AIBU to think Shamima is not coming across well?

[HurryUpAndWait23]

I do really feel for her, she was an exploited child and went through what appeared to be repeatedly brutal experiences.

But whenever she talks, the attitude and "the world owes me" way in which she speaks is not helping her cause at all.

@Cadent

The fact she spoke of Manchester being justified and heads in bins... it's obvious she still supported them, groomed or not.

She has said that she had to say whatever she was told to say otherwise her life was in danger.

She's still there. Is her life not still In danger? Nobody asked her to say that, she said it off her own back, proudly.

@Cadent

The fact she spoke of Manchester being justified and heads in bins... it's obvious she still supported them, groomed or not.

She has said that she had to say whatever she was told to say otherwise her life was in danger.

Of course she has. She’d say anything to get out of that camp. Except sorry, that word isn’t in her vocabulary.

She’s not in an ISIS camp anymore, @Tyrantosaurus. Hence she can leave now.

I totally get wanting her to be tried over here, but why the bending over backwards to defend this woman? Nobody, rightly, affords the same compassion to white terrorists, incels, pedophiles and other bad people.

Sorry, meant she can say say what she wants without being directed anymore.

@Tyrantosaurus

I totally get wanting her to be tried over here, but why the bending over backwards to defend this woman? Nobody, rightly, affords the same compassion to white terrorists, incels, pedophiles and other bad people.

It’s not defending her to say give her a fair trial in the UK. Let her be tried and sentenced. I don’t think being made stateless and living in a camp for the rest of her life is justice.

I don’t think being made stateless and living in a camp for the rest of her life is justice

Where was the justice for Isis victims? It’s a bit rich to support a regime that rapes, tortures and executes women and children and then expect justice for yourself.

I don't quite know what to think about her, as a person, really. Obviously she did an appalling thing in choosing to join ISIS, but she was fifteen. She would have known something about the violence I think, but maybe not as much as we assume. Again, she was 15.

And I think religious 'logic' can be very seductive at that age. It's all very black and white. Start from the premise that there is a true faith, and that you have a responsibility to follow it correctly (and if not, you could go to hell), and the rest can be built on that bit by bit. Who knows what she was told about what was going on if she was in contact with ISIS members - presumably the line was that the people being killed had done terrible things or something similar. They would have pushed all the supposed positives and made her feel special, chosen etc. All of it obvious bullshit to anyone capable of critical thinking, but not to this particular 15 year old.

And she also doesn't come across as particularly intelligent in her interviews - she's had months and years to think about what to say etc but it's all very stilted and unsophisticated. Whether she's telling the truth or not, she does appear an easy mark. The lack of any visible emotion about her children is concerning too, not in the sense that she must be evil, but there's clearly something not quite right there.

Regardless of that, I think the UK acted wrongly by leaving her stateless. I echo those who say she's our problem to deal with.

It’s not defending her to say give her a fair trial in the UK. Let her be tried and sentenced. I don’t think being made stateless and living in a camp for the rest of her life is justice.

I know, I can get behind that and even the fact she was groomed at 15. My comment about defending was more in regards to "she's a child/victim/was trapped/poor girl/it's because she's brown people don't like her/she didn't know who IS were before she went/she's changed"

If she has to be brought back, it is what it is, but that's it. That's just a legality, but the moral defends is bewildering having followed the hype around this case

I agree with some posters about leaving her stateless (as much as it pains me to say it) I'm not convinced is right.

I do think she likely would carry out future terror attacks and cannot be trusted BUT look at the crimes so many other criminals commit - we still let them back out into society.

I also DO believe the fact she is not white means she has harsher treatment. If a blonde hair blue eyed woman flew to Syria and then begged to return I'm not sure she would receive the same treatment. Maybe I'm wrong....

If a blonde hair blue eyed woman flew to Syria and then begged to return I'm not sure she would receive the same treatment

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally-Anne_Jones

@Blossomtoes so was she left stateless? It doesn't say in the article so I'm confused!

I have zero sympathy for her & I hope her attempts to reclaim her British citizenship fail!

Be confused no longer. She was indeed made stateless.

@SailYourShips

Be confused no longer. She was indeed made stateless.

No, Sally Anne-Jones was not made stateless. She was actually on Britain’s Most Wanted list. They wanted her back.

They wanted her back.

I think “they” - whoever they are - were delighted not to have to deal with her.

*She was actually on Britain’s Most Wanted list. They wanted her back."

She was one of four British people put on the UN's most wanted list at the request of David Cameron. The US decided she was too dangerous and made her a high priority for assassination, she is believed to have been killed in a targeted drone strike.

@Blossomtoes

They wanted her back.

I think “they” - whoever they are - were delighted not to have to deal with her.

But still wanted her back in the UK.

But still wanted her back in the UK

Apparently not. That’s why she’s dead.

The US killed her, not UK.

@Cadent

The US killed her, not UK.

On our behalf. Nobody tried to stop them.

On our behalf. Nobody tried to stop them.

She was posting personal details of US military personnel online to make them targets for jihadists which was probably the main motivation for killing her but I do think it unlikely they would not have informed the UK government of their intentions. I would imagine it was very convenient for the UK government not to have to deal with her.

@Blossomtoes

On our behalf. Nobody tried to stop them.

Nope, that Wiki page says David Cameron had her added to the UN’s Most Wanted list, which is about freezing her assets, not killing her.

The amount of lies posted here is insane.

I do think she likely would carry out future terror attacks and cannot be trusted BUT look at the crimes so many other criminals commit - we still let them back out into society.

So you would be happy for her to come back and carry out another Manchester bombing? wtf?

[quote Cadent]@Blossomtoes

On our behalf. Nobody tried to stop them.

Nope, that Wiki page says David Cameron had her added to the UN’s Most Wanted list, which is about freezing her assets, not killing her.

The amount of lies posted here is insane.[/quote]
You were not privy to private conversations and Wiki is hardly the be all and end all of sources. No one on this thread knows what was discussed between the US and the UK regarding the drone strike, including you. The lack of comment ( or leaked comments) after on behalf of the UK government does speak volumes, as generally we hear pretty quickly if there has been disagreement.
I don’t remember any outrage on behalf of the public either.