Shamima Begum

[WiseOwl182 10]

4 minutes ago, K1Machine said:

I think thats the wrong decision personally.

On what grounds?

[K1Machine 10]

3 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

On what grounds?

Its a double standard. Look what Glitter did. He was brought back to Blighty

Besides, bringing her back was a good opportunity to make an example of her. The kid could have been taken of her, given a new life with a good family and she could have had a prison sentence so long it would have made people think twice before doing what she did.

Edited February 19, 2019 by K1Machine

[Dales 10]

2 minutes ago, K1Machine said:

Its a double standard. Look what Glitter did. He was brought back to Blighty

Besides, bringing her back was a good opportunity to make an example of her. The kid could have been taken of her, given a new life with a good family and she could have had a prison sentence so long it would have made people think twice before doing what she did.

I think that making her stay there gives a far stronger message.  Particularly as she wants to come back to England.

[K1Machine 10]

Just now, Dales said:

I think that making her stay there gives a far stronger message.  Particularly as she wants to come back to England.

No. The Government have just made her a martyr. Besides, what did her child do wrong? Given the right upbringing that kid could have been a positive contributor to the economy and society.

[jaffa1 10]

16 minutes ago, Dales said:

Neither had the children who attended the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester.

Good answer.

8 minutes ago, K1Machine said:

Its a double standard. Look what Glitter did. He was brought back to Blighty

Besides, bringing her back was a good opportunity to make an example of her. The kid could have been taken of her, given a new life with a good family and she could have had a prison sentence so long it would have made people think twice before doing what she did.

It's  a good example  by NOT  bringing her back, will make them think twice the next time because no matter what Trump thinks it's  not over. 

[Dales 10]

1 minute ago, K1Machine said:

No. The Government have just made her a martyr. Besides, what did her child do wrong? Given the right upbringing that kid could have been a positive contributor to the economy and society.

A martyr how?? It may have helped her cause if she had shown any remorse.  As I previously said, I care more about the people / children killed in the Manchester arena bombings / Westminster attacks.  That is just my opinion though.

[K1Machine 10]

5 minutes ago, jaffa1 said:

 

It's  a good example  by NOT  bringing her back, will make them think twice the next time because no matter what Trump thinks it's  not over. 

This has nothing to do with Trump, jeez, some people are obsessed with that guy.

No, its a bad decision. That child she gave birth to did nothing wrong. It should have been given a chance of a decent life. She on the other hand could have been made an example of.

[Dales 10]

2 minutes ago, K1Machine said:

This has nothing to do with Trump, jeez, some people are obsessed with that guy.

No, its a bad decision. That child she gave birth to did nothing wrong. It should have been given a chance of a decent life. She on the other hand could have been made an example of.

Was she as bothered about her other two children who died? Did she try and get a better life for them? 

[K1Machine 10]

2 minutes ago, Dales said:

A martyr how?? It may have helped her cause if she had shown any remorse.  As I previously said, I care more about the people / children killed in the Manchester arena bombings / Westminster attacks.  That is just my opinion though.

Thats fair enough and I respect your opinion. I think she has been made a martyr because in some peoples eyes she was fighting for a righteous cause.  Now she has been left in a hell hole with not much prospect of survival. What if some teen sees her has someone who has been wronged by our government, been left to die (as has her child) and they want to exact revenge for it or even follow in her footsteps.

No, A better way would be to give the kid to a decent family and lock her up for the next 50 years with no chance of parole. In my view that would send a stronger message.

Just now, Dales said:

Was she as bothered about her other two children who died? Did she try and get a better life for them? 

How did they die?

[nikki-red 308]

1 minute ago, Dales said:

Was she as bothered about her other two children who died? Did she try and get a better life for them? 

For all we know maybe she wanted to, but I doubt she couldve said she wanted to leave and then just been waved off on the next flight home.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

9 minutes ago, jaffa1 said:

Good answer.

How on earth was that a good answer?

 

 It was pointed out that her child is an innocent victim in all this and he made a glib comment about the kids at the Ariane Grande concert in Manchester. If the baby is only a couple of days old, how  on earth is it responsible for something which happened nearly two years before it was born?

 

Have you been smoking drugs? 😱

[melthebell 863]

12 minutes ago, K1Machine said:

This has nothing to do with Trump, jeez, some people are obsessed with that guy.

No, its a bad decision. That child she gave birth to did nothing wrong. It should have been given a chance of a decent life. She on the other hand could have been made an example of.

because trump keeps saying IS are defeated but they arent, and shes one of them so.....