International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Social Issues & Current Events (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=82)
-   -   ISIS teenager wants to come home (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334783)

Vixen 14th February 2019 05:31 AM

ISIS teenager wants to come home
 
Seems one of the three teenage schoolgirls then budding sixth form pupils who thought it would be a great idea to join the ISIS movement in Syria, now wants to return to the UK.

Quote:

One of three schoolgirls who left east London in 2015 to join the Islamic State group says she has no regrets, but wants to return to the UK.

In an interview with the Times, Shamima Begum, now 19, talked about seeing "beheaded heads" in bins - but said that it "did not faze her".

Speaking from a refugee camp in Syria, she said she was nine months pregnant and wanted to come home for her baby.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47229181


What does the panel think?

My initial thought was let her rot, but then callow youth does do stupid things - the Icarus syndrome - and I thought perhaps she deserves to be given a chance. However, her attitude irritates me and I can't help wondering if she is some kind of psychopath.

applecorped 14th February 2019 05:32 AM

She made her bed let her stay there and enjoy the bin full of heads

Vixen 14th February 2019 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by applecorped (Post 12600123)
She made her bed let her stay there and enjoy the bin full of heads

Might depend on her official legal nationality rather than her antics. If she is still British then the UK might have to take her back, although it's possible she is declared stateless thanks to her ISIS affiliation.

What a cheek though, only coming back to use the NHS.

Western life OK then.

MikeG 14th February 2019 05:38 AM

It's illegal in international law to declare someone stateless. We can't and won't do that.

applecorped 14th February 2019 05:39 AM

We?

I would declare her an enemy combatant and if/when she returns I would jail her for at least 10 years

MikeG 14th February 2019 05:48 AM

This whole subject, whilst interesting, is moot. The girl is in Syria where we have no consular cover, and to get to a country where she could ask for help in being repatriated she would have to find her way across hostile territory and then across one of the most heavily policed borders in the world, without any paperwork. She might wish for all this to happen, and those who say she was a victim of online grooming whilst a 15 year old child may also wish this to happen, but the actuality is that there isn't any mechanism that could realistically bring these wishes to fruition. This discussion is all hypothetical only.

Childlike Empress 14th February 2019 05:55 AM

She "wants" to return because the show is over. To illustrate what "Baghouz", the last territory held by ISIS as mentioned in the article is, it's a couple of streets of a single village, and the 24 hours ultimatum the SDF gave to the remaining maybe 300 fighters to surrender is about to end every minute now.

France and some non-"Western" states have already taken some of the fine products of their societies back and the UK will eventually have to do the same, as the SDF has repeatedly called for.

Vixen 14th February 2019 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeG (Post 12600131)
It's illegal in international law to declare someone stateless. We can't and won't do that.

'We' did it to the so-called four Beatles (now three), did we not?

Worm 14th February 2019 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by applecorped (Post 12600123)
She made her bed let her stay there and enjoy the bin full of heads

Quote:

Originally Posted by applecorped (Post 12600133)
We?

I would declare her an enemy combatant and if/when she returns I would jail her for at least 10 years

Quote:

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress (Post 12600145)
She "wants" to return because the show is over.

Your compassion is truly overwhelming.

Childlike Empress 14th February 2019 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worm (Post 12600156)
Your compassion is truly overwhelming.


Read the article. She regrets nothing and liked the ISIS lifestyle. She had to flee because the alternative was a nice greeting from home in form of a bomb on the head, and that danger is still not over:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SANA
Deir Ezzor, SANA- Warplanes of the US-led “International Coalition” on Tuesday continued aggression on the Syrian territories through shelling al-Baghouz town in Deir Ezzor countryside claiming the lives of scores of civilians and injuring others, mostly women and children.

Local sources in Deir Ezzor told SANA that at least 70 civilians were martyred or injured, mostly women and children on the outskirts of al-Baghouz town in airstrikes launched by warplanes of the “International Coalition”.

The sources indicated that the coalition’s airstrikes targeted a camp that embraces hundreds of civilians who fled the shelling by the coalition and the terrorism of Daesh (ISIS), indicating that the number of martyrs is more likely to rise due to the critical conditions of some of the injured and the difficulty of hospitalizing them due to the continued shelling.

This massacre comes just hours after warplanes of the “International Coalition” committed another massacre in al-Baghouz village as 24 civilians were martyred mostly women and children.


Mike! 14th February 2019 06:24 AM

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Puppycow 14th February 2019 06:25 AM

If she comes back there should be consequences. Serious consequences.

If the question is a moot one, I will shed no tears for her predicament, which she put herself in.

SuburbanTurkey 14th February 2019 06:30 AM

What's the law around this kind of stuff? ISIS is obviously an illegal operation, but sounds like she wasn't involved directly in any combat or other operations. She volunteered to marry a terrorist. Does that count as a criminal contribution?

MikeG 14th February 2019 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 12600153)
'We' did it to the so-called four Beatles (now three), did we not?

No. Dual citizens can have their British nationality revoked, but we cannot and will not revoke the nationality of those with only British citizenship. That is a fundamental of international law.

