British IS schoolgirl 'wants to return home'

[Teaboy]

FWIW Edie I do agree with the general thrusts of your argument regarding compassion and her being allowed back to the UK which should be her right. It just bothers me that given everything she has done, the appalling atrocities she has helped to enable and her obvious attitude now it really bothers me that she should be given special treatment that you, me or anyone else would get.

She thinks its fine to bomb pop concerts full of kids but not fine that her and her child aren't flown home and allowed to just get on with their lives.

 

[Pickman's model]

In one breath you are saying she is a traumatized child who has been indoctrinated into a cult and in the second you blithely say she possess little risk? Of course she poses a massive risk, as big a risk as any young male IS fighter who is returning from the front line.

Given she initially committed her 'crime' (if any crime has been committed) as a child Jail is not a given and these decentralization programs are questionable at best.

These are not reasons she shouldn't be allowed back - she should be, but its bizarre to claim she poses little risk.

yeh atm the risk she poses is unknown.

 

[Edie]

You have no idea what risk she poses. What she would like to do (she thought the Manchester bombings were justified), what she's capable of doing (she was intelligent and resourceful enough to get to Syria as a child, despite being on the state's radar), what training, contacts or resources she gained in Syria - we only have her word for it het activities were confined to those of a housewife; she might be an expert bombmaker.

Admittedly, nor do I know the risk, but I'm less willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.

The maximum for that offence is ten years. That'd be for the committed adult male fighters who tried to recruit others. She'd say she was a child, was brainwashed, never fought, never recruited. There'd be psych reports saying she has PTSD etc., and reports about the impact of prison on her child. She'd probably get 4-6 years, of which she'd have to serve half, some of which would be out on a tag - she could do not much more than 18 months.

Effective surveillance of someone who knows they're being watched is near impossible, and would be relatively easy to avoid. The example I have above of an unregistered mobile. Or, if, say, she leaves home with a suitcase and goes to the tube, then what? She gonna be stopped every time, just because someone is watching her house. What if she drives out of her garage with a bit full of explosives? Pull her over every time she uses a car?

Fair enough there.

 

[Spymaster]

She poses little risk.

How do you know this? For 4 years she has been an enthusiastic supporter of a regime whose followers have demanded that their people return to their countries to continue the jihad by cutting throats and running people down with vehicles. Exactly what has happened in the most recent attacks in Europe, perpetrated by people who afaia, didn't even go to Syria. At the very least she poses an ideological threat.

She’ll be in prison for years ...

Again, how do you know this? This thread has amply demonstrated that there's no shortage of people who would rather support her than see her punished. As the law, stands, it probably would only see her prosecuted for joining a proscibed organisation which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years. IF, and it's an enormous IF, she were sentenced to the maximum, she'd do 5 years. More likely she'd do a bit of time and be directed to one of these deradicalisation programs which don't seem to work in all cases.

... after which she’ll be under surveillance for years.

A use of expensive resources that surely would be better employed elsewhere.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

All due respect this isn’t exactly a normal situation. This isn’t someone losing a passport in Spain and pleading special circumstances. It’s significant enough for several crews of international journalists to travel to her. Just bring her back with them.

Pretty much this.

The people running the camp will not let her leave until she has travel documents to do so. She's being held by the Kurds, whom the Turks have vowed to attack and destroy. At which point an ISIS dregs left rotting in the camp will be free to do do what they like, sneak in and blow up teenage concerts, for example...

 

[Pickman's model]

Pretty much this.

The people running the camp will not let her leave until she has travel documents to do so. She's being held by the Kurds, whom the Turks have vowed to attack and destroy. At which point an ISIS dregs left rotting in the camp will be free to do do what they like, sneak in and blow up teenage concerts, for example...

even if she had travel documents, a passport or whatnot, i expect any international journalists visiting refugee camps have to pass through a range of checkpoints on the way there: and indeed on the way back. while their local guides / fixers may be able to get a vanload of journalists through these places, i suspect that going through them with an increasingly famous daesh woman would not be quite so simple. taking her along could easily compromise the lot and lead to a brief but full and final exchange of views by the roadside.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

even if she had travel documents, a passport or whatnot, i expect any international journalists visiting refugee camps have to pass through a range of checkpoints on the way there: and indeed on the way back. while their local guides / fixers may be able to get a vanload of journalists through these places, i suspect that going through them with an increasingly famous daesh woman would not be quite so simple. taking her along could easily compromise the lot and lead to a brief but full and final exchange of views by the roadside.

