[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Does her unborn child deserve to die for her mistakes? Do the children that get victimised and abused in IS' territories deserve it because of who their parents are?

Honestly the attitude displayed by a lot of members in this thread is disgusting. A complete lack of empathy and straight up sense from a lot of people I expected more from.

If she comes back she's not gonna have a 'cushy' life as I believe at least one member was making out, she'd likely be charged and imprisoned for a very long time and then placed on watchlists after that. She probably won't get to see her child raised and that's her own fault but her child will likely be raised in a loving environment where they won't be indoctrinated and turned into a child soldier or raised to be a radicalised baby factory. Children shouldn't suffer for their parents' sins.

Plus, as others have said, she's a British, she's our responsibility and she was radicalised here. We can't just pass the buck especially considering the people saying that would be very much for deporting her if the situation was reversed. Let her come back, throw her in prison and hopefully get some useful information out of her and let her child live a normal life.

People on the thread are reacting to her interview, not to what may or may not happen to her on her return, she personally wants to come back to live quietly with her child, she wants to return like nothing has happened and that she should just be accepted back as if she had never run off to fight against the west in the first place. It has already been established very early in the thread that only a very small percentage of returning Jihadi's ever get to see the inside of a court so I expect the same will happen with her if she does get back.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Does her unborn child deserve to die for her mistakes? Do the children that get victimised and abused in IS' territories deserve it because of who their parents are?

Honestly the attitude displayed by a lot of members in this thread is disgusting. A complete lack of empathy and straight up sense from a lot of people I expected more from.

If she comes back she's not gonna have a 'cushy' life as I believe at least one member was making out, she'd likely be charged and imprisoned for a very long time and then placed on watchlists after that. She probably won't get to see her child raised and that's her own fault but her child will likely be raised in a loving environment where they won't be indoctrinated and turned into a child soldier or raised to be a radicalised baby factory. Children shouldn't suffer for their parents' sins.

Plus, as others have said, she's a British, she's our responsibility and she was radicalised here. We can't just pass the buck especially considering the people saying that would be very much for deporting her if the situation was reversed. Let her come back, throw her in prison and hopefully get some useful information out of her and let her child live a normal life.

She is British at the moment. But any minute now she will be stateless and it is perfectly within our rights to get rid. She's useless to us, she has no information to share. And when is someone going to care even a little bit about all those severed heads that did not faze her.

Legally, we do not have to take her back. And I hope we won't. The resources that would be wasted on her could be used more fruitfully somewhere else.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by parmnion

And that's probably the attitude that draws them into hating us.

Originally Posted by Glenn.

It’s self inflicted. I wouldn’t have much sympathy for someone suffering a hangover after deliberately drinking too much alcohol

If you were a mother of a 17yr old son you would be up on Sunday cooking him a hearty breakfast though.

[Cherie]

Apparently she will have to get herself to Turkey or Iraq for the UK to help as it’s too dangerous to have a consulate in Syria

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by parmnion

If you were a mother of a 17yr old son you would be up on Sunday cooking him a hearty breakfast though.

Like **** would I

[thesheriff443]

She had two more children while over there but they died of starvation and illness, the problem is,we let murders and rapists go back into society so people will stand on that argument, I’d leave her were she is.

[LaLaLand]

I'm reading comments all over saying "oh she was only a kid when she went" SHE WAS FIFTEEN YEARS OF AGE. You know full well right from wrong well before you're 15 years old. If she's old enough to travel with "her mates" across Europe, get herself smuggled into Syria and join IS then she was no "child".

"What about the baby?" - what about the endless babies/children her mob have slaughtered needlessly?

Tough **** lady. Absolute oxygen thief.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Jonnii

I'm reading comments all over saying "oh she was only a kid when she went" SHE WAS FIFTEEN YEARS OF AGE. You know full well right from wrong well before you're 15 years old. If she's old enough to travel with "her mates" across Europe, get herself smuggled into Syria and join IS then she was no "child".

