What should happen to the ISIS Brides?

[repoman]

I think that this case shows that "women and children first" is hardwired into humans and can not be removed. It is a feature and not a bug. Men are much more expendable in our instinctual responses as it should be.

What is happening to the males that joined ISIS and now want to return? In the UK.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

8 C.F.R. 1182(a)(3)(B) is pretty clear on this:

(ii) Exception
Subclause (IX) of clause (i) does not apply to a spouse or child-
(I) who did not know or should not reasonably have known of the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible under this section; or
(II) whom the consular officer or Attorney General has reasonable grounds to believe has renounced the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible under this section.

There is an exception for a spouse or child who is also inadmissible. However, one problem with her case is that she wasn't a spouse when she first joined up with ISIS. Anyway, I seriously doubt that they apply the exception to her case, nor do I think they should. Severe stupidity should still have its consequences.

Note part (I)--didn't know. They certainly knew they were joining a terrorist organization.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm not up to speed on this.

Are these including kids who were born in the USA and grew up there and then went over to ISIS? And now they want to strip their citizenship rather than make them stand trial back home? Do I have that right?

If so, what is the basis for that? You can just strip citizenship from people? They become a citizen of nowhere? That seems rather nuts to me. They are criminals and terrorists maybe, but they are still citizens.

It seems a naturalized citizen can have their citizenship stripped for a few reasons one of which is cavorting with terrorists but a birth right citizen can not.

A birth right citizen can only lose their citizenship by renouncing it.

AIFAK voluntarily taking up arms against the US can strip anyone of citizenship. (The voluntary bit is because if you're a dual citizen of a country that conscripts you into their army for a war with the US doesn't count.) Joining ISIS is taking up arms against the US.

 

[Toni]

I'm not up to speed on this.

Are these including kids who were born in the USA and grew up there and then went over to ISIS? And now they want to strip their citizenship rather than make them stand trial back home? Do I have that right?

If so, what is the basis for that? You can just strip citizenship from people? They become a citizen of nowhere? That seems rather nuts to me. They are criminals and terrorists maybe, but they are still citizens.

It seems a naturalized citizen can have their citizenship stripped for a few reasons one of which is cavorting with terrorists but a birth right citizen can not.

A birth right citizen can only lose their citizenship by renouncing it.

AIFAK voluntarily taking up arms against the US can strip anyone of citizenship. (The voluntary bit is because if you're a dual citizen of a country that conscripts you into their army for a war with the US doesn't count.) Joining ISIS is taking up arms against the US.

Is it really?

Also, we’re talking about decisions made by teenagers who were preyed upon by professional liars/recruiters who are extremely adept at manipulating impressionable young people. Basically, they were convinced to join a cult. And used as breeders.

 

[repoman]

What about males of the same age who were convinced to join?

 

[Derec]

I think that this case shows that "women and children first" is hardwired into humans and can not be removed. It is a feature and not a bug. Men are much more expendable in our instinctual responses as it should be.

It's a bug. Especially in the modern day where women have all the rights men have. Why should they still get special protections and privileges, like the leniency Zoidberg wants to give them just because they have a vagina.

What is happening to the males that joined ISIS and now want to return? In the UK.

They should be tried, preferably by Kurds. European prisons are too cushy.

 

[thebeave]

What about males of the same age who were convinced to join?

Are we forgetting about Johnny Jihad?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walker_Lindh

Yeah, its not ISIS (Taliban instead) but he was around the same age. He got 20 years in prison. Just noticed from the Wiki that he is due to be released this year!

 

[J842P]

AIFAK voluntarily taking up arms against the US can strip anyone of citizenship. (The voluntary bit is because if you're a dual citizen of a country that conscripts you into their army for a war with the US doesn't count.) Joining ISIS is taking up arms against the US.

Is it really?

Also, we’re talking about decisions made by teenagers who were preyed upon by professional liars/recruiters who are extremely adept at manipulating impressionable young people. Basically, they were convinced to join a cult. And used as breeders.

One of the girls in this thread, the British one, was a teenager.

The younger American girl was 20. The other American woman was middle aged.

 

[Derec]

https://twitter.com/Shamima__Begum

I don't think they're damning. I think she's trying to put on a brave face, like so many teenagers often do.

That's a parody account.

If I'm to speculate, it could be to make her feel better about getting rejected, which is what she expects.

You think they have wifi in that tent camp they are holding her in?

I was a communist a short period in my early teens. Because I fancied a girl who was also a communist.

"Appearance not important"

That doesn't make me feel I need to apologise to all those wronged by communist regimes throughout the ages. I think Shamima Begum is in the same situation.

Big difference is that you did not join a communist insurgency somewhere.

 

[Derec]

Yeah, its not ISIS (Taliban instead) but he was around the same age. He got 20 years in prison. Just noticed from the Wiki that he is due to be released this year!

Was Hoda's husband killed? Maybe these two crazy jihadist kids can hook up.

 

[Toni]

AIFAK voluntarily taking up arms against the US can strip anyone of citizenship. (The voluntary bit is because if you're a dual citizen of a country that conscripts you into their army for a war with the US doesn't count.) Joining ISIS is taking up arms against the US.

Is it really?

Also, we’re talking about decisions made by teenagers who were preyed upon by professional liars/recruiters who are extremely adept at manipulating impressionable young people. Basically, they were convinced to join a cult. And used as breeders.

One of the girls in this thread, the British one, was a teenager.

The younger American girl was 20. The other American woman was middle aged.

There are a bunch of teenagers in this position, not just the from the linked article.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I doubt this will change many peoples' minds, and I'm not suggesting it should. I'm just pointing out that she has expressed some remorse.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGAxm6KJTWE[/YOUTUBE]

Why is expressing remorse a requirement for returning. It's free expression and free thought in the West. Demanding she says certain things to return is abhorrent to western values. It's everything the West does NOT stand for.

 

[ruby sparks]

Why is expressing remorse a requirement for returning. It's free expression and free thought in the West. Demanding she says certain things to return is abhorrent to western values. It's everything the West does NOT stand for.

How on earth do you think up such posts?



"Evaluations of remorse play a crucial role in a wide range of
criminal justice determinations. They influence sentencing
hearings; parole, probation, and clemency determinations;
forensic evaluations; decisions on whether to try a juvenile as an
adult; and even (counterintuitively) determinations of guilt or
innocence. "

And

"A defendant’s perceived
remorse or lack of remorse (based only on in-court observations
of the defendant) is one of the most important factors in jurors’
decision whether to sentence him to death (Haney, Sontag, &
Constanzo, 1994, p. 163)."

Remorse and Criminal Justice
http://www.susanbandes.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/remorsebandesER-3.pdf

 

[ronburgundