When I first saw this thread had resurfaced I was thinking she had passed away.
I’ve seen arguments from both sides on here but why not proceed with a “trial in absentia”? I know this is a unique one but let’s say she’s found guilty and given a 20 year custodial sentence for Terrorism charges (as we all know that’s 10 years in reality), wether she’d be as keen to return home knowing she’s doing porridge for a good few years.
You’re right there, my Blue mate has a stall on the outside market (near the top where the indoor market is) every Tuesday and Saturday, he can’t leave his stall unattended at anytime as the morons hanging around would just help themselves.There are millions here worse than her and more dangerous..........Ashton is riddled with mad cunts ready to stab me if I walk to the shops.
1) Going to Syria was a terror offence1) There's nothing obvious to charge her with given she was a child at the time and the government would be too scared she got found not guilty and that garnered her more support.
2) Article 6 of ECHR (right to a fair trial) makes trials in absentia very difficult to justify.
3) A British prison is infinitely prefarable to being in a North Syrian refugee camp.
Some kid stabbed on Aldi car park few weeks ago. My estate getting robbed every night. Top range cars targeted nightly. It's a joke.You’re right there, my Blue mate has a stall on the outside market (near the top where the indoor market is) every Tuesday and Saturday, he can’t leave his stall unattended at anytime as the morons hanging around would just help themselves.
When I was a kid Ashton market and the shops were vibrant and packed with shoppers, now it’s refugees, druggies and feckless wankers. I still live in Ashton but it’s a nice area, the town centre and outskirts of there are really a shithole.
Not followed her really ...what did she say?1) Going to Syria was a terror offence
2) wether difficult or not just do it if she agrees, she may be willing to admit her guilt
3) if she’s given a long enough sentence she could, and I stress could, be reformed and mature enough to never be a threat again
Saying all that, she’s a **** for what she said about the Manchester Arena victims, most of them innocent children.
Not followed her really ...what did she say?
Well she's lost , but purely on a point of law. Constitutionally the H.S had the right to remove her citizenship. That's understandable.
Now she's in limbo as regards nationality. I think she should be judged in a British court of law and she has said she would accept any verdict handed down. What's the problem? She's no threat and she's shown contrition. A 15 year old kid who had clearly been mistreated by one or both parents to have been desperate enough to embark on such a calamitous odyssey. A very impressionable minor manipulated by some egregiously mindless thugs.
No threat if she faces British justice and does her time.No threat?
Well, she was OK with kids being bombed and she would sew suicide bombers into vests. Sure she was probably impressionable, but how do you know those beliefs haven't stayed with her? You don't. She's going to say what she has to.
It's a very relaxed attitude to say she is no threat. You might be right but is it worth finding out? I'm sure the Manchester Arena bomber was an just impressionable young lad once that got his brain warped into thinking he should do what he did.
This girl said what he did was ok, so as far as I'm concerned she is of the same mould as him in terms of mentality.
No threat you say? Not worth finding out in my opinion.
No threat if she faces British justice and does her time.
She lost this appeal because technically the H.S had the power to remove her citizenship. They weren't debating her case mate. She needs to have her day in a British court. She's a British subject by any other metric.Well I'm not opposed to that.
Obviously this is such a high profile case now that it's put the government in a tough situation.
Imagine they were to bring her back, she does her time, gets out and ends up involved in some terror organisations, or even marries someome with even a link or anything like that to one, imagine the uproar. Not saying that would happen but you can't rule it out. The backlash would be insane.
That's the reason I think she's losing her appeals, not because they class her as very dangerous, but they're simply scared about the backlash on the off chance she puts a foot wrong.
Lost her appeal - that’s a fucking shame.
Yep about time.We got something right at last.
It was retribution for Muslims killed by the West and she had no sympathy.Not followed her really ...what did she say?
Well I'm not opposed to that.
Obviously this is such a high profile case now that it's put the government in a tough situation.
Imagine they were to bring her back, she does her time, gets out and ends up involved in some terror organisations, or even marries someome with even a link or anything like that to one, imagine the uproar. Not saying that would happen but you can't rule it out. The backlash would be insane.
That's the reason I think she's losing her appeals, not because they class her as very dangerous, but they're simply scared about the backlash on the off chance she puts a foot wrong.
It was retribution for Muslims killed by the West and she had no sympathy.
It was the half baked rationalisation of someone coming to terms that they'd wasted their whole life. Cruel and thoughtless comments but I wouldn't place much weight on it.
She's the advert against running off and becoming a Jihadi bride, hopelessly naïve and dim.
Rather ironically Sharmeena Begum (no relation) who inspired the three girls to follow her was never stripped of her citizenship, has escaped a prison camp and crowd funded for Islamic state under a new identity.
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
I’d let her live with me. Rent free.First one a million times over