|
Post by cobhamstokey on Feb 27, 2021 16:09:32 GMT
An astonishing thread. Some of the posters likening her to the victims at Rochdale and blaming the British public for turning her head into ISIS. I despair I really do. I wonder if their attitudes would be the same if they’d been personally affected by ISIS or lost a relative to one of their bombings. At no point should she ever be turned into a victim. If she is then a precident will well and truely be set for anyone under the age of 17 who commits a criminal offence. It's amazing how some people suddenly want to start mentioning grooming victims in places like Rochdale when they probably haven't even given the matter a second thought before. The 2 issues are poles apart and cannot be compared. The 3 girls that left the U.K. to join ISIS certainly didn’t look like they were forced to do anything. The girls in Rochdale were groomed and were violently treated and in the case of the young girl in Blackpool murdered.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Feb 27, 2021 16:17:35 GMT
I hope nobody on this forum lowers themselves to comparing this to Rochdale. You'll find advocates for anything out there these days. There's a group in America called NAMBLA which seeks to legalise sex with young boys.
It doesn't mean anyone should actually agree with them. We certainly shouldn't be comparing this with Rochdale.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Feb 27, 2021 20:38:58 GMT
The Guardian wrote six... SIX articles on Miss Begum yesterday... Seething. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/26/the-guardian-view-on-shamima-begum-she-ought-to-have-her-day-in-courtThis article however, is proof that the Guardian are absolutely counting on getting her home so an exoneration process can begin that more or less involves a whitewash: "it is important to understand how a schoolgirl became radicalised to the point that she quit the country, including the role played by online grooming" .... "it is arguable that she and the other recruits (Ms Sultana is dead, and Ms Abase’s fate is unknown) were victims of terrorism-linked sex trafficking" "But whether Ms Begum was an active participant in acts of terror, or a traumatised witness as some observers believe, she should face justice in the UK" There are numerous witnesses who claim that she was an active and willing participant. Even the Independent reported it (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/shamima-begum-isis-syria-morality-police-suicide-belts-a8869016.html) and they are also relatively left wing. The problem is, such evidence is almost entirely useless in court. The evidence is mostly circumstantial. Witnesses are either dead or living in Syria. There isn't going to be CCTV or even a digital trail that can be used against her. What you'll have, is a prosecution fighting with no evidence while her defence throws in every trick imaginable (groomed, young, sex-trafficking, dead kids, no bodies, no proof etc). The Guardian know that in a UK court, she would be closer than ever to freedom.
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Feb 27, 2021 21:20:37 GMT
The Guardian wrote six... SIX articles on Miss Begum yesterday... Seething. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/26/the-guardian-view-on-shamima-begum-she-ought-to-have-her-day-in-courtThis article however, is proof that the Guardian are absolutely counting on getting her home so an exoneration process can begin that more or less involves a whitewash: "it is important to understand how a schoolgirl became radicalised to the point that she quit the country, including the role played by online grooming" .... "it is arguable that she and the other recruits (Ms Sultana is dead, and Ms Abase’s fate is unknown) were victims of terrorism-linked sex trafficking" "But whether Ms Begum was an active participant in acts of terror, or a traumatised witness as some observers believe, she should face justice in the UK" There are numerous witnesses who claim that she was an active and willing participant. Even the Independent reported it (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/shamima-begum-isis-syria-morality-police-suicide-belts-a8869016.html) and they are also relatively left wing. The problem is, such evidence is almost entirely useless in court. The evidence is mostly circumstantial. Witnesses are either dead or living in Syria. There isn't going to be CCTV or even a digital trail that can be used against her. What you'll have, is a prosecution fighting with no evidence while her defence throws in every trick imaginable (groomed, young, sex-trafficking, dead kids, no bodies, no proof etc). The Guardian know that in a UK court, she would be closer than ever to freedom. Wasnt that idiot Owen Jones was it?
