There is a palpable desperation to use those pitchforks now they have them out.Feck me the foaming at the mouth hatred in here even in discussions of a tragically dead baby
Shamima Begum, IS teen wants to come back to the UK
- Thread starter Tommy
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Feck me the foaming at the mouth hatred in here even in discussions of a tragically dead baby
Who would you say is currently foaming at the mouth in here?
I'm almost certain those fighters will have returned by themselves. Ironically, I think if she'd managed to make her own way back to the UK, she'd probably have just gotten in. She may well have made things much more difficult for herself with media appearances which a government in need of a public 'victory' has spun for its own purposes.
I think even if she had been completely 'innocent' and somehow ended up in Syria, the government probably would have offered consular services to help get her back but I doubt they'd be offering a chartered flight for her to get back.
I agree she shouldn't have caused the media storm, others have returned home quietly and she probably could have done the same if she kept her mouth shut, but she never came accross as the smartest person . But maybe she was just desperate as she knew that baby had no chance in that camp.
Also, the US and Kurds don't really want to use up resources housing these people, Trump himself said home countries should take them back and deal with them or they will end up letting them go. I guess the way out is to get to Turkey and leave from there.
@RedTillI'mDead definitely has been. He's called for her to be killed/tortured/kill herself etc
I personally don't have much sympathy for her as this was caused by her own actions, young as she was, but I don't agree with removing her citizenship.
If that makes you feel better. It's funny though how it's the denominator in why she's treated differently to anyone else British abroad who has actually been involved in murder. The rest of your post is just babble that doesn't really have anything to do with any kind of legal process or logic.
Firstly, haha. Secondly, I'm a little sorry that I gave you an out to focus on so that you could ignore the rest of the post re: your opinion that people who haven't done anything as bad as murder/rape are more dangerous to society than actual murderers and rapists, but I'm confident that everyone else can see how ridiculous it was. Are you going to tell me that the women that get infatuated with murderers in prison and go on to marry them are more dangerous to society than murderers because they knowingly went and slept with them and had a relationship with them? Come off it, that's bollocks and you know it. Judge her for what she's done, not for the mental gymnastics you're doing to bring up some proposed hypothetical that you have no indication she's capable of or willing to do herself. Call it what it is, a slim possibility that can be dealt with through existing means.
At the end of the day, the bottom line is/should be that no matter what your/my biased opinion is, she is a British citizen, she is our problem, and we should deal with her as our problem rather than illegally stripping her of her citizenship and sending her somewhere she's never been because we don't want to face the issue.
There's a little bit of hysterics in that jump to the extreme there, we work with foreign entities all the time to return criminals to the UK so that they can be prosecuted. It's absolutely normal. Not entirely sure why we'd need to invoke the SAS.
But is there a fear that those people will use their incarceration to radicalize others to commit acts of terror within the UK upon release?
That's not really relevant. For starters, it'd be easier for them to radicalize others not in prison, just through the internet. They'd reach and engage with exponentially higher numbers of people. Secondly, there's probably as much (or rather, there _should_ be as much fear as there is that anyone else will use their incarceration to come out worse than they went in and reoffend, murdering/raping again, learning how to hone their criminal craft whilst incarcerated and how to commit fraud etc from their fellow cell mates. There's no reason this case should be treated any differently to any other criminal.
It's a bit soon to be saying she's being treated differently. The specific scenario of someone going off to join a terrorist organisation which unilaterally declares itself to be the government of a a new country is something we haven't really seen before. I think everyone, our government included, is making up the rules as it goes along.
From a legal perspective, I'm sure this dreadful woman has the right to return to the UK. I'm equally sure she'll be a burden on this country for the rest of her life. This perception has absolutely nothing to do with the colour of her skin (or her eyes, or her hair, or her shoes...) - but it has everything to do with her actions.
Let's be entirely honest, if this problem somehow 'went away' , not many people would lose any sleep over it.
Right. Yeah, well, color me not convinced.
How’s about this... the UK negotiates a deal and gets her imprisoned in Gitmo.
Can’t radicalize those who are already radicalized.
Isn't Gitmo a highly contentious discussion, with the consensus being that it should be shut down? I might be misremembering here but wasn't Obama admonished for not shutting it down?
What do you feel is the best course of action regarding her?
I feel that since she was a traitor, removal of citizenship shouldn't be totally off the table.
I believe Obama tried to shut down gitmo, it was even a campaign promise of his if I am not mistaken.
