Jump to content

Let Me In...............


Bud the Baker

Recommended Posts


6 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:


 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/31/james-matthews-who-joined-kurdish-forces-to-fight-isis-not-guilty
******************
[mention=819]Isle Of Bute Saint[/mention] Apparently SBs husband isn't dead 
 


I couldn't read further than the first sentence.
"former British soldier accused of attending terrorist training camps run by Kurdish militia fighting against Islamic State"
Guardian really is a shite mouthpiece these days.

Yeah but people went to fight or support both sides and the resulting mess if/when they return (have returned!) to the UK and what charges can be made against them for actions committed abroad, which groups are deemed as being terrorist & which not are not going to be straightforward.

 

In SBs case which court is the ultimate arbiter over whether she shouldlose her UK citizenship - would really upset the gammons if it was the ECJ!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
Well, those who are accused of beig knee-jerk reactionaries who are manipulated by a liberal media are being told on these pages that they are reacting to selected information bites and not recognisisng the grooming that took place, not looking at the situation as a whole.  
 
The situation as a whole is that the girl has freely revealed that the things she has seen are OK because of the teachings she was subjected to in the UK, . By her own words, she has implicated somebody close to her as an advocate of Jihad, possibly (maybe even probably) someone who is quite happy to call for holy war without actually getting his or her hands dirty in the process, someone who has hard line views but hits the panic button when one of their own goes off to war.  One thing we need to make clear in this country is that there ARE consequences to so-called free speech and that people should understand that the biggest danger of speaking your mind is that you influence someone else to go off and do something outrageous in your name.
Any crime she may have committed would be associated with being a member of a banned terrorist organisation as defined under prevention of terror legislation
So in the absence of any crimes being identified or more importantly javid being likely to get enough proof for a conviction he's taken the easy way out as she is able to apply for Bangladeshi citizenship through her mother's nationality.

Also, so far the only crime would be going to Syria and living with isis. As this was done when she was 15 even less chance of a conviction?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
Yeah but people went to fight or support both sides and the resulting mess if/when they return (have returned!) to the UK and what charges can be made against them for actions committed abroad, which groups are deemed as being terrorist & which not are not going to be straightforward.
 
In SBs case which court is the ultimate arbiter over whether she shouldlose her UK citizenship - would really upset the gammons if it was the ECJ!
I agree I just found the language of calling the kurds terrorists for trying to defend their people and land from isis risible to say the least.

UK didn't support the kurds, then we did. Sounds like the narrative is being pushed by a compliant media to once again make them the bad guys.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christ, some good stuff on here........

Anyway for the record, I am delighted the bitch is going on the scrapheap. and will be someone else's problem, hope her parents show their love and join her.

This is about life and death, IS are scum, the worst of the worst killiing innocents not soldiers .

Well done the Tories, finally a sensible decision, go further and get all Muslim extremists to feck,

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TPAFKATS said:

I agree I just found the language of calling the kurds terrorists for trying to defend their people and land from isis risible to say the least.

UK didn't support the kurds, then we did. Sounds like the narrative is being pushed by a compliant media to once again make them the bad guys.

Fully agree, the Kurds seem to have enjoyed (sic) their brief moment of being on our side against ISIS and are being sacrificed for the greater good once again - all hail the GG!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DougJamie said:

Christ, some good stuff on here........

Anyway for the record, I am delighted the bitch is going on the scrapheap. and will be someone else's problem, hope her parents show their love and join her.

This is about life and death, IS are scum, the worst of the worst killiing innocents not soldiers .

Well done the Tories, finally a sensible decision, go further and get all Muslim extremists to feck,

  

It might not be over yet - her new born son will most likely be a British citizen and that may yet be a pathway for her mother back to the UK although it will take months if not years of legal wrangling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:

Can't say too much on the murder can't believe he is trying to blame someone else. He will pay a huge price for his lies. The evidence is overwhelming against him which will all come out. 

