Wife of ISIS fighter wants to return to the UK

surrey_commuter · February 2019

Slowbike wrote:

john80 wrote:

Imposter wrote:

john80 wrote:

I would dispute that and suggest that Syrian troops are probably better placed to de-radicalise ISIS in Syria. They wont be hiring a psychologist at any point in this process and it will mainly involve execution or prison.

What should happen to her newborn baby? Should he be executed/imprisoned too?

What I think is irrelevant as the current situation for this baby was dictated by the actions of its parents.

except the baby was born to a british citizen - and is therefore a british citizen and I'd hazard a guess that the grandparents/family would be willing to bring him up.

john80 wrote:

They are equally deserving of asylum

AFAIK, the baby doesn't need Asylum - he has a right to enter this country.

I think John needs to stop sympathising with the terrorists. If executing his mother is not going to start a spriral of violence then what is? If we are going down that route then of course the baby should be executed.

laurentian · February 2019

john80 wrote:

Maybe when it is old enough to form an opinion on its early life it should look to these two for some answers as to how his or her life has turned out.

You're right.

Right now, this baby is an innocent British citizen who has yet to form any opinions but I'd bet my shirt that, should his mother not be allowed back into the UK to face trail and he not be brought up by the state or willing, suitable relatives, he'd be about as radicalised as it's possible to be.

john80 · February 2019

laurentian wrote:

john80 wrote:

Maybe when it is old enough to form an opinion on its early life it should look to these two for some answers as to how his or her life has turned out.

You're right.

Right now, this baby is an innocent British citizen who has yet to form any opinions but I'd bet my shirt that, should his mother not be allowed back into the UK to face trail and he not be brought up by the state or willing, suitable relatives, he'd be about as radicalised as it's possible to be.

Your right it would be much better to bring the kid back to Britain and see if it follows the current family business model. Stay at home mum, foreign fighter dad. This guy had a good role model from his father a well renowned hate preacher.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/0 ... arged-gun/

Look I get that the kid tugs at the heart strings but from my perspective there are also many others that could do with a go in a western democracy. Maybe he will hate the West growing up but then again maybe he will not. I would rather have the multiple country buffer between all of Begum's current and future offspring and a visa system. Not sure she or her husband are really on board with western laws and societal norms regarding of equal rights regardless of race or religion for example.

rick_chasey · February 2019

john80 wrote:

laurentian wrote:

john80 wrote:

Maybe when it is old enough to form an opinion on its early life it should look to these two for some answers as to how his or her life has turned out.

You're right.

Right now, this baby is an innocent British citizen who has yet to form any opinions but I'd bet my shirt that, should his mother not be allowed back into the UK to face trail and he not be brought up by the state or willing, suitable relatives, he'd be about as radicalised as it's possible to be.

Your right it would be much better to bring the kid back to Britain and see if it follows the current family business model. Stay at home mum, foreign fighter dad. This guy had a good role model from his father a well renowned hate preacher.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/0 ... arged-gun/

Look I get that the kid tugs at the heart strings but from my perspective there are also many others that could do with a go in a western democracy. Maybe he will hate the West growing up but then again maybe he will not. I would rather have the multiple country buffer between all of Begum's current and future offspring and a visa system. Not sure she or her husband are really on board with western laws and societal norms regarding of equal rights regardless of race or religion for example.

Isn’t the entire point that there is already a fairly fair and robust system in place go deal with this so that your or anyone else’s inconsistent whims aren’t taken into account?

Ie if she managed to come back she’d be prosecuted. If she wasn’t then presumably that’s because there wasn’t enough evidence?

Isn’t it also relevant that things like this often begin in the first place when people who have a responsibility to look after others shirk their responsibilities and say “not my problem anymore”???

Radicalisation requires fertile ground on part of the radicalised. There are usually plenty of opportunities for people to step in before the end up radicalised.

What kind of example does this “it’s not our problem anymore” behaviour by the home office offer?

rick_chasey · February 2019

In case it’s not clear:

Whether it’s individually, as a group, as a society or even nation; you lie in the bed you make. Only pussies try and dodge that.

