International [ISIS Repatriation] Yazidis plead with Canada not to repatriate ISIS members

Sorry, can't feel sympathy for ISIS scum. May she rot in jail.

its like that because their emphasis is on rehabilitation and reinsertion into society. the nordic countries are like that too. hell, breivik that killed 70 kids might get out after 20.
What you are saying about the emphasis on rehabilitation is absolutely true. But Breivik is not getting out after 20 years. No chance of that happening. He has a "forvaring" sentence, and that word, directly translated, means "storage." Breivik was sentenced to 21 years in "storage" - the maximum at the time (since 2015 the max has been 30 years), but that can be extended by five years at a time, and he can expect a good few extensions before anyone even considers another option. The general consensus here in Norway is that he'll never get out. He'd probably be worse off if he did anyway, as there's more than a few people who would like to "talk" to him.
 
Sorry, can't feel sympathy for ISIS scum. May she rot in jail.

What you are saying about the emphasis on rehabilitation is absolutely true. But Breivik is not getting out after 20 years. No chance of that happening. He has a "forvaring" sentence, and that word, directly translated, means "storage." Breivik was sentenced to 21 years in "storage" - the maximum at the time (since 2015 the max has been 30 years), but that can be extended by five years at a time, and there's and he can expect a good few extensions before anyone even considers another option. The general consensus here in Norway is that he'll never get out. He'd probably be worse off if he did anyway, as there's more than a few people who would like to "talk" to him.
i hope you are right.
 
10 years is a bullshit sentence.

Should be life in solitary. Should have been charged as an accessory to genocide.
 
Sorry, can't feel sympathy for ISIS scum. May she rot in jail.


What you are saying about the emphasis on rehabilitation is absolutely true. But Breivik is not getting out after 20 years. No chance of that happening. He has a "forvaring" sentence, and that word, directly translated, means "storage." Breivik was sentenced to 21 years in "storage" - the maximum at the time (since 2015 the max has been 30 years), but that can be extended by five years at a time, and he can expect a good few extensions before anyone even considers another option. The general consensus here in Norway is that he'll never get out. He'd probably be worse off if he did anyway, as there's more than a few people who would like to "talk" to him.
The funny thing is that Brazilian law is heavily influenced by German and Scandinavian law, but we are even more lenient. It is 40 years max and that's it, no extensions. It was 30 years a few years ago. With deductions due to good behavior he would eventually get out here. Hell, Bin Laden would probably be free if he was apprehended around here.
10 years is a bullshit sentence.

Should be life in solitary. Should have been charged as an accessory to genocide.
Maybe the Yazidi learn a thing or two about the Dashnaktsutyun.
 
its like that because their emphasis is on rehabilitation and reinsertion into society. the nordic countries are like that too. hell, breivik that killed 70 kids might get out after 20.
It's shameful. really.
 
Wow. While I have no sympathy for ISIS brides and wish them nothing but the worst, in reality I'm not sure how much culpability she had there, because she is basically chattel to her husband in the Islamic State.

She was an enforcer for ISIS and made no attempt to stop the girls murder - allegedly even threatening to shoot the girl for crying.

Imo, she got off light
 
She was an enforcer for ISIS and made no attempt to stop the girls murder - allegedly even threatening to shoot the girl for crying.

Imo, she got off light
Indeed she did , the fact that she wanted to go back to ISIS and was so blasé about describing the death of the little girl to the undercover agent mark her out as psycho cunt ,so fuck her 10 years is a joke as she probably won’t even serve that long .
 
Dozens of suspected ISIS brides flown back to Germany and Denmark from Syrian refugee camp with their children
By Tom Williams | Oct 7, 2021​

PRI_203854724.jpg

Dozens of children and their mothers were back on German soil today after being flown home from Syrian refugee camps

Both Germany and Denmark have flown suspected ‘Isis brides’ and their children home from refugee camps in Syria.

Several of those flown back into the countries yesterday were arrested of arrival but officials pledged to do all they could for the ‘blameless’ children.

The decision will increase pressure on the British government who has blocked appeals by Shamima Begum to return to the country she left when she was 15 to join Isis.

The mother of another woman, Nicole Jack, has also pleaded for her daughter to be allowed home to ‘face the consequences’ after being stuck in Syria since she fled there in 2015.