The people running the camp have said that with an emergency passport they can hand her over to the Turks who will stick her on a flight to the UK, so long as the UK acknowledges that she's coming. The UK would only need to send a consular courier to the Turkish border to hand those docs over. The caliphate is finished, it seems that they just want shot of these scumbags and that it is our responsibility to deal with them. The fact that we don't want to I guess is that our laws are not in place/robust enough to get a meaningful conviction from someone like her, there's no evidence she has done anything particularly serious, (passport fraud is hardly crime of the century, joining ISIS was not a crime when she left the UK). Would appear the US is having the same problems, even though that Alabama woman is on record as encouraging others to join and to celebrate US deaths, alongside the US having a much more 'flexible justice system', seemingly allowing it to bang up whomever it wishes for as long as it likes.

 

[Edie]

FWIW Edie I do agree with the general thrusts of your argument regarding compassion and her being allowed back to the UK which should be her right. It just bothers me that given everything she has done, the appalling atrocities she has helped to enable and her obvious attitude now it really bothers me that she should be given special treatment that you, me or anyone else would get.

She thinks its fine to bomb pop concerts full of kids but not fine that her and her child aren't flown home and allowed to just get on with their lives.

I get that. But I feel this is more complex than just entitlement.

 

[Edie]

How do you know this? For 4 years she has been an enthusiastic supporter of a regime whose followers have demanded that their people return to their countries to continue the jihad by cutting throats and running people down with vehicles. Exactly what has happened in the most recent attacks in Europe, perpetrated by people who afaia, didn't even go to Syria. At the very least she poses an ideological threat.

Again, how do you know this? This thread has amply demonstrated that there's no shortage of people who would rather support her than see her punished. As the law, stands, it probably would only see her prosecuted for joining a proscibed organisation which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years. IF, and it's an enormous IF, she were sentenced to the maximum, she'd do 5 years. More likely she'd do a bit of time and be directed to one of these deradicalisation programs which don't seem to work in all cases.

A use of expensive resources that surely would be better employed elsewhere.

So what, rather than subject her to the rule of law we allow the Home Secretary to do whatever he sees fit? That cannot be right.

 

[SpackleFrog]

strange in the light of trump's admonition to britain, among others, to take daesh people in

America First

 

[xenon]

All due respect this isn’t exactly a normal situation. This isn’t someone losing a passport in Spain and pleading special circumstances. It’s significant enough for several crews of international journalists to travel to her. Just bring her back with them.

They'd have to take her to a country with British consular services to get emergency travel docs. Not just rock up at an airport in Turkey. Also goes against general journalistic integraty and impartiality. (Yeah, yeah I know.)

If anyone's being brought out of there, bring someone else back who's not chosen to join Daesh instead.


My opinion hasn't changed. If she makes it to a country with consular representation, by all means let her return to the UK to face investigation and due process. Removing her British citizenship was a synical grandstanding move by the home secretary.

 

[Pickman's model]

America First

the cradle of the best and of the worst

 

[brogdale]

Anyone else reckon that Rudd was quite happy for HO civil servants to allow Javid to go ahead with the Bangladesh/joint-nationality grand-standing nonsense, only to end up looking like a self-serving tit when the whole thing inevitably fell at the first?

 

[Edie]

xenon the whole ‘bring someone back whose not Daesh’ is a meaningless argument. Complete false dichotomy.

 

[Pickman's model]

Anyone else reckon that Rudd was quite happy for HO civil servants to allow Javid to go ahead with the Bangladesh/joint-nationality grand-standing nonsense, only to end up looking like a self-serving tit when the whole thing inevitably fell at the first?

bet rudd said 'go ahead, it'll be fine' while laughing behind her hand

 

[brogdale]

bet rudd said 'go ahead, it'll be fine' while laughing behind her hand

Yep, and his shaky performance at the dispatch box will have kept the giggles going.

 

[xenon]

xenon the whole ‘bring someone back whose not Daesh’ is a meaningless argument. Complete false dichotomy.

No. Not whilst you're talking about sympathy and empathy it isn't. It's an emotional response to your expression of feeling some sympathy towards her.

 

[Spymaster]

So what, rather than subject her to the rule of law we allow the Home Secretary to do whatever he sees fit?

Given that Bangladesh have, in no uncertain terms, said they won't accept her, Javid's decision, it will be argued, has probably de facto made her stateless. The legal process is likely to roll on for years during which she may well die or be killed in the camp. If that doesn't happen, give her to Iraq or Syria, whose people were most affected by her choices and crimes. France, I believe, is allowing it's fighters to be tried overseas.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

My opinion hasn't changed. If she makes it to a country with consular representation, by all means let her return to the UK to face investigation and due process.

