Grays_1890
Barry Daines
I take a moral stance equal to themn she wouldn't give a gnats chuff if I was killed tomorrow on the tube by one of her ISIS chums she wouldn't care...
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
I take a moral stance equal to themn she wouldn't give a gnats chuff if I was killed tomorrow on the tube by one of her ISIS chums she wouldn't care...
Glenda's Legs
Paul Walsh
I was just reading these posts on the train. Jumped into a cab home from the station and this was the driver’s chosen topic of ‘conversation’. By the end of the under-10-minute journey he had the girl in front of a firing squad, being guilty of treason.
It’s a difficult one. I have no desire whatsoever to see her back in the country. If she does come back she will need careful monitoring and surveillance, and most likely protection as well (that one especially rankles) which will cost money and resources which could be better deployed elsewhere.
I don’t know enough of her background (or that of her friends) but it appears that she was influenced/radicalised in her mid teens, a vulnerable time for many (and by our laws, was the subject/victim of statutory *struggle cuddle*, if I understand her situation correctly). Given that she is still living in that same ISIS environment, it is not a surprise that she is still of the same mindset and is showing no remorse. Is it now better to allow her back, with restrictions and controls, and have the chance for her to be de-radicalised & re-integrated while the opportunity is there? Or to just leave her adrift at the mercy of a hateful, dangerous, vile organisation, albeit one she has seemingly chosen to embrace? My head says leave her be but I must admit a part of me feels there should be a more humane response. The problem with the humane route is that as a British citizen, once back she can’t (I think) then be deported if she continues with her jihadist views.
Moral arguments aside however, if the law states that as a British citizen she is entitled to return (subject to certain conditions), then she must be allowed to return. We can’t have a system where exceptions to the law are applied on a case by case basis by the government of the day, even if it seems like common sense. There will always be an undeserving few who benefit from a law that protects the deserving majority. If the law is not serving its purpose it needs to be changed, not manipulated/ignored.
It’s a difficult one. I have no desire whatsoever to see her back in the country. If she does come back she will need careful monitoring and surveillance, and most likely protection as well (that one especially rankles) which will cost money and resources which could be better deployed elsewhere.
I don’t know enough of her background (or that of her friends) but it appears that she was influenced/radicalised in her mid teens, a vulnerable time for many (and by our laws, was the subject/victim of statutory *struggle cuddle*, if I understand her situation correctly). Given that she is still living in that same ISIS environment, it is not a surprise that she is still of the same mindset and is showing no remorse. Is it now better to allow her back, with restrictions and controls, and have the chance for her to be de-radicalised & re-integrated while the opportunity is there? Or to just leave her adrift at the mercy of a hateful, dangerous, vile organisation, albeit one she has seemingly chosen to embrace? My head says leave her be but I must admit a part of me feels there should be a more humane response. The problem with the humane route is that as a British citizen, once back she can’t (I think) then be deported if she continues with her jihadist views.
Moral arguments aside however, if the law states that as a British citizen she is entitled to return (subject to certain conditions), then she must be allowed to return. We can’t have a system where exceptions to the law are applied on a case by case basis by the government of the day, even if it seems like common sense. There will always be an undeserving few who benefit from a law that protects the deserving majority. If the law is not serving its purpose it needs to be changed, not manipulated/ignored.
I think, due to the fact the she was influenced to go in the first place and the subsequent experiences she's had, she is going to be a bit of sociopath now, hence the matter of fact way she said she wasn't phased by seeing chopped-off heads in bins. I can't shed any tears if she's unable to come back here, but I'm also not that upset if she is allowed back and is prosecuted for crimes she has committed. I don't think she'll be fit to raise the baby she's carrying, whose life is going to be a bit of a tragedy it seems.
If international law dictates that she's allowed back under certain circumstances, then so be it. Then she gets dealt with accordingly over here.
If international law dictates that she's allowed back under certain circumstances, then so be it. Then she gets dealt with accordingly over here.
SpurMeUp
Gary Stevens
Another company taken out by Brexit. Is it still made up 'project fear'? How many millions are the Bank of England saying brexit is costing the UK per week? Yet brexit offers no clear benifits that anyone can outline. You could not make it up! What perfection.
The British airline Flybmi has gone bust, cancelling all flights with immediate effect and blaming Brexit as the main cause of its collapse.
The company, which employs 376 staff and operates more than 600 flights a week, said it faced “several difficulties” in recent weeks including spikes in fuel and carbon costs, the latter arising from the EU’s recent decision to exclude UK airlines from full participation in the Emissions Trading Scheme.
“Current trading and future prospects have also been seriously affected by the uncertainty created by the Brexit process, which has led to our inability to secure valuable flying contracts in Europe and lack of confidence around bmi’s ability to continue flying between destinations in Europe,” the airline said in a statement.
“Against this background, it has become impossible for the airline’s shareholders to continue their extensive programme of funding into the business, despite investment totalling over £40m in the last six years. We sincerely regret that this course of action has become the only option open to us, but the challenges, particularly those created by Brexit, have proven to be insurmountable.”
