Has anyone watched the 90 minute BBC documentary on Shamima Begum?

Delila

I think she expected adventure and romance with dashing superheroes - she was fifteen. Bethnal Green couldn’t compare.

I agree, and it may have appealed rather than staying here and shoved into an arranged marriage.I don’t know if they were groomed or not.
Regardless of age I don’t think anyone should be stripped of nationality, they should be sent back to the country they were living in (UK in this case) and be dealt with here.

Doodledog

I saw the documentary. It was good, and I didn't change my mind - I felt that she was groomed and in any case too 15 is too young for anyone to be held responsible for a stupid decision for the rest of her life.

She isn't very likeable, but that shouldn't be a good reason to deny her citizenship. There is no way of knowing whether she is traumatised by what happened to her (she was married off to an abusive husband, sent to live with a man known to the authorities for being violent whilst her husband was in a toture jail, and had five pregnancies, two miscarriages and three dead babies), and I don't think that she would get a fair trial anyway - it would make more sense to have her case put before a panel of experts, such as psychologists and agents specialising in terrorism.

The longer she is denied entry to the UK, the older she will be (obviously!) and the more likely it is that she will be 'got at' in the camps, whether that is to attack her or recruit her to the cause again, if she left it as she says.

Totally agree with this. Remember also that she was being interviewed in a place that left her open to the danger of 'punishment' if her statements went against Isis. It must be terrifying.

Thankfully we don't live in a country where the criminal justice system is based on how likeable (or not) people are. I believe that Harold Shipman was very popular with his patients. If a fifteen year old girl had been trafficked to this country for the purposes of prostitution (because basically that is what it was) it would be her traffickers in court and she would be a witness. Anyone who believes that SB was free to leave or make her own decisions doesn't know much about how ISIS treats women. She is still at risk where she is now, so I'm sure that will have been very careful how she answered questions.

I have not watched the documentary yet so maybe I have missed something, but where are her parents in all this? If it was my DD and I thought she was innocent I would be on every newsreel and in every newspaper fighting her cause.

I watched the documentary and I have not changed my opinion of her. She said she believed she was leaving Bethnal Green for Islamic utopia, a place where Muslim girls were treated better than in the UK.
I really do not believe she was that naive, she gathered together all that is required to leave the country without alerting her parents or the authorities.
She had dual nationality, why does she not want to join her father in Bangladesh ?

I don't think it matters whether or not she was groomed or whether or not she is a nice person. She is our responsibility and we should not shuffle that off for another country to deal with.

When I was 15, if David Essex had offered to whisk me away from my boring life and change it for being with him in a gypsy caravan where I could be free of school and parents, my only question would have been 'where do I sign?' I used to dream of dancing round a camp fire with him, and cooking delicious meals by the side of a stream, gazing into his twinkly eyes.

Anyone who knows me will tell you that a life on the open road is most definitely not for me, and could have told you that back then. . 15 year olds are not noted for their common sense, which is why they are technically children for another three years.

Doodledog

When I was 15, if David Essex had offered to whisk me away from my boring life and change it for being with him in a gypsy caravan where I could be free of school and parents, my only question would have been 'where do I sign?' I used to dream of dancing round a camp fire with him, and cooking delicious meals by the side of a stream, gazing into his twinkly eyes.

Anyone who knows me will tell you that a life on the open road is most definitely not for me, and could have told you that back then. . 15 year olds are not noted for their common sense, which is why they are technically children for another three years.

But if he’d said that in order to live this idyllic life you’d have to watch people being beheaded, and maybe be involved in killings, ,would you still have gone….

I haven’t watched it but have read about it. I always thought that for those 3 girls - probably from families where they weren’t allowed much freedom - and were very susceptible to grooming - it was a sort of excitingly romantic Mills-and-Boon-y adventure, where they’d be going off to marry a handsome warrior - and doing it all in the name of Allah, which of course made it not only OK, but almost obligatory.

She also had a "friend" from the same school who had gone out there and was telling her that what was said about ISIS was not true. I have no doubt , the "friend" was also being manipulated by ISIS. I'm afraid people who believe she was not groomed are like the police who said that the girls in Rotherham had made a "life choice"! Thankfully, we now see that for what it was, grooming followed by violence and control.

I think any Foreign Office time spent on her would be better spent trying to free Iranian-held prisoners and separating the Iranians from the Russians.

I didn't see the programme. But just reading the comments on here have made me soften my views about her.
Although I did at one point a while ago wonder if she should be sent to Holland as her husband is Dutch and isn't she supposed to " belong" to him.
From what I remember her father looked quite old and a very traditional Muslim. I bet SB didn't have an easy life at home and I agree that the life offered must have seemed exciting and romantic. Didn't the father hot foot it back to Bangladesh and abandon his family?

Lizbethann, the documentary is well worth watching. You’ll gain some insight into what life with her Dutch husband would have been like and why she has no desire to be with him again. He’s still in prison at the moment.

Please can someone explain- why is a 15 year old from Bradford 'groomed' and a naive victim, and another guilty and evil?

And all of them from difficult, deprived backgrounds, with all sorts of issues.

