The fact she was a child is completely irrelevant.
She’s not a child any more, she’s an adult.
And as an adult she has upheld the ideology of ISIS, and she has done. Openly.
So by that logic, John Venibles was “only a child” when he murdered James Bulger. Therefore we presumably can’t hold him responsible for the fact he is back in jail for downloading child abuse images. He was shaped by his childhood after all.
At 10 I don’t think that Venibles and Thompson should have been tried as adults. The fact that the law was changed to try them as adults and to satisfy the public blood lust says it all.
They were both clearly vulnerable children at the time, and questions should have been asked as to how this crime could happen.
But they committed the crime, and they were responsible for having done so. And when they were let out of prison they were both adults, and as such as adults they are and were responsible for the subsequent decisions they have taken in life.
People have less sympathy for two ten year olds than they have for a girl five years older than them. Why is that? Is it because a two year old is closer to home than people out in Syria? So the people being murdered over there aren’t as real? And because she alleged that she had babies who died that makes her more worthy of sympathy.
So she was 15 when she went out there. Now she isn’t. She’s a danger to the UK now and has made that abundantly clear by voicing her terrorist views in public.
Nobody brings out the “he/she is only a child” card when a poster posts here that their child is being bullied by another. And yet a 15 year old who delights in the murder and torture of others needs to be given sympathy. I don’t think so.