She is on the Turkish border, but can not cross without the docs. The Kurds running the camp have asked the UK to provide the docs at the border so they can be rid of her.

 

[Pickman's model]

Given that Bangladesh have, in no uncertain terms, said they won't accept her, Javid's decision, it will be argued, has probably de facto, made her stateless. The legal process is likely to roll on for years during which she may well die or be killed in the camp. If that doesn't happen, give her to Iraq or Syria, whose people were most affected by her choices and crimes.

if reports of widespread unease in northern iraq are true, and daesh do make a comeback there, then i suppose another option for disposing of her will be open

 

[maomao]

Were enthusiastically pro nazi wives punished after World War Two? (apart from when the allies turned up and raped them all that is)

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Javid has fucked himself, trying to palm her off without checking properly if he can. We'll now have to take her back and he will have to accept that she will receive a short period of questioning and be released, making him look a useless, toothless braggart.

 

[Pickman's model]

Javid has fucked himself, trying to palm her off without checking properly if he can. We'll now have to take her back and he will have to accept that she will receive a short period of questioning and be released, making him look a useless, toothless braggart.

an orally flatulent windbag

 

[xenon]

OH god not the errant Nazi comparison again.

 

[brogdale]

Javid has fucked himself, trying to palm her off without checking properly if he can. We'll now have to take her back and he will have to accept that she will receive a short period of questioning and be released, making him look a useless, toothless braggart.

 

[Edie]

No. Not whilst you're talking about sympathy and empathy it isn't. It's an emotional response to your expression of feeling some sympathy towards her.

It’s a bit of a daft emotional response in my view, because it completely ignores any context, but crack on.

 

[Spymaster]

Were enthusiastically pro nazi wives punished after World War Two?

Was there solid evidence that enthusiatically pro nazi wives went out of their way to materially support the crimes perpetrated by the regime?

If so, then they should have been.

 

[newbie]

Aye, lets not forget journalists are racking up thousands of pounds travelling to a refugee camp and interviewing her purely for clickbait and rage shares.

They don't even have the decency to run reports of conditions in the camps or interview anyone else while they're there.

true, the initial scoop interview has moved all the focus into celeb territory. The media has regular access and while I haven't read/seen every report one thing that is striking is that sfaik she hasn't alleged ill-treatment or particular hardship in the camp. That's to the credit of her captors.

I have some doubts the people she's incarcerated with would have been so merciful/civilised. I also doubt they'd all be particularly sympathetic if she renounced them and what they stood for- her interviews have to be seen in the context that she shares space with murderers and rapists and she thus cannot be seen to step out of line. More than that, they're members of a group who were often credited with extremely sophisticated use of propaganda across the news and social media. While she is in that camp nothing she says can really be taken at face value, she may be a willing part of an outreach programme, she may be being coerced in what she says.

Whichever way there are a lot like her and her husband. Their crimes were predominantly against Syrian and Iraqi people so they should have first choice on what happens. Rather than each individual nation trying to work out what do with their nationals, leaving the likes of Bangladesh to pick up the pieces, perhaps there is scope for some internationally brokered agreement on how to proceed? One possibility is that the Rest of the World provides the funds for Kurdish or Syrian groups to take all the children into care (or repatriate them) and to build a proper prison and keep these people (after due process and conviction) in it for some decades.

 

[Dillinger4]

I just sent this to the Home Secretary:

Dear Sir,


I am writing in regard to the order given for the revocation of UK Citizenship of Shamima Begum.


To do this is rash, poorly thought out, made for extremely short term gain with no consideration of the longer term consequences. It is a trial by media, instead of by law. It is arbitrary and unjust. It is a gift to those who hate us. It does irreparable damage to our reputation for justice, equality under the law.


Shamima Begum was born in the United Kingdom. It is not the right of the Home Secretary to arbitrarily decide who is and who is not a UK citizen. If Ms Begum has broken UK law, then bring her home and put her on trial, and give her due process of law. To act with such short sightedness, for such short term gain, inspires only disappointment, and damages us all.


There should be a public enquiry into radicalisation. This must be extensive, and it must be public. It must focus on all forms of extremism. There must be a greater understanding among the British public as to how young people become radicalised.


Instead, following the example of the Norwegian Government in the aftermath of the Utoya massacre, we should aspire to higher values in the face of hatred. Anything less is a gift to those who would destroy our way of life.


I believe that as Home Secretary to the Government of the United Kingdom, you should hold yourself to these higher values, and to fail to do so shows that you are not suitable for the job.


Yours,

*******

 

[Dillinger4]

btw I don't believe the British government or nation or anything has or ever had any of those values and I don't think this will make any change to that but this has been on my mind this week and I needed to say it.