Germany repatriated 23 children and their eight mothers from the Roj camp on Wednesday evening, while Denmark brought back 14 children and three women.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said that the children bear no responsibility for their situation and ‘it is right that we do everything to make possible for them a life in safety and a good environment.’

‘The mothers will have to answer to criminal justice for their actions,’ Maas added in a statement.

He thanked Kurdish authorities in Syria, Denmark and ‘our American partners, who provided logistical support.’

German federal prosecutors said three women — whom they identified only as Solale M., Romiena S. and Verena M. in line with local privacy rules — were arrested on arrival at Frankfurt airport.

They were accused of membership in a foreign terror organisation, taking the children with them against their fathers’ will and violations of their duties of care and education.

Denmark’s National Board of Social Service said the Danish group arrived early Thursday at the Karup air base in the west of the country.

The three women were arrested. They face preliminary charges of promoting terrorism and violating laws on traveling to and staying in a conflict zone.

In contrast, the UK has stripped citizenship from some of those who left to fight for Isis and is refusing to allow them to return.

The Government’s position has been that those who have fought for or supported Isis should face justice in the most appropriate jurisdiction, adding that that will often be where their offences have been committed.

Last month, former Isis-bride Begum asked the British public for forgiveness, saying in an interview from a Syrian refugee camp that there is ‘no evidence’ she was a key player in preparing terrorist acts and is prepared to prove her innocence in court.

Following her comments, Health Secretary Sajid Javid, who was home secretary when the decision was made to strip Begum of her British citizenship, poured cold water on the prospect of overturning the ruling.
https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/07/germ...n-home-from-syrian-refugee-camp-15385478/amp/
 
Last edited:
Anyone who was in ISIS or provided material support should be charged as accessories to genocide and war crimes and given long prison terms.
 
Anyone who was in ISIS or provided material support should be charged as accessories to genocide and war crimes and given long prison terms.
Agreed. Yet in some of these cases I'm likely to plead "won't somebody think of the children". Their parents are corrupt and may he beyond salvage, but leaving kids to grow up in truly shit conditions is inhumane if they have family who would be willing to care for them. The mothers should face the music of course.
 
Agreed. Yet in some of these cases I'm likely to plead "won't somebody think of the children". Their parents are corrupt and may he beyond salvage, but leaving kids to grow up in truly shit conditions is inhumane if they have family who would be willing to care for them. The mothers should face the music of course.
Kids can be taken in by uncles, aunts, grandparents, in-laws or adopted.
 
After long legal battle with ‘ISIS bride,’ Britain pushes for power to cancel citizenship without notice
By Amy Cheng, The Washington Post |
November 19, 2021



Britain’s Conservative government could be allowed to strip people of citizenship without giving them notice to appeal if legislation being debated in Parliament becomes law.

The Nationality and Border Bill would permit the Home Secretary, Britain’s top domestic security official, to cancel citizenship without warning on national security grounds if it is not “reasonably practicable” to provide a warning.

The move comes months after a top British court said that Shamima Begum, the British-born “ISIS bride” who left the country as a teenager to join the Islamic State group, will not be allowed to return to the United Kingdom to fight a legal case about the revocation of citizenship.

“Deprivation of citizenship on conducive grounds is rightly reserved for those who pose a threat to the UK or whose conduct involves very high harm,” said the Home Office in a statement, adding that British citizenship is a “privilege” and not a right.

London said that the bill does not give it extra powers to remove citizenship, but legal experts have slammed the legislation for potentially creating situations where people lose their right to return home without being allowed to challenge the decision in court.

“It’s not the kind of transparency in due process that you want,” said Alexander Gillespie, an international law expert at New Zealand’s University of Waikato. “You want these things to be dealt with so that the person has a chance to answer the charges against them.”

While international law provides rights to citizenship, governments can retract it — usually after someone has been convicted of or confessed to a serious offense like terrorism — as long as the person has a second citizenship “to fall back onto,” said Gillespie.

Such punitive measures have been in headlines in recent years, after several Western governments canceled the citizenship of people who had allegedly joined Islamist terrorist groups in the wake of the Arab Spring. Some of these people had complex citizenship situations or multiple passports, leaving countries in disagreement over who should take responsibility.

