Shamima Begum

Discussion in 'Taylor's Tittle-Tattle - General Banter' started by Maninblack, Feb 14, 2019.

  1. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    Idiotic as she was, she's a victim of grooming and at least statutory rape, maybe more. She's been under bombardment, seen lots of violence and had two babies die. She almost certainly has PTSD, maybe Complex PTSD. Nothing she says now is to be relied upon as her true character.

    People change immensely from 18-29. For example, many notorious and violent racists have done complete about turns in their thinking. Here's a US example, but there are loads of others, so maybe she could too. There are, after all, plenty of ex Islamists now active against extremists, like Ed Hussain or Majid Nawaz.
  2. cyaninternetdog

    cyaninternetdog Forum Hippie

    Religion is just what we thought before we knew that mental illness was a thing. I drive a diesel car so I cant be a hippie. What this girl did and thinks is wrong no doubt but she was a kid used by evil people for their own gain.
  3. Religion was man's way of explaining what we didn't understand.

    For example like why on earth did we buy Ken Sema?
  4. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    The big question is why take the risk? Why should we expend capital trying to unravel her warped mind and then in keeping her under lifelong surveillance? She'll never be trustworthy and taking her back is a massive risk. If we look at her solely as a victim we lose sight of the fact she's clearly intelligent, highly motivated and resourceful. She's survived in a literal warzone for 4 years!

    This isn't just somebody with obnoxious views, on the fringes of society - she's chosen a course which opposes everything our society stands for. Literally our destruction. It would be different if she'd asked to come back within a couple of months. Plus, the neo-Nazi in your link had a moment of self-awareness which led him to change, which I expect is a common reason why that happens. All the things you rightly point out are factors in why may be like she is have been and gone and she's still on board with IS.

    Maybe the solution is to see if one of the Arab states will take her and offer her citizenship. In return we revoke her British citizenship, essentially exiling her.
  5. Maninblack

    Maninblack Reservist

    She chose whilst under the influence of radicalisation, so she didn't 'choose' to support IS of her own free will. She is a British citizen and thus deserves a chance to prove herself to the authorities, if necessary through a fair trial. If she fails she will have to suffer the consequences and I have no problem with that. If she succeeds, she should be given the full support of the social care system to help her reintegrate into British society, the cost of which is immaterial.
  6. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    She could be highly dangerous, we simply don’t know yet, but we should be able to get a decent idea. There is a lot of intelligence to go on, from captured IS or infiltrators. We know for example that the ‘White Widow’ had a lot of power and influence. This woman seems more like a baby machine in the ISIS scheme of things. She didn’t have the power to keep those babies alive.

    Apparently very few returning Islamists have ‘re-offended’ anywhere. Probably the spell is broken for them, by defeat or from the trauma of their experiences.Because she is so young the chances that she can be unravelled are probably higher.

    We can’t put any store on what she says for now, good or bad; could be ideologically loyal to ISIS, could be pure Stockholm Syndrome, or pure trauma. However, we simply can’t foist her on another country because she is also a Muslim.
  7. Knight GT

    Knight GT Predictor extraordinaire 2013/14

    Beat me to it. Can I have Jonathan Ross?
  8. luke_golden

    luke_golden Space Cadet

    I fort Brexit was spose-da get rid of all the forrins?
  9. kVA

    kVA Reservist

    I waiting to read Trumps tweets before I make up my mind.

    My South African colleague, who never shys from giving his fair and balanced opinion, said:

    The government should say ‘you’ve made your bed, you’ve got to lie in it’

    He’s another one who ‘just speaks as he finds’ which I gather is South Ifrican for ‘I open my gob before thinking things through’. In this case I think it’s ‘I use song lyrics as sound bites’.
  10. cyaninternetdog

    cyaninternetdog Forum Hippie

    I feel this would take philosophers and religous leaders years to answer this question. Even science couldnt answer this question. Monty Python would reform and do a film about it.

    "He's not the crown jewels, he's a very naughty boy".
  11. sydney_horn

    sydney_horn Squad Player

    It is a difficult one.

    Of course the safety of all UK citizens should be paramount. Also others need to be deterred from making the same "choice".

    Based on that alone then she should be prevented from returning.

    But she was a child when she left and, as others have said, her "choice" was heavily influenced by her environment and indoctrination.

    I heard on the radio yesterday (I didn't catch the interviewees name) that some previously radicalised Muslims have been "turned" and are now invaluable assets in the fight against the radicalisation of other youth.

    I think we in the "civilised" west could show that we are better than the terrorists that threaten us.

    If we take this girl back. Rehabilitate her and show compassion for her unborn child, then perhaps we could end up with a former IS supporter who will speak out against them.

    I can see that some might see this as a sign of weakness and perhaps it is. But just preventing her entering the country may end up with her being seen as a martyr and hero which will give those wishing to radicalise the Muslim youth more ammunition to do so.
  12. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    I'm not so sure either way.