The GOP wouldn't let him shut it down if I recall correctly
The fact that she went off to join a terrorist organisation really isn't relevant. We don't have different rules on how we handle criminals abroad that differ based on what kind of crime they committed, so invoking that here would be inventing a different standard. The fact that she broke the law is what is relevant. So she should be dealt with as anyone else who has, i.e working with foreign entities to bring them back to the UK to face prosecution. Go to any social media page discussing this issue and pick at random any 10 comments you like and then say this isn't about the colour of her skin. The country as a whole I'm ashamed to say has a horrible attitude towards anything that contains Islam, things are suddenly elevated to be way more serious if it has Islamic connections. Then consider this is the government that once said if you want a black person as a neighbour then vote for the other party. Racism is hardly foreign (mind the pun) to them.
We're not making the rules up as we go along, we already have rules in place. We're breaking the rules as it goes along because we don't want to deal with our own problem.
it's not just a shitty place, it's a shitty place full of people who get released without conviction
https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/detention/guantanamo-numbers
Obama had a supermajority when he took office, any promise he failed on is on him and the democrats.
Sure, some folks don’t like it.
Then again, those folks alternative is putting the terrorists into prisons in the US where they might radicalize others... so yeah, once again, I’m not convinced that’s a good idea.
I agree that there's a lot of truth in that statement.
Our government is taking a rather populist position, but I don't suppose for one second that it really expects it to hold water legally.
Regarding the skin colour issue, I can only reflect on my own views, and I am entirely sure that it is a complete irrelevance to me. I understand your observation that this may not be the case for some other people, but I doubt this represents a majority (or even a sizeable minority) view. I feel exactly the same disgust towards white jihadists.
rules and consistency don't matter here guys because Shemina is a criminal mastermind who would end the gender disparity in suicide bombers by radicalising her mortgage fraud cellmate
Admittedly I'm not an expert on US politics so I could be completely wrong, but it was my understanding that that would be a massive understatement?
You can't say that the government is taking a populist position but then say you doubt that it represents even a sizeable minority view. Especially in the Brexit climate and how much of the bullshit around that has stemmed directly from 'get the brown people out, even though they're not a part of the EU to begin with'. People won't express those views on the Caf because they'll get banned for them, but they're clearly a sizeable view. I'd agree with you that it isn't a majority, but I can't agree that it's not even a sizeable minority.
In 2016, 56% of Americans polled opposed the closing of Gitmo.
You are either carelessly or wilfully misinterpreting what I said. To be clear, the ostracising of this woman is a populist position, but racism isn't. There is no contradiction there.
I'd be happy if we were able to prevent her from coming back to the UK, but it has nothing to do with her skin colour.
Oh come on, if she was a white girl that went on to convert, marry a much older guy and live in a foreign land losing 3 kids - you're telling me the narrative would be exactly the same?
listen to yourselves.
But cos she's brown, she knew what she signed up to. Cos she must have done, right? Muslim is a brown religion.
But cos she's brown, she knew what she signed up to. Cos she must have done, right? Muslim is a brown religion.
I'm fine, cheers.
All i'm saying is, she is clearly not bright, clearly not versed in religious doctrine, was a fecking idiot no doubt - but was 15 when she made that decision. But the standards for her decisions are different for some reason?
All i'm saying is, she is clearly not bright, clearly not versed in religious doctrine, was a fecking idiot no doubt - but was 15 when she made that decision. But the standards for her decisions are different for some reason?
Yeah, because she joined fecking ISIS, not because she’s brown.
no offense and that but i've made it clear i'd rather not share correspondence with you.
You're omitting the points about joining a terrorist organisation, sympathising with the terrorist attack in Manchester, and showing no sign of disowning the IS ideology. If a white girl did the same things then absolutely I'd have the same attitude. Would the narrative in the press be the same? - who knows, but my guess is it would.
You realize that after the other response?
Well said.
You realize that after the other response?
No I didn't, but when you replied like the broken record player you are it reminded me why I originally felt like that.
Bold words from the guy who is throwing out the race card.
Shamima being brown has nothing to do with the backlash and treatment she’s gotten.
Ok sorry carry on
you don't have to guess, there's are white jihadi brides, they all get the title "White Widow" (despite the protestations and apparent obliviousness in this thread, we do live in a racial and racist world), in the case of Samantha Lewthwaite she is actively wanted for arrest and trial by the British state, others like Sally-Ann Jones have been the targets of attempted assassination. They haven't had their nationality revoked though, and they haven't been used a political tool by the home or foreign offices.
Do Samantha or Sally-Ann have options for a 2nd nationality?