She’s British and she is a product of the nation.

rjsterry · February 2019

john80 wrote:

laurentian wrote:

john80 wrote:

Maybe when it is old enough to form an opinion on its early life it should look to these two for some answers as to how his or her life has turned out.

You're right.

Right now, this baby is an innocent British citizen who has yet to form any opinions but I'd bet my shirt that, should his mother not be allowed back into the UK to face trail and he not be brought up by the state or willing, suitable relatives, he'd be about as radicalised as it's possible to be.

Your right it would be much better to bring the kid back to Britain and see if it follows the current family business model. Stay at home mum, foreign fighter dad. This guy had a good role model from his father a well renowned hate preacher.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/0 ... arged-gun/

Look I get that the kid tugs at the heart strings but from my perspective there are also many others that could do with a go in a western democracy. Maybe he will hate the West growing up but then again maybe he will not. I would rather have the multiple country buffer between all of Begum's current and future offspring and a visa system. Not sure she or her husband are really on board with western laws and societal norms regarding of equal rights regardless of race or religion for example.

What, that multiple country buffer that prevented... what exactly? How did the multiple country buffer protect those involved on Westminster Bridge or London Bridge? The idea that keeping one teenager out of the country provides the rest of us with any additional safety is absurd.

Jez mon · February 2019

Western laws like not making people stateless? Or just the western laws that you fancy?

john80 · February 2019

Rick Chasey wrote:

In case it’s not clear:

Whether it’s individually, as a group, as a society or even nation; you lie in the bed you make. Only pussies try and dodge that.

She’s British and she is a product of the nation.

It is interesting that vast majority of the UK population have to seemingly lie in some bed that she has made having never met her and having no way to influence her or simply tell her that the plan was misinformed at best. At what point does the person have to lie in the bed they directly make as I am struggling to see when that would be from this debate?

imposter2.0 · February 2019

john80 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

In case it’s not clear:

Whether it’s individually, as a group, as a society or even nation; you lie in the bed you make. Only pussies try and dodge that.

She’s British and she is a product of the nation.

It is interesting that vast majority of the UK population have to seemingly lie in some bed that she has made having never met her and having no way to influence her or simply tell her that the plan was misinformed at best. At what point does the person have to lie in the bed they directly make as I am struggling to see when that would be from this debate?

Welcome to civilised society and collective responsibility, John. Sounds like you may struggle to fit in...

Pross · February 2019

I actually don't understand a word of the point being made now. This thread has become surreal.

john80 · February 2019

rjsterry wrote:

john80 wrote:

laurentian wrote:

john80 wrote:

Maybe when it is old enough to form an opinion on its early life it should look to these two for some answers as to how his or her life has turned out.

You're right.

Right now, this baby is an innocent British citizen who has yet to form any opinions but I'd bet my shirt that, should his mother not be allowed back into the UK to face trail and he not be brought up by the state or willing, suitable relatives, he'd be about as radicalised as it's possible to be.

Your right it would be much better to bring the kid back to Britain and see if it follows the current family business model. Stay at home mum, foreign fighter dad. This guy had a good role model from his father a well renowned hate preacher.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/0 ... arged-gun/

Look I get that the kid tugs at the heart strings but from my perspective there are also many others that could do with a go in a western democracy. Maybe he will hate the West growing up but then again maybe he will not. I would rather have the multiple country buffer between all of Begum's current and future offspring and a visa system. Not sure she or her husband are really on board with western laws and societal norms regarding of equal rights regardless of race or religion for example.

What, that multiple country buffer that prevented... what exactly? How did the multiple country buffer protect those involved on Westminster Bridge or London Bridge? The idea that keeping one teenager out of the country provides the rest of us with any additional safety is absurd.