The evidence may or may not be overwhelming but unless you are part of the case you are not in a position to know for sure and given that this is an ongoing trial maybe you should show some decency and STFU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:

So in the absence of any crimes being identified or more importantly javid being likely to get enough proof for a conviction he's taken the easy way out as she is able to apply for Bangladeshi citizenship through her mother's nationality.

Also, so far the only crime would be going to Syria and living with isis. As this was done when she was 15 even less chance of a conviction?

But there is evidence, much of it from her own mouth, that she joined a banned terrorist organisation?  That is a crime, many people have rightly gone to jail for their membership of right-wing terror groups in the UK, so the use of the legislation to deny entry to SB is entriely consistent with the powers of the HS.

 

I like the euphemism "living with Isis", if it was used as the working title of a hollywood spoof comedy.  The Syrian people who were conquered and the humanitarian workers who have been captured, forcibly restrained and executed were, unfortunately "living with Isis".  It is a disgrace to use that term as a form of explanation or apology for volunteering to join a terrorist organisation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

It might not be over yet - her new born son will most likely be a British citizen and that may yet be a pathway for her mother back to the UK although it will take months if not years of legal wrangling.

This part annoys me. If she had her citizenship revoked before the baby was born this situation wouldn't be an issue.

Why have the British Government been so unaware of this? Do we seriously believe they didn't know she existed up until a week ago when some journalist done an interview with her? We're supposed to have the best intelligence services in the world. Her citizenship should have been revoked the day she set foot in Syria. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

Yeah but people went to fight or support both sides and the resulting mess if/when they return (have returned!) to the UK and what charges can be made against them for actions committed abroad, which groups are deemed as being terrorist & which not are not going to be straightforward.

 

In SBs case which court is the ultimate arbiter over whether she shouldlose her UK citizenship - would really upset the gammons if it was the ECJ!

It gets funny when a Pinko calls someone else a gammon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LargsBud said:

This part annoys me. If she had her citizenship revoked before the baby was born this situation wouldn't be an issue.

Why have the British Government been so unaware of this? Do we seriously believe they didn't know she existed up until a week ago when some journalist done an interview with her? We're supposed to have the best intelligence services in the world. Her citizenship should have been revoked the day she set foot in Syria. 

Were they unaware or is this a carefully thought out strategy ?

Make the big stand and revoke the mothers citizenship but ensure it's done AFTER the son is born thus appearing to give the baying public in the UK what they demand but leaving the door ever so slightly ajar for the mother and her families lawyers to exploit.  Very difficult for any government to say they will take a baby from it's mother over a citizenship wrangle. IMO if the baby gets to come to the UK (nothing to stop him in law so far according to the legal experts in this field) the mother is bound to follow but as I said it will no doubt take an eternity by which time the frenzy will have died down and she will sneak in quietly before no doubt spouting her crap at how she was appallingly treated once she's safely back home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
But there is evidence, much of it from her own mouth, that she joined a banned terrorist organisation?  That is a crime, many people have rightly gone to jail for their membership of right-wing terror groups in the UK, so the use of the legislation to deny entry to SB is entriely consistent with the powers of the HS.
 
I like the euphemism "living with Isis", if it was used as the working title of a hollywood spoof comedy.  The Syrian people who were conquered and the humanitarian workers who have been captured, forcibly restrained and executed were, unfortunately "living with Isis".  It is a disgrace to use that term as a form of explanation or apology for volunteering to join a terrorist organisation.
I'm not apologising for any of her words or actions.
I'm trying to point out that she was a child when she did this. I'm also trying to point out that what she will have 'experienced' will have affected her ability to show empathy, sympathy and humanitarianism as evidenced by her interviews.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 is certainly a vulnerable age, it is certainly not childhood though.

What she experienced will have made her the person she is, that's true for how she was raised up to and after the age of 15.  We all make decisions that will affect our whole lives at that age.  Some of it works out to the good and some of it doesnt.  I don't know any of them, but I'm willing to concede that many of the perpretrators of the many attocities carried out in the name of IS are motivated by things that they learned at a much younger age than 15.  Can we really justify a period of amnesty for people after they hit a certain age regardless ofthe severity of their actions?