The British airline Flybmi has gone bust, cancelling all flights with immediate effect and blaming Brexit as the main cause of its collapse.
The company, which employs 376 staff and operates more than 600 flights a week, said it faced “several difficulties” in recent weeks including spikes in fuel and carbon costs, the latter arising from the EU’s recent decision to exclude UK airlines from full participation in the Emissions Trading Scheme.
“Current trading and future prospects have also been seriously affected by the uncertainty created by the Brexit process, which has led to our inability to secure valuable flying contracts in Europe and lack of confidence around bmi’s ability to continue flying between destinations in Europe,” the airline said in a statement.
“Against this background, it has become impossible for the airline’s shareholders to continue their extensive programme of funding into the business, despite investment totalling over £40m in the last six years. We sincerely regret that this course of action has become the only option open to us, but the challenges, particularly those created by Brexit, have proven to be insurmountable.”
Last edited:
glasgowspur
Andy Thompson
Rights that the crew she joined wants to deny others based on religion and sex. Views she by all accounts agrees with. As I understand it she only wants to return here to have the child safely, after previous have not survived, and return with said child to be raised in the culture of Isis or whatever they call themselves.
So the real question is, should we allow an enemy of ours to return here to breed safely more enemies for the future?
Am I misunderstanding it?
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
Dont we already do this.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
In every 5 year period, 57% of all businesses collapse. That's a market economy.
SpurMeUp
Gary Stevens
Not established ones. Where are your stats from?
Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
All businesses. Statups are 90% failure rates. Data is Office for National Statistics Business Demography reports
The point though is there's no evidence business failure rate is any different in the last two years than it has been at any point since we moved to neo-liberalism in the late-70s. It's just that every incompetently run business selling crap no one wants (in this case irregular flights from places in the middle of nowhere to places in the middle of nowhere) can cry Brexit, rather than have their real failings scrutinised.
monkeybarry
Jack Jull
You mean those that came through the Hitler youth?
It is a very good question.
And as uncomfortable as it is, society has to look at it's own impact in creating these situations. Just as Naziism was affected by political actions of other countries, so has the situation in the middle East.
I guess the difference is we are still in a war scenario (probably always will be?), so how do you assess the risk of her being a mole Vs actually wanting the best for her child?
Maybe child into foster car and her prosecuted and released on license with regular counseling and intelligence gathering?
SpurMeUp
Gary Stevens
The evidence is there from the people running businesses - if you care to listen. Not all comapnies the UK have lost have gone bust, some have simply moved out the UK, which challenges your theory that there is no change in outlook due to the vote and comapnies are just going bust.
When you have CEOs outlining the factors why businesses failed specifically because of Brexit it is dangerous to follow your bias over evidence and say 'oh they are just blaming failure on Brexit'. Brexit will take out weaker companies first, that is obvious is it not? But just because they are less profitable, it does not follow that brexit was not a factor. Flybee had raised £40m previously to reinvest and get through tough times. As we know investment into the UK has plummeted post Brexit, not being able to raise cash to get through a sticky time where uncertainty with routes into the EU and carbon offsetting caused increased costs - both factors directly linked to Brexit.
When you have the Bank of England number crunchers calculating that Brexit is costing the UK £40 billion a year - now! - then you have to say what the fuk are we doing this for? That's £800m a week! Are the Bank of England making this up? That's a new hospital for every area of the UK. That's austerity extended for 2 more years with nurses and teachers pay rises frozen. That's less money for roads, local councils, for local care services etc etc.
Wake up Brexiteers, this Brexit charade does not add up. If it does, you must be able to outline how it does, and what we will get out of it. If you can not maybe it's not a shi1 show caused by a biased media, an incompetent Prime Minster and lying business people, maybe it is Brexit itself.
Last edited:
SpurMeUp
Gary Stevens
Ideology makes people do some crazy stuff. I don't have any answers to what you do with her to be honest. Ultimately people have to be accountable for their actions (even if they believe that what they are doing has some kind of greater good). If she wasn't raised in a religious family she wouldn't have bunked off to Syria. She might have run away from home and got pregnant with the lead guitarist of a punk band instead. But she didn't.
Last edited:
Craig_J
Mido
https://outline.com/T5G9nB
Oh noes, a small amount of the EU GDP will be moving to the UK in order to work around regulations.
Oh noes, a small amount of the EU GDP will be moving to the UK in order to work around regulations.
glorygloryeze
Tom Huddlestone
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
Do you remember me saying to you a year ago when the clearing bonds was the big news story(gone quiet) that even if we did lose that business it would come back in a few years due to over regulation in Brussels. No reason to remember because I talk some funny stuff at times, but I remember it because you also agreed with me.
Anyway asia is the area we should be focusing on with regards the financial services industry, but yeah far from worrying that Frankfurt or wherever will take all of Londons business, I would expect in 5 years time London to still be the dominant financial capital of Europe and actually increased.
Not that I altogether think that is necessarily a good thing, turning into gutter boy now.
I fully agree. Even if the EU do manage make trading from the UK expensive, their desire for transactional taxation, along with a general socialist leaning, will always make it cheaper in the long run to be in the UK.