Shamima Begum

As she clearly has no morals there's no complexities involved in this case.

There are certainly complexities, which you would have been alerted to had you read Maher's article. A shame that you did not bother to do that.

It's also unfortunate that you are not prepared to consider empirical evidence on the nature of the adolescent brain that may have a bearing on the Begum case. People with open minds should be prepared to engage with material like this, and challenge the content specifically rather than dismiss it out of hand.

I did realise that I might run the risk of coming across like Lord Longford in referencing this neurological research. And some teenagers do mature intellectually at faster rates than others, and are indeed capable of being aware of the moral implications of their deeds.

The following is from Islam Beyond the Violent Jihadis by Ziauddin Sardar and is an extract from his encounter with Sixth Form Religious Studies students at a girl’s school in Bradford in 2015. These students almost certainly fall into this category:

‘Perhaps we can start with a simple question.’ Several girls raised their hands immediately, and I randomly pointed towards a pupil who oozed confidence. ‘Would you say that Islam is incompatible with postmodernism?’ she asked. There was no way I could duck the second question. ‘Yes, it is,’ I replied. ‘Postmodernism suggests that almost everything that provides meaning and a sense of direction in our lives is meaningless – such as religion, history, tradition, reason and science. It also argues that all truth is relative. As a faith, Islam seeks to provide meaning and direction in the lives of believers. It places strong emphasis on tradition, history, reason and science. And it sees only some truths as relative. Ironically, postmodernism itself functions as a religion for some people.’ A lively discussion followed, with some girls expressing slight disagreement with my explanation. ‘It wasn’t nuanced enough’, said one.

…As one question followed another, it became evident that the sixth formers were into asking critical, complex questions. And they were not going to be satisfied with simple answers. Not the sort of women who will go and join the ‘Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIL) to become ‘jihadi brides’.

…What, I asked, did the sixth formers think of those who leave Britain to fight for the Islamic State’? ‘Misguided’. ‘Brainwashed’. ‘Not very educated, are they?’ The answers came thick and fast. Another girl in hijab said, ‘They know very little about Islam. What they know they have acquired from the social media or websites run by ultra-conservative imams. They think they are learning about Islam but they are being fed propaganda and a literalist, extremist version of Islam.’ Another lively discussion followed, and we ended up exploring the reasons why some young Muslims are happy to give up their lives in Britain and head for ‘the Caliphate’ in in Syria.'


Pupils like this would certainly have been capable of knowing what they were doing at the age of 15. But I doubt that Begum resembled them when she was the same age.

In closing I will just point out that moral certainty can be just as dangerous as amorality, and I perceive an unwarranted degree of that certainty in your posts.

Megan Phelps-Roper, formerly of the Westboro Baptist Church, has written very perceptively about this:

'Doubt causes us to hold a strong position a bit more loosely, such that an acknowledgement of ignorance or error doesn’t crush our sense of self or leave us totally unmoored if our position proves untenable. Certainty is the opposite: it hampers enquiry and hinders growth. It teaches us to ignore evidence that contradicts our ideas, and encourages us to defend our position at all costs, even as it reveals itself as indefensible. Certainty sees compromise as weak, hypocritical, evil, suppressing empathy and allowing us to justify inflicting horrible pain on others.'

As you consider my contributions to lack credibility, I will therefore leave it at that.
 
Last edited:
Anyone remember the thread when she first went over and one of our respected long-standing posters basically saying "fair play to her" as though she was off on some innocent Famous Five style adventure with a couple of her mates?!!
 
Anyone remember the thread when she first went over and one of our respected long-standing posters basically saying "fair play to her" as though she was off on some innocent Famous Five style adventure with a couple of her mates?!!

Who was it?
 
Genuine question asked without prejudice.

What SPECIFIC crimes is she suspected of and likely to be charged with under English law if she was to be allowed to return to this country?
 
Sorry but I’m not divulging that info in public. You’ll have to search for it yourself.

Then why say anything at all?

FYI I did search the first person I had a vague hunch you might have been talking about.

And if it was in 2015 there is a good chance the post you are referencing no longer exists anyway.
 
Just in case anyone is interested, this is from the Wiki:

Caliphate (Swedish: Kalifat) is a Swedish television series. It premiered on 12 January 2020 on Sveriges television. It became the most-viewed series ever on SVT Play.

