ISIS teenager wants to come home

[Segnosaur]

True, it probably was not stated as "come live with a bunch of murdering fundies". But your very own reference points out the following:

Witness E pointed out that Ms Begum must have been aware of the Islamic State group's atrocities, including beheadings of Western hostages, by the time she travelled.

Witness E is speaking from their own adult perspective. Schoolkids don't necessarily keep up with the news on any deep level.

They may not watch cable news with the regularity of a senior citizen.

But then, from an interview with Sky news (referenced in the Washington Post article above)
Q: Did you know what Islamic State were doing when you left for Syria? Because they had beheaded people. There were executions.
A: Yeah, I knew about those things and I was okay with it. Because, you know, I started becoming religious just before I left.

So she can't claim total ignorance before she left. She admitted she knew of the beheadings, and went to join ISIS anyways.

 

[Vixen]

They may not watch cable news with the regularity of a senior citizen.

But then, from an interview with Sky news (referenced in the Washington Post article above)
Q: Did you know what Islamic State were doing when you left for Syria? Because they had beheaded people. There were executions.
A: Yeah, I knew about those things and I was okay with it. Because, you know, I started becoming religious just before I left.

So she can't claim total ignorance before she left. She admitted she knew of the beheadings, and went to join ISIS anyways.

Who oiled the wheels? Can anybody just get up and pop over to Syria?


Somebody recruited these three silly schoolgirls and arranged their passage.

 

[Segnosaur]

In the case of a teenager who wants to join ISIS... its true that they haven't yet reached the age to drive. The question is have they at least reached the maturity level to understand that "going to live with a bunch of murdering fundies is bad".
...
Put it this way... if instead of going to join ISIS, how would she be treated by the legal system if she were told by ISIS recruiters "stay in England and kill people there". Would she be seen as an innocent victim and let off scot free as a victim of grooming? Or would they say "you might have been influenced, but even at your young age you should have recognized it was wrong"

But she didn't kill anyone and she wasn't recruited i.e. groomed to kill anyone.

No she didn't. She just decided to uproot her life in order to support people who WERE actually killing people, and to breed the next generation of soldiers who would continue fighting and beheading people. She was the diet coke of evil... one calorie, not evil enough.

Its like being the cook for the soldiers at a concentration camp... you aren't killing people directly, but what you are doing is providing support for the system that allows such killings to occur.

 

[Segnosaur]

I just question what she thinks she might do to "fight terrorism".

I mean, its not like she can help give intelligence to help defeat ISIS. She has been in a refugee camp for so long that anything she might have known (about ISIS activities in the middle east, or about their efforts to traffic in girls) is probably years out of date (and probably already known by various intelligence agencies).

I suppose she could go on a "don't do what I did" tour, but I'm not really sure how useful that would be

I can see her as a good role model for today's teenagers now that she has seen the consequences of her actions.

That's of course only assuming she really has repented, and isn't just trying to curry favor.

Is she genuinely remorseful? Maybe she is. But if her actions are motivated only by the thought of "Sorry I got caught" or "sorry ISIS lost" or whatever, then she'd be more useful having the book thrown at her as an example rather than as some sort of "role model".

Who oiled the wheels? Can anybody just get up and pop over to Syria?
Somebody recruited these three silly schoolgirls and arranged their passage.

I hope they do manage to find (and prosecute) anyone that was involved in brainwashing/grooming/transporting the girls to the middle east.

That doesn't necessarily mean the girl herself shouldn't face at least some consequences for her actions, or be seen as a potential threat.

 

[RolandRat]

"Shamima Begum said she had never seen an execution during her time with IS, "but I saw a beheaded head in the bin". "It didn't faze me at all," she added.

"Despite her friend and her two children dying, and seeing the oppressive nature of IS, she said she does not regret joining the terror group."

https://news.sky.com/story/i-dont-r...l-wants-to-return-to-uk-for-her-baby-11636715

"James Eadie KC, representing the government, said in written arguments that Begum had aligned with IS and stayed in Syria for four years until 2019.

Eadie said Begum left IS territory “only as the caliphate collapsed”, adding: “Even at that stage, the evidence demonstrates that she left only for safety and not because of a genuine disengagement from the group.”

He added: “When she did emerge, and gave multiple press interviews shortly before the secretary of state decided to deprive her of her citizenship, she expressed no remorse and said she did not regret joining [IS], acknowledging that she was aware of the nature of the group when she travelled.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...been-a-victim-of-child-trafficking-court-told

I hope the court rejects her case and keeps her out.

