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.

I doubt her "marriage" has any legal standing.

I can't see anyone going in and helping her to get out of Syria. Isn't that what's been said? She has to make her own way out.

Her baby should be given the same assistance as any British baby would be given in a dangerous situation/war zone. She has access to journalists so it is possible to reach her. I imagine the baby could be brought out if necessary. It would be risky but the same risks ought to be taken for this baby as they would be for another British baby.

I don't believe it is her baby!

It's all too convenient-she's 'found' by a reporter a few days before she's due to give birth, it arrives when she is all over the news and she is up and about giving her views a few hours later.

It's all bollocks and meant to pull the heartstrings of the soft hearted and simple minded.

It is quite possible that the marriage is not internationally legal, or in any secular or other records, as it was held in a part of Syria that was not under government control at the time.

So she may well not have any claim to Dutch citizenship (depends on their laws, whether they grant to non-marital partners, including those claiming marriage but being unable to prove it; and on whether a period of residency is also required).

Whether the child, born overseas, to an unmarried Dutch man is automatically entitled to Dutch citizenship is a matter for their laws, as is whether they require proof of paternity in addition to acknowledgement

If she married a Dutch man I am certain that gives her dutch citizenship as well

Applying for citizenship based on marriage is a long bureaucratic process. That's not an option for her when she doesn't have a passport and is in a country where The Netherlands doesn't have a diplomatic mission.

I think people put too much stock in 'deradicalisation' programmes. The governments own figures suggest a 95% failure rate, and there were reports that a multimillion euro French one did not deradicalise a single jihadist.

If you've grown up with this fundamentalist mindset from your family, family friends, hardline mosque and community, then those are your norms, I'm afraid, and there are many with this mindset. It's not just a violent ideology, but a religiously violent one, which has a very enroaching and encompassing ideology. Its not something that a few sessions of therapy can overcome.

You also have the problem that as she says herself, apart from joining one of the heinous terrorist groups on the world, we have no evidence against her of any crimes, and will be unlikely to. Did she beat her husband's 9 year old Yazidi sex slave? We will never know. Did she whoop and cheer to public executions, such as throwing gays off buildings? Again - we don't know. Her crimes were committed in a war zone and it's just not possible that the Met can pop over and gather evidence.

We live in an area where people went off to join ISIS. One has been on the news asking to come back. I don't want him here. I know he'd be lauded as some kind of hero by the local hoodlums. My daughter was attacked in primary school by a boy with links to this type of background. Eventually he was permanently excluded from school for threatening to behead his classmates with knives and to rape the girls. In primary school.

People are far too soft, and are putting this woman before the safety of their own children.

It's not difficult to get confirmation that she gave birth (she says she was taken to a hospital with labour pains).

It's worth making the effort to try to get the confirmation if we have the resources to get the baby out and it's deemed not too dangerous (balancing any risk against the life of a baby).

I'm shocked at some of the callous attitudes I've read towards the baby to be honest.

Many of the same people who don't want her or her baby back here because it poses a risk to their children have argued that her baby is not more important than the Syrian babies that have died or are in the camp.

I think the Syrians should decide what to do.

If they want to deport her we have to take her back (how can we expect to be able to deport people from our country if we don't)

If they want to imprison her - so be it.

If she wants to come back, she should make her own way back.

The baby is an innocent British child in all this who had no say in where he was born and should be no less than any other British child in or outside Britain in terms of our duty of care.

But if it had been her baby, she would have called it after an infamous killer of Jews.

Now, I wonder if that might possibly point to how she hopes he turns out?

He won't be a baby forever and if that baby gets into the UK, you can bet your bottom dollar, she will be right there too.

That's why she's saying she's had a baby.

Medusa83 I hope your daughter is ok! How awful!!!! - I also 100% agree with you people are to bloody soft!

I don't believe anyone has ill will towards the baby. If it was delivered to a British Embassy we would all be happy. But I can see the argument that it's her own fault her child is in this position - she chose to be there and the buck stops with her. The govt will help the baby if it can.
And really, no baby is more important than another. All their lives are equally valuable. What it says on their passport should have no bearing on how children are viewed.

Why would this baby be priority over any other baby in a refugee camp,? We don't go round the world rescuing babies that's ridiculous.

Maybe we should though.

It is up to her to look after the baby that she has managed to produce from somewhere.

She will be hanging on to that baby-wherever she got it from- because it's her ticket out.

We all know-as evidenced on this thread- that there will be a big hullabaloo saying that she shouldn't be separated from "her" baby.

It wouldn't surprise me if a father didn't pop up the minute she is back in London and those same morons will start shouting that they should be reunited in order to have a family life!

That's why she is saying she has had a baby. Without a baby, her chance of getting out would be slim.

I don't believe in the other babies either or her backstory because all that tall tale has come from her and isn't verified by anyone.

Of course, the BBC-that bastion of dopes- prints her words as if they are facts!

Isn't the baby Syrian? If it is actually hers.

Isn't the baby Syrian?
No, because the baby's father isn't Syrian.

How do we know the baby's father isn't Syrian?

From whom has this information come?

It's from her, isn't it!

Time to say tatty bye to her and leave her to her fate.

I made a post on a politics thread recently about how it was inevitable that society has turned more right wing in the last few years and this was because the pendulum got to lefty extreme and some of the posts on here are proving just that. The fact that people are defending, downplaying and sympathising with a woman who is unrepentant about joining a terrorist organisation that hates the west and think that she should actually be be helped back here because of her rights proves it.

She would watch you and your children die in front of her with a smile on her face. But yeah, poor her.

If she married a Dutch man I am certain that gives her dutch citizenship as well

Multidimensionally, it doesn't. Firstly, she didn't marry him under the laws of a state which is recognised by anyone. Secondly, she is already a British citizen and I think I am right in saying Holland does not recognise dual-citizenship. Thirdly, it order to become a Dutch citizen by marriage requires, amongst other things, passing an exam only available in Dutch.

Oh, and by your argument, her husband is now a British citizen. He isn't, and isn't going to be.

The baby was born in Syria. I knew a girl once, whose parents were both British, but she was born in India. She had an Indian passport. This baby's father is supposedly Dutch, but an Is fighter and was born in Syria. Why do we all jump to thinking of it as British?

We don't go around rescuing babies but we do rescue British subjects. He didn't choose to be born in Syria and the British government has a responsibility towards its subjects.

As for proving it's British - it will be if she is British by birth.

He isn't Syrian unless the Syrians grant him citizenship surely? They would only do that if they believed his father was Syrian but they have no reason to believe that.

The other babies in the camp are not our responsibility as they're not British. Like it or not, that's how it works.

According to the Sun today she lost both children since November 2018. I'm not sure I believe this, also not sure she has a new baby now. All I have seen is a blanket !
This young woman should never be allowed back here.

But it isn't how it works as we aren't rescuing anyone from that camp.

And we have no reason to believe that baby is hers and nor should we.

And I don't believe the baby is a British subject. She'd have to take him to the British embassy and Declare him so. She can't do that as there is no consulate in Syria. He was born in Syria.

@Mummylyn

All that information has come from her. It is lies. She has made it up.

Are we going to believe every piece of shit that we're told. Unless she can prove any of it and she can't- we should not believe her.

Babies dying from malnutrition when she looks as tubby as Les Dawson and yet people still swallow it. It suits their agenda I suppose!