Wife of ISIS fighter wants to return to the UK

1…89111314…29

Comments

  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Mr Goo wrote:
    Nope. But I bet TM is pleased the spotlight is pointing elsewhere.

    I doubt if TM is following this thread...
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    Imposter wrote:
    Mr Goo wrote:
    Nope. But I bet TM is pleased the spotlight is pointing elsewhere.

    I doubt if TM is following this thread...

    yeah - nice one. of course she is. nowt better to do with her day. makes a break from fcuking everything up.
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    Matthewfalle wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    Mr Goo wrote:
    Nope. But I bet TM is pleased the spotlight is pointing elsewhere.

    I doubt if TM is following this thread...

    yeah - nice one. of course she is. nowt better to do with her day. makes a break from fcuking everything up.

    To be fair, it's not as though the parliamentary calander is fully booked. Apparently there was nothing on at all on Wednesday afternoon. Nothing much happening right now apparently.
    Faster than a tent.......
  • secretsqizz
    secretsqizz Posts: 424
    1956-36-2.jpg
    My pen won't write on the screen
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,442
    Which rag printed that?
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    daily heil most probs. or the express.

    racist filth.
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,968
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Which rag printed that?

    Presumably one that doesn't realise we are staying under the jurisdiction of the ECHR.
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 12,769
    Obvs it was Tribune magazine, being Labour supporting and therefore anti semitic.

    I use semitic in the full correct sense of course.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Can't believe that would have appeared in any MSM publication. Would be interested to know the source..
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    rjsterry wrote:
    Corbyn coming out firmly against Javid is perfect for them.

    Corbyn, another known terrorist sympathiser comes out in favour of the terrorist scum just like the usual suspects on here.

    Of course, none of them want to be involved in the problem, just virtue signalling and willing to put others and this country at risk.

    If you are on the same side as Corbyn regarding a terrorist you know your moral compass is broken!
  • darkhairedlord
    darkhairedlord Posts: 7,180
    We all need to be wary of dangerous extremists tryin to radicalise us: Coopster, Fish2, mile-muncher.
  • darkhairedlord
    darkhairedlord Posts: 7,180
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Corbyn coming out firmly against Javid is perfect for them.

    Corbyn, another known terrorist sympathiser comes out in favour of the terrorist scum just like the usual suspects on here.

    Of course, none of them want to be involved in the problem, just virtue signalling and willing to put others and this country at risk.

    If you are on the same side as Corbyn regarding a terrorist you know your moral compass is broken!
    There is only one dangerous extremist on this forum.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,442
    As Mark Steel says: "The argument for keeping Begum out is that she’s a threat to our security. This is a strong point, because if she came back she’d have to stand trial, and if convicted of terrorist offences she’d have to go to a high security jail, where there would be nothing to stop her organising a holy jihad, except for a series of heavily armed guards outside her isolated cell.

    But if she’s abroad, somewhere vaguely foreign, she won’t be able to get up to anything much, because once Isis supporters are abroad they pretty much keep themselves to themselves."
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 18,964
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Corbyn coming out firmly against Javid is perfect for them.

    Corbyn, another known terrorist sympathiser comes out in favour of the terrorist scum just like the usual suspects on here.

    Of course, none of them want to be involved in the problem, just virtue signalling and willing to put others and this country at risk.

    If you are on the same side as Corbyn regarding a terrorist you know your moral compass is broken!

    Is Jacob Rees Mogg a terrorist sympathiser?
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Corbyn coming out firmly against Javid is perfect for them.

    Corbyn, another known terrorist sympathiser comes out in favour of the terrorist scum just like the usual suspects on here.

    Of course, none of them want to be involved in the problem, just virtue signalling and willing to put others and this country at risk.

    If you are on the same side as Corbyn regarding a terrorist you know your moral compass is broken!

    Is Jacob Rees Mogg a terrorist sympathiser?

    well, he's just a d1ck tbh.....
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • Jez mon
    Jez mon Posts: 3,809
    darkhairedlord wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Corbyn coming out firmly against Javid is perfect for them.

    Corbyn, another known terrorist sympathiser comes out in favour of the terrorist scum just like the usual suspects on here.

    Of course, none of them want to be involved in the problem, just virtue signalling and willing to put others and this country at risk.

    If you are on the same side as Corbyn regarding a terrorist you know your moral compass is broken!
    There is only one dangerous extremist on this forum.

    The right wing, in favour of law, unless that law is regarding not making people stateless.
    You live and learn. At any rate, you live
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,867
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    As Mark Steel says: "The argument for keeping Begum out is that she’s a threat to our security. This is a strong point, because if she came back she’d have to stand trial, and if convicted of terrorist offences she’d have to go to a high security jail, where there would be nothing to stop her organising a holy jihad, except for a series of heavily armed guards outside her isolated cell.

