FactualFrank wrote:Let me know when you've finished crying.


FactualFrank wrote:Let me know when you've finished crying.
OK, my tears of laughter have stopped now FF. Tell me, has your bottom lip stopped quivering?FactualFrank wrote:Let me know when you've finished crying.
Nice to hear.BurningBeard wrote:OK, my tears have stopped now FF.
Would anyone out there like to explain to this fu@kwit why serving 2 years of a 6 year sentence for terrorism is abhorrent?Imploding Turtle wrote:You've replied twice now and failed to answer my very simple question.
What do you think is wrong with the sentence?
I wasn't aware she committed terrorism. I thought all she'd done was become a member of a banned terrorist organisation.bob-the-scutter wrote:Would anyone out there like to explain to this fu@kwit why serving 2 years of a 6 year sentence for terrorism is abhorrent?
pushpinpussy wrote:Of the 18,814 deaths caused by terrorists around the world last year, well over half were due to the actions of just four groups: Islamic State, the Taliban, Al-Shabaab and Boko Haram. Btw, i, after reading this thread believe this turtle geezer must be part of one of these groups. just to support this outrage as much as he does beggars belief
He isn't supporting the outrage, read his posts and try again.pushpinpussy wrote:Of the 18,814 deaths caused by terrorists around the world last year, well over half were due to the actions of just four groups: Islamic State, the Taliban, Al-Shabaab and Boko Haram. Btw, i, after reading this thread believe this turtle geezer must be part of one of these groups. just to support this outrage as much as he does beggars belief
Erasmus wrote:I do wish Imploding Turtle would present his points in a less combative and aggressive manner as his approach tends to obscure the fact that many of his ideas get right to the point.
In this case, there is no disagreement over what we think about ISIS and its adherents and supporters. They represent an utterly vile ideology that contravenes all the ideals of decency and morality. And there is nothing but absolute condemnation for this young woman who is so blinded by vanity, stupidity and wickedness that she is absolutely unable to distinguish right from wrong. I haven't seen anything on the thread from anyone that gives one word of support to terrorism.
The issue that is being debated is how we should think and act in the face of this abominable ideology and its supporters. To my mind, the most important thing is that we maintain an absolute distinction between us and them in terms of ideology and conduct. They are petty-minded religious bigots who express that bigotry through grotesque acts of violence. We base our conduct on the ideology of the enlightenment and that is why we are different to them and so much better than them. So we should never sink to their type of lynch-mob, vigilante type of mentality. We are civilised they are barbarians and however angry we may be we cannot deviate from the values of our civilisation. If we do that they will have succeeded because they are making us like them.
So we don't summarily execute people and we adhere to the rule of law. If that means we have to take her back then so be it. And if the values of our civilisation demand that we put her on trial and prosecute her as well, then that is what we have to do in order to maintain the clear distinction between us and them. Otherwise they have not been defeated. If our anger moves us to deviate from our values and culture then they are getting exactly what they are seeking and that cannot be allowed to happen.
*complementpushpinpussy wrote:You do realise being called stupid by an idiot who's always wrong is actually a compliment.
Hey. Remember when you said you thought i'm a member of an international terrorist organisation? Eh? Do you remember that 200 IQ post?pushpinpussy wrote:You do realise being called stupid by an idiot who's always wrong is actually a compliment.
No-one likes youImploding Turtle wrote:Hey. Remember when you said you thought i'm a member of an international terrorist organisation? Eh? Do you remember that 200 IQ post?
I’m beginning to warm to her. Best WUM I’ve heard of for a while.RingoMcCartney wrote:Sky news interview ---
No regret. No remorse. No apology.
"Did you know about what islamic state were doing, executions, the be headings when you set out for Syria?"
"Yes but I believe that Islamically, it's all allowed. So I'm OK with that"
"You didn't question it?"
"No"
"Do you have any regrets about what you've been through?"
