• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

ISIS teenager wants to come home

Darat said:
I've not seen anything either - but what has that to do with her being put on trial for her crimes, that is the type of issue that is dealt with by the judge when they decide on sentencing.
Click to expand...

You are conflating two separate issues. The idea that she was groomed absolves her from personal responsibility for her own actions, and assumes she did not actually want to join ISIS. Whether or not she should be allowed back to face trial is another issue.

Darat said:
What excuses? Has anyone said she shouldn't be put on trial for what she has done?
Click to expand...

Yes. Vixen, for a start.
Then there's your own position, which is that somehow it isn't her fault. Others on this thread take that stance too.

Darat said:
What defenders? Has anyone said she shouldn't be held responsible for her crimes?
Click to expand...

As I have said, claiming she's just a brainwashed child is saying just that. It's saying that it's someone else's doing that made her that way, and she was just an innocent pawn.

Darat said:
Which ideology?
Click to expand...

Left-wing, post-colonial guilt.
 
Darat said:
I've not seen anything either - but what has that to do with her being put on trial for her crimes, that is the type of issue that is dealt with by the judge when they decide on sentencing.
Click to expand...

Let me try asking this again, as none of Begum's fanclub deigned to answer last time.
OK, she is brought back to the UK, sentenced, and found guilty of terrorist offences. Then what?
If she is placed in the general prison population, there is a significant risk of her radicalising those around her. If she is placed with other Islamist convicts, this creates a crucible of fundamentalism, leading to more of a threat. So, is she to be placed in solitary confinement for the duration of her sentence?
Then, what happens after she is released? Will she have to be watched, or do we just assume that she's rid herself of her murderous tendencies and is now fully rehabilitated?
What do we do with her? How do we ensure that she is no longer a threat to British society?
 
Cosmic Yak said:
You are conflating two separate issues. The idea that she was groomed absolves her from personal responsibility for her own actions, and assumes she did not actually want to join ISIS. Whether or not she should be allowed back to face trial is another issue.



Yes. Vixen, for a start.Then there's your own position, which is that somehow it isn't her fault. Others on this thread take that stance too.



As I have said, claiming she's just a brainwashed child is saying just that. It's saying that it's someone else's doing that made her that way, and she was just an innocent pawn.



Left-wing, post-colonial guilt.
Click to expand...

Citation, please.
 
Vixen said:
Citation, please.
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
For goodness sake, have you never heard of Stockholm Syndrome? ?
Click to expand...

Stockholm Syndrome applies to victims, hostages, not to perpetrators. You are saying she was brainwashed by her environment. Nowhere in that long, rambling post of yours do you say she is responsible for her own actions.
In an earlier post, you downplayed the seriousness of what she'd done, saying her joining a terrorist group was a childish whim, no more serious than wearing platform shoes. That doesn't shout 'put her on trial!' to me.
However, perhaps you forgot to say that part out loud.
For the record, do you believe Begum should be help responsible for her actions, both at the time of her journey to Syria, and afterwards? Would you like to see her stand trial for terrorist offences?
 
Last edited:
Patty Hearst is an heiress to the Hearst yellow-newspaper fortune, abducted and held for ransom. She was later spotted participating in a bank robbery with the group that kidnapped her. The only criminal charges brought against her were for the bank robbery, not with her abduction.
 
Last edited:
Cosmic Yak said:
Stockholm Syndrome applies to victims, hostages, not to perpetrators. You are saying she was brainwashed by her environment. Nowhere in that long, rambling post of yours do you say she is responsible for her own actions.
In an earlier post, you downplayed the seriousness of what she'd done, saying her joining a terrorist group was a childish whim, no more serious than wearing platform shoes. That doesn't shout 'put her on trial!' to me.
However, perhaps you forgot to say that part out loud.
For the record, do you believe Begum should be help responsible for her actions, both at the time of her journey to Syria, and afterwards? Would you like to see her stand trial for terrorist offences?
Click to expand...

Thanks for admitting I said nothing of the sort you said I did. All civilised countries understand the concept of age being a mitigating factor. Note, mitigating doesn't mean the same as 'innocent'. Begum has never had a trial so how do you know whether she is innocent or guilty, and in any case, nationality shouldn't be determined on your likeability factor but on objective grounds. Objectively, Begum was British and now she is stateless.

You are being obtuse when you pretend not to understand these salient issues.
 
Actually after a long argument between Cosmic Yak and I it's clear he has a good understanding and where we differ is a few areas of interpretation - i.e. the (to me) awfulness of the power under section 40 and interpretation of some clauses in the Bangladeshi nationality act where I believe they are unclear.
 
