Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

British IS schoolgirl 'wants to return home'

If she was a 19 yo man, would your views be different?
She's nineteen now but she was Fifteen when she left. But whichever age, young men in that cohort also do things that they would not do when they're older. You don't have to go to Syria to know that, just look at the society you live in now or the one you grew up in yourself.
 
She's nineteen now but she was Fifteen when she left. But whichever age, young men in that cohort also do things that they would not do when they're older. You don't have to go to Syria to know that, just look at the society you live in now or the one you grew up in yourself.
Of course they do, but that doesn't mean they are let off for acts carried out when they were irresponsible teens. I don't want to condemn or write off this woman for life, but I also don't want to downplay the utterly despicable nature of both her beliefs and her actions. The fact she was there as a child bearer rather than an active fighter doesn't diminish her responsibility much in my book. Two different roles while acting for the same cause.
 
She's nineteen now but she was Fifteen when she left. But whichever age, young men in that cohort also do things that they would not do when they're older. You don't have to go to Syria to know that, just look at the society you live in now or the one you grew up in yourself.

What, so no prison sentences for offences committed before the age of 40 because, you know, kids eh...?

If she had killed a child in Bethnal Green at age 15 she'd have been locked up and the key thrown away as she'd have been well over the age at which she's liable for her actions.
 
I'm having similar trouble with this tack.

I'm not actually trying to get her off. Just pointing out that it isn't obviously all that clear cut what offence she has committed simply by going out there and getting married and living on the front line. Generally, there is a distinction between supporting terrorism and membership of an organisation, even if you don't get issued with a card. Likewise support tends not to operate on the level of being a member of the same household, no matter how important your role in the social reproduction of terrorist communities. I imagine that if she tries to come back here the state will come up with a reason to bang her up. I won't loose any sleep over the justice of her particular case and will probably sleep happier in my bed at night so long as she isn't walking the streets of London. That doesn't mean that it might not set a precedent for greater political repression of other groups, too.
 
Last edited:
Of course they do, but that doesn't mean they are let off for acts carried out when they were irresponsible teens. I don't want to condemn or write off this woman for life, but I also don't want to downplay the utterly despicable nature of both her beliefs and her actions. The fact she was there as a child bearer rather than an active fighter doesn't diminish her responsibility much in my book. Two different roles while acting for the same cause.
Additionally, she was there for 4 years. So over 18 for at least one of them. She openly states that the reason for her leaving was because life had become rather uncomfortable. Not because she disagreed with what IS were doing.
 
... it isn't obvously all that clear cut what offence she has commited simply by going out there and getting married and living on the front line.
You're just repeating the same tosh over and over.

It is perfectly clear to pretty much everyione else.
 
You're just repeating the same tosh over and over.

It is perfectly clear to pretty much everyione else.
It's clear morally imo. But it's also clear legally. A while back the govt went out of its way to stress that anyone going to Syria to join up with ISIS was committing a criminal offence. Well that's exactly what she did.
 
I'm not actually trying to get her off. Just pointing out that it isn't obviously all that clear cut what offence she has committed simply by going out there and getting married and living on the front line.

Doesn't it come under treason?
 
Can anyone access the Times piece:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/analysis-will-the-isis-brides-be-prosecuted-bf5x0pg5w

The teaser suggests that it might point to some of the issues.
When the three teenagers from Bethnal Green in east London travelled to Syria, their parents were assured by senior police that they were unlikely to be prosecuted for terrorist offences.

Bernard Hogan-Howe, the Metropolitan Police commissioner, and Sir Mark Rowley, the force’s head of counterterrorism, agreed that the girls would be “returning to their families” if they decided to come back. “We have no evidence that these three girls are responsible for any terrorist offences. They have no reason to fear, if nothing else comes to light, that we will treat them as terrorists,” Sir Mark told the Commons home affairs select committee in March 2015.
 
Can anyone access the Times piece:
Analysis: Will the Isis brides be prosecuted?

