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.

ahh no my PhD isn't in international affairs, its in physics. If anything that you should tell you just how obvious it is that thinking of human's as subhuman is a BAD thing....even a scientist can get it...and we're not exactly famous for understanding the complex interpersonal stuff.

You remember Nazi propaganda referring to people as cockroaches? You just did that exact same thing.

Time for a rethink when your keeping that kind of company, surely?

birds not sure...but I would hope you could somehow remind them that a newborn baby is human and qualifies for human rights, even when its born to a member of a terrorist organisation.

I'd take anything to be honest. Makes me feel sick thinking I might know people who genuinely manage to think Begum and her son are animals.

The Nazis were equally adamant that they had good reason to refer to Jews as subhuman. They thought that they had justification.

They didn't believe that they were wrong to do so.

but let's focus on a Teenager who hasn't committed any crimes.

How do you know?

This framing of arguments is getting ridiculous on both sides

The British invented concentration camps...maybe we are doomed to repeat this mistake forever.

But I'm a snowflake who prefers the rule of law and the right to a trial over knee jerk emotive actions that could set dangerous precedents and be the cause for more people being pushed towards the likes of ISIS.

What do I know?

I'm actually missing where we killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis in the Iraq war?

As far as I know, it was a combination of the former regime and jihadis flooding in from across the region "to fight infidels to create a caliphate" that were responsible for the vast majority of the killings (unless we were sending in our soldiers to target Shia mosques??), but what do I know.

I'd like to recommend a very good book by Nick Cohen called What's left. This gives a very interesting perspective on the Iraq war and the confusion that the left have faced in siding with Islamists over the past 30 years.

Just she hasn't committed any crimes until its proven she has in court.

Our actions in entering that war were unlawful.

People died as a result of our actions including British soldiers.

No one has yet been held accountable but I've never seen much vitriol towards those that led us into it compared to this one case in front of us now.

she hasn't committed any crimes until its proven she has in court.

That's not what was stated though was it, it was

let's focus on a Teenager who hasn't committed any crimes.

And if we are to be technical, then she has committed a crime by being a member of a proscribed organisation.

Papers like the Mail are playing a dangerous game. Whipping people up into a frenzy because they know it's a popular view to want her made into some sort of example. People lie to have someone to hate. It doesn't take much to create a mob.

At the same time people like Piers Morgan are highly intelligent and know full well that if she is made an example of, the more terrorists it'll create.

The gutter press is sacrificing its own citizens to sell papers and people are too stupid to see it.

*like

quite easily in fact
she chose to leave her country and join basically her countries enemies and join them in their fight against all countries that they sorta dont like
now the realities have set in and she doesnt like the consequences of her actions and thinks the country she joined a war against should give her a cuddle and say "come home love its ok you were a misunderstood teen, there there its all right?"
she left and basically became and enemy of the state as it were... if shes allowed back in she should be in prison for life, you dont get to say fuck you ill help bomb you and shit and then think you get to come "home"

There seems to be some fairly warped views on this thread. She was 15 when she went over. A child. She didn't get the idea out of thin air - presumably she was groomed somehow, either in person, or online. What was going on in her family, that made Syria such a tempting option?

She's "married" to an IS fighter. How did that happen? She's only been there a few years hasn't she? So barely old enough to consent to marriage.

She's experienced 2 miscarriages, witnesses beheadings, etc. As a child. Imagine the trauma? We know children can be trained as soldiers, to kill others - presumably we understand that's not their fault? That they're brainwashed? Terrified? They're abused into compliance and end up in a world where it seems normal to them. So of course they don't denounce it. It doesn't make them evil.

As an adult they then have a choice. Although choice is a loose term once they're that far down the road. As an adult she has finally made a decent choice. She wants to come home for the good of her baby. Maybe finally having a baby gave her the strength to assess her options?