|
|
|
Post by Dutchpeter on Feb 27, 2021 21:32:17 GMT
The Guardian wrote six... SIX articles on Miss Begum yesterday... Seething. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/26/the-guardian-view-on-shamima-begum-she-ought-to-have-her-day-in-courtThis article however, is proof that the Guardian are absolutely counting on getting her home so an exoneration process can begin that more or less involves a whitewash: "it is important to understand how a schoolgirl became radicalised to the point that she quit the country, including the role played by online grooming" .... "it is arguable that she and the other recruits (Ms Sultana is dead, and Ms Abase’s fate is unknown) were victims of terrorism-linked sex trafficking" "But whether Ms Begum was an active participant in acts of terror, or a traumatised witness as some observers believe, she should face justice in the UK" There are numerous witnesses who claim that she was an active and willing participant. Even the Independent reported it (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/shamima-begum-isis-syria-morality-police-suicide-belts-a8869016.html) and they are also relatively left wing. The problem is, such evidence is almost entirely useless in court. The evidence is mostly circumstantial. Witnesses are either dead or living in Syria. There isn't going to be CCTV or even a digital trail that can be used against her. What you'll have, is a prosecution fighting with no evidence while her defence throws in every trick imaginable (groomed, young, sex-trafficking, dead kids, no bodies, no proof etc). The Guardian know that in a UK court, she would be closer than ever to freedom. Wasnt that idiot Owen Jones was it? And logically angers small ‘c’ Conservative working class voters.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 27, 2021 21:46:11 GMT
The Guardian wrote six... SIX articles on Miss Begum yesterday... Seething. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/26/the-guardian-view-on-shamima-begum-she-ought-to-have-her-day-in-courtThis article however, is proof that the Guardian are absolutely counting on getting her home so an exoneration process can begin that more or less involves a whitewash: "it is important to understand how a schoolgirl became radicalised to the point that she quit the country, including the role played by online grooming" .... "it is arguable that she and the other recruits (Ms Sultana is dead, and Ms Abase’s fate is unknown) were victims of terrorism-linked sex trafficking" "But whether Ms Begum was an active participant in acts of terror, or a traumatised witness as some observers believe, she should face justice in the UK" There are numerous witnesses who claim that she was an active and willing participant. Even the Independent reported it (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/shamima-begum-isis-syria-morality-police-suicide-belts-a8869016.html) and they are also relatively left wing. The problem is, such evidence is almost entirely useless in court. The evidence is mostly circumstantial. Witnesses are either dead or living in Syria. There isn't going to be CCTV or even a digital trail that can be used against her. What you'll have, is a prosecution fighting with no evidence while her defence throws in every trick imaginable (groomed, young, sex-trafficking, dead kids, no bodies, no proof etc). The Guardian know that in a UK court, she would be closer than ever to freedom. Fcuking left wing libtard rag.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 28, 2021 8:49:02 GMT
I'm not sure this was the UK Surpreme Court we are no longer tied to the EU so thats one avenue gone. So im not sure where she can appeal to. The EU should have nothing to do in matters like this one. They don’t
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 28, 2021 8:50:08 GMT
She can appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. That has nothing to do with EU membership. Fair do's do we still take any notice of them anymore. Yes. The ECHR is nothing to do with the EU or the ECJ.
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Feb 28, 2021 8:59:30 GMT
Fair do's do we still take any notice of them anymore. Yes. The ECHR is nothing to do with the EU or the ECJ. Yeah we've already discussed it earlier.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 28, 2021 9:40:34 GMT
The Guardian wrote six... SIX articles on Miss Begum yesterday... Seething. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/26/the-guardian-view-on-shamima-begum-she-ought-to-have-her-day-in-courtThis article however, is proof that the Guardian are absolutely counting on getting her home so an exoneration process can begin that more or less involves a whitewash: "it is important to understand how a schoolgirl became radicalised to the point that she quit the country, including the role played by online grooming" .... "it is arguable that she and the other recruits (Ms Sultana is dead, and Ms Abase’s fate is unknown) were victims of terrorism-linked sex trafficking" "But whether Ms Begum was an active participant in acts of terror, or a traumatised witness as some observers believe, she should face justice in the UK" There are numerous witnesses who claim that she was an active and willing participant. Even the Independent reported it (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/shamima-begum-isis-syria-morality-police-suicide-belts-a8869016.html) and they are also relatively left wing. The problem is, such evidence is almost entirely useless in court. The evidence is mostly circumstantial. Witnesses are either dead or living in Syria. There isn't going to be CCTV or even a digital trail that can be used against her. What you'll have, is a prosecution fighting with no evidence while her defence throws in every trick imaginable (groomed, young, sex-trafficking, dead kids, no bodies, no proof etc). The Guardian know that in a UK court, she would be closer than ever to freedom. I think it is incredibly important to understand how and why she became radicalised. What happens if she doesn’t come back here? I am not sure of her situation. Is she in prison somewhere? If the choice is bring her back here to face justice, or leave her to reign free in wherever she is, I’d bring her back. If she is already in prison, leave her there.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Feb 28, 2021 10:06:27 GMT
