Treason

[uncleglen]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The child is the result of this teenage jihadi

> getting pregnant by another Dutch jihadi, and

> where is the father?

> So why do you want her child in this country

> brought up by the grand father who radicalised his

> own daughter. And the father will not ignore his

> baby, he'll want to come here from Holland to see

> her and her baby. Why put this country at further

> risk? Solution, why doesn't the family go and join

> her in Syria? Result, Today's child is tomorrow?s

> terrorist

Agreed...most babies born into fundamentalist religious families are indoctrinated from day 1 and the laws of this country and the UK protect that in the name of FREEDOM. The only freedom here is the freedom of the terrorist to kill and maim

[rendelharris]

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Agreed...most babies born into fundamentalist

> religious families are indoctrinated from day 1

> and the laws of this country and the UK protect

> that in the name of FREEDOM. The only freedom here

> is the freedom of the terrorist to kill and maim

I'm more concerned about Islamaphobic racist antisemitic bigots who celebrate when someone of differing opinions to themselves dies young of cancer being allowed to teach our children.

[KidKruger]

RH - at what point will you cease labelling UG with those spiteful attacks ?

Do you need him to acknowledge guilt for all/some of them, or even then would you still persist ?

I can't speak for the rest of the forum, but personally I am aware (have seen) several times you use the same attacks, again and again. Is this to be an indefinite behaviour going forward ?

I expect UG (and the entire forum) has GOT the message so why not wind it in, unless you have something additional (a new attack, perhaps ?) to stab him with.

Please don't pull the "I'm standing-up for freedom" BS. All the things you accuse UG of are illegal, so if you're so convinced just call the police and make your case, you seem convinced, so convince them.

Just quit the vile (are there any viler ?) attacks.

Back to the subject, I think a line has to be drawn, someone left the country to join the fight with ISIS.

Whether she picked-up a gun, learned how to make bombs, or agreed to take the fight to the UK, we'll never know I expect. We do know she thought it a worthy cause and went to support an outfit that would happily kill in the UK (amogst other places) if possible.

I'd prefer a precedence be set that no-one, man or woman, returns to UK from such a foray. I hope this would

If that's not possible due to law and rights, that's a shame and will be to the detriment of the UK's safety IMO.

These are extreme times and unfortunately, against my usual view, extreme measures need adopting. We can speculate all day about her / anyone's intentions, but if she never returns she'll not partipate in / support terrorism from within the UK. And hopefully neither would anyone else else finding they can't return.

Like I said, it may not be achievable due to UK hands being tied.

[rendelharris]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> RH - at what point will you cease labelling UG

> with those spiteful attacks ?

> Do you need him to acknowledge guilt for all/some

> of them, or even then would you still persist ?

> I can't speak for the rest of the forum, but

> personally I am aware (have seen) several times

> you use the same attacks, again and again. Is this

> to be an indefinite behaviour going forward ?

> I expect UG (and the entire forum) has GOT the

> message so why not wind it in, unless you have

> something additional (a new attack, perhaps ?) to

> stab him with.

> Please don't pull the "I'm standing-up for

> freedom" BS. All the things you accuse UG of are

> illegal, so if you're so convinced just call the

> police and make your case, you seem convinced, so

> convince them.

> Just quit the vile (are there any viler ?)

> attacks.

I'll stop attacking him when he stops being a vile antisemitic racist Islamaphobic bigot. When he makes posts that don't display any of those traits, I don't attack him. When he does (as he did in his post above), I'm going to point it out, every single time. If you or anyone else doesn't like it, feel free to report it to Admin and they can delete as they feel necessary.

Interesting that you seem to think attacking someone for their foul bigotry is "viler" than displaying foul bigotry in the first place. Says a lot about your value system.

I would love the idea of the boys in blue having a word with UG for his foul comments, and they most certainly do transgress a number of laws, but as it's barely possible to get them to attend a house burglary I somehow doubt they'd be interested in what is said on the EDF. So as long as he persists with his foulness, I'll persist in opposing it. Thank you.

[Blah Blah]

I'm with you RH. UC has time and time again shown his true colours.

[JohnL]

Those beliefs are a 'group think' I see all over twitter at the moment - and recently once or twice in 'real' life. I now just block (although sometimes with a snide remark first).

At least Tommy Robinson now banned from Facebook and when he moaned about that on Instagram he got banned from there too (mid sentence apparently LOL)

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/26/tommy-robinson-banned-from-facebook-and-instagram

[Blah Blah]

Not before time. In the past two weeks he has used fb to bait his followers to troll a rape crisis center, because of all the services they offer, they produced one leaflet aimed at helping BAME women come forward, for distribution within the BAME community. And he baited his followers to abuse a personal trainer because she offers a class to muslim women. He is a racist hypocrite and rabble rouser, and it is only a matter of time before he baits someone to go further than verbal abuse.

[malumbu]

I've enjoyed this debate, and as often I am interested in informed views whether I agree or not. It's bound to lurch one way or the other, but has not got too rabid.

Now time to interject. People make silly mistakes. They get misled by their peers. They may be particularly vulnerable to this.

But to draw a comparison with WW2. "She's gone out to fight for an evil entity and deserves everything she gets....". Many of the German population were in the same situation during and after the second world war in supporting their regime. And you could argue that there were certain aspects of what the allied armies did, such as fire storms in German cities and dropping nuclear bombs that a modern society would consider as war crimes, that no doubt had popular support then and now.

I'm with the let the law of the land decide on the appropriate treatment if and when she returns.