"It's changed me as a person. Its's made me stronger, tougher"
"There's a struggle going on in the UK about whether you should be allowed to come back home. What are your feelings about that.?"
"I think a lot of people should have sympathy towards me I didn't know what I was getting into (despite admitting she was fully aware about the executions and beheadings, which are acceptable "islamically" and I was "ok" with that) i was hoping that for the sake of me and my child theyd let me come back. I cant live here forever."
Unbelievable!!!
This is a woman that joined a terrorist organisation. A blood thirty islamic death cult. An organisation that literally ripped out the , still bleading, hearts of its enemys. It's raped , it's thrown people off buildings and carried out appalling atrocities .
Yet she remains unrepentant about joining it. She is shameless about being part of it. She admits that only now that the caliphate has fallen does she want to return. Had it been on the front foot she'd be happy to be continuing to aid and abett her blood thirsty islamic terrorist monsters.
But no. She wants to avail herself of the services and privileges available to her , from the very same society that her and her islamic state cohorts avowed to over throw using any means necessary.
The next news item was about a little lad in this country, 4 years old I think. He has cystic fibrosis. His desperate mum had got together with other parents to try and persuade the government to pay for expensive drugs that could help to extend his life beyond the expected 30 years.
There is not an unlimited amount of public money. What will the total and ongoing cost be of allowing the ISIS member and her child back into this country?
I want my taxes to spent on helping children, who through no fault of their own , have debilitating illnesses. Rather than on "rehabilitatiing" terrorists, who, were their utopian islamic state to materialise. Would be "OK" , as it's "islamically acceptable" to be slaughtering them if they refused to confirm to their ideology.
One that essentially voted for Nigel Farage. After that I don’t think anything should surprise you.Lancasterclaret wrote:
Just what sort of country are we turning into here?
Exactly this!Lancasterclaret wrote:Worth reiterating here
No one wants this piece of **** back in the UK but you can't just overturn the rule of law.
For it to be a 9 pager, with most of the comments saying we should do exactly that (and not just from the usual suspects) is bloody worrying.
Just what sort of country are we turning into here?
A national referendum might...Lancasterclaret wrote:No one wants this piece of **** back in the UK but you can't just overturn the rule of law.
It’s pretty astonishing, even for this messageboard’s standards.Lancasterclaret wrote:Worth reiterating here
No one wants this piece of **** back in the UK but you can't just overturn the rule of law.
For it to be a 9 pager, with most of the comments saying we should do exactly that (and not just from the usual suspects) is bloody worrying.
Just what sort of country are we turning into here?
Macabre humour mocking ISIS and the club in the same sentence,i like it.bfccrazy wrote:It’s definitely a grim sign when even ISIS have a better international scouting network than we do ......
DYCHE OUT!
In the context he used it, compliment is correct.FactualFrank wrote:*complement
Got to have a laugh matetiger76 wrote:Macabre humour mocking ISIS and the club in the same sentence,i like it.
You my friend will not understand till your dragged out of your house to be beheaded. At that moment you might think , I should have got this earlier.Imploding Turtle wrote:I'm yet to read anything she's done that would justify overthrowing our system of justice just to keep her from coming home.
Do you people even understand what would happen in this country if we did throw away out justice system in favour of one where only some people have the right to a trial? I'd like an answer.
This.Lowbankclaret wrote:This Muslim girl has got loads of pages of press in the mainstream media.
The white girls were abandoned in Bradford and elsewhere.
Everything that’s wrong with the UK
Lowbankclaret wrote:You my friend will not understand till your dragged out of your house to be beheaded. At that moment you might think , I should have got this earlier.
They're not weasel words, and it's not about the "letter" of the law. It's about the principle of the law, and if you had any principles then maybe you'd understand why they're important.ClaretMoffitt wrote:This.
And that's exactly the way many on here in this thread want it, make no mistake on that.