 

[theprestige]

All of that should be argued in court, in the UK, with evidence, with her present, and with her still holding UK citizenship.

This whole debacle has been down to the UK government deciding to try this case in the court of public opinion, via press conferences and sound bites, instead of giving a UK citizen the due process of law to which she is entitled.

Rishi Sunak should take a break from doing photo ops with Zelensky, rescind these clown world policy decisions of his predecessors, and see that this woman gets a proper trial.

 

[Vixen]

"Shamima Begum said she had never seen an execution during her time with IS, "but I saw a beheaded head in the bin". "It didn't faze me at all," she added.

"Despite her friend and her two children dying, and seeing the oppressive nature of IS, she said she does not regret joining the terror group."

https://news.sky.com/story/i-dont-r...l-wants-to-return-to-uk-for-her-baby-11636715

"James Eadie KC, representing the government, said in written arguments that Begum had aligned with IS and stayed in Syria for four years until 2019.

Eadie said Begum left IS territory “only as the caliphate collapsed”, adding: “Even at that stage, the evidence demonstrates that she left only for safety and not because of a genuine disengagement from the group.”

He added: “When she did emerge, and gave multiple press interviews shortly before the secretary of state decided to deprive her of her citizenship, she expressed no remorse and said she did not regret joining [IS], acknowledging that she was aware of the nature of the group when she travelled.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...been-a-victim-of-child-trafficking-court-told

I hope the court rejects her case and keeps her out.

Stockholm Syndrome is proven to be real. This is a situation so named where hostages after a while began to adopt and sympathise with the hostage takers views. It is a real phenomenon, this is why people who are drawn into sinister cults - often the young and gullible - have to be debriefed and deprogrammed after being rescued. One famous example is that of 'heiress' Patty Hearst, from a wealthy newspaper magnate family, who was kidnapped by the Symbionese Army (or she claimed to have been). She is even captured on CCTV in a bank acting as a look out during one of this political groups bank robberies. She was led to believe the bank robberies were in a good cause, etcetera. Then there were all of those young adults who thought Charles Manson's family was the place where it was at.

Begum's lawyers have indicated that Begum is willing to stand trial for any crimes committed whilst she was under the Caliphate in Syria.

Expecting someone who has just been rescued from such a situation, where her colleagues would have engaged in one-to-one fighting against the Syrian army with the Russians and Americans to immediately show remorse and fully understand the bigger picture is simply not reasonable.

 

[Vixen]

All of that should be argued in court, in the UK, with evidence, with her present, and with her still holding UK citizenship.

This whole debacle has been down to the UK government deciding to try this case in the court of public opinion, via press conferences and sound bites, instead of giving a UK citizen the due process of law to which she is entitled.

Rishi Sunak should take a break from doing photo ops with Zelensky, rescind these clown world policy decisions of his predecessors, and see that this woman gets a proper trial.

That's right. A problem is that these tribunals are often highly secretive, to do with national security, and the government just wants the headlines. It has discovered that anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim is highly popular. Bear in mind the Home Secretary who binned Begum's British citizenship was himself ironically registered as a Non-Dom Pakistani, to avoid UK taxation, despite supposedly being patriotically British.

 

[Lplus]

Nonsense. Once in the Caliphate there was no escape. The other aspect of the grooming was that her friends were all for it, too. This is a type of mob mentality when teenagers think, hey, my friends are doing it, it must be fun and it must be normal.

The caliphate is no more, hasn't she since at least expressed regret for her actions and condemned the idea of the caliphate and it's expressed intent to destroy "The West"?

And presumably her friends have expressed regret too?

 

[Elaedith]

They may not watch cable news with the regularity of a senior citizen.

But then, from an interview with Sky news (referenced in the Washington Post article above)
Q: Did you know what Islamic State were doing when you left for Syria? Because they had beheaded people. There were executions.
A: Yeah, I knew about those things and I was okay with it. Because, you know, I started becoming religious just before I left.

So she can't claim total ignorance before she left. She admitted she knew of the beheadings, and went to join ISIS anyways.

If she is accused of doing something illegal, that should be decided in a fair trial (although from what I understand, leaving the UK for Syria was not illegal at the time).
There is no excuse for making somebody stateless or trying to dump the problem on to another country.