    She was a child when she went - more easily persuaded, more susceptible, more easily groomed - and was obviously less well equipped to make the right choices. There are good reasons why children are not given more full responsibility until they reach 18.

    But she was married within a few weeks of arriving there, and has no doubt been continually receiving ISIS anti western propoganda, will have been repressed and kept away from reality and has totally lived the life of ISIS, alongside and sleeping with their fighters and is only "free" now, because ISIS have been effectively broken up.

    She said that she ahd been living the life that she saw in the propaganda films that she watched before going. She appears to have accepted her life and has no regrets.

    But frankly,why would she have changed from being anti-west and a potential threat within a few days? It is now ingrained. Personally, I would have been hugely sceptical if she had turned on ISIS so quickly.

    Do we abandon her, and her baby because of all this? She was a wronged child but who now needs help. Her age when she went is the important factor here.

    I feel we should help, but the legal process should be followed.

    I think.
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2019
  13. HappyHornet24

    HappyHornet24 Crapster Staff Member

    Is he a Daily Mail journalist?
  14. The Voice of Reason

    The Voice of Reason First Team Captain

    I have not read the whole thread as I have just seen it this morning, so apologies if I am repeating what others have said.

    For what it is worth IMO we should allow her back for the sake of the child, but there is no way she should be allowed to keep it if her attitude remains the same when she is safely away from the camp in Syria. Hopefully she is only saying the things she has been, because she is afraid for her life if she does not act the hardened Jihadi whilst she is still there.

    Having said that, even if after debriefing by the security services she appears to actually be showing remorse, she should probably not be allowed to keep the child, and she probably should still be put on trial for being a member of a terrorist organisation.

    The baby is the important thing in all this, and if it is allowed to stay with it's mother it would probably be far more likely to end up becoming radicalised either by it's mother or others that will no doubt still try to keep their hooks in her and her family.
  15. kVA

    kVA Reservist

    He’d Be just what they’re after!

    Ironically he doesn’t like trump despite showing many of the same characteristics.
  16. hornmeister

    hornmeister Club Legend

    I would suggest getting yourself tested then.:D
    Knight GT and HappyHornet24 like this.
  17. hornmeister

    hornmeister Club Legend

    A very good point made on Question time last night.

    She was 15 as was her friend and another was 16 when they went over. People have suggested that as children they were not fully responsible, yet there are calls for 16 year olds to vote. Added to that the age of criminal responsibility, and joining a terrorist organisation I suspect is a criminal act, is 10.

    We can't refuse entry because she is a British citizen, she can;t be made stateless by renouncing that citizenship, but we don't have to assist her in getting back unless she reaches a consulate or embassy and if she does then transport back to the UK where due processing in law should be carried out.
  18. nornironhorn

    nornironhorn Administrator Staff Member

    Someone texted 5 live yesterday asking if we would be having the same discussion if it was a male. I don't think we would.

    Fair enough, the unborn child comes into it too, but even if it was a male who had a very young child I don't think people would be as supportive of her return.
    domthehornet, wfcmoog and UEA_Hornet like this.
  19. hornetgags

    hornetgags McMuff's lovechild

    I've tempered my view a little.

    Ok, let her back in if they let the Windrush deportees back in.
  20. She shouldn't be allowed back if she's any relation to this guy.
    RookeryDad and wfcmoog like this.
  21. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    Interesting views guys and I don't dismiss them completely. Norn makes an equally good point though - I feel a lot of the sympathy comes about because she's a woman with child. I'm as sure as I can be a man wouldn't elicit the same reaction.

    If she fails to reintegrate the consequences won't just be for her. She's so far off the deep end that the most logical outcome of that is the death of others, either directly or through her recruiting sympathisers to kill and main. I don't think it's an acceptable risk to take.

    If she's exiled and chooses to lead a peaceful life, and renounces her support of the caliphate and everything it stands for, and openly regrets her choices, then she can be a role model from afar. A positive role model in how to turn things around, while presenting a clear and obvious example of the ongoing cost of choosing to side with those sickos. Namely, you can never go back to the country of your birth and cant travel to its likeminded allies. Until there's sufficient counter-balance to the forces pulling them towards IS (mentally or literally) it'll continue to happen. A few years in prison, in all likelihood surrounded by other radicals, isn't going to do more than delay the consequences. These radicals exploit our softness and belief everyone deserves another chance. It's our achillies heel.

    Exile wouldn't be 'foisting her on another country'. I'm sure she'd feel much more at home in a country more attuned to her view of the world and I'm sure she'd prefer it to Guantanamo or the like. And, to be clear, I'm not saying Muslims en masse should be encouraged to leave/forcibly removed from the UK. Just the very very small minority who have sworn to do harm to this country like this woman and have left without regret.