The British government argued in the Begum case that revoking her British citizenship would not render her stateless as she could obtain citizenship in Bangladesh, where she has family roots. But Begum has not been to Bangladesh and the South Asian country has refused to let her in.



This summer, New Zealand reluctantly took in a 26-year-old woman identified as Suhayra Aden. Aden, who grew up in Australia and New Zealand, allegedly joined ISIS as a teenage bride, and later had her Australian passport canceled. Canberra’s decision sparked a diplomatic row with Wellington.

“New Zealand has not taken this step lightly,” New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said of Aden, who had been detained in Turkey. “They are not Turkey’s responsibility, and with Australia refusing to accept the family, that makes them ours.”

Similarly, in 2019, the Donald Trump administration barred Hoda Muthana, a New Jersey-born woman who left the country to marry an ISIS fighter, from returning to the United States. The United States and Muthana were at odds as to whether she was ever a citizen, with the government arguing that her father was an accredited Yemeni diplomat when she was born.

Meanwhile, Muthana’s lawyer released a document that stated the father was no longer a representative of the Yemeni government at the time of Hoda Muthana’s birth.

The issue becomes particularly complex if the people who have their citizenship revoked have young children born elsewhere, who may also lose their right to live in the West.


https://www.seattletimes.com/nation...r-to-cancel-citizenship-without-notice/?amp=1
 
Last edited:
First the wife, now the husband.

In world first, Germany sentences Iraqi jihadist to life in prison for Yazidi genocide

By AFP | November 30, 2021



A Frankfurt court on Tuesday handed a life sentence to an Iraqi man who joined the Islamic State group for genocide against the Yazidi minority, in the first verdict worldwide to use the label.

Taha Al-Jumailly, 29, was found guilty of genocide, crimes against humanity resulting in death, war crimes, aiding and abetting war crimes and bodily harm resulting in death after joining the so-called Islamic State group in 2013.

Proceedings were suspended as the defendant passed out in court when the verdict was read out.

The Yazidis, a Kurdish-speaking group hailing from northern Iraq, have for years been persecuted by IS militants who have killed hundreds of men, raped women and forcibly recruited children as fighters.

In May, UN special investigators reported that they had collected "clear and convincing evidence" of genocide by IS against the Yazidis.



"This is the outcome every single Yazidi and all genocide survivors were hoping to see," Natia Navrouzov, a lawyer and member of the NGO Yazda, which gathers evidence of crimes committed by IS against the Yazidis, told AFP after the verdict.

"Today is a historical day for humanity and the Yazidi genocide enters finally the history of international criminal law. We will make sure that more trials such as this take place," she said.

Torment

Prosecutors say Al-Jumailly and his now ex-wife, a German woman named Jennifer Wenisch, "purchased" a Yazidi woman and child as household "slaves" while living in then IS-occupied Mosul in 2015.

They later moved to Fallujah, where Al-Jumailly is accused of chaining the five-year-old girl to a window outdoors in heat rising to 50 degrees Celsius (122 Fahrenheit) as a punishment for wetting her mattress, leading her to die of thirst.

In a separate trial, Wenisch, 30, was sentenced to 10 years in jail in October for "crimes against humanity in the form of enslavement" and aiding and abetting the girl's killing by failing to offer help.

Identified only by her first name Nora, the child's mother testified in both Munich and Frankfurt about the torment visited on her daughter.

She also described being raped multiple times by IS jihadists after they invaded her village in the Sinjar mountains in northwestern Iraq in August 2014.

'Clear message'

The mother was represented by a team including London-based human rights lawyer Amal Clooney, who has been at the forefront of a campaign for IS crimes against the Yazidis to be recognised as genocide, along with former Yazidi slave and 2018 Nobel Peace Prize winner Nadia Murad.

Although Clooney did not travel to Munich or Frankfurt, she called Wenisch's conviction "a victory for everyone who believes in justice," adding that she hoped to see "a more concerted global effort to bring ISIS (another acronym for IS) to justice".

Murad has called on the UN Security Council to refer cases involving crimes against the Yazidis to the International Criminal Court or to create a specific tribunal for genocide committed against the community.

Germany, home to a large Yazidi community, is one of the few countries to have taken legal action over such abuses.

German courts have already handed down five convictions against women for crimes against humanity related to the Yazidis committed in territories held by IS.