Hundreds of women come on this site, having got into shitty, abusive relationships. as grown ups, not as 15 year olds even. Having "allowed" for want of a better word, their nasty husbands to abuse them and their children. And this site is all about helping them escape. Not condemning them and saying "well you made your choice love, deal with it." How is it this girl's fault?

As to getting her back from an active war zone, that's a much trickier issue. And what to do with her once home, as even though she was innocent at the start, she could be dangerous now. But the lack of sympathy from some is pretty appalling.

My favourite part of this thread is when at least three posts (not sure if same poster or not, can't remember) specifically mentioned the dawn prayer as evidence of a terrorist upbringing. Classic MN.

She has to make her own way out, IF of course the Kurds let her go. Her only redemption would be to genuinely become the poster girl AGAINST ISIS which at present I don’t think she has any inclination to do so. If she did it would send a powerful message against that ideology. Bear in mind she is in a camp full of ISIS sympathisers so to suddenly start talking against ISIS where she is would be a very stupid move for her and the baby.

The Spanish invented concentration camps in Cuba actually, not the British so please look that one up.

Shamina is still an adolescent. She sounds like a very disturbed one and that is unsurprising. And yes the Manchester bomber was clearly also a very disturbed adolescent. And the children who killed James burger were very disturbed children.

There are very specialist programs here to help young women like her and her child (and help keep society safer in the process). It doesn't ensure safety but it's right and what we should be doing if we actually want things to change.

TheRiver, it's interesting that, despite attempting to pour scorn on a point I made, you haven't actually managed to produce a reasoned argument against it.

She made remarks about the UK which I'm sure could fit the definition of treason.

If you think that, you don't understand the law of treason.

you dont get to say fuck you ill help bomb you and shit and then think you get to come "home"

There's no evidence that she helped bomb anyone, and to be honest it's pretty clear that she just doesn't have the intelligence or the capacity to do so. She was obviously a very easy target for her uncle and his grooming friends because she lacks any critical thinking capacity and was easy to brainwash. I suspect IS aren't paying much attention to her because they regard her as no loss to their cause.

None of that is to say that she shouldn't be duly punished for any crimes she is found to have committed, or indeed that we shouldn't keep a very close eye on her if she comes back in case she is targeted again. But the fact remains that she is a British citizen and, if she gets back here, we have no choice but to admit her to the country.

jilled I was going by the forcing of Native Americans onto reservations that predates that...technically they were Americans doing that not British...but if we'd won the war they'd have still been British...so I feel we have a reasonable claim...

Lol at let her come back 'but keep a close eye on her' 😂😂.
I imagine she'll get shanked in the camp before long.

She shouldn't be brought back. And of course, we can stop her coming back, the UK needs to remove her nationality and don't recognize her as a citizen.

Other countries do this, especially China. When a Chinese citizen is found to be here illegally and they are about to be deported, the Chinese government doesn't always cooperate with their deportations, or China just says they are not citizens of China, and that's it, we can't deport them. So, yeah, we could do the same to this woman. Especially, as she doesn't has a passport yet.

Or like the home office director says apply the treason law.

I can understand people being worried about the safety of their children but a lot of released offenders go on to commit serious crimes. Not exclusively terrorists.

Perhaps people should be out these campaigning for tougher sentences or better rehab if recidivism is people's main concern.

Unless it's only just become a concern. Recidivists; convicted paedophiles and killers were already walking the streets in Britain while this girl was in Syria.

I think this sums up the whole situation.

i.imgur.com/sHbx9ck.jpg

Out of curiosity I've been truing to find posts/columns that would defend her somehow without using the "she's brainwashed, she's a poor soul", but couldn't find any, would leave to see some, if they even exist.

She is doing a tremendous amount of damage to whatever she truly thinks is her cause. If you put all her statements together what comes out is a woman, who is deeply religious, who liked it in the ISIS, didn't really mind the killings even on a moral level, but still wants to go back to UK because she doesn't want to be with the losing side and she wants that healthcare badly.

Such a nasty image, honestly, she's doing the propaganda job for the far-right, all they need to do is just link her interviews.