    Re: the cost. The cost isn't just financial. The cost is in hours of intensive monitoring, surveillance and analysis that will likely have to happen for years to come if she returns. There's a finite amount of suitably qualified people who can do that job at any time so logically if they're watching her they're not watching someone else, who might be on the way up. I'd much rather our efforts were spent on those who hadn't already decided to leave.
    luke_golden likes this.
  22. hornmeister

    hornmeister Club Legend

    Pregnancy and sex don't come into it other than from an emotional point of view. It's a matter of international law. The person is a British citizen, we can not refuse re-entry however we can refuse freedom if found guilty of breaking UK law.
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2019
  23. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    I agree that the first principle is that we have a right to be protected from extremists. If there is evidence about crimes she has committed or doubts about her future conduct these should be dealt with first.

    In saying this, we have no knowledge that she has committed any violent act or is genuinely committed to the overthrow of UK society. IS is pretty busted now, so even if she was there is nothing to fight for.

    I don’t take this lightly. In the case of Samantha Lewthwaite her participation was overlooked as assumptions were made about her gender. In fact Lewthwaite was as committed as any of the 7/7 bombers. I believe the difference will be that she was an adult when she came to her views. This woman was a child.
  24. Cthulhu

    Cthulhu Keyboard Warrior Staff Member

    Presumably she doesn't have any money.
    I hear of so many people without legal aid. I hope she doesn't get any to be honest
  25. Another perspective. Young girl gets groomed and radicalised into a cult by evil bastards. Persuaded to live in this cult for years, being exposed to cult propaganda, brutality and horror. Wants to come back and is met by near universal bile and fury.
    Young girl is groomed and sexualised by evil bastards in Rochdale. Used for sex for years by Pakistani taxi drivers. Rescued and given near universal pity, sympathy and help.
    Is it cos I's black, me wonders?
    sydney_horn and Bwood_Horn like this.
  26. hornmeister

    hornmeister Club Legend

    Stop wondering. Playing the race card when it's not warranted creates an element of "cry wolf" for the real cases.
    The Rochdale girls were if I recall correctly younger and not ideologically opposed to western ways, possibly creating a risk.
    There's a difference between grooming and abuse and persuasion & indoctrination. The Rochdale kids did not commit a crime.
    wfcmoog likes this.
  27. Bwood_Horn

    Bwood_Horn Squad Player

    suumink rong with u m8 shes luverly

  28. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    Christ on a bike you can see the resemblance.

    Anyway I can’t say her name as I have poor annunziation.
    Bwood_Horn likes this.
  29. Bwood_Horn

    Bwood_Horn Squad Player

    I don't see it myself (apart from they have the same complete lack of self-awareness and self-satisfied look of entitlement), this one on the other hand (fnarrr, fnarrr):
    It's BoJo in a frock.
  30. Not really. If your experiences never led you to believe there was a god, then you do not have to disprove such a being existed. You simply never accepted the concept in the first place. You are not responsible for or obliged to consider other peoples beliefs when considering your own experiences, even if they expect you to be subject to them.
  31. May be naive, but if she denounces IS before she comes home, then her and her baby are dead. Whatever her stated views, she is admitting that the UK is a safer environment for her and her baby.

    If she comes back, and if she is susceptible to IS conditionung, she will also be susceptible to MI6 'de-briefing'.

    I do not fear her coming back into the country, and believe there may actually be something to gain in the short and long term, that will not necessarily be reflected in her outward persona.

    Whether she works with or against the UK, she is likely to be a valuable source of counter intelligence.
  32. Clive_ofthe_Kremlin

    Clive_ofthe_Kremlin Squad Player

    One cannot 'waive' your rights to being a citizen! There is no such thing. International law is very clear on this point. A country cannot arbitrarily remove citizenship. Otherwise what's to stop them deciding that gypsies ought to have their citizenship removed and communists and drink drivers and the IRA and anyone else who's not flavour of the month at the moment.

    Ludicrous dangerpratt Sajid Javid says “My message is clear – if you have supported terrorist organisations abroad I will not hesitate to prevent your return”.

    What exactly constitutes a "terrorist organisation abroad" is no doubt to be decided by him and his Tory chums. Mr Trump just put Cuba back on the list of countries deemed to be "state sponsors of terrorism". We Kremlins support Cuba. Will they have our passports off us too?

    If this girl has committed a crime, then she must stand trial in a fair court of law. Have a chance to put her defence. Hear the case for the prosecution. That's how justice developed over many centuries of European civilisation works and that's what makes us different from ISIS murderers and crazies.
  33. I would never have gone to Cuba had I known it was a hotbed of state sponsored terrorism. I expect Trump will now ban me ?
  34. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    I am not certain about what we should do for the best. But there has been one real bit of good to come out of this situation - and I hope that this will be a turning point in a better future.

    Moose is at one with Jacob Rees-Mogg on this subject.

    Praise the Lord!
    Moose likes this.
  35. hornetgags

    hornetgags McMuff's lovechild

    Seems the ECJ disagrees with you...
    hornmeister and wfcmoog like this.

Share This Page