The Guardian wrote six... SIX articles on Miss Begum yesterday... Seething. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/26/the-guardian-view-on-shamima-begum-she-ought-to-have-her-day-in-courtThis article however, is proof that the Guardian are absolutely counting on getting her home so an exoneration process can begin that more or less involves a whitewash: "it is important to understand how a schoolgirl became radicalised to the point that she quit the country, including the role played by online grooming" .... "it is arguable that she and the other recruits (Ms Sultana is dead, and Ms Abase’s fate is unknown) were victims of terrorism-linked sex trafficking" "But whether Ms Begum was an active participant in acts of terror, or a traumatised witness as some observers believe, she should face justice in the UK" There are numerous witnesses who claim that she was an active and willing participant. Even the Independent reported it (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/shamima-begum-isis-syria-morality-police-suicide-belts-a8869016.html) and they are also relatively left wing. The problem is, such evidence is almost entirely useless in court. The evidence is mostly circumstantial. Witnesses are either dead or living in Syria. There isn't going to be CCTV or even a digital trail that can be used against her. What you'll have, is a prosecution fighting with no evidence while her defence throws in every trick imaginable (groomed, young, sex-trafficking, dead kids, no bodies, no proof etc). The Guardian know that in a UK court, she would be closer than ever to freedom. I think it is incredibly important to understand how and why she became radicalised. What happens if she doesn’t come back here? I am not sure of her situation. Is she in prison somewhere? If the choice is bring her back here to face justice, or leave her to reign free in wherever she is, I’d bring her back. If she is already in prison, leave her there. There's a difference between understanding the steps it took for her to end up radicalised and essentially de-escalating choices that she made and has continued to make. If we think we will learn something off her, then I can see the value to bringing her back and ensuring she subsequently spends a minimum of 30-40 years in jail (or longer). That article only briefly mentions gaining an insight into the recruitment process though, yet it repeatedly looks to whitewash her actions. There's a high probability we would actually learn nothing from her. If she was willing to talk, which I suspect is unlikely, there's a good chance she'll admit that she many of the decisions she made involved little or no grooming. Why do we continue to make excuses for terrorists? Were young people groomed into joining the EDL? No, they were just dickheads.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 28, 2021 10:39:14 GMT
I think it is incredibly important to understand how and why she became radicalised. What happens if she doesn’t come back here? I am not sure of her situation. Is she in prison somewhere? If the choice is bring her back here to face justice, or leave her to reign free in wherever she is, I’d bring her back. If she is already in prison, leave her there. There's a difference between understanding the steps it took for her to end up radicalised and essentially de-escalating choices that she made and has continued to make. If we think we will learn something off her, then I can see the value to bringing her back and ensuring she subsequently spends a minimum of 30-40 years in jail (or longer). That article only briefly mentions gaining an insight into the recruitment process though, yet it repeatedly looks to whitewash her actions. There's a high probability we would actually learn nothing from her. If she was willing to talk, which I suspect is unlikely, there's a good chance she'll admit that she many of the decisions she made involved little or no grooming. Why do we continue to make excuses for terrorists? Were young people groomed into joining the EDL? No, they were just dickheads. We only make excuses for particular terrorists though, interesting why is that ?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 28, 2021 11:09:14 GMT