MI5 thought Khalid Masood was a peripheral figure to a terrorist plot in 2010 but then stopped taking interest in him based on their risk assessment. For the London Bridge attacks we had a more hardcore group of guys called Khuram Shazad Butt, Rachid Redouane & Youssef Zaghba. All of these 3 guys had a form sheet that would want you to make them leave the country and incidentally only 1 of the 3 was actually British. Based on the above 4 examples of what they had done prior to going mental and the action taken are you still so sure that MI5 and the MET have a good chance of correctly identifying what crimes ISIS fighters returning to the UK may or may not have committed and try them accordingly? The best way to tackle ISIS sadly is to let Syria and Iraq go back about their business of dictatorships as democracy over throwing regimes has not panned out too well. At the end of the day if she gets back to Britain then the UK will have a hard time getting rid of her as Bangladesh will not accept her and a case will be made that Syria is not a safe place for her but I don't share your view that we should facilitate her return in any way.

john80 · February 2019

Imposter wrote:

john80 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

In case it’s not clear:

Whether it’s individually, as a group, as a society or even nation; you lie in the bed you make. Only pussies try and dodge that.

She’s British and she is a product of the nation.

It is interesting that vast majority of the UK population have to seemingly lie in some bed that she has made having never met her and having no way to influence her or simply tell her that the plan was misinformed at best. At what point does the person have to lie in the bed they directly make as I am struggling to see when that would be from this debate?

Welcome to civilised society and collective responsibility, John. Sounds like you may struggle to fit in...

I think it is more welcome to collective guilt by which individuals who are part of such collectives to be responsible for other people's actions and occurrences by tolerating, ignoring, or harboring them, without actively engaging.

rick_chasey · February 2019

Pross wrote:

I actually don't understand a word of the point being made now. This thread has become surreal.

U.K. ought to be responsible for its own citizens and not disown them to make them someone else’s problem.

Something that can be applied to all aspects of life.

imposter2.0 · February 2019

john80 wrote:

I think it is more welcome to collective guilt by which individuals who are part of such collectives to be responsible for other people's actions and occurrences by tolerating, ignoring, or harboring them, without actively engaging.

Sounds like you're agreeing with me..

rjsterry · February 2019

john80 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

john80 wrote:

laurentian wrote:

john80 wrote:

Maybe when it is old enough to form an opinion on its early life it should look to these two for some answers as to how his or her life has turned out.

You're right.

Right now, this baby is an innocent British citizen who has yet to form any opinions but I'd bet my shirt that, should his mother not be allowed back into the UK to face trail and he not be brought up by the state or willing, suitable relatives, he'd be about as radicalised as it's possible to be.

Your right it would be much better to bring the kid back to Britain and see if it follows the current family business model. Stay at home mum, foreign fighter dad. This guy had a good role model from his father a well renowned hate preacher.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/0 ... arged-gun/

Look I get that the kid tugs at the heart strings but from my perspective there are also many others that could do with a go in a western democracy. Maybe he will hate the West growing up but then again maybe he will not. I would rather have the multiple country buffer between all of Begum's current and future offspring and a visa system. Not sure she or her husband are really on board with western laws and societal norms regarding of equal rights regardless of race or religion for example.

What, that multiple country buffer that prevented... what exactly? How did the multiple country buffer protect those involved on Westminster Bridge or London Bridge? The idea that keeping one teenager out of the country provides the rest of us with any additional safety is absurd.

MI5 thought Khalid Masood was a peripheral figure to a terrorist plot in 2010 but then stopped taking interest in him based on their risk assessment. For the London Bridge attacks we had a more hardcore group of guys called Khuram Shazad Butt, Rachid Redouane & Youssef Zaghba. All of these 3 guys had a form sheet that would want you to make them leave the country and incidentally only 1 of the 3 was actually British. Based on the above 4 examples of what they had done prior to going mental and the action taken are you still so sure that MI5 and the MET have a good chance of correctly identifying what crimes ISIS fighters returning to the UK may or may not have committed and try them accordingly? The best way to tackle ISIS sadly is to let Syria and Iraq go back about their business of dictatorships as democracy over throwing regimes has not panned out too well. At the end of the day if she gets back to Britain then the UK will have a hard time getting rid of her as Bangladesh will not accept her and a case will be made that Syria is not a safe place for her but I don't share your view that we should facilitate her return in any way.