The story is based on the real-life case of the Bethnal Green trio (who included Shamima Begum, in which three teenage girls from London met jihad recruiters at their high school in February 2015. The television adaptation follows multiple characters including Fatima – a Swedish Security agent, Pervin – a young Swedish woman lured into Syria, and Sulle – an opinionated teenager groomed by the Islamic state/ISIL. The plot explores and revolves around themes such as Islamic extremism, terrorism, tensions within Islam and among Muslims, women's rights, and human rights.

Caliphate was made available globally on Netflix on 18 March 2020.


I found the series gripping and - based on a whole raft of books that I read about about ISIS, Salafi-jihadism and radicalisation a while back - pretty accurate from what I could tell, more so than Homeland and Les Bureau des Legendes.


Even better is Pontecorvo's remarkable The Battle for Algiers, which is widely regarded as one of the greatest films ever made, and that also looks at female participation in acts of terror (see the trailer).



And for those who may want to delve into the specialist literature, this has recently been published:

9780190647322.jpg


Haven't got around to reading my copy yet but Afsaruddin is an outstanding academic. Her modus operandi is usually to out-Salafi the Salafists by demonstrating that their understanding of the early period of Islam and, in particular, the history of the al salaf al salih or Companions of the Prophet, is utterly erroneous. The same goes for their interpretations of the relevant passages in the Qur'an and the ahadith, ones that are typically invoked to justify their actions. Contrastingly, she demonstrates how the notion of sabr or stoic forbearance was more foregrounded than qital or fighting in this formative period.
 
Well sometimes , instead of applying the Queensbury Rules its better to use the motto if you cant beat them join them.
As she clearly has no morals there's no complexities involved in this case.
Having seen the latest pictures where she appears to have become very westernised with sunglasses on her head and no head scarf and, she looked the picture of health
If she has truly seen the light she will do more good spending her time with the other kids in the camp explaining that terrorism/radicalisation is not the solution.

Don't you get it?

She, herself, is asking to come back and face the consequences and she'll do whatever time she gets!

I don't understand your thought process.
 
You are now arguing against yourself.
You initially said she may have been recruited
Then you post an article that says it was her doing the recruiting!!!
Hardly a good point to raise that she didn't know what she was doing

LOL!

What? You're arguing that one cannot be recruited and then become a recruiter if radicalised!!

Wow...
 
I think most would be concerned that she may return to the U.K. and carry out a terrorist act.
Why should we take the risk.
What about the human rights of the poor innocents who have been slaughtered by the Group she was happy to align herself with when she was sewing suicide belts.

Again this is an emotive response.

There is no indication she'd carry out any acts of terrorism on her return. Why would anyone be released from prison or their extradition to the UK be requested, if everyone feared they'd commit another crime?

You have to remove Begum and the emotion surrounding her, and look at the precedent being set and how this might impact society in the future.

The question is, do you support people being stripped of their citizenship and deported to a country they happen to qualify for citizenship for because they have committed a crime? And if so, do you still support it without the person having undergone a trial?
 
If the Kurds want to put her on trial they should be putting her on trial, she allegedly committed the crimes there not here.

I'm not 100% sure on this but as there is no recognized Kurdish state, they'd be unable to extradite her.
 
membeship or professing membership of a prescribed terrorist organisation

conspiracy to join such an organisation


Thank you.

From what I can make out, those charges carry a maximum sentence of 14 years. I’ve not studied it in detail though, so may be mistaken.

For me, it’s an awfully dangerous precedent stripping any Briton of their Citizenship. But if it could ever be justified you’d have thought it would be for the most heinous crimes imaginable, rather than ones that carry the same punishment as causing death by careless driving.
 
Some people are just soft on crime

And those that are hard on crime are responsible for enacting policies of spectacular ineptitude in terms of the law of unforeseen consequences.

The classic example is America's 'War on Drugs' and the seminal study is David Simon and Ed Burns's The Corner on the complete failure of this policy in the US city of Baltimore.

Or if you want to be entertained while seeing your claim subjected to a swift process of trituration, try watching a few episodes of the TV series The Wire or the more recent We Own This City.
 
Is this is a serious response?

There is a serious point, which is that in this debate a number of voices associated with the 'soft on crime' sort of rhetoric have been noticeably reluctant to see Shamima Begum face justice for the crimes she appears to have committed.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top