To wonder how we CAN even consider not bringing the girl back from Syria?

[SpeakingALanguage]

Do we not legally have to? We can't just wipe our hands of her, can we?

I've seen petition after petition on my Facebook feed about not allowing her back, sign the petition, etc etc.

But if she's a British citizen, does she not have every legal right to be here, even if she is vile and dangerous?

I did see someone mention she would have to get here on her own steam, but isn't there a big part in the British passport (I know she hasn't got one but she was entitled and is technically British), that says something along the lines of Her Majesty grants assistance and protection as needed?

Without her baby even coming into the argument, she alone regardless is allowed back here, vulnerable with a newborn or not.

Do we know What ages were her other children when they died of malnutrition? She looks well fed and healthy to me. Also where is her husband?

That’s great, thanks for explaining how isis recruit and I’ll ask again - do you sympathise with he likes of the Manchester bomber who was also I assume ‘groomed’ into joining isis and murdering our children?

At 15 years old she is old enough to know killing people is wrong.
You can't punish a child in the same way that you would an adult. That's one of the fundamental principles of our justice system.

She was not deliberately radicalised-don't be foolish!

What special knowledge do you have of this that makes you so confident that she wasn't radicalised? Are you an expert? Are you working on this case?

What is your aim in trotting this garbage out?

What is your aim in shutting down any thought that she may have been? How can you not see that there is a real need to understand why and how people become and support terrorists? Don't you want to prevent people supporting and joining terrorist groups? It's worrying that you're so aggressively against any deeper thought and consideration here. Why are you shouting down people who want to look below the surface and do more to prevent future terrorism than make simplistic statements?

Jamie bulgers killers were a lot younger than she was and they were tried as adults.

do you sympathise with he likes of the Manchester bomber who was also I assume ‘groomed’ into joining isis and murdering our children

I don't think that anyone sympathises with them, but you can't strip someone of their citizenship for crimes they committed as a children. They should be given therapy and be deradicalised. For crimes committed as an adult, they should have a fair trial, with any mitigating circumstances (like grooming) taken into account.

I take your point@ReflectentMonotomism but that is not the image of 'grooming' that some posters want us to take on board.

They are trying to compare her to victims of sexual abuse and that is just not on. The most I would concede is that she is a product of her upbringing-the same as for all of us and not worthy of standing as an excuse now.

For those who insist on comparing her to victims of sexual grooming, I suggest they watch the BBC Three Girls which is on Netflix right now.

Jamie bulgers killers were a lot younger than she was and they were tried as adults.
And that was a terrible thing, which would never happen today, and it probably wouldn't have happened back then if it weren't for the public's reaction to the murders.

Jamie bulgers killers were a lot younger than she was and they were tried as adults.

And it's usually regarded as having been stupendously misguided. They also weren't sentenced as adults.

It's easy to stand on the terraces and shout "evil, evil, burn the witch". But there are a lot of people who, but a small nudge one way or the other, might go off and do the same things, and it would be as well to understand what happened in order to stop it from happening. If you're confident that she wasn't groomed, what's your explanation: bad blood? So what would you do in order to stop it from happening again?

Most people who join terrorist organisations are not Bond villains, they're pathetic losers who are made something by association (it was Sartre, wasn't it, who said that the appeal of anti-Semitism is that it allows nobodies to become somebody, or words to that effect).

These were girls raised in an isolated community, by deeply unpleasant families who mistrusted the society they were (not) part of, with limited contact with wider Britain.. Their school turned out to be a Potemkin school, with its claims of great academic success actually the product of fraud. We have not seen similar cases on a large scale,. and when we look at the cases that have happened we see commonality.

Explaining is not the same sa excusing: I'm perfectly happy to see her arrested and charged for involvement in a proscribed organisation, or anything we can stick her for under the 1957 Geneva Convention Acts or anything else. I'm relatively happy to see her subjected to an extended TEO, and were she to accidentally walk into the wrong end of the Right Arm of the Free World I would shed no tears. But I'd really like her to be the last such case, and that means finding out what went wrong. Not just saying "evil, evil bad blood".

They are trying to compare her to victims of sexual abuse and that is just not on

I agree absolutely: it is completely different, and she is in large part guilty of her own crimes.

However, we still need to understand what happened, rather than just write her off as a bad sort.

@TheRiverIsAComfort

You are the one making absolute statements- I am asking questions. You are very sure that she was not radicalised, I am asking why- but you are either unwilling or unable to explain your position.

My 'agenda' is to understand so that we can prevent. Yours is seems to be to make aggressive statements, declare absolutes for which you fail to present any evidence when questioned, and insult people who ask you to defend the absolute positions you take. That's not 'debate', that's childish spluttering.