MikeG 14th February 2019 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey (Post 12600177)
What's the law around this kind of stuff? ISIS is obviously an illegal operation, but sounds like she wasn't involved directly in any combat or other operations. She volunteered to marry a terrorist. Does that count as a criminal contribution?

My understanding is that those like her may not have broken any laws. The government is (currently I think) bringing in a law which would make it a crime to travel to designated places, but obviously this couldn't be used retrospectively. In future, the government would designate a war zone or a terrorist training camp, and thus be able to charge and punish anyone who went there.

angrysoba 14th February 2019 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey (Post 12600177)
What's the law around this kind of stuff? ISIS is obviously an illegal operation, but sounds like she wasn't involved directly in any combat or other operations. She volunteered to marry a terrorist. Does that count as a criminal contribution?

I think so. She's been aiding a terrorist organization. I think we have to take her back and also prosecute her. Presumably it could make a difference given the age at which she left as to whether or not she would be tried as an adult, but as said, it sounds like she is unrepentant and wants to go the UK because she wants to give birth. Her earlier children died, presumably because ISIS hospitals, if such exist, are squalid as is the ideology she subscribes to.

MikeG 14th February 2019 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Puppycow (Post 12600172)
If she comes back there should be consequences. Serious consequences........

Consequences for what? Should people face consequences from the state if they haven't broken any laws?

I'll be honest, I don't want her back in the country, or anyone like her, but I also don't want the state to able to punish people for legal activities.

angrysoba 14th February 2019 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeG (Post 12600190)
Consequences for what? Should people face consequences from the state if they haven't broken any laws?

I'll be honest, I don't want her back in the country, or anyone like her, but I also don't want the state to able to punish people for legal activities.

According to the BBC article:

Quote:

Another British jihadi bride, Tareena Shakil, who got out of the war zone with her child, lied to the security services on her return and was jailed for membership of a terrorist group.

If Ms Begum got out of the country, that is the kind of charge she could face - along with encouraging or supporting terrorism.

baron 14th February 2019 07:10 AM

There is whole raft of crimes she might be in breach of, including (paraphrased) supporting terrorism, inviting support for terrorism, funding terrorism, being a member of a proscribed organisation, distributing, displaying or promoting terrorist material, receiving or engaging in terrorist training, transmitting information likely to be useful in terrorist activity, failing to report terrorist activity or the suspicion of terrorist activity to the authorities and, depending on what she's done in Syria, direct involvement in terrorist acts. And that's just a few off the top of my head.

If this terrorist cannot be stripped of her citizenship, which is likely, then she should be given no help whatsoever to return to the UK and any person who does help her should be charged with terrorist offences. If she makes it back the UK under her own steam her child should be immediately removed from her custody and she should be charged with all pertinent offences. Unfortunately, although I suspect enough evidence for multiple life sentences can be found, the weak-minded UK justice system will sentence her to six or eight years and she'll serve three.

Then, she will get out of jail and security forces will spend millions of taxpayers' money monitoring her activities. Whether she slips the net and commits a terrorist act on UK soil, or causes one to be committed, or whether she simply remains a parasite for the rest of her life, sucking on the fat tit of the welfare state, who knows. Personally I'd have her executed.

Childlike Empress 14th February 2019 07:15 AM

Here's the article about France taking back 130 of their ISIS members captured alive, two weeks ago, after the SDF/YPG has called for months if not years on countries to take them back.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Firat News Agency
[...] There are some 3.000 ISIS members captured in YPG special units’ operations in northern Syria in Rojava’s prisons. The number rises as the operations continue. Over 800 of the arrestees stand out as citizens of 46 countries, including many Western countries. The Rojava administration has been calling for France, the US, Germany and other countries to take on the task of putting these foreign ISIS members on trial. To date, only Indonesia, Russia, Morocco and the Sudan have officially requested extradition from the Rojava administration for their citizens captured alive by the YPG.


A couple of days later even the US called on states to take back their citizens. Although I have read nothing about them doing the same - which is usual MO I guess. Do as we tell you, not as we do.

Myriad 14th February 2019 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 12600121)
My initial thought was let her rot, but then callow youth does do stupid things - the Icarus syndrome - and I thought perhaps she deserves to be given a chance. However, her attitude irritates me and I can't help wondering if she is some kind of psychopath.


That depends. Has she done any cartwheels?

TragicMonkey 14th February 2019 08:55 AM

I hear Guantanamo enjoys a pleasant climate year round.

Archie Gemmill Goal 14th February 2019 09:06 AM

She should be allowed to return and tried in a court. I'm not sure the kid should be allowed to stay with her regardless.

dann 14th February 2019 09:29 AM

There are German ISIS teens, too: "Ich will zurück in mein altes Leben" (mdr.de - Sachsen-Anhalt, Feb. 2019)

"I want to go back to my old life."

bluesjnr 14th February 2019 09:37 AM

I have no hesitation in wishing the worst possible outcome for her. We should clandestinely execute the piece of **** if she gets within a channels width of "home".

ahhell 14th February 2019 09:37 AM

As a rule, I'm in favor of giving former 16 year old ******** an out from their ******* choices. She doesn't actually seem to regret those ******* choices. I'm not sure what to do with someone that says they are "unfazed" by bins full of severed heads.

p0lka 14th February 2019 10:09 AM

Maybe she isn't saying anything bad about ISIS at the moment because of where she is?
Her tune might change in a safer environment.