Perhaps the answer is for a largely Islamic country to show compassion and to take her in. In a sense, although she wishes to return to the UK, could she "claim asylum " in a " Muslim " country. She might not get what she wanted....life in the UK....but those calling for her "execution" would also have to live with her treatment by the country in which she achieved asylum. I understand the argument, why should others deal with our problems....that can always apply to asylum seekers and opens up the debate" what is " our" problem? " Her vision and expectation of what life in the UK would be like for her, should she return, might be far from what she imagines. Imprisonment, ostracised, persecuted?...so she might prefer the "freedom" of a Muslim country. She is only one person, so if she was denied an easy return and citizenship at least it would set a precedent and deterrent to others who might do similar. The concept of " grooming" is a difficult one and philosophically perhaps all criminal behaviour can be put down to circumstances of birth, upbringing and environment....I suppose we could reach the stage in which none of us are responsible for any of our actions because we are victims of our genetics or environment . As a society we have to take difficult decisions and draw the line somewhere. When you look at the pictures of the victims of the MEN bombings, it's a shame that much less attention is paid to the futures of those victims and their families, I wonder what the families are doing now? Manchester Arena victims suffered catastrophic injuries, court told | Express & Star www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2020/02/25/manchester-arena-victims-suffered-catastrophic-injuries-court-told/
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Feb 28, 2021 11:16:26 GMT
I think it is incredibly important to understand how and why she became radicalised. What happens if she doesn’t come back here? I am not sure of her situation. Is she in prison somewhere? If the choice is bring her back here to face justice, or leave her to reign free in wherever she is, I’d bring her back. If she is already in prison, leave her there. There's a difference between understanding the steps it took for her to end up radicalised and essentially de-escalating choices that she made and has continued to make. If we think we will learn something off her, then I can see the value to bringing her back and ensuring she subsequently spends a minimum of 30-40 years in jail (or longer). That article only briefly mentions gaining an insight into the recruitment process though, yet it repeatedly looks to whitewash her actions. There's a high probability we would actually learn nothing from her. If she was willing to talk, which I suspect is unlikely, there's a good chance she'll admit that she many of the decisions she made involved little or no grooming. Why do we continue to make excuses for terrorists? Were young people groomed into joining the EDL? No, they were just dickheads. www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-cornwall-55891140No mentions of grooming here, it's just widely accepted that he is what he is, a wrong 'un. And he was even younger- 13- when he started off.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Feb 28, 2021 13:08:06 GMT
Surely the thinking by the Home Office and Supreme Court must be not to set a legal precedent which would give opportunities for future returning terrorists.
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Feb 28, 2021 13:24:22 GMT
I think it is incredibly important to understand how and why she became radicalised. What happens if she doesn’t come back here? I am not sure of her situation. Is she in prison somewhere? If the choice is bring her back here to face justice, or leave her to reign free in wherever she is, I’d bring her back. If she is already in prison, leave her there. There's a difference between understanding the steps it took for her to end up radicalised and essentially de-escalating choices that she made and has continued to make. If we think we will learn something off her, then I can see the value to bringing her back and ensuring she subsequently spends a minimum of 30-40 years in jail (or longer). That article only briefly mentions gaining an insight into the recruitment process though, yet it repeatedly looks to whitewash her actions. There's a high probability we would actually learn nothing from her. If she was willing to talk, which I suspect is unlikely, there's a good chance she'll admit that she many of the decisions she made involved little or no grooming. Why do we continue to make excuses for terrorists? Were young people groomed into joining the EDL? No, they were just dickheads. Because for some on the far left they like to blame the majority of the U.K. and in particular anyone politically right of them for everything that goes wrong in the world. Yes of course there are issues with racism in the U.K. from a small minority of idiots but your vast majority of the U.K. population whether they’re black, white, gay or straight are good people. The likes of Owen Jones and the idiot of LBC just want anyone who doesn’t agree with them to feel shame. The one thing I’d like to know is what they’re idea of a perfect U.K. is and even then would they still be unhappy and permanently pissed off.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Feb 28, 2021 14:04:24 GMT
Oh I see, so only certain terrorists can be groomed. Interesting distinction.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Feb 28, 2021 14:30:03 GMT
I hope nobody on this forum lowers themselves to comparing this to Rochdale. You'll find advocates for anything out there these days. There's a group in America called NAMBLA which seeks to legalise sex with young boys. It doesn't mean anyone should actually agree with them. We certainly shouldn't be comparing this with Rochdale. Definitely not there is no comparison in the eyes of some The poor lasses from Rochdale and the like were simply the wrong type of victim
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Feb 28, 2021 14:30:21 GMT