Call me whatever you please, but don't flatter yourself that you are debating here, you are having a tantrum. And you didn't answer a single question I asked, so if this was a debate, you lost.

Have a lovely day :)

If she finds her own way back she has to be taken in - she’s the UK’s criminal, therefore the UK’s responsibility. I quite agree though that people shouldn’t be put at risk to bring her back. It’s unfortunate for her baby of course, but still not worth putting more people at risk. I would hope that the baby should be removed from her care on arrival.

So where do we draw the line between extreme radicalisation and acceptable, if perhaps misguided, belief?

And is there a difference between radicalisation and grooming?

Again @ReflectentMonatomism I see your point.

However, maybe the lesson is that we look into the sort of school that she attended, the community she sprang from and learn that way. That though, doesn't preclude us from writing off this deeply unpleasant and dangerous woman.

I would be very perturbed to see her back in this country. Maybe she could be The Poster Person for showing others that once they align themselves with ISIS, that's their lot.

You too @Icannotremember or, it would seem, think!

However, maybe the lesson is that we look into the sort of school that she attended, the community she sprang from and learn that way. That though, doesn't preclude us from writing off this deeply unpleasant and dangerous woman.

Quite. And it's possible that with more understanding would come less need to write her off. She has spent her whole life in an echo chamber of anti-Western hatred, but she is only 19.

Most of the Waffen SS went on to be the backbone of the Wirtschaftswunder, very few of them were tried for much of anything and even the people that were tried were largely released by the early 1950s. They had all the deeply inculcated hatred that the Nazis gave them and they were a dab hand with a machine gun - pointed at the British Army or pointed at desperate crowds of Jewish children, they weren't overly bothered - and yet, twenty years later, most of them were respectable family men. People change.

Of course, we smashed up the Nazi machine pretty effectively, whereas we are very reluctant to confront the deep vein of violent conservatism in a small, but not negligible, part of the British Muslim community.

There are posts on here that sicken my stomach.

This is a traitor. An anti British anti western hater. This piece of scum shows no remorse and when people talk about her human rights, it’s sickening .

Why should we care for this scumbags human rights when she couldn’t give a shiny shite when it comes to the human rights of other people.

The Manchester bombings, Lee Rigby. And she condoned these atrocities. Was joyous even.

Makes my stomach turn and I genuinely hope that she rots in hell.

I don’t care whether she is 15 or 50, she knew exactly what she was doing and is a dangerous individual.

So many do gooders on this thread and it’s all bullshit.

Sadly, yes, she is a British Citizen and the likelihood is that she will be allowed back. There will be a public outrage and I am thankful that common sense prevails in the majority of the British public.

We don’t need or want someone like this living on our streets, in our neighbourhoods.
Or in our country.

Yet it will cost millions to protect her. And who will pay? Why the taxpayer of course.

if she were white I don't think the debate would've raged as much.

As someone else just said, bore off. Irma Grese was white, people were baying for her blood. She was hanged as a nazi war criminal. The colour of her skin didn’t save her.

I agree @RedWineIsFabulous I just saw her recent interview. Nope, not a shred of regret there, she even seemed to be trying to justify it. Nope, I don't care about her one jot. We need to concentrate on keeping British people safe, normal non-terrorist supporting British people.

I am stepping away from this thread as, once again, MN debate turns into a name calling abuse fest. I am not an ISIS sympathiser, gullible or stupid. I think that this young woman should face the appropriate justice if and when she returns to the UK as should any British citizen. I also think this country should use what they can learn from this situation to protect any other young person, male or female, from falling into the trap of ISIS or similar organisations. If that makes me a 'do-gooder', I'm OK with that. It is not a binary choice. I am able to have sympathy for people who have been killed by extremists, but I can also consider the point of view of people who have fallen victim to them in other ways.

JellyCatElfie, the only smidgen of sympathy anyone is showing is in relation to the fact that she was a 15 year old girl who had been groomed when her mother was dying. So no, self evidently we are sympathising "with all ISIS fighters who have been swayed by propaganda and gone to commit terror attacks". We don't know that she has committed terror attacks in any event.

The Uk does not pay for people to move around the planet. If I got stuck in Australia with out any money the UK would not be funding my journey home!

it will be a sad day for our democracy when we have to bow down to the likes of her.

No-one is saying we have to "bow down" to her, any more than we "bow down" to people like Peter Sutcliffe or Ian Huntley in allowing them to stay in the UK. No-one is suggesting that she should not be punished in relation to any offences she has committed. I wish people wouldn't keep making up what others say just because they don't agree with them.