Prosecutors in Naumburg on Tuesday charged a German woman named as Leonora M. with aiding and abetting crimes against humanity after she and her IS husband enslaved a Yazidi woman in Syria in 2015.

Germany has charged several German and foreign nationals with war crimes and crimes against humanity carried out abroad, using the legal principle of universal jurisdiction which allows offences to be prosecuted even if they were committed in a foreign country.

The trial of Al-Jumailly "sends a clear message", Navrouzov told AFP.

"It doesn't matter where the crimes were committed and it doesn't matter where the perpetrators are, thanks to the universal jurisdiction, they can't hide and will still be put on trial."


https://www.france24.com/en/europe/...ihadist-to-life-in-prison-for-yazidi-genocide
 
Last edited:
10 Women Who Joined ISIS Stage Hunger Strike in Syrian Kurds' Detention Camp To Pressure France to Bring Them Home
By Constant Méheut | Feb. 21, 2021

1607191-711612545.jpg

Al-Hol, a Kurdish-run camp holding relatives of Islamic State fighters in northeast Syria
PARIS — In a desperate appeal to France’s government, some 10 Frenchwomen who joined the Islamic State and are now being held in detention camps in Syria began a hunger strike on Saturday, protesting the government’s refusal to bring them home for trial.

The women are among dozens of French mothers and their 200 or so children who have been detained by Kurdish forces for at least two years in squalid camps, and are in a state of legal limbo.

“We decided to stop feeding ourselves, regardless of the risks, until we meet the right people to get answers about our future,” one of the women said in a voice message obtained by The New York Times.

Two French lawyers representing the women confirmed the hunger strike in a statement released on Sunday evening.

Since at least 2019, when the Islamic State lost its final foothold in Syria, some 60,000 relatives of Islamic fighters, mostly women and children, have been stuck in fetid, disease-ridden detainment camps run by Kurdish forces in northeastern Syria, with no clear future in sight.

France, along with other Western nations that also have citizens detained there, has resisted calls from families and rights groups to repatriate its people, and it has brought back only a handful of children.

Repatriating citizens who had left to wage jihad has long been a sensitive issue in France, a country that is still reeling from years of Islamist terrorist attacks. But the hunger strike, along with recent initiatives from French lawmakers and citizens, may add pressure on the government to take action in the face of a situation that is worsening by the day.

United Nations human rights experts last week urged 57 states, including France, to repatriate women and children whose “continued detention, on unclear grounds” in the camps “is a matter of grave concern and undermines the progression of accountability, truth and justice.”

France has long argued that adults who joined the Islamic State, including women, should be tried where they committed their crimes: in Syria and Iraq. Several men have already been tried and sentenced in Iraqi courts.

But trying women has so far proved impossible since their potential crimes are unclear and because the Kurdish administration that is detaining them is not internationally recognized. Kurdish forces who run the camps have called for the repatriation of all foreigners, saying they cannot keep them indefinitely in an unstable region.

The women holding the hunger strike say they want to be tried in France.

“We are there, waiting, in tents, in the cold, in the winter,” one hunger striker said in a voice message.

She said: “We want to pay our debt to society for the choice we made to come here. But it’s time for this nightmare to end and for us to go home.”

The New York Times obtained several voice messages from the women but is not publishing their names because they have received death threats from Islamic State supporters who oppose their desire to return to France.

Countries like Russia, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan have each repatriated more than 100 of their citizens, many more than Western nations where public opinion is firmly against bringing home those who left to fight with Islamic State.

Rights groups have pressed the governments to at least bring home their citizens’ children, arguing that the minors did not choose to go to Syria and that having them raised in camps that have become cauldrons of Islamist radicalization would only aggravate the situation.

But France has agreed to repatriate children only on a case-by-case basis, giving priority to orphans and fragile children whose mothers agree to let them go. To date, 35 children have been brought back, including a 7-year-old girl suffering from a heart defect who was flown to France for urgent medical care in April.

In the current French political climate, repatriations might prove even more fraught. In the fall, the country was hit by several Islamist terrorist attacks that reopened old wounds. A draft law aimed at combating Islamism is expected to get final approval in the French Senate next month.