I suppose Fleurpepper it’s because there are no easy, glib answers. Integration is a very complex situation with tussles amongst the generational families concerned. The Muslim parents come to the West for a better life - standards in medicine, public health, education etc - not so much our values and way of life. Their children go to schools and become somewhat ‘westernised’ with their mobile phones, access to music and fashion and friends. Then they go home after school and their parents don’t integrate. Some mothers in the families neither go out to work, nor learn to speak English. They become fearful for their rebellious teenagers. They perhaps become over strict. Girls in particular, who mature quicker and don’t have the same freedoms as the boys, become confused between ‘possibilities they see Out There’ and what their traditional families expect of them. This must chafe some of these girls. It is such a dichotomy that confronts them!

To look on line and see young freedom fighters on the side of Allah against the infidels (after all, ‘they don’t like us much anyway’ must go through their minds) will tempt some if they are feisty enough. Others in their peer group will probably just try to muddle through the two ways of life, maybe hoping a future husband will be somewhat Westernised too.

I think this second generation - or coming up for third now - have a lot of issues to contend with. It can’t be easy.

But your question was also about grooming of those girls in Rotherham etc. by Asian taxi drivers, many of whom were given prison sentences.

I suppose the main difference is these poor, needy girls from broken homes and often ‘in care’ had bad things done to THEM. Their misfortune was to become embroiled in lifestyle choices that ended up harming THEMSELVES. They were the victims (unlike Shamima who made a choice to go out and SUPPORT a violent regime).

That’s how I see it anyway.

Fleurpepper

Please can someone explain- why is a 15 year old from Bradford 'groomed' and a naive victim, and another guilty and evil?

Yes I wonder that too, Fleurpepper could it be that the victims in Bradford and Rotherham were white girls groomed by Asian men as opposed to SB, who is a Muslim Asian girl groomed by a Muslim terrorist group? Might there be an element of racism lurking here?

But if he’d said that in order to live this idyllic life you’d have to watch people being beheaded, and maybe be involved in killings, ,would you still have gone….

No, but I don't think that that side of things was made clear to SB either. The documentary showed a propaganda video with smiling children being handed food and toys, and handsome men in mixed-sex crowds.

I think she was wrong to go - who wouldn't think that? But I also think that she made a mistake as a 15 year old who was taken in by people well-schooled in manipulation and grooming, and that 15 year olds should not be written off for doing stupid things, however bad they are.

I don’t think racism for one minute foxie although anger did play a part as the authorities were so keen ‘not to offend anyone culturally’ (and wasn’t one of the perpetrators on the local Council too which must have been awkward for the authorities to tackle!) that blind eye syndrome took over for far too long. I honestly believe that the fact it was local Asian men grooming vulnerable white girls has nothing to do with the colour of the skins involved. In fact, had it been white taxi driver gangs doing this to those girls, I believe the authorities would have been more confident about stepping in and would have done so much sooner.

We need to stop looking at the colour of people’s skins - white, black, brown - and concentrate on the CRIMES committed and have the guts to go in and deal with it.

"I suppose the main difference is these poor, needy girls from broken homes and often ‘in care’ had bad things done to THEM. Their misfortune was to become embroiled in lifestyle choices that ended up harming THEMSELVES. They were the victims (unlike Shamima who made a choice to go out and SUPPORT a violent regime)."
She was "groomed" Urmstongran just like the other girls were groomed, she was also a child. The girls in Bradford etc didn't make "lifestyle choices" they were groomed, it is really not the same thing at all and they didn't "harm themselves" they were harmed by evil men who picked on them because they were unhappy, vulnerable children and therefore susceptible and easy prey.

Yes, of course I agree foxie they were groomed. Given alcohol and sweets and cigarettes as an inducement. Rides in cars (taxis) to make them feel ‘special’. But in the end, the bad things were DONE to them. They weren’t doing bad things to OTHERS.

That, to me, is the main difference.

Shamima too was groomed. Now, I have no doubt about it since watching the documentary. Her friend (already in Syria) presented a false picture of life out there with ISIS. But once there, Shamima saw things (she was intelligent and not stupid) and these atrocities were being done, not to her - although her idealistic husband was abusive - but to OTHERS.

Shamima herself was safe - provided she obeyed her husband.
The Rotherham girls were not safe. Although both WERE groomed.

people keep saying she was a child at 15, but she had enough nous to steal her sister's passport and impersonate her.
also doesn't islam say something about respecting, obeying one's parents.
rather than going behind their backs to leave home.
didn't the headmistress of her school warn about the false lures of terrorist groups.
the age of criminal responsibility is 10. not 18.
a 15 year old bears responsibility for their actions.
i don't know what should happen to her.
i'm glad i don't have to decide that.
but i feel no sympathy for her. she was is a terrorist. only stopped because of being captured.
i see no comparison with rotherham etc victims.

so does Christianity!

She was groomed, she was a victim- and she came from a family background and conflict of cultures, etc, which caused her to be prayed upon. Yes, like the other girls... in a different way.

If it is deemed to have been 'a choice' for her, why not for the others. I am sure they understood that the gifts of cigarettes, alcohol, etc, were not given as generosity by the awful people who groomed them.

And sorry Urmstongran, as much as I would love for people to judge people and cases by colour- that is not the reality out there.

I think ‘preyed upon’ might be more appropriate under the circumstances Fleurpepper! 🤣

?what does
<so does Christianity!>
mean in this context ?
she is muslim, not christian.