The Great Zaganza 14th February 2019 10:16 AM

Anyone we can get out of a warzone can't support the war.

TragicMonkey 14th February 2019 11:06 AM

Teenage rebellion is dyeing your hair, smoking cigarettes, spraypainting graffiti, and shoplifting. Anything with baskets of severed heads involved is something else entirely.

Skeptic Ginger 14th February 2019 11:11 AM

She's in a refugee camp, close to giving birth, of course she wants to go back to the UK.

Seems to me if she's a citizen she should be allowed back in (not sure who should pay her transport), tried for laws broken and hopefully there are relatives that would raise the child.

IOW, just follow the law, distaste for the girl shouldn't be part of it. And yes, the age she was when she went on her 'adventure' matters. But so does any potential she has of carrying out a terrorist act.

Skeptic Ginger 14th February 2019 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza (Post 12600516)
Anyone we can get out of a warzone can't support the war.

:confused:

I don't see how you figure this.

theprestige 14th February 2019 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeG (Post 12600190)
Consequences for what? Should people face consequences from the state if they haven't broken any laws?

I'll be honest, I don't want her back in the country, or anyone like her, but I also don't want the state to able to punish people for legal activities.

Being at war isn't necessarily "illegal" in the usual sense. But it does entitle the people you're at war with to impose extreme sanctions on you - including lethal sanctions.

POW camps are quite rightly regulated by laws, but they are not part of the due process of their nation's criminal justice system. Because POWs aren't criminals in that sense. They're just enemy combatants, and the conventions for their due process are entirely different from the conventions of the criminal justice system.

Also, it's hard to imagine anything more obviously "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" than marrying an enemy soldier.

The Great Zaganza 14th February 2019 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12600582)
:confused:

I don't see how you figure this.

If that kid survives, it's almost certain to become a terrorist to some degree.
Enlightened self-interest suggests that the world is safer when more people get some education instead of growing up in terrorist-controlled refugee camps.

theprestige 14th February 2019 11:32 AM

Rescue the girl, abort the fetus, put her on trial.

SusanB-M1 14th February 2019 11:35 AM

Was any mention made of the husband of the girl and, presumably, the father of her children?

cullennz 14th February 2019 11:44 AM

Not sure if it has been mentioned, but did she have her citizenship revoked?

If so, who gives a ****

If not, the UK is under a moral obligation to take her back, or at least make sure she isn't harmed.

Personally my opinion would be to take her back, but under the proviso it is to monitored detainment indefinitely (probably add a pretend trial to make it look nice). This will give them a lengthy period to see if she can be rehabilitated, keep her kid and evaluate whether she could/should be released to the public.

Again. Forgive me if I missed it as I only have time to skim, but from what I understand she didn't actually kill anyone, just got treat like a play toy for the nutty blokes with the bombs and guns.

Dr. Keith 14th February 2019 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey (Post 12600573)
Teenage rebellion is dyeing your hair, smoking cigarettes, spraypainting graffiti, and shoplifting. Anything with baskets of severed heads involved is something else entirely.

Such a prude.

cullennz 14th February 2019 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SusanB-M1 (Post 12600615)
Was any mention made of the husband of the girl and, presumably, the father of her children?

From what I have read, the girls going over there found out it was for their recreation, not for soul partnerships, if you know what I mean.

She might have been different though

theprestige 14th February 2019 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeG (Post 12600131)
It's illegal in international law to declare someone stateless.

"International law" is a set of opt-in conventions. It has no legal jurisdiction or enforcement authority. Maybe the UK has domestic laws that embody some of the principles of "international law"? I don't know. But if they do, then it would be illegal in UK law, which is actually a thing.

Quote:

We can't and won't do that.
I don't know about won't, but I'm pretty sure you can. If not de jure, then certainly de facto. Just refuse to repatriate her. Would probably piss off whichever country is stuck hosting her. They'd probably raise a fuss and complain about "international law". But the actual operative laws would be the domestic laws and treaty agreements of the two nations involved. Plus the domestic laws of any other nation that also wanted to get involved via sanctions or whatever.

---

ETA: If pressed, I'd say that the only real "international law" is the Resolutions of the UN Security Council. The only enforcement authority is whatever a UNSC member nation chooses to do under the banner of a UNSC Resolution. We've seen how well that works in practice. It's also just the fundamental law of molon labe, which is the only real law between nation states.

JoeMorgue 14th February 2019 11:53 AM

I can't help but feel that "You're not welcome back in a country (as a normal, private citizen) after you've declared yourself to an enemy of that country" is just one of those things that in any sane world we would haven't to spell out.

But there's nothing in the rule book that says a golden retriever can't play football yet again I guess.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.