The teaser suggests that it might point to some of the issues.

There is a difference between voluntarily getting back home because you realised you've made a terrible mistake and having to leave because your cult has been utterly routed and you've nowhere else to go.
 
There is a difference between voluntarily getting back home because you realised you've made a terrible mistake and having to leave because your cult has been utterly routed and you've nowhere else to go.

But he didn't say come back and all will be foregiven, he said 'We have no evidence that these three girls are responsible for any terrorist offences.' This was only one month after their arrival and a lot happened in the meantime, but still it does point to the fact that marrying a criminal and having their kids isn't generally an offence in and of itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim
I honestly don't have a solid opinion on this because of her age really. Although i will say the suggestion that she just needs therapy and healing is probably naive given she seems pretty clear in her head re the righteousness of heads in bins. Just watched this in the news, she said a lot more than is represented in the piece, seems to regret a bit. Also her man was twice her age so that's abuse,and yeah 19 is still a bairn really. Very difficult.

And yes, would be just as conflicted if she' d joined the national front.
 
I honestly don't have a solid opinion on this because of her age really. Although i will say the suggestion that she just needs therapy and healing is probably naive given she seems pretty clear in her head re the righteousness of heads in bins. Just watched this in the news, she said a lot more than is represented in the piece, seems to regret a bit. Also her man was twice her age so that's abuse,and yeah 19 is still a bairn really. Very difficult.

And yes, would be just as conflicted if she' d joined the national front.

I think that's a perfectly reasonable and decent position to hold. If she gets back to the UK it should be a case of hope for the best but prepare for the worst.
 
But he didn't say come back and all will be foregiven, he said 'We have no evidence that these three girls are responsible for any terrorist offences.' This was only one month after their arrival and a lot happened in the meantime, but still it does point to the fact that marrying a criminal and having their kids isn't generally an offence in and of itself.

Fair point but presumably he said that at a time when they were still trying to coax her back. I think there's little chance she wouldn't end up in court now, as you say - things have moved on.
 
I think that's a perfectly reasonable and decent position to hold. If she gets back to the UK it should be a case of hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

If I was in a very forgiving mood and in charge of decisions I might send a secret service agent over with a carry cot to make an assessment of her position and condition, and bring the bairn back.
 
Fair point but presumably he said that at a time when they were still trying to coax her back. I think there's little chance she wouldn't end up in court now, as you say - things have moved on.

They have, but those conversations will be remembered.
 
They have, but those conversations will be remembered.

I don't think they'll give much of a shit.

There were cases when they said the same to families of young men who had joined IS. They came back to find themselves locked up all the same.
 
There's posters of them in every school these days.

Children have to learn them.

British-Values-picture.jpg

When I worked in a nursery we had to do ‘British values’ nonsense with 4 year olds.

Little bastards told me I ‘had to go to jail FOREVER!!’

My crime: “eating all the noodles”

Rule of law my arse
 
hhhaahhahahahha

Yeah, I think the point being that it didn't do wonders for trust in the British state for those who had gone out there and immediately regretted it. More importantly it didn't really help for trust in the British state for the families and communities that had worked hard to get them back. Almost like a recruiting tool in itself.
 
"Don't tread on any landmines!" - maybe we could all send her this on a post-card

Disagree with stripping citizens of their nationality etc but I have no sympathy whatsover for this odious toerag
 
Yeah, I think the point being that it didn't do wonders for trust in the British state for those who had gone out there and immediately regretted it. More importantly it didn't really help for trust in the British state for the families and communities that had worked hard to get them back. Almost like a recruiting tool in itself.

frankly dont care fuck the lot of them a community that breeds jihadists doesnt deserve any trust
 
Yeah, I think the point being that it didn't do wonders for trust in the British state for those who had gone out there and immediately regretted it. More importantly it didn't really help for trust in the British state for the families and communities that had worked hard to get them back.
Boo hoo.
 
Back
Top Bottom