Families of relatives stranded in Syrian camps and rights groups have long denounced this piecemeal repatriation process. In northern France, the mother of a Frenchwoman detained in Syria has been on hunger strike since Feb. 1 to protest France’s policy.

In a public letter, a French lawmaker recently condemned the conditions of the camps and the government’s reluctance to act, which he called “deeply inhuman and irresponsible political cowardice.”

“If, because of our inertia, we continue to condone the guilty silence of the government,” the letter read, “then we will have been the lawmakers who let innocent children die.”

A spokeswoman for the French Foreign Ministry, which oversees the repatriation process, could not be immediately reached for comment.

Marie Dosé and Ludovic Rivière, the lawyers for the women on hunger strike, said in a statement that the women should be only tried in France, and that “for more than two years,” they “have been waiting to pay for what they have done.”

In one of the voice messages, a woman said that they needed “a helping hand from our country now.”

A trial in France, she said, would be “a second chance.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/21/world/europe/isis-frenchwomen-hunger-strike.html
If they won’t eat food, then let them eat our motherfucking asses.
 
The funny thing is that Brazilian law is heavily influenced by German and Scandinavian law, but we are even more lenient. It is 40 years max and that's it, no extensions. It was 30 years a few years ago. With deductions due to good behavior he would eventually get out here. Hell, Bin Laden would probably be free if he was apprehended around here.

Maybe the Yazidi learn a thing or two about the Dashnaktsutyun.
The whole thing about Brazil is true. Brazilian laws are a joke and one of the reasons why so many commit crimes (no fear of the law) or make justice with their own hands (tired of injustice)
 
American-born ISIS bride not a citizen, judge rules
Hoda Muthana will not be allowed to return to the U.S. after traveling to Syria to join the extremists in 2014.
By Luke Denne | Nov 15, 2019​

190220-hoda-muthana-mc-ONE_TIME_USE_ONLY-0900_27a5ae546a362e59213a56a0499d3a3d.fit-2000w.JPG

A federal judge has ruled that Hoda Muthana, an American-born woman who moved to Syria to join the Islamic State militant group, is not a U.S. citizen.

In an interview with NBC News earlier this month, Muthana said she believes she “deserves a second chance” to return to the United States after publicly renouncing the extremist ideology she once espoused freely online.

The New Jersey-born woman left the U.S. in 2014 to join the terrorist group, and burned her U.S. passport shortly after arriving in Syria. She went on to marry three ISIS fighters, all of whom were killed.

Her father, Ahmed Ali Muthana, had been suing to secure permission for his daughter to return to the U.S. with her 2-year-old son, Adam.

The case centers on whether Muthana’s father, who originally came to the U.S. as a diplomat for the Yemeni government, still held diplomatic immunity when she was born in 1994. The children of diplomats are not granted the right to citizenship by birthright.

Ahmed Ali Muthana — a naturalized U.S. citizen — says that his posting had concluded in the months before Hoda was born, but the State Department contested this.

In February, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told NBC News that “Ms. Hoda Muthana is not a U.S. citizen and will not be admitted into the United States.”

“She’s a terrorist,” he added.

While the judge acknowledged that Ahmed Ali Muthana's diplomatic posting had ended before she was born, he accepted the State Department's argument that notification of his status change was not received in time.

Therefore, Hoda Muthana should not have been granted citizenship by birthright and should never have been issued a passport in the first place.

Christina Jump, one of the attorneys acting for Ahmed Ali Muthana, told NBC News that they are "disappointed" and will "very likely appeal" the ruling.

The Alabama-raised woman became notorious for her online postings from Syria designed to recruit foreigners to join the group and commit acts of violence in their home countries.

In one post, she urged American jihadists to target events like Memorial Day and to “go on drivebys, and spill all of their blood.”


Muthana has since said she felt remorse, and indicated that she “regrets every single thing.”

Concerned for her son’s health, she said she wants to return to the U.S. and face justice.

“They can watch over me 24/7, I’d be OK with that,” she told NBC News from the al-Roj refugee camp in northern Syria this month.

“I want my son to be around my family, I want to go to school, I want to have a job and I want to have my own car.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1082766
U.S Supreme Court declined to hear Islamic State bride Hoda Muthana's appeal
By Adela Suliman | Jan 13, 2022



A woman from Alabama who left the United States in 2014 to join the Islamic State in Syria will fight on in her legal battle to regain American citizenship, her lawyers said, after the latest blow to her case.