These weasel words about being "all about the letter of the law" are just that, weasel words, its a shield to hide behind. These same people are happy for democratic votes to be ignored but claim to be advocates of the rule of law and democracy. Their morals only extend as far as their motivations allow.
The same people on twitter right now saying she was a child at 15 and didn't know any better therefore should be allowed to come back are EXACTLY the same people who are trying to bring the voting age down to 16 in hopes of winning a second brexit referendum. Their words mean absolutely nothing.
Or imagine if Tommy Robinson wasn’t allowed back in the country....Imploding Turtle wrote:They're not weasel words, and it's not about the "letter" of the law. It's about the principle of the law, and if you had any principles then maybe you'd understand why they're important.
Here, i'll explain for you.
Imagine we threw away our laws to stop this girl coming home. We'd be punishing her without a trial. What's to stop the government from doing that to just anyone? You're an extremist, what's to stop the government deciding not to let you back into the country for any reason it likes?
But even worse than that example, what if the government decides "well, we don't need a trial" when you get accused of other crimes? Rape? Murder? Child molestation? If you were falsely accused of any of these you'd want a fair trial, right? Well, tough **** rapist/murderer/kiddie fiddler because you don't have the right to a fair trial any more.
Is that what you want to become possible in this country? (i want an answer)
mdd2 wrote:We are now in an era as far as I can see where terrorism has gone beyond the "norm"
The IRA is/was perhaps the worst we have had in the UK and "civilian" casualties were collateral damage on the mainland as the IRA targeted other terrorist groups the armed forces, police and politicians (mainly Tories).
IS and Al-Quaeda and other mainly "muslim" groups target anyone irrespective of religion etc and so the question has to be asked as to whether we have "war footing' rules and regulations or carry on with our present system. Even in NI we had or chose to abolish trial by jury because of the threats posed by the IRA, is it better that an innocent man is denied their freedom or a terrorist is free to roam the streets of the UK to kill again.
I believe we have people under surveillance because we cannot prosecute due to the source of our evidence being either inadmissable in Court or would expose our sources or methods of information gathering to those wishing us harm.
Difficult questions in difficult times.
Pretty sure most of Manchester would have been happy excluding Salman Abedi given what later happened.
But we do know how internment without trial helped the IRA in NI
It's because freedom is in descent in this country. We've forgotten how important it is for all of us to be free and that being treated equally under the law is a vital element of freedom. Instead some people want our government to treat some people differently because, well, we just don't like THOSE people.Lancasterclaret wrote:Not a shock that explaining the value of law to people who can't see past skin colour and religion is a complete waste of time is it?
Stayingup wrote:Yes moral issue v Practical onetSome clowns on here the other day were comparing Trump to Hitler. Well, the organization this young woman affiliated herself with had the Hitler manual I think, only slighty more barbaric.
When she returns and has settled in her new house (hopefully at th sole expense of Turtle and Lancy) she can maybe tell the authorities where Big Daddys hiding out.
This meme appeared unironically on a friend’s FaceBook page. They used to be a Big poster on the previous incarnation of this board but have not been so on this.TheFamilyCat wrote:One that essentially voted for Nigel Farage. After that I don’t think anything should surprise you.
The young white girls in Bradford and elsewhere were victims, coerced (groomed) into those situations.Lowbankclaret wrote:This Muslim girl has got loads of pages of press in the mainstream media.
The white girls were abandoned in Bradford and elsewhere.
Everything that’s wrong with the UK
"Brainwashed" she's admitted that she went looking for the propaganda and doesn't regret a thing.Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:The young white girls in Bradford and elsewhere were victims, coerced (groomed) into those situations.
These young muslim girls who went to Syria were victims, coerced (groomed) into those situations.
The fact you fail to recognise this due to your obvious prejudice is everything that's wrong with the UK.
Plenty of people on here referring to her as a woman because she's now 19, when she was brainwashed by ISIS propaganda she wasn't, she was 15.