviewers aren’t asking the hard questions (e.g. about the Yazidis). Although I haven’t seen the full interview.
It's more of the same, he did ask about the brutality but she dodged the question by saying she was just a housewife with no involvement. Surprisingly she still maintains she has no regret going and showed no sympathy for her family back home.
No doubt she has a lawyer somewhere advising her. Agree, serious questions have be asked.
So what would you do, bring her back...whether that be in prison or not, pay a load of tax money making this happen...money hard working decent people have paid for. And then when she spreads her terrorist virus to others and more innocent people die what will you think then?
Did someone drag her to the airport? And did she try to escape? Or has she simply said things are a bit shit for her and in reality she just wants to take advantage of our NHS and maybe get a free home?
So hypothetically, if a 15 year old girl gets groomed online by some 40 year old sex predator and convinced to leave the country so he can marry and have sex with her, you would shrug your shoulders and say "well she must have known what she was doing, she wasn't dragged to the airport"? Because I think most normal people understand that just because a fifteen year old girl can be convinced into doing something, that doesn't mean she's fully aware of the consequences. Thus we have laws stopping adults from having sex with and marrying young teenagers.
I smell a whiff of m'learned friend's aftershave...
I agree...she should be punished...with death. Better her death than someone I know...including you and your family. So you can either agree with me or disagree and if that means it's Russian roulette as to whether someone in our families die then you can know it's entirely on your liberal attitudes and other such terrorist sympathizers.
There is literally no benefit, beyond some libtards patting themselves on the back as they ask us all to fund the housing and benefits and medical care of a terrorist who may or may not in a Russian Roulette like manner decide to help kill some of our friends and family.
It's less that there are benefits and more that there are obligations/responsibilities.
I'm beginning to sense that this is a pointless conversation but, for what it's worth, if she does come back and kill both me and my family then I will certainly take on board that criticism.
we won't break international law but refusing her entry?
What, you think she should be killed? As @sullydnl says, she remains a British citizen, as does her innocent baby.
I had the same feeling of us clearly being on different spectrums of opinion.
If our law was set appropriately she should have given up all rights to British citizenship when she left to support terrorists who are fighting against our country.
wtf