"What about the baby?" - what about the endless babies/children her mob have slaughtered needlessly?

Tough **** lady. Absolute oxygen thief.

'I'm outraged that her people have killed babies and so I'm gonna take joy in the fact that her children have been killed and her unborn baby is in danger. Those kids should have known better than to be born by a terrorist!'

Such warped sense of outrage and morality makes me despair for the future.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

'I'm outraged that her people have killed babies and so I'm gonna take joy in the fact that her children have been killed and her unborn baby is in danger. Those kids should have known better than to be born by a terrorist!'

Such warped sense of outrage and morality makes me despair for the future.

She has no remorse! And if isis had not been beaten she would still be with her murdering husband and friends giving birth to more children to kill uk citizens given the chance.

You should be more outraged at the thousands of innocent kids dying of starvation shouldn’t you?

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

She has no remorse! And if isis had not been beaten she would still be with her murdering husband and friends giving birth to more children to kill uk citizens given the chance.

You should be more outraged at the thousands of innocent kids dying of starvation shouldn’t you?

What a bizarre point to make and at the end of the day you're still basically fine with saying that you're fine with children dying because you're demonising them before they're even born and that's ****ed up, 'Giving birth to more children to kill UK citizens...'. An utterly ****ed up point of view and one that is devoid of empathy.

Your last point about starvation comes across as hollow and questionable, are you saying you're only empathetic enough to sympathise with one or the other? You can't sympathise with both? You may be limited in your ability to empathise but I won't ever demonise a child before it's born just so I don't have to feel empathy for the fact it's fated to a horrible life and a worse death.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

What a bizarre point to make and at the end of the day you're still basically fine with saying that you're fine with children dying because you're demonising them before they're even born and that's ****ed up, 'Giving birth to more children to kill UK citizens...'. An utterly ****ed up point of view and one that is devoid of empathy.

Your last point about starvation comes across as hollow and questionable, are you saying you're only empathetic enough to sympathise with one or the other? You can't sympathise with both? You may be limited in your ability to empathise but I won't ever demonise a child before it's born just so I don't have to feel empathy for the fact it's fated to a horrible life and a worse death.

Get off your high horse dezzy, my point of view is no more fcuked up as yours.

When the government bomb Isis strong holds there is a chance of so called civilian casualties, I don’t care if her and her baby gets killed as they are the enemy. That’s what happens in a war.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Jonnii

I'm reading comments all over saying "oh she was only a kid when she went" SHE WAS FIFTEEN YEARS OF AGE. You know full well right from wrong well before you're 15 years old. If she's old enough to travel with "her mates" across Europe, get herself smuggled into Syria and join IS then she was no "child".

"What about the baby?" - what about the endless babies/children her mob have slaughtered needlessly?

Tough **** lady. Absolute oxygen thief.

I agree with this Jonnii, those beheaded people she so nonchalantly dismissed had babies,parents,brothers sisters etc. I time for Britain to stop molly coddling these scumbags,the NHS is stretched enough without the likes of her using them.

[Beso]

Hope she makes it Cherie. .I would love to see a film made on this.

[Beso]

Begum married Yago Riedijk, 27, a Dutch convert to Islam, 10 days after arriving in the city in 2015


Groomed.

[thesheriff443]

You can play with a baby lion, but let it live in the wild and when you meet it again it will kill you in an instance.

Elephants will purposely stamp on baby lion cubs because they know what they grow into.

Humans are not as advanced as you would like to think.

[thesheriff443]

People play on the fact she is pregnant, but what parent after having two kids die of starvation in a war zone would get pregnant again!

One that does not care, she would not care if it was your child lying dead in front of her when ISIS was in control.

[Northern Monkey]

They should let her have the kid then bring it to her family to raise in the UK then hand the terrorist mother over to Assad to deal with.She committed terrorism in Syria the Syrians can punish her.
If i smuggled drugs into Morocco for example i’d be locked up there.

