Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2019 13:42:55 GMT
The 'reformed' female example you used has now settled in the US, just cant have seen this happening if her father was burning the American flag. But he wasn't, it was hypothetical.
How do we know Shamina Begum wasn't defined by her Father's views?
My point is, it's all very well putting up one article about someone who has 'reformed' saying it can be done. Far, far too many variables to compare these two cases and think everything can be rosy.
We are arguing about different things then. I was referring to whether people can change. The article was about someone who has, and yes different circumstances will make a difference. I also quoted someone involved in deradicalisation programmes in sn earlier post so not just one example. The trouble is what takes priority, giving an individual another chance or the safety and welfare of the general population. When you are dealing with murderers, terrorists, rapists and the like the potential risks must surely outweigh the benefits of trying to change someone? That's why I think there should always be some accountability for those who make decision like allowing early release, a bit like corporate manslaughter. It might make the decision makers less blasé. |
|
|
|
Post by inee on Feb 18, 2019 13:43:17 GMT
I feel there are no special circumstances as even though she was in syria she aligned herself with isis, she has also said she is ok with beheading because it's ok under islamic law, she has also said she wants to come back because of our medical system, she appears to show no remorse. And that is the most worrying thing. She could (and should) have at least pretended to be sorry! The fact that even that seems beyond her leaves very little room for anyone to credibly defend her. Her solicitor isn't exactly helping is he, he's claimed that the nsdap members in Germany were treated more fairly than her at the Nuremberg trials ,beggars belief as the world is a very different place now than even just 15 years ago, looks like he's just trying to get idiots who have to react when ever they hear the word nazi. Now here's a kicker her dad or one of the dads of the group she left with is blaming the ,local council, school they attended, our government and our security forces as he allegedly phoned the police to say his daughter was getting radicalised, which then comes full circle to the anti UK & us protests he took part in so in reality does his failings as a parent not make him guilty of her radicalisation, hes also trying to garner sympathy by saying before she went her muh died and it's all related. |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Feb 18, 2019 13:46:10 GMT
Think it's fairly obvious we'll allow her back, few weeks of being paid by newspapers for her story, settled back to her community and claiming benefits within 6 months.
Makes you sick.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2019 13:49:47 GMT
Think it's fairly obvious we'll allow her back, few weeks of being paid by newspapers for her story, settled back to her community and claiming benefits within 6 months. Makes you sick. Makes some of us sick !!! |
|
|
|
Post by inee on Feb 18, 2019 13:57:55 GMT
Has her father been photographed burning the American flag though? Not trying to upset the apple cart, jaggas mentioned he read a news report on the father, i read that same reporter similar, however try as i may i cant find any reference to it today or yesterday(my internet history is deleted every time i close my browser). A point i would like to make is whilst reading those reports i was left wondering if the article was about her dad (i will swear blind it was) or as i found later a similar article about another one who left for syria (the one in question is the one that this girl has claimed died in an airstrike) , i will look up the names later as i need to take my meds |
|
|
|
Post by inee on Feb 18, 2019 14:04:19 GMT
The 'reformed' female example you used has now settled in the US, just cant have seen this happening if her father was burning the American flag. But he wasn't, it was hypothetical.
How do we know Shamina Begum wasn't defined by her Father's views?
My point is, it's all very well putting up one article about someone who has 'reformed' saying it can be done. Far, far too many variables to compare these two cases and think everything can be rosy.
We are arguing about different things then. I was referring to whether people can change. The article was about someone who has, and yes different circumstances will make a difference. I also quoted someone involved in deradicalisation programmes in sn earlier post so not just one example. Whilst i agree some can change, i feel that in terms of religion it would be extremely difficult to undo all those years of brainwashing from birth, i don't think i phrased that well, i'm trying to point out it would be a lot easier to change the views of someone on the far right or far left ,than someone who has held those views for most of their lives as it would go against everything they hold true, make out their parents and family as liars ,not just muslims but also christians (just look at those in the bible belt in the us) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2019 14:10:08 GMT
The problem as I see it is the impression it gives out. Other young kids will feel as though they will also be able to go abroad and either commit, or provide assistance, to terrible atrocities, and when they've had enough 'fun' they can just return home to the land of benefits and free living, without paying any consequencies.