That's a slightly different point. As far as I understand it she was radicalised through a combination of online propaganda and a small number of local influences. She didn't travel to Syria for some sightseeing then decide that marrying an IS fighter was the life for her; the damage was done here.

Pross · February 2019

Rick Chasey wrote:

Pross wrote:

I actually don't understand a word of the point being made now. This thread has become surreal.

U.K. ought to be responsible for its own citizens and not disown them to make them someone else’s problem.

Something that can be applied to all aspects of life.

I got that bit and agree with it, it's some of the more recent posts I'm struggling to follow. All sorts of issues seem to be getting mixed together and it seems that some are unable to differentiate someone who is a British citizen and therefore a British problem from a citizen of another country trying to get into the UK on the basis of their ethnicity.

rick_chasey · February 2019

Curious anyone has mentioned ethnicity in this context.

What does it have to do with this case?

Pross · February 2019

Rick Chasey wrote:

Curious anyone has mentioned ethnicity in this context.

What does it have to do with this case?

The impression I got was that one person seemed to think taking back one of our own citizens was the same as taking in an asylum seeker and the only reason I can see for that thought pattern was the ethnicity of the person in question. As others have asked before, possibly including you, would people be kicking up as much fuss if the person trying to return was white and would we, for example, have taken away the citizenship of someone if they'd been entitled to Irish / Canadian / Australian citizenship?

rick_chasey · February 2019

Makes sense.

ballysmate · February 2019

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Curious anyone has mentioned ethnicity in this context.

What does it have to do with this case?

The impression I got was that one person seemed to think taking back one of our own citizens was the same as taking in an asylum seeker and the only reason I can see for that thought pattern was the ethnicity of the person in question. As others have asked before, possibly including you, would people be kicking up as much fuss if the person trying to return was white and would we, for example, have taken away the citizenship of someone if they'd been entitled to Irish / Canadian / Australian citizenship?

As the situation hasn't arisen, nobody has can say what the reaction would be can they?
As I said re Rick's KKK analogy, fictitious whataboutery.

DeVlaeminck · February 2019

Pretty sure I read about some white Isis fighter who has had his citizenship taken away because he also has Canadian citizenship? Is that what you are referring to Pross.

Edit - someone our tabloids refer to as Jihadi Jack

rick_chasey · February 2019

Ballysmate wrote:

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Curious anyone has mentioned ethnicity in this context.

What does it have to do with this case?

The impression I got was that one person seemed to think taking back one of our own citizens was the same as taking in an asylum seeker and the only reason I can see for that thought pattern was the ethnicity of the person in question. As others have asked before, possibly including you, would people be kicking up as much fuss if the person trying to return was white and would we, for example, have taken away the citizenship of someone if they'd been entitled to Irish / Canadian / Australian citizenship?

As the situation hasn't arisen, nobody has can say what the reaction would be can they?
As I said re Rick's KKK analogy, fictitious whataboutery.

It’s not fictitious nor what aboutery since I wasn’t referring to any actual event, real or otherwise. It was hypothetical “if x” to illustrate my suspicion there is an unsaid bias to this. The way people responded suggested to me that there was some merit (“it’s totally different” etc) to that suspicion.

Do you even know what you are trying to say?

robert88 · February 2019

Perhaps Joseph Stalin was right? Treat returned Russian pows as damaged goods, likely to be infected with western culture. Send them to die in labour camps or just shoot them.

rjsterry · February 2019

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Pretty sure I read about some white Isis fighter who has had his citizenship taken away because he also has Canadian citizenship? Is that what you are referring to Pross.

Edit - someone our tabloids refer to as Jihadi Jack

I mentioned it up thread. I don't think an attempt to remove citizenship has been made yet, but it will be interesting to see what happens. Javid seemed to concede that the Begum case might be more difficult than first thought when he was questioned by the Select Committee in Parliament.

rick_chasey · February 2019

A (former) Deutsche bank MD f@cking it up eh?

Who’d have thought.

“I didn’t know the rules”

Yeah yeah mate.

ballysmate · February 2019

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Curious anyone has mentioned ethnicity in this context.