 

[Darat]

The caliphate is no more, hasn't she since at least expressed regret for her actions and condemned the idea of the caliphate and it's expressed intent to destroy "The West"?

And presumably her friends have expressed regret too?

Her friends are reported as being dead.

 

[Darat]

"Shamima Begum said she had never seen an execution during her time with IS, "but I saw a beheaded head in the bin". "It didn't faze me at all," she added.

"Despite her friend and her two children dying, and seeing the oppressive nature of IS, she said she does not regret joining the terror group."

https://news.sky.com/story/i-dont-r...l-wants-to-return-to-uk-for-her-baby-11636715

"James Eadie KC, representing the government, said in written arguments that Begum had aligned with IS and stayed in Syria for four years until 2019.

Eadie said Begum left IS territory “only as the caliphate collapsed”, adding: “Even at that stage, the evidence demonstrates that she left only for safety and not because of a genuine disengagement from the group.”

He added: “When she did emerge, and gave multiple press interviews shortly before the secretary of state decided to deprive her of her citizenship, she expressed no remorse and said she did not regret joining [IS], acknowledging that she was aware of the nature of the group when she travelled.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...been-a-victim-of-child-trafficking-court-told

I hope the court rejects her case and keeps her out.

Her actions when she left the UK and afterwards were as a British citizen, if what she did was criminal then she should face trial for that, I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

The issue is that the UK has made her stateless disregarding our obligations and commitments under international treaties. We have no excuse for rendering her stateless.

Plus the idea that she is so dangerous to the security of the UK that we couldn't put her on trial here is beyond ridiculous.

Why shouldn't she face trial for her - alleged - crimes in the UK?

 

[RolandRat]

All of that should be argued in court, in the UK, with evidence, with her present, and with her still holding UK citizenship.

It is being argued in court, that doesn't mean it cannot be discussed on a discussion forum.

Stockholm Syndrome is proven to be real. This is a situation so named where hostages after a while began to adopt and sympathise with the hostage takers views.

It is also extremely rare.

why shouldn't she face trial for her - alleged - crimes in the UK?

Because we removed her citizenship. I have put my point across about this at length earlier in the thread. We will never agree on it so I don't see any point rehashing that discussion.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

Because we removed her citizenship. I have put my point across about this at length earlier in the thread. We will never agree on it so I don't see any point rehashing that discussion.

As an aside - do you agree with our international obligations to not make someone stateless?

 

[RolandRat]

As an aside - do you agree with our international obligations to not make someone stateless?

Absolutely. I think we acted in accordance with our international obligations, you do not. Ne'er the twain shall meet.

 

[Darat]

Absolutely. I think we acted in accordance with our international obligations, you do not. Ne'er the twain shall meet.

But she is now stateless, she literally has no nationality - so we haven't acted in accordance with our international obligations.

That's a black and white clear fact.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

True, it probably was not stated as "come live with a bunch of murdering fundies". But your very own reference points out the following:

Witness E pointed out that Ms Begum must have been aware of the Islamic State group's atrocities, including beheadings of Western hostages, by the time she travelled.

Its not like the activities of ISIS were all that secret. How far should we push the "she just didn't know about the bad stuff" argument?

And if you accept that she was genuinely ignorant of what ISIS was, how do we know that she won't have other bouts of ignorance in the future?

Witness E's statement is an assertion backed by absolutely no evidence.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

People in M15 might be good at recognising threats to national security. However, on the level of human trafficking of minors, I am not sure they are the go-to. All the spooks I ever knew are fiercely patriotic, so the M15 representative in court today might well just be expressing unconscious bias, as ISIS were a grave threat some years ago and their crimes hideous.

Based on their activities in the six counties MI5 are good at creating threats to national security but bad at identifying them.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

It is being argued in court, that doesn't mean it cannot be discussed on a discussion forum.



It is also extremely rare.



Because we removed her citizenship. I have put my point across about this at length earlier in the thread. We will never agree on it so I don't see any point rehashing that discussion.

The home secretary at the time rendered her stateless not because she was a clear and present danger to the state, nor because she ever committed acts which were repugnant to all morality, but because the English government knew that various state bodies had acted with depraved indifference when failing to protect a vulnerable child and didn't want to deal with the consequences of that failure.

 

[RolandRat]

But she is now stateless, she literally has no nationality - so we haven't acted in accordance with our international obligations.

That's a black and white clear fact.

We didn't make her stateless, IMO Bangladesh did. Another point we will never agree on.