So Shamima Begum wants to come back

Started by cromwell, September 17, 2021, 06:13:11 PM

« previous - next »

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

cromwell

Quote from: T00ts on September 17, 2021, 08:21:50 PM
Ok so that's her crime. I wonder if she was aware of that or even if she is now? On a humanitarian level to her as the young impressionable youngster she was at the time I feel incredibly sorry for the great mistake she and her two friends made. Her 2 friends died, she has lost 3 children, it can't be a happy place that she is in. I am relieved that I haven't been asked to judge her but I can still see both sides and bow to the Government decision based on what  Javid has said. But it's a tough one.
I'm not sure it's even that alone,I suppose like Phil the Greeks will in decades it will be known.

TBH Andrew Neil nearly convinced,you too once though I shouldn't tell you that :) but my head tells me no,and looking at her interview she came across to me as heartless bitch whose seen and done much in her short time on this earth and of late much evil.
A veneer of sincerity like glass.
Energy....secure and affordable,not that hard is it?

T00ts

Quote from: johnofgwent on September 17, 2021, 07:47:19 PM

She has left the United Kingdom for the express purpose of giving succour to a terrorist organisation pledged to overthrow the UK government and replace it with a caliphate.


This violates our antiterrorism laws.


The Labour party will tell you she was under 18 and in no position to make a decision for which she can be held responsible. Yet that same party handed children and immigrants who chose not to become naturalised a VOTE in the Assembly and Local elections. The SNP has done the same as they know they need the votes of children too immature to take responsibility for their acts to keep them in power.


You don't get to have it both ways. Either she was a child and we need to re-run the elections with only adult citizens voting, or her age group are adult enough to vote, in which case she should be in Nuremberg facing hanging.


Can't pick and choose. Which is it to be ??

Ok so that's her crime. I wonder if she was aware of that or even if she is now? On a humanitarian level to her as the young impressionable youngster she was at the time I feel incredibly sorry for the great mistake she and her two friends made. Her 2 friends died, she has lost 3 children, it can't be a happy place that she is in. I am relieved that I haven't been asked to judge her but I can still see both sides and bow to the Government decision based on what  Javid has said. But it's a tough one.

johnofgwent

Quote from: T00ts on September 17, 2021, 07:19:54 PM
Looking at this the comment that she is home grown and deserves our lawful procedure feels valid. The trouble for me is what offence has she actually committed? Is it simply the threat of her radicalisation?


She has left the United Kingdom for the express purpose of giving succour to a terrorist organisation pledged to overthrow the UK government and replace it with a caliphate.


This violates our antiterrorism laws.


The Labour party will tell you she was under 18 and in no position to make a decision for which she can be held responsible. Yet that same party handed children and immigrants who chose not to become naturalised a VOTE in the Assembly and Local elections. The SNP has done the same as they know they need the votes of children too immature to take responsibility for their acts to keep them in power.


You don't get to have it both ways. Either she was a child and we need to re-run the elections with only adult citizens voting, or her age group are adult enough to vote, in which case she should be in Nuremberg facing hanging.


Can't pick and choose. Which is it to be ??
<t>In matters of taxation, Lord Clyde\'s summing up in the 1929 case Inland Revenue v Ayrshire Pullman Services is worth a glance.</t>

T00ts

Quote from: cromwell on September 17, 2021, 07:08:33 PM
Ha! you added the link,it confirmed that on QT too look in around 32:00 in
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=diDMuuZVOkI

Looking at this the comment that she is home grown and deserves our lawful procedure feels valid. The trouble for me is what offence has she actually committed? Is it simply the threat of her radicalisation?

johnofgwent

Sorry but as Toots says she has chosen to marry a Dutchman who has somehow retained his citizenship despite being an active member of ISIS.

Fair enough. She is their problem now.

The path is open for the marriage to be authenticated and for her to be naturalised as a Dutch citizen


Then she can wander up and down the Schengen area macheteing at will....


<t>In matters of taxation, Lord Clyde\'s summing up in the 1929 case Inland Revenue v Ayrshire Pullman Services is worth a glance.</t>

cromwell

Ha! you added the link,it confirmed that on QT too look in around 32:00 in
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=diDMuuZVOkI
Energy....secure and affordable,not that hard is it?

papasmurf

She should be let back in and arrested as soon as she lands. Then debriefed by the security services. (That could take months.)
Nemini parco qui vivit in orbe

T00ts

Quote from: cromwell on September 17, 2021, 06:13:11 PM
On last nights QT Andrew Neil put up a good argument as to why she should be allowed back as did T00ts many months ago but for entirely different reasons.

I also saw a piece of her being interviewed,her plea to return as she sported Nike cap and western dress she came across to me as genuine as a nine pound note.

The arrogant I want come back and advise the govt on Isis terrorists because you don't know what you're doing (how to win friends and influence people) along with a half hearted apology over her delight at the time of the Manchester bombing
I tried to find the ref but can't. There was an MP in the last few days who more or less said - if you knew what I know you would make the same decision - I want to say it was Sajid Javid but that could be wrong. The mother in me says give her a chance, she was too young to know what she was doing and let's face it she was groomed and aided with money, instructions tickets etc online by people who knew exactly what they were doing. Once there did she honestly have a choice? We heard of other girls trying to escape who were killed in the attempt.
It's possible that like many teenage rather sheltered girls she got carried away with what she thought was glamour and romance plus they convinced her that she was on God's side and that everyone else were infidels and she had a duty. All compelling stuff.
Brainwashed, groomed, swept along with the glamour that I seem to remember ISIS members enjoying at the cost of others and probably too sheltered here to properly understand just what she was into. Equally the horror being registered around the world would not have been available to her.

It is interesting that she has not detached herself from her Dutch husband. Perhaps Holland should be where she should be asking to go. It is sad that here is a young woman who has destroyed her life and hurt her family. Should we allow her back? I find it exceptional that we as a usually lenient country have deemed her a danger and in the light of that I feel disposed to trust our Government on the subject. Why? Whoever the MP was said something about her creating a precedent. Should we risk that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRQm-EsUxgA

cromwell

On last nights QT Andrew Neil put up a good argument as to why she should be allowed back as did T00ts many months ago but for entirely different reasons.

I also saw a piece of her being interviewed,her plea to return as she sported Nike cap and western dress she came across to me as genuine as a nine pound note.

The arrogant I want come back and advise the govt on Isis terrorists because you don't know what you're doing (how to win friends and influence people) along with a half hearted apology over her delight at the time of the Manchester bombing convinces me I was right first time round,sod off and live in another Stone Age state.
Energy....secure and affordable,not that hard is it?