What does it have to do with this case?

The impression I got was that one person seemed to think taking back one of our own citizens was the same as taking in an asylum seeker and the only reason I can see for that thought pattern was the ethnicity of the person in question. As others have asked before, possibly including you, would people be kicking up as much fuss if the person trying to return was white and would we, for example, have taken away the citizenship of someone if they'd been entitled to Irish / Canadian / Australian citizenship?

As the situation hasn't arisen, nobody has can say what the reaction would be can they?
As I said re Rick's KKK analogy, fictitious whataboutery.

It’s not fictitious nor what aboutery since I wasn’t referring to any actual event, real or otherwise. It was hypothetical “if x” to illustrate my suspicion there is an unsaid bias to this. The way people responded suggested to me that there was some merit (“it’s totally different” etc) to that suspicion.

Do you even know what you are trying to say?

:?: :?:

What I was trying to say is that if people are to make comparisons, they would be best sticking to real people and real events. If someone with Irish/Canadian/Australian entitlement had/was being treated differently, the point would be valid. Likewise if someone fitted your KKK analogy.
I thought an educated man like yourself would have got that.

ballysmate · February 2019

Or if you want to go down the thought experiment road, if Sajid Javed were to revoke the citizenship of a person fitting Pross' example, ie Irish/Canadian etc, would people be calling him a racist?

shirley_basso · February 2019

I asked that question already. Noone answered - I think the ethnicity makes a difference is john80's head due to him trying to draw parallels to asylum seekers.

I think john80 is saying it's ok to strip the nationality of a british national and leave them and their child to die in a terrorist warzone because that individual may have a claim to another nation and wants to wash his/the UK's hands of the issue while it is convenient, as she has shown no remorse for what she has done.

He thinks that on the other side of the same coin, even though its not equivalent, we would be better off opening the border to 1 asylum seeker who wants to come to the UK and settle here and adopt some so-called 'british' values.

From hearing people at work talking about it, it seems lots of people think she should be left where she is to die, although the most vocal person in the office isn't (obviously) the most considered.

rjsterry · February 2019

Ballysmate wrote:

Or if you want to go down the thought experiment road, if Sajid Javed were to revoke the citizenship of a person fitting Pross' example, ie Irish/Canadian etc, would people be calling him a racist?

We'll find out soon as Jack Letts wants to come home from the Kurdish prison he is being held in. He definitely does have Canadian citizenship.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/20 ... octor-who/

john80 · February 2019

Shirley Basso wrote:

I asked that question already. Noone answered - I think the ethnicity makes a difference is john80's head due to him trying to draw parallels to asylum seekers.

I think john80 is saying it's ok to strip the nationality of a british national and leave them and their child to die in a terrorist warzone because that individual may have a claim to another nation and wants to wash his/the UK's hands of the issue while it is convenient, as she has shown no remorse for what she has done.

He thinks that on the other side of the same coin, even though its not equivalent, we would be better off opening the border to 1 asylum seeker who wants to come to the UK and settle here and adopt some so-called 'british' values.

From hearing people at work talking about it, it seems lots of people think she should be left where she is to die, although the most vocal person in the office isn't (obviously) the most considered.

I will be clear if a human being had done what Shamina Begum has done then I would be taking the same view. The ethnicity or religion of the person is irrelevant. She has supported and organisation that has breached a large number of UK laws and values. She is fundamentally a racist and supports religious persecution of others. You either believe in the basic values of stopping racism or religious persecution or you don't. On the asylum front we have had multiple claims of support for the baby is an innocent in all this. The reality is Syria is full of innocents that were either butchered by ISIS or watched their loved ones butchered and were left as refugees. This child is no more or less innocent than these people. She will appeal the decision and the UK government will make the case and they will win or lose. If you really want her back then get down to downing street and start a protest. Maybe there is a large number of the UK public that will fight for the government to go out of its way to repatriate foreign fighters and their supporters. You only need 100k of signatures on a government petition to get a debate on it if you guys are so fussed about it.

Wife of ISIS fighter wants to return to the UK

Comments

Categories