It will be almost impossible to charge her with any crimes. I don't think Plod will be going into Syria to make any enquiries, collect evidence or take witness statements. However, anyone who has studied, or been involved with Counter Insurgency (COIN) will be fully aware of the importance of civilian support to the terrorists. How do you define it as a crime to provide assistance to a man who kills, maims, rapes innocent people. So she may only cook his meals, provide sexual relief (when he's not out raping), have his kids etc. On the face of it, legally she's not really committing any crimes as such. Nothing that will stand up in a court of law in the West anyway. However, in the world of counter insurgency it's a different story.
If the law says we cannot stop her coming back, then the law needs changing ASAP.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2019 14:13:29 GMT
We are arguing about different things then. I was referring to whether people can change. The article was about someone who has, and yes different circumstances will make a difference. I also quoted someone involved in deradicalisation programmes in sn earlier post so not just one example. Whilst i agree some can change, i feel that in terms of religion it would be extremely difficult to undo all those years of brainwashing from birth, i don't think i phrased that well, i'm trying to point out it would be a lot easier to change the views of someone on the far right or far left ,than someone who has held those views for most of their lives as it would go against everything they hold true, make out their parents and family as liars ,not just muslims but also christians (just look at those in the bible belt in the us) You just have to watch her interview. She has no regrets about joining ISIS. She said she had a good life. She only wants to come home because she has been caught and is now held in a camp. Come home to continue to spread her hate? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2019 14:28:44 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2019 14:31:10 GMT
The problem as I see it is the impression it gives out. Other young kids will feel as though they will also be able to go abroad and either commit, or provide assistance, to terrible atrocities, and when they've had enough 'fun' they can just return home to the land of benefits and free living, without paying any consequencies. It will be almost impossible to charge her with any crimes. I don't think Plod will be going into Syria to make any enquiries, collect evidence or take witness statements. However, anyone who has studied, or been involved with Counter Insurgency (COIN) will be fully aware of the importance of civilian support to the terrorists. How do you define it as a crime to provide assistance to a man who kills, maims, rapes innocent people. So she may only cook his meals, provide sexual relief (when he's not out raping), have his kids etc. On the face of it, legally she's not really committing any crimes as such. Nothing that will stand up in a court of law in the West anyway. However, in the world of counter insurgency it's a different story. If the law says we cannot stop her coming back, then the law needs changing ASAP. Pretty much said the same in an earlier post. How do you prove what someone has done whilst in Syria? There will be a big show of taking her in to custody, looking at what they can charge her with and her taxpayer funded lawyer will then leave the CPS with nowhere to go other than release into the community. The public will be reassured that she will remain under close monitoring by Cowley, Bodie and Doyle - at great expense to the taxpayer. She will then get housed, jump a queue for mental health treatment and get £x weekly benefits paid into her bank. The taxpayer will pick up her criminal legal costs, costs incurred bringing her 'home', re-housing costs, benefit payments, costs of civil service administration, surveillance costs, NHS cost for her and the baby, social worker costs, and then a family law lawyer to help her with a custody battle. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2019 14:44:04 GMT
Perhaps the lawyer has inadvertently given us a solution. If she is in need of a mental health assessment ensure the conclusion is that's she's as mad as a March hare and lock her in a secure hospital for the rest of her life. To save the taxpayer too much expense she can live in a converted broom cupboard - just need a steel door fitted and bobs yours uncle. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2019 14:46:03 GMT
Perhaps the lawyer has inadvertently given us a solution. If she is in need of a mental health assessment ensure the conclusion is that's she's as mad as a March hare and lock her in a secure hospital for the rest of her life. To save the taxpayer too much expense she can live in a converted broom cupboard - just need a steel door fitted and bobs yours uncle. Best thing I've read all day  PS - The bit about 'Bob's your uncle'. These days I wouldn't be too sure ! |
|
|
|