    But if she’s abroad, somewhere vaguely foreign, she won’t be able to get up to anything much, because once Isis supporters are abroad they pretty much keep themselves to themselves."

    All the f***wits arguing for her to be kept out to 'keep us safe' seem to have forgotten that she was radicalised by people outside this country, just as many other homegrown extremists.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,921
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Which rag printed that?

    Did they not run it past the Cake Stop committee first to see if it was fit for publication?
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    rjsterry wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    As Mark Steel says: "The argument for keeping Begum out is that she’s a threat to our security. This is a strong point, because if she came back she’d have to stand trial, and if convicted of terrorist offences she’d have to go to a high security jail, where there would be nothing to stop her organising a holy jihad, except for a series of heavily armed guards outside her isolated cell.

    But if she’s abroad, somewhere vaguely foreign, she won’t be able to get up to anything much, because once Isis supporters are abroad they pretty much keep themselves to themselves."

    All the f***wits arguing for her to be kept out to 'keep us safe' seem to have forgotten that she was radicalised by people outside this country, just as many other homegrown extremists.

    So your plan to allow the UK face of ISIS back into the country which risks allowing her to radicalise more people in this country and risks in the UK that presents. Additionally, also removing the huge deterrent that you will be disowned by the UK if you decide to join up with a terrorist organisation.

    If she manages to suicide bomb somewhere in the UK, (remember she only has to be lucky once) the terrorist sympathisers like yourself will blame those who should have been watching over her, not those who facilitated her repatriation back into the UK.

    You've really not though of the consequences of your views!

    Simply put, she is too much of a risk to UK society. While I despise the Syrian regime, their authorities can deal with her as their law allows
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    Ballysmate wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Which rag printed that?

    Did they not run it past the Cake Stop committee first to see if it was fit for publication?

    I don't think they ran it past any committee, old lad.
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    As Mark Steel says: "The argument for keeping Begum out is that she’s a threat to our security. This is a strong point, because if she came back she’d have to stand trial, and if convicted of terrorist offences she’d have to go to a high security jail, where there would be nothing to stop her organising a holy jihad, except for a series of heavily armed guards outside her isolated cell.

    But if she’s abroad, somewhere vaguely foreign, she won’t be able to get up to anything much, because once Isis supporters are abroad they pretty much keep themselves to themselves."

    All the f***wits arguing for her to be kept out to 'keep us safe' seem to have forgotten that she was radicalised by people outside this country, just as many other homegrown extremists.

    So your plan to allow the UK face of ISIS back into the country which risks allowing her to radicalise more people in this country and risks in the UK that presents. Additionally, also removing the huge deterrent that you will be disowned by the UK if you decide to join up with a terrorist organisation.

    If she manages to suicide bomb somewhere in the UK, (remember she only has to be lucky once) the terrorist sympathisers like yourself will blame those who should have been watching over her, not those who facilitated her repatriation back into the UK.

    You've really not though of the consequences of your views!

    Simply put, she is too much of a risk to UK society. While I despise the Syrian regime, their authorities can deal with her as their law allows

    what defines your limits as to risks to UK society?
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    So your plan to allow the UK face of ISIS back into the country which risks allowing her to radicalise more people in this country and risks in the UK that presents. Additionally, also removing the huge deterrent that you will be disowned by the UK if you decide to join up with a terrorist organisation.

    If she manages to suicide bomb somewhere in the UK, (remember she only has to be lucky once) the terrorist sympathisers like yourself will blame those who should have been watching over her, not those who facilitated her repatriation back into the UK.

    You've really not though of the consequences of your views!

    Simply put, she is too much of a risk to UK society. While I despise the Syrian regime, their authorities can deal with her as their law allows

    Got to say - paranoid delusional jingoistic 'patriots' like you are far more of a risk to 'UK society' than this young, groomed, radicalised teenage mother are ever likely to be...
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,867
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    As Mark Steel says: "The argument for keeping Begum out is that she’s a threat to our security. This is a strong point, because if she came back she’d have to stand trial, and if convicted of terrorist offences she’d have to go to a high security jail, where there would be nothing to stop her organising a holy jihad, except for a series of heavily armed guards outside her isolated cell.

    But if she’s abroad, somewhere vaguely foreign, she won’t be able to get up to anything much, because once Isis supporters are abroad they pretty much keep themselves to themselves."

    All the f***wits arguing for her to be kept out to 'keep us safe' seem to have forgotten that she was radicalised by people outside this country, just as many other homegrown extremists.

    So your plan to allow the UK face of ISIS back into the country which risks allowing her to radicalise more people in this country and risks in the UK that presents. Additionally, also removing the huge deterrent that you will be disowned by the UK if you decide to join up with a terrorist organisation.