Silly Green Monkey said:
Patty Hearst is an heiress to the Hearst yellow-newspaper fortune, abducted and held for ransom. She was later spotted participating in a bank robbery with the group that kidnapped her. The only criminal charges brought against her were for the bank robbery, not with her abduction.
Click to expand...

That's right. She was treated leniently because it was accepted she was brainwashed by the Symbiotic cult in a Stockholm Syndrome situation. This is when hostages or other type of captives - such as young people being groomed - take the side of their captors or abusers. This is a survival mechanism, and is also to do with empathising with the people close to you.
 
Vixen said:
That's right. She was treated leniently because it was accepted she was brainwashed by the Symbiotic cult in a Stockholm Syndrome situation. This is when hostages or other type of captives - such as young people being groomed - take the side of their captors or abusers. This is a survival mechanism, and is also to do with empathising with the people close to you.
Click to expand...

It was not a Stockholm Syndrome situation. It was a classic grooming situation. I long ago got rid of my psychology texts but the Britannica is a good resource
https://www.britannica.com/science/Stockholm-syndrome
The survival instinct is at the heart of the Stockholm syndrome. Victims live in enforced dependence and interpret rare or small acts of kindness in the midst of horrible conditions as good treatment.
Click to expand...
 
Like you said, grooming. Once she was in Syria she was completely at the mercy of ISIS, they controlled her entire environment. Also she hasn't been put on trial yet.
 
Darat said:
My view remains the same.

She doesn't have any other nationality than British.
She was groomed
She was sex trafficked across the EU
She entered into a forced marriage
She supported ISIS

She should be repatriated to the UK, she should go on trial for her support of ISIS, that she was groomed and sex trafficked needs to be taken into account if she is found guilty of that crime. If a jail sentence is the appropriate punishment after due process and a guilty decision then she should be treated like other British citizen found guilty of such crimes. I assume after release she would remain on our "watch list".
Click to expand...
This. However there are two main issues:
1. The ignorant masses who refuse to accept point one above.
2. The deep reluctance of the prior UKGov to actually let the (alleged) criminal case against her get anywhere near a court.
 
Silly Green Monkey said:
Like you said, grooming. Once she was in Syria she was completely at the mercy of ISIS, they controlled her entire environment. Also she hasn't been put on trial yet.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct. In that environment your life would be in great danger if you expressed any opposition or dissent, so you play along, and often, due to cognitive dissonance, you even start rationalising that perhaps these people have a point and are fighting for a worthy cause.

It was grooming and radicalising to get the 15-year-old schoolgirls there and once there, they were at the mercy of their new 'husbands' and associates, following the tenets of fundamental Islamism.
 
catsmate said:
This. However there are two main issues:
1. The ignorant masses who refuse to accept point one above.2. The deep reluctance of the prior UKGov to actually let the (alleged) criminal case against her get anywhere near a court.
Click to expand...

Both rude and wrong. She has automatic Bangladeshi citizenship. I suggest you read the pertinent parts of this thread, to better understand the issue you are commenting on.
 
Cosmic Yak said:
Stockholm Syndrome applies to victims, hostages, not to perpetrators. You are saying she was brainwashed by her environment. Nowhere in that long, rambling post of yours do you say she is responsible for her own actions.
In an earlier post, you downplayed the seriousness of what she'd done, saying her joining a terrorist group was a childish whim, no more serious than wearing platform shoes. That doesn't shout 'put her on trial!' to me.
However, perhaps you forgot to say that part out loud.
For the record, do you believe Begum should be help responsible for her actions, both at the time of her journey to Syria, and afterwards? Would you like to see her stand trial for terrorist offences?
Click to expand...

Bump for Vixen. Can you answer the questions, please?
 
Cosmic Yak said:
Stockholm Syndrome applies to victims, hostages, not to perpetrators. You are saying she was brainwashed by her environment. Nowhere in that long, rambling post of yours do you say she is responsible for her own actions.
In an earlier post, you downplayed the seriousness of what she'd done, saying her joining a terrorist group was a childish whim, no more serious than wearing platform shoes. That doesn't shout 'put her on trial!' to me.
However, perhaps you forgot to say that part out loud.
For the record, do you believe Begum should be help responsible for her actions, both at the time of her journey to Syria, and afterwards? Would you like to see her stand trial for terrorist offences?
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
Yes, of course Begum should stand trial if there is reasonable prospect of success of a conviction. You need more than hearsay and the opinion of tabloid columnists to get it past CPS.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sorry, but you still haven't answered this one. You were the one that picked up on this, remember? I think it only fair that you should state your position clearly.
As for 'hearsay', she is on record admitting joining a terrorist organisation. Did you perhaps miss her saying that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom