Judge wonders at high cost of preventing wannabe Jihadi from going to Syria, decides it’s OK as it saved his life

Until he kills someone in Great Britain I assume…

High Court judge has questioned if an “extraordinary level” of state intervention was justified in stopping a 17-year-old boy from travelling to Syria amid fears he would wage jihad.

Mr Justice Hayden said he had wondered whether or not the “huge resources” deployed in the case were “proportionate”.

He said people often asked why time and taxpayers’ money was spent preventing teenagers from joining terror groups in the Middle East, adding that he considered the argument: “Why not just let them go?”

But the judge concluded that in the case of the boy, who had an uncle held in Guantanamo Bay, a young man’s life had been saved by the local authority’s intervention.

  • V10_Rob

    I agree, let him go.

    Just forbid him returning.

  • It’s a moral quandary, really.

    On one hand, they will get blown up. On the other hand, they are only going to Syria to rape children.

    • Minicapt

      They’d be “Youth in Asia”.


  • Frances

    And how many National Health operations were postponed for lack of funds while this teen was tracked?