There's a difference between understanding the steps it took for her to end up radicalised and essentially de-escalating choices that she made and has continued to make. If we think we will learn something off her, then I can see the value to bringing her back and ensuring she subsequently spends a minimum of 30-40 years in jail (or longer). That article only briefly mentions gaining an insight into the recruitment process though, yet it repeatedly looks to whitewash her actions. There's a high probability we would actually learn nothing from her. If she was willing to talk, which I suspect is unlikely, there's a good chance she'll admit that she many of the decisions she made involved little or no grooming. Why do we continue to make excuses for terrorists? Were young people groomed into joining the EDL? No, they were just dickheads. Because for some on the far left they like to blame the majority of the U.K. and in particular anyone politically right of them for everything that goes wrong in the world. Yes of course there are issues with racism in the U.K. from a small minority of idiots but your vast majority of the U.K. population whether they’re black, white, gay or straight are good people. The likes of Owen Jones and the idiot of LBC just want anyone who doesn’t agree with them to feel shame. The one thing I’d like to know is what they’re idea of a perfect U.K. is and even then would they still be unhappy and permanently pissed off. I would want to know exactly what they expect to gain. If it was nothing more than "British foreign policy" then she might as well stay in Syria. I'd allow her to return on the condition she provides a detailed itinerary. I would be looking for names, contact points, where they met, where they stayed, which companies helped them in Turkey, where she slept, what time she took a fucking piss... I'd want absolutely no stone unturned and I would want there to be something tangible to be used in this ongoing war against radicalisation. Once she had fulfilled such obligation, she could return to face charges and participate in a rehabilitation programme. Ironically, this isn't too dissimilar to the Guardians suggestion, except they would have it co-authored by Afua Hirsch and title it "A long walk to freedom".
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 28, 2021 14:50:39 GMT
I think it is incredibly important to understand how and why she became radicalised. What happens if she doesn’t come back here? I am not sure of her situation. Is she in prison somewhere? If the choice is bring her back here to face justice, or leave her to reign free in wherever she is, I’d bring her back. If she is already in prison, leave her there. There's a difference between understanding the steps it took for her to end up radicalised and essentially de-escalating choices that she made and has continued to make. If we think we will learn something off her, then I can see the value to bringing her back and ensuring she subsequently spends a minimum of 30-40 years in jail (or longer). That article only briefly mentions gaining an insight into the recruitment process though, yet it repeatedly looks to whitewash her actions. There's a high probability we would actually learn nothing from her. If she was willing to talk, which I suspect is unlikely, there's a good chance she'll admit that she many of the decisions she made involved little or no grooming. Why do we continue to make excuses for terrorists? Were young people groomed into joining the EDL? No, they were just dickheads. Perhaps we can learn nothing directly from her. But the authorities need to look into how and why she was recruited and decided to do what she chose to do. I think that is really important. Some people make excuses for terrorists, or criminals. I am not sure why. But some people also misunderstand that looking into the reasons which explain why people do certain things is not making excuses for them. It is understanding and learning from it. It will help the authorities prevent it happening again. For example, Drug addicts and alcoholics commit the vast majority of low level theft in this country, for example. Without excusing their behaviour, the addiction likely explains their behaviour. If you can treat the addiction or the things that cause people to be addicts, you will stop the crimes far better than throwing them in prison.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Feb 28, 2021 15:06:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Feb 28, 2021 15:21:03 GMT
There's a difference between understanding the steps it took for her to end up radicalised and essentially de-escalating choices that she made and has continued to make. If we think we will learn something off her, then I can see the value to bringing her back and ensuring she subsequently spends a minimum of 30-40 years in jail (or longer). That article only briefly mentions gaining an insight into the recruitment process though, yet it repeatedly looks to whitewash her actions. There's a high probability we would actually learn nothing from her. If she was willing to talk, which I suspect is unlikely, there's a good chance she'll admit that she many of the decisions she made involved little or no grooming. Why do we continue to make excuses for terrorists? Were young people groomed into joining the EDL? No, they were just dickheads. Perhaps we can learn nothing directly from her. But the authorities need to look into how and why she was recruited and decided to do what she chose to do. I think that is really important. Some people make excuses for terrorists, or criminals. I am not sure why. But some people also misunderstand that looking into the reasons which explain why people do certain things is not making excuses for them. It is understanding and learning from it. It will help the authorities prevent it happening again. For example, Drug addicts and alcoholics commit the vast majority of low level theft in this country, for example. Without excusing their behaviour, the addiction likely explains their behaviour. If you can treat the addiction or the things that cause people to be addicts, you will stop the crimes far better than throwing them in prison. I agree but she won't unless she is compelled to. She's hardly jumped at the opportunity to offer information.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 28, 2021 15:30:07 GMT