    If she manages to suicide bomb somewhere in the UK, (remember she only has to be lucky once) the terrorist sympathisers like yourself will blame those who should have been watching over her, not those who facilitated her repatriation back into the UK.

    You've really not though of the consequences of your views!

    Simply put, she is too much of a risk to UK society. While I despise the Syrian regime, their authorities can deal with her as their law allows

    I'll spell it out again. Keeping one person out of the country provides no protection. Leaving her in Syria makes it much easier for her to be the next online recruiting sergeant for IS. And being British she would be the perfect saleswoman for like-minded people back home. The exile even fits neatly with the clash of civilizations narrative that IS like to push.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Imposter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    So your plan to allow the UK face of ISIS back into the country which risks allowing her to radicalise more people in this country and risks in the UK that presents. Additionally, also removing the huge deterrent that you will be disowned by the UK if you decide to join up with a terrorist organisation.

    If she manages to suicide bomb somewhere in the UK, (remember she only has to be lucky once) the terrorist sympathisers like yourself will blame those who should have been watching over her, not those who facilitated her repatriation back into the UK.

    You've really not though of the consequences of your views!

    Simply put, she is too much of a risk to UK society. While I despise the Syrian regime, their authorities can deal with her as their law allows

    Got to say - paranoid delusional jingoistic 'patriots' like you are far more of a risk to 'UK society' than this young, groomed, radicalised teenage mother are ever likely to be...

    Now just imagine for one moment that he is not a moron but one of a large group of people wanting to reduce faith in the democratic process. Then demanding the Govt does something which is illegal and will get overturned is quite clever. Even better is that it will be overturned by a supra-national body so giving a new excuse to advocate isolationalism.

    Or you get to know what is written on the beer mats in ‘spoons without going in
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    Imposter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    So your plan to allow the UK face of ISIS back into the country which risks allowing her to radicalise more people in this country and risks in the UK that presents. Additionally, also removing the huge deterrent that you will be disowned by the UK if you decide to join up with a terrorist organisation.

    If she manages to suicide bomb somewhere in the UK, (remember she only has to be lucky once) the terrorist sympathisers like yourself will blame those who should have been watching over her, not those who facilitated her repatriation back into the UK.

    You've really not though of the consequences of your views!

    Simply put, she is too much of a risk to UK society. While I despise the Syrian regime, their authorities can deal with her as their law allows

    Got to say - paranoid delusional jingoistic 'patriots' like you are far more of a risk to 'UK society' than this young, groomed, radicalised teenage mother are ever likely to be...

    Could we arrange a swap - Begum for Coopster? Admittedly it would deradicalize Cake Stop a bit but I'm sure we can cope.
    Faster than a tent.......
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 12,769
    Coopster = Botster. Dobroy nochi tovarisch.
  • bianchimoon
    bianchimoon Posts: 3,942
    Imposter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    So your plan to allow the UK face of ISIS back into the country which risks allowing her to radicalise more people in this country and risks in the UK that presents. Additionally, also removing the huge deterrent that you will be disowned by the UK if you decide to join up with a terrorist organisation.

    If she manages to suicide bomb somewhere in the UK, (remember she only has to be lucky once) the terrorist sympathisers like yourself will blame those who should have been watching over her, not those who facilitated her repatriation back into the UK.

    You've really not though of the consequences of your views!

    Simply put, she is too much of a risk to UK society. While I despise the Syrian regime, their authorities can deal with her as their law allows

    Got to say - paranoid delusional jingoistic 'patriots' like you are far more of a risk to 'UK society' than this young, groomed, radicalised teenage mother are ever likely to be...
    Sage words
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • verylonglegs
    verylonglegs Posts: 3,959
    Rolf F wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    So your plan to allow the UK face of ISIS back into the country which risks allowing her to radicalise more people in this country and risks in the UK that presents. Additionally, also removing the huge deterrent that you will be disowned by the UK if you decide to join up with a terrorist organisation.

    If she manages to suicide bomb somewhere in the UK, (remember she only has to be lucky once) the terrorist sympathisers like yourself will blame those who should have been watching over her, not those who facilitated her repatriation back into the UK.

    You've really not though of the consequences of your views!

    Simply put, she is too much of a risk to UK society. While I despise the Syrian regime, their authorities can deal with her as their law allows

    Got to say - paranoid delusional jingoistic 'patriots' like you are far more of a risk to 'UK society' than this young, groomed, radicalised teenage mother are ever likely to be...

    Could we arrange a swap - Begum for Coopster? Admittedly it would deradicalize Cake Stop a bit but I'm sure we can cope.

    Syria has suffered enough don't you think...and now you want to inflict Coopster on them? You're a sick individual.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,867
    Wonder if The Saj will dump this guy on Canada.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... from-syria
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Now Jihadi Jack wants to return to the UK.

    Awks for the terrorist sympathisers on here...

Categories