Post by South Stand Ultra on Feb 18, 2019 15:07:40 GMT
"She said she was partly inspired by videos of fighters beheading hostages and also by videos showing "the good life" under IS." I'd be inspired if someone chopped off her head!!! Really hope this piece of sh1t drops dead soon, rather than me and everyone else paying for a new house for her and its son. Would love it, if someone kills her in the camp she's in now!! Honestly, I'd be over the moon if someone chopped her head off. |
|
|
|
Post by jaggas on Feb 18, 2019 21:56:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Feb 19, 2019 11:03:54 GMT
Got a spare room, Oldie? Drop her a line and offer to put her up. She can be reached on slaughterallinfidels@hotmail.com
I cannot really understand people like Eric and others who label people like myself leftie loonies when what we are doing is taking the very conservative view of upholding the laws on our statute book. I don`t necessarily disagree with you on this one. But when a law is a bad one, then should it not be changed? If you`d been around just prior to WW1, would you have taken the same attitude over the Cat And Mouse act? "Well, it`s the law, and dammit, it should be upheld." It was a bad law, it needed to be changed, and eventually it was. Same today. A law which states that everyone holding UK citizenship, should be allowed to return here no matter how catastrophic the consequences are likely to be, is a bad law and should be changed. And let`s be real here, the consequences are likely to be bad. Short of going on Syria`s Got Talent, and belting out " Je ne regrette rien ", it`s hard to see what more she could do, to convince people that she thinks she`s taken the right path in life. What sort of ideas do you think she`s likely to instil in her son? You might have an image of him growing up to be a card carrying member of the Liberal Democrats, but I fear the reality will be different.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 11:23:09 GMT
I cannot really understand people like Eric and others who label people like myself leftie loonies when what we are doing is taking the very conservative view of upholding the laws on our statute book. I don`t necessarily disagree with you on this one. But when a law is a bad one, then should it not be changed? If you`d been around just prior to WW1, would you have taken the same attitude over the Cat And Mouse act? "Well, it`s the law, and dammit, it should be upheld." It was a bad law, it needed to be changed, and eventually it was. Same today. A law which states that everyone holding UK citizenship, should be allowed to return here no matter how catastrophic the consequences are likely to be, is a bad law and should be changed. And let`s be real here, the consequences are likely to be bad. Short of going on Syria`s Got Talent, and belting out " Je ne regrette rien ", it`s hard to see what more she could do, to convince people that she thinks she`s taken the right path in life. What sort of ideas do you think she`s likely to instil in her son? You might have an image of him growing up to be a card carrying member of the Liberal Democrats, but I fear the reality will be different.
I agree if a law is seen to be flawed or not working in the public interest then they need to be changed. But through due process. Let's have the new Act of Parliament debated, reviewed and brought to the Statute Book. Not by the kangaroo court of Public opinion. However how she brings her children up is her business. Other than actually breaking a specific law in so doing, it's a dark day in hell if we start to review how we bring our kids up based upon the parents personal convictions. Orwellian indeed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 19:21:55 GMT
So
Just been announced.
The Home Secretary has renounced this woman's citizenship.
I think that breaks international law.
But C4 suggesting that through her mother she may have duel nationality with Bangladesh. If true, what he has done is legal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 19:28:26 GMT
If that is true then it is truly wonderful news. If it is against International Law, then let her go through the courts. I'm pretty sure the government lawyers will be able to string it out for years.
She's just a spunk bucket for a psychopathic paedophile.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 19:47:01 GMT
If that is true then it is truly wonderful news. If it is against International Law, then let her go through the courts. I'm pretty sure the government lawyers will be able to string it out for years. She's just a spunk bucket for a psychopathic paedophile. Indeed it is wonderful news. If she and her family wish to appeal then deprive them of legal aid and let Oldie and her other supporters raise the fees by crowd funding. |
|
|
|
Post by South Stand Ultra on Feb 19, 2019 20:02:44 GMT
Under the 1981 British Nationality Act someone can be deprived of their citizenship if the home secretary is satisfied that it would be "conducive to the public good" and they would not become stateless as a result.
|
|