[Beso]

Ffs we used to burn women to death or sowly drown them...we used to hang draw and quarter live peoplease. ...if that's not as barbaric as isis then what is?

[hijaxers]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Ffs we used to burn women to death or sowly drown them...we used to hang draw and quarter live peoplease. ...if that's not as barbaric as isis then what is?

'Used to' being the operative words ,we don't anymore and have not for a long time

she can go to hell as far as i'm concerned.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by hijaxers

'Used to' being the operative words ,we don't anymore and have not for a long time

she can go to hell as far as i'm concerned.

Sounds like she's already there m8.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Sounds like she's already there m8.

Her choice though to be fair

[Beso]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Her choice though to be fair

And it's her choice to come back now

[Amy Jade]

I may sound awful and I totally admit I lack any empathy in the situation for her but letting her back is dangerous af especially as she has shown no remorse.

If she should be allowed back then I hope they take the child away from her and she goes to prison and the other inmates make her life a misery.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Amy Jade

I may sound awful and I totally admit I lack any empathy in the situation for her but letting her back is dangerous af especially as she has shown no remorse.

If she should be allowed back then I hope they take the child away from her and she goes to prison and the other inmates make her life a misery.

If it's dangerous to the UK to let her back in, is it not dangerous to the country she's in currently to leave her there?

A country that has far fewer resources available to monitor her...

...a country that she isn't from.


Yes she's a dangerous criminal but she's a dangerous criminal who was born and raised in the United Kingdom, and thus, the United Kingdom should be making sure that she isn't a danger to anyone, anywhere. The attitude that it's OK for a dangerous person to be out there "so long as she isn't here" is just worrying, and a huge part of the overall problem.

There seems to be a misconception that "we are responsible for her" is about making sure that she is OK or having some sort of sympathy for her. But "we are responsible for her" isn't about protecting her, it's about protecting OTHERS from her if she is dangerous.

People see a dangerous UK citizen and want to wash their hands of it and say "Oh not our problem, she's not on UK soil so who cares what happens elsewhere". It's a mind-bogglingly irresponsible and selfish attitude for any country to have. We don't want to have to deal with dangerous people from other countries, and we don't want to deal with dangerous people from our own country? What sort of attitude is that? It's utter hypocrisy.

And I have absolutely no doubt that the same people who are all for it would have plenty to say about other countries if they were leaving their dangerous citizens in the UK and wanted nothing to do with it.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

If it's dangerous to the UK to let her back in, is it not dangerous to the country she's in currently to leave her there?

A country that has far fewer resources available to monitor her...

...a country that she isn't from.


Yes she's a dangerous criminal but she's a dangerous criminal who was born and raised in the United Kingdom, and thus, the United Kingdom should be making sure that she isn't a danger to anyone, anywhere. The attitude that it's OK for a dangerous person to be out there "so long as she isn't here" is just worrying, and a huge part of the overall problem.

There seems to be a misconception that "we are responsible for her" is about making sure that she is OK or having some sort of sympathy for her. But "we are responsible for her" isn't about protecting her, it's about protecting OTHERS from her if she is dangerous.

People see a dangerous UK citizen and want to wash their hands of it and say "Oh not our problem, she's not on UK soil so who cares what happens elsewhere". It's a mind-bogglingly irresponsible and selfish attitude for any country to have. We don't want to have to deal with dangerous people from other countries, and we don't want to deal with dangerous people from our own country? What sort of attitude is that? It's utter hypocrisy.

And I have absolutely no doubt that the same people who are all for it would have plenty to say about other countries if they were leaving their dangerous citizens in the UK and wanted nothing to do with it.

Whilst I agree with what you are saying, I don't think its just a British thing to do. I am sure no civilised country's general population would open their arms and want to welcome back their home grown terrorists. Its a natural reaction from the general public to not want them anywhere near their relatively safe lives.

In my opnion, she should be brought back and locked up and try to be de-radicalised. If that is not possible she should be detained indefinitely