There's a difference between understanding the steps it took for her to end up radicalised and essentially de-escalating choices that she made and has continued to make. If we think we will learn something off her, then I can see the value to bringing her back and ensuring she subsequently spends a minimum of 30-40 years in jail (or longer). That article only briefly mentions gaining an insight into the recruitment process though, yet it repeatedly looks to whitewash her actions. There's a high probability we would actually learn nothing from her. If she was willing to talk, which I suspect is unlikely, there's a good chance she'll admit that she many of the decisions she made involved little or no grooming. Why do we continue to make excuses for terrorists? Were young people groomed into joining the EDL? No, they were just dickheads. Perhaps we can learn nothing directly from her. But the authorities need to look into how and why she was recruited and decided to do what she chose to do. I think that is really important. Some people make excuses for terrorists, or criminals. I am not sure why. But some people also misunderstand that looking into the reasons which explain why people do certain things is not making excuses for them. It is understanding and learning from it. It will help the authorities prevent it happening again. For example, Drug addicts and alcoholics commit the vast majority of low level theft in this country, for example. Without excusing their behaviour, the addiction likely explains their behaviour. If you can treat the addiction or the things that cause people to be addicts, you will stop the crimes far better than throwing them in prison. Could we torture her ?
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 28, 2021 15:37:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Feb 28, 2021 16:12:48 GMT
Because for some on the far left they like to blame the majority of the U.K. and in particular anyone politically right of them for everything that goes wrong in the world. Yes of course there are issues with racism in the U.K. from a small minority of idiots but your vast majority of the U.K. population whether they’re black, white, gay or straight are good people. The likes of Owen Jones and the idiot of LBC just want anyone who doesn’t agree with them to feel shame. The one thing I’d like to know is what they’re idea of a perfect U.K. is and even then would they still be unhappy and permanently pissed off. I would want to know exactly what they expect to gain. If it was nothing more than "British foreign policy" then she might as well stay in Syria. I'd allow her to return on the condition she provides a detailed itinerary. I would be looking for names, contact points, where they met, where they stayed, which companies helped them in Turkey, where she slept, what time she took a fucking piss... I'd want absolutely no stone unturned and I would want there to be something tangible to be used in this ongoing war against radicalisation. Once she had fulfilled such obligation, she could return to face charges and participate in a rehabilitation programme. Ironically, this isn't too dissimilar to the Guardians suggestion, except they would have it co-authored by Afua Hirsch and title it "A long walk to freedom". This. Though from what she’s previously said she’s way too far gone In her beliefs and unlikely to say anything of any use to intelligence.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 28, 2021 17:00:40 GMT
Perhaps we can learn nothing directly from her. But the authorities need to look into how and why she was recruited and decided to do what she chose to do. I think that is really important. Some people make excuses for terrorists, or criminals. I am not sure why. But some people also misunderstand that looking into the reasons which explain why people do certain things is not making excuses for them. It is understanding and learning from it. It will help the authorities prevent it happening again. For example, Drug addicts and alcoholics commit the vast majority of low level theft in this country, for example. Without excusing their behaviour, the addiction likely explains their behaviour. If you can treat the addiction or the things that cause people to be addicts, you will stop the crimes far better than throwing them in prison. Could we torture her ? Perhaps you should volunteer to interrogate her!?
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Feb 28, 2021 17:02:17 GMT
Perhaps you should volunteer to interrogate her!? I wouldn’t even wish that on Begum🤣
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Feb 28, 2021 18:08:25 GMT
Oh I see, so only certain terrorists can be groomed. Interesting distinction. Apparently so
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Feb 28, 2021 21:25:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Feb 28, 2021 21:35:56 GMT
I think the start of that article says all you need to know about the Guardian. And I quote “ Every day it seems the Guardian serves up another reason for being ashamed to be British.” They should be ashamed.
|
|