On Monday, the Supreme Court declined without comment to consider Hoda Muthana’s petition seeking permission to reenter the United States. The court refused to hear an appeal filed by her family or overturn lower court rulings in which relatives argued she was unlawfully denied her return to the country. Her legal team, the Constitutional Law Center for Muslims in America (CLCMA), called the outcome a “sad day for the Muthana family, and for the sanctity of United States citizenship in general.”

American-born Muthana, 27, has been living with her 4-year-old son in a Syrian refugee camp. Her passport was revoked in 2016, and the U.S. government has since said she is not a citizen and will not be allowed to return to the United States.

Muthana was 20 and a student at the University of Alabama at Birmingham when she left the United States, after apparently becoming radicalized by online videos prompting her to seek a life under Islamic State rule. She used her college tuition money to secretly buy a plane ticket to the Middle East, while telling her family that she was going to Atlanta for a field trip as part of a class assignment.

While she was living in the self-declared caliphate in Syria, Muthana helped spread Islamic State propaganda on social media and called for the death of Americans. During her time there, she married three Islamic State fighters, having a child with her second husband, who was killed in battle. She later escaped Islamic State-held territory and surrendered to Kurdish forces, who placed her in a refugee camp with her child.

Her attorneys called this week’s Supreme Court decision “extremely disappointing news” and have argued that U.S. authorities should recognize Muthana’s citizenship, which they say she acquired at the time of her birth in Hackensack, N.J.

Muthana’s passport was revoked in 2016, a decision made under President Barack Obama. In 2019, President Donald Trump tweeted that he had instructed Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, “not to allow Hoda Muthana back into the Country!” Pompeo also said in a statement the same day that Muthana “is not a U.S. citizen and will not be admitted into the United States.”

Muthana has previously told the press that she renounces the extreme ideology of the Islamic State and that she had been “naive,” “arrogant” and “brainwashed.” She has also said that she was prepared to face any legal consequences for her actions if she returns to the United States and that she wants her son to grow up as an American citizen. “I know I’ve ruined my future and my son’s future and I deeply, deeply regret it,” she told the Guardian newspaper. According to her lawyers, she and her son have also faced threats for renouncing the Islamic State, the Associated Press reports.

A spokesperson for the State Department told The Post that it welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision declining to further review her case and that it had not changed its position with regard to Muthana’s citizenship status. The department has said in the past that Muthana is not, and has never been, an American citizen.

She stands outside of the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship, the government argues, because her father, who is now a naturalized citizen, was formerly a Yemeni diplomat and under the jurisdiction of his home country.

Muthana’s lawyers have argued that her father was discharged from his diplomatic position by the time of her birth on Oct. 28, 1994, by which point her mother had also gained permanent residency status.

Muthana’s case closely echoes that of British-born Shamima Begum, who was stripped of her British citizenship in 2019 after leaving to live under the Islamic State as a teenager. Last year, Britain’s top court ruled that Begum would not be allowed back into the United Kingdom to fight a legal case about the revocation of citizenship.

Begum, who was 15 when she, along with two school friends, left for Syria, has made numerous appeals to the public for forgiveness and offered to help the government fight terrorism if she is allowed to return home. She’s said she believed she was “doing the right thing” at the time and did not realize that the group was a “death cult.”

The Islamic State largely territorially disintegrated after international military intervention, led by the United States. The vast number of foreign fighters remaining has left world leaders in difficult positions as they try to balance individual human rights against national security. Making individuals stateless also risks violating international laws, but both Britain and the United States have claimed the women are citizens of other countries, which their lawyers, along with some of the nations in question, dispute.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/01/13/hoda-muthana-islamic-state-alabama-supreme-court/
 
Last edited:
For those who are new to the thread or don't remember who Hoda Muthana was:





 
Last edited:
These idiots are young americans in microcosm. Fuck shit up as bad as they possibly can for themselves then hope the establishment saves them because actually its them that was the victim all along and we owe them for the poor decisions they made.
 
Importing these pieces of shit is beyond me. Let them rot and die where ever the fuck they were caught.
Hell, we should even pay for some much more cruel country to detain these bastards.
 
Back
Top