Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Capture of the 2 British Jihadis

20 replies

yolofish · 09/02/2018 13:06

Of the 'gang of 4' who were given a nickname because of their Britishness, one is dead, one was in custody and the last two are now in the custody of the American-backed Kurdish forces.

Just listening to some interesting comentators on Jeremy Vine (yes, I know...) and their capture seems to throw up various problems/options.

  1. They are chucked into Guantanamo Bay indefinitely
  2. They are tried in the US and end up in max security prison for life
  3. They are tried in the UK and may or may not receive a full life tariff

The latest two have wives and children, but it was said the men's British citizenship has (had?) been revoked. So what happens to the women and children?

God, what a can of worms! I'm inclined to prefer option 2 but whatever happens to them they are going to be held up as martyrs for their cause arent they?

OP posts:
sallyarmy1 · 09/02/2018 13:16

'British jihadists' is an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

They are NOT 'British' - that has been taken away from them.

FannyWisdom · 09/02/2018 13:21

Not by normal thinking people.
Saddle the type to martyr the cocks are already smitten by the jihad.

Watch Stacey Dooley latest episode on iPlayer, the IS commander that they interviewed.
The contempt seeps out of him.
while the glorious Yazidi ex sex slave withers him with a head tilt

FannyWisdom · 09/02/2018 13:21

Sadly not saddle.

translationAndRotation · 09/02/2018 13:22

3 seems impossible. My skim-reading of the BBC article said they had been stripped of their citizenship.

1 - 2. I don't care. I think it's perfectly acceptable to say that some people forfeit their rights.

"So what happens to the women and children?"

Are they British? Dependent's visa? Iligal immigrants?

I find it hard to believe that the wives didn't know what their husbands were up to so hope that if they were implicit (even through silence) that they'll be tried too.

I suspect that any child is more likely to have a good upbringing in foster homes and looked after by Social Services than by a terrorist jihadist.

Greensleeves · 09/02/2018 13:26

On a related note, a British ex-soldier who went to fight AGAINST ISIS with the Kurds is being charged with terror offences - first case of its kind in the UK.

Greensleeves · 09/02/2018 22:30

Does anyone know how widespread the revoking of British citienship is? It's not applied to all the ex-ISIS fighters, is it?

BrandNewHouse · 09/02/2018 22:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Greensleeves · 09/02/2018 22:34

Ah that makes sense

yolofish · 09/02/2018 23:08

I'm not sure, the implication appeared to be that the children of these men could be left stateless? going to read your link now greensleeves

OP posts:
FannyWisdom · 09/02/2018 23:12

Only if they hold dual nationalities and a couple of other exemptions apply too.

Put it this way they don't get deported back anywhere like Syria to be sold at auction as sex slaves.

Ivebeenaroundtheblock · 09/02/2018 23:17

Jahidis Jack is applying to come to Canada as he holds dual citizenship...and at a recent open forum meeting the prime minister was spewing how great Canada's reintegration program was...

FannyWisdom · 09/02/2018 23:20

Ah that well known human rights black hole that is Canada....
Hmm

yolofish · 09/02/2018 23:27

so on a quick read of that link it seems that someone of previous good record can be accused of "being in a place of terrorism" and therefore treated as a terrorist on return to UK. Jim sounds to me possibly misguided but generally well-intentioned towards the UK, quite unlike the gang of 4...

OP posts:
IvorHughJarrs · 09/02/2018 23:35

I think it is shocking that young men who went away to fight terrorists are being treated like this. It is wrong, in my view, to penalise them for fighting against a group that have expressed hatred for this country and attacked innocent people on British soil.

As for these two jihadis, they should be treated with the same mercy and compassion they have demonstrated to others

Guavaf1sh · 09/02/2018 23:38

The gang of 4 are violent murderers and not safe to be let free anywhere. Sad as it is to say it would be better if they were killed whilst trying to escape. It would solve a lot of problems

Greensleeves · 09/02/2018 23:42

I agree Ivor, it makes no sense Sad

Birdsgottafly · 09/02/2018 23:57

The people who seem to be the most sensible and the Victims families want them to face a International War Crime Court.

There have been too many Atrocities and the taking of sex slaves overlooked in previous, but not that long ago conflicts, that we need to be recognising acts for what they are and dealing with the perpetrators accordingly.

GB certainly isn't the way to go.

In regards to their Wives, it depends on their backstory. Reading the accounts of young Women who were forced to marry Isis fighters and have children, they are very much victims. In some cases they had to marry and have a child or go on a suicide mission. Once they have children they are trapped. Others were threatened with gang rape and having any babies born removed, or marriage.

BonnieF · 10/02/2018 00:08

I couldn’t care less what happens to them, as long as they are either dead or sent to Guantanamo for the remainder of their lives.

Presumably the CIA’s apprentice waterboarders need someone to practice on?

Greensleeves · 10/02/2018 00:49

I don't know how anybody can express support for the existence of Guantanamo Bay and still claim to have any sense of right and wrong.

But it is downright weird that 400+ returning ISIS fighters are being quietly "reintegrated" while a volunteer who went to fight against ISIS is being prosecuted as a test case under the Terrorism Act Confused

New posts on this thread. Refresh page