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 don’t think the majority want her back. Their rights to not to have someone with huge terrorist connections living amongst them should over rule her “right” to have her demands followed through. A lot of people are going on about her “rights” , whilst the rights of the population get ignored.

No-one is suggesting that the rights of the general population should be ignored. If she comes back, and if she has committed crimes, she should be subject to the same treatment as we give to other people who are thought to have committed crimes, i.e.a fair trial and just punishment. If she remains a terrorist threat, her admission can be subject to safeguarding conditions and she should be closely monitored. However, the fact that people don't want her back can't override the fact that she has British citizenship and has to be allowed back.

So do you sympathise with all isis fighters who have been swayed by propaganda and gone to commit terror attacks - or just her?

We can't arrest people for crimes in wars to which we are not a party.

Yes we can. Geneva Conventions Act 1957, S.1(1) and S.1(2) explicitly claim universal jurisdiction irrespective of location and nationality.

The thing that nags me more seeing the interview is she betrayed our country apparently willfully and the vast majority of decent kind inclusive people who live here then when it didnt work out she demands understanding and to be let home to the place she hated so much ,to the place her husband and the others tried to bomb,To be returned to live amongst our grieving families of innocent victims...To be housed to be fed ,watered, clothed because she foolishly procreated,We have no say what so ever but it will be a sad day for our democracy when we have to bow down to the likes of her.The self serving,demanding evil terrorist sympathizor,,,not in my name please,she is not in the least bit sorry she has stated that on the record,She now wants the best for her son..well sorry love you had the best you were ever going to get and you chose to go cos it wasnt good enough for you then well I am sure as hell its too good for you now.....The vast majority of us work,pay our dues,raise our kids to be good citizens,The vast majority of us live decent productive lives you just dont fit in....

*The Manchester Arena suicide bomber was rescued by the Royal Navy from the civil war in Libya three years before he killed 22 people at a pop concert, it has emerged.

Salman Abedi was 19 when he boarded the HMS Enterprise in Tripoli in August 2014 with his younger brother Hashem and more than 100 other British citizens.

It is understood Abedi’s name was on a list of stranded citizens handed to the crew in charge of the evacuation. The vessel took them to Malta where they caught a flight back to the UK.

In May last year, he killed 22 people, including seven children, at an Ariana Grande concert with a homemade suicide vest*

I just cant sympathise, groomed or not the risk of "rescuing" someone who left to join isis is too big of a risk for me. Hopefully we have learnt, the fact she was young and has a baby makes no difference to me.

If that makes me cruel then so be it.

Their rights to not to have someone with huge terrorist connections living amongst them should over rule her “right” to have her demands followed through. A lot of people are going on about her “rights” , whilst the rights of the population get ignored.

The population does not have a right to decide how someone should be punished. That's not how the justice system works.

She was not a YOUNG girl when she made her way to Syria and now she is an unrepentant woman.

She was not groomed or brainwashed and if ISIS were riding high, she would be right there with them.

I base this on the fact that that is exactly what she was doing before it unravelled and, importantly, her words now.

I imagine a group comprised of sympathisers, bleeding hearts and idiots scratching their heads and arses and wondering what they can come up with as an excuse for this murderous woman's own words and eventually, they hit upon the idea of saying she was groomed!

Now, if they keep repeating it, some dolts will believe it- as shown on this very thread. Let's hope they are the minority!

Are there any medical records to corroborate that she has given birth to three children? She seemed to be on the verge of smirking all throughout the interview clips I've seen. She has been living a rather unusual life and maybe shields her emotions, but she didn't seem like a new mother, or one who has been grieving the loss of two children in 2/3 years.

Oh my word, this was a young girl who was groomed. How can done of you have such little sympathy? She won't show remorse. She has been brainwashed. Everything that we think is wrong, she has been told is right and it will gave been justified to her by lslamic extremist ideology. Why would she show remorse for things she does not appreciate are wrong?

I'm sure there are plenty of young men with the same mindset in the same position who also left from the UK. Do we take them all back? And presumably provide living resources and physical and mental health support for all of them, pushing the people who didn't leave with the intention of wanting to destroy us further down the lists?

Was she groomed, though? Was she just following through on principles her family brought her up to believe in? I am very unclear on what role, if any, her family and friends had, in her decision to go to Syria and all the rest of it.

For instance, I was brought up as a Catholic. All my family were Catholics, I went to a Catholic school, most of my friends and my family's friends were Catholic. At the age of 15 I wanted to go further and become a nun. By 19 I wanted to join a closed order (about as extreme as you can get as a female Catholic) and at 17 my brother wanted to become a priest. I honestly thought i would welcome the opportunity to die a martyr's death, no matter how excruciating. Was I groomed?