What she has experienced has HELPED make her a person with dangerous views and a total lack of empathy or remorse, not a healthy mix and as the wife of a Dutch "soldier", mother of an allegedly dual nationality Dutch son and daughter of a Bengladeshi parent there are options for her to seek to rehabillitate herself.  It is what she has learned and what she has believed that make her potentially a danger to herself and others in this country.  The fact that she was young when she set out on her adventure is sad but not the only factor here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

The evidence may or may not be overwhelming but unless you are part of the case you are not in a position to know for sure and given that this is an ongoing trial maybe you should show some decency and STFU.

I have a friend who is a criminal lawyer in Glasgow.  Of course he has told me nothing about the overwhelming evidence , that is pure speculation on my part living in the same street the boy lives on. Let's call it island chin wag. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:

m not apologising for any of her words or actions.
I'm trying to point out that she was a child when she did this. I'm also trying to point out that what she will have 'experienced' will have affected her ability to show empathy, sympathy and humanitarianism as evidenced by her interviews.

I think other people are simply trying to point out (they don't give a shit) which perhaps they might if she had apologised

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jaybee said:

I think other people are simply trying to point out (they don't give a shit) which perhaps they might if she had apologised

 

How come this "victim" gets a voice. She made a decision, got on a plane, joined a banned organisation that kills innocents , her husband, who she still sees as another way out, should be put against a wall.................... and she lost 2 kids , or so she says...................

What about the thousands of innocent victims that have no voice

As for her parents, go support your daughter, obviously in on this, or completly blinkered

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DougJamie said:

How come this "victim" gets a voice. She made a decision, got on a plane, joined a banned organisation that kills innocents , her husband, who she still sees as another way out, should be put against a wall.................... and she lost 2 kids , or so she says...................

What about the thousands of innocent victims that have no voice

As for her parents, go support your daughter, obviously in on this, or completly blinkered

 

Agree entirely, merely trying to make the point that she couldn't even be bothered to offer a token apology, instead she is depending on the suckers who live in the UK to give in and let her return 'for her baby's sake'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, jaybee said:

Agree entirely, merely trying to make the point that she couldn't even be bothered to offer a token apology, instead she is depending on the suckers who live in the UK to give in and let her return 'for her baby's sake'.

Her baby in this story is the only victim. Anyway justice done. Good day for society

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit to being completely confused by this very common trait of expressing wide ranging compassion for criminals of all kind and yet pretty much total silence on behalf of their victims (other than perhaps a throwaway line about how thoughts are with them).

When you have a victim and a criminal, why are so many people drawn to express empathy with the criminal over the victim?

As an example, some prisoners are sharing cells with one other inmate right now and there is widespread condemnation of this but no balancing argument about the victims. Why is that?

Can anyone explain this?

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites



 
How come this "victim" gets a voice. She made a decision, got on a plane, joined a banned organisation that kills innocents , her husband, who she still sees as another way out, should be put against a wall.................... and she lost 2 kids , or so she says...................
What about the thousands of innocent victims that have no voice
As for her parents, go support your daughter, obviously in on this, or completly blinkered
 
 


Totally agree i'd send the lawyer with them aswell all very dangerous people
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

Were they unaware or is this a carefully thought out strategy ?

Make the big stand and revoke the mothers citizenship but ensure it's done AFTER the son is born thus appearing to give the baying public in the UK what they demand but leaving the door ever so slightly ajar for the mother and her families lawyers to exploit.  Very difficult for any government to say they will take a baby from it's mother over a citizenship wrangle. IMO if the baby gets to come to the UK (nothing to stop him in law so far according to the legal experts in this field) the mother is bound to follow but as I said it will no doubt take an eternity by which time the frenzy will have died down and she will sneak in quietly before no doubt spouting her crap at how she was appallingly treated once she's safely back home.

Looks very much like this is a carefully thought out "hardman" ploy right enough. Bangladesh announce they will not entertain any application for citizenship (totally understandable) and therefore under international law she will revert to being a British national. Expect a pre prepared "what more can I do" type statement from Javid in the coming days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...