https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-47500387
just saying, if there wasn't a lynch mob denying her, the child would likely not have died.
meanwhile the actual terrorist in this equation is free to go home.
Deeply sorry for the child, despite the fate having been sealed by the mother way beforehand.
she wanted to get back to the UK though.
but unfortunately, we would rather welcome back the terrorist fighters than the groomed raped wives. you see, the wives are more disposable that's why it wouldn't matter either way if they all died. our sons and daughters fought to keep this land safe you see, but it doesn't matter that those same "sons and daughters" had a cause in this mess. we are a proud land and can do no wrong.
She knew full well what she was getting into. She even still see's most of IS's actions as being fine.
To be honest, I don't give a single fuck if anything or anyone pro-IS comes back or not. Not even the guns and equipment they used. Everything related to them can just disappear for all I care.
But honestly? It pisses me off more that a person that lived a fairly trouble-free life thought the idea of jihad was better than what she had. That the idea of killing random people, in her own backyard basicaly, was a fine idea.
If I suddenly see the idea of robbing banks or cooking meth as good, then I deserve whatever comes to me. And even that, depending on the outcomes and actions of it, isn't as bad as supporting a terrorist group. I mean, for fuck sakes, you're literaly living in a country where you have rights and are exchanging all of that for rape who knows how many times a day, and obviously no rights.
I'll be honest, is probably better if they did pass, considering what they're being born into. Would be hell
Returning home to a normal life like nothing happened after taking a vacation in terroristland to support the most vile death cult insurgency the world has seen in decades is not a "human right."
you can make your same dull arguments but you still put up no fight over the actual terrorist doing actual atrocities being literally treated more humanely than a wife.
but now we've punished a child for it.
just screw em, they made their choice. for legality doesnt matter or human rights or citizenship, all that matters is how we send a message isnt it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
If people could dunk the actual terrorists into 15 metre deep pits with sharp stones at the bottom they probably would. But you cant legally do that.
You can however legally disbar this slobbering moron from ever seeing the shores she left for partaking in an infidel-burning-bonanza.
legality vs. morality.
the dutch terrorist will be punished less than a housewife only to send a message to your own citizens.
people are so proud but they just look like idiots if they think a housewife's son dying is more sending a message than a terrorist being free.
that will just say "hey, pick up a gun, you'll be punished less"
Her first 2 children probably wouldn't have died if she didn't join a terrorist regime, but now that she's had a change of heart (not really), you better jump in and help.
I'm confused, why are people acting like she would come back and not face consequences? Why is it fair for Bangladesh to be forced to take a citizen that's never step foot in their country??
Javid did this knowing it would blow up in his face in court later, he's just doing it to win over the nationalist side of the public.
What is this myth that you're going to somehow get people who want to be Ak-wielding, head-chopping psychopaths on your side if you just show them that society takes no action. (And yeah, i know you didn't say 'take no action', but fuck it, if you can make shit up about my argument so can i about yours.)
The decision was actually made by him when the UK government still thought she had citizenship in Bangladesh.
I think we should have her come back and be tried for treason.
i'm just against this hypocrisy people are showing.
people are so scared to make an actual decision about the fight against terrorism so they will use a scapegoat housewife to meet their agenda and "send their messages".
it just tells me they're scared to deal with the problem.
You're named after a Kalashnikov so I am a bit suspicious.
She should be returned home, tried for treason, and given the most severe punishment possible.
She is in large part responsible for the death of her children. She had a responsibility as a mother to not fucking join ISIS but she did. That's her own responsibility.
All of that costs the government money. Why bother when ISIS is already being dealt with properly?
iraq war costs money
air strikes cost money
We (I'm not British but in this case "we" means "civilized countries") have an obligation to fulfill the law and by the law we need to try her for her crimes in our country. She's no longer an enemy combatant, and I'm not concerned about how dangerous she will be in a maximum security prison.
We already pay for the imprisonment and care of many bad people.
Also AFAIK her children are all dead. She's the only one left suffering as a result of her actions. I wish we had done something to help her child before it died, but I'm not going to pretend like she didn't utterly fail as a mother.
And he wouldn't have had to do it if she wasn't a fucking idiot.
I hate to say it, but she has to be a fucking idiot to think that getting raped and kill people who don't believe in the same bulshit as murderous suicidal lunatics beats having to do homework and calling Keith a knob.
then why don't you deal with terrorists more harshly than wives
The idea that we're suddenly responsible for the consequences of somebody's else's actions is a dumb one. If she decides to join ISIS and has a child, the UK is no more responsible to care for that child than you are. Yeah it sucks for the kid, but you don't redeem yourself just by becoming a mother.
That's not even true. Where are you getting this from? Not trying her for treason is treating her better than terrorists.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47431249
"He faces a six-year jail term for joining a terror organisation if he returns to the Netherlands"
You realise that the UK has different people in charge to NL, right? You would have a point if they were both originally Dutch.
this is a world forum.
nobody is complaining about the terrorist being let off in comparison.
I wouldn't mind if every verified ISIS combatant, every willing member of their logistics network, every driver and pilot, every propagandist and every drooler who actually thought ISIS had anything going for it as an organization was put to the wall and shot.
This isn't about them.
No one is saying she should return to a normal life. She should be brought back so that she can face trial and be put in prison. You are the one advocating for her to go free by saying she should just be left where she is, not the people wanting her to brought back.
Governments sometimes make different decisions about the same thing. Also, she essentially is a terrorist, to be honest.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