I think if you are simply going a bit further along the road your family set your feet on, then it's hard to call it grooming.

Is grooming more to do with illegality?

The population does not have a right to decide how someone should be punished. That's not how the justice system works.
I know vey well the population doesn't have a right to decide what happens. I am saying that the populations, ie the majority, should have THEIR rights considered above hers. I'm sure you knew what I meant.

Jux I was raised loosely as a Catholic.

One parent atheist and against religion... I was taken to church and not every week.

I think I had pleasant balance really..

I do however consider lots of religion brain washing yes. because there's no room for a ways out or alternative ways of thinking....

Of course she wasn't groomed.

This has just been thrown into the mix as a red herring/bit of fog by those who want to make excuses for the woman.

Some potato up thread even claimed that the response she is getting from most quarters was linked to the colour of her skin!

That red herring didn't fly but the grooming excuse is starting to do so!

It is absolute pigshit, insulting to those who were really groomed and best treated with contempt. After all, those who spout it are either ISIS sympathisers, stupid or gullible.

Of course she wasn't groomed.

What do you call the deliberate radicalisation of young people, then? Is it not a form of grooming? Prevent is the element of CONTEST which aims to stop people becoming and/or supporting terrorists and it specifically is aimed at people who are vulnerable.

People seem to think that by saying this woman was groomed, it absolves her of all responsibility for actions- it doesn't, at all, but it may go some way to explaining them.

At 15 years old she is old enough to know killing people is wrong. I don't belive the grooming argument. She wanted to go, so she did. Her life there isn't serving her any longer so she wants back.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. This dog will bite if we take her back, and then everyone will have changed there tunes. Bring the baby home, by all means, but she made her bed. She needs to lie in it.

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

What is your aim in trotting this garbage out?

She was 15 and left her family to join ISIS in another country. Of course she was groomed. That is not a normal thing for a well-balanced 15 year old to do. And yes, I do think that extreme religious beliefs demonstrate close similarities to grooming.

If a 15 year old has sex, it is considered as rape as we do not consider her old enough to be able to consent to sex. How is this 15 year old any different? Why was she old enough to know what she was doing at 15 and yet she wouldn't be old to consent to have sex?

saturdaynext the country has a few too many people always looking for the rights of the scum, my mindset is the opposite, I think about the rights of decent law abiding people. It's something that just comes natural.

Upsy1981 Do you sympathise with all isis fighters who joined Islamic state before the age of 16, then?

Well, @Upsy, you have either swallowed the Kool-Aid or you are one of the people intent on it putting it about as a red herring to try and re-position this unrepentant woman as a frightened groomed child.

If it is the latter-to my mind and to the mind of many-you will be doing so for one of the three reasons that I detailed upthread; bearing in mind of course that one head can wear all three hats at once!

If she makes it back on her own of course we have to take her in, she is our responsibility... if she were white I don't think the debate would've raged as much. She should, of course, be put in prison when/if she returns.

For example do you also have sympathy for the Manchester bomber who was injured aged 17 fighting for an Islamic state group, but was still allowed back into the Uk and went on to murder 22 innocent people and injure hundreds many of them children??

And bore off with the skin colour comments

She was not deliberately radicalised

It's perfectly possible she was. No mother, raised by elderly grandmother and a religious fanatic uncle. Friend raised by a mother and father who attended extremist rallies. It sounds like a clique of extremist adults who raised extremist children.

We might start to ask some very hard questions about why we have allowed communities to grow up in our cities which are entirely isolated from the outside world, which they hold in complete contempt.

it also makes it highly unlikely that bringing her back into the country will end well: she's been raised entirely within an extremist culture, and her school (basically 100% Muslim) would have been extremely reluctant to challenge it. And it's a crooked school, too: the head and the SMT were suspended a year or so ago after fiddling exams (and, amusingly or not, it's the alma mater of the Kray twins).

www.theguardian.com/education/2017/feb/10/staff-at-outstanding-london-school-suspended-over-alleged-exam-cheating

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39194587

So I think we can take the claims that these were academically brilliant girls with a massive pinch of salt.

At 15 years old she is old enough to know killing people is wrong.

I'm sure she Did know killing people was wrong. I'm also sure they don't go straight in to the grooming process by getting her to sign up to killing people. I'm reasonably sure that the grooming would start very gently, finding a chink in her armour, a weakness that could be exploited and slowly drip, drip, drip feeding her compliments and thoughts before they even got anywhere near talk of beheading. By which point she would be eating out of the palm of their hands and everything she knew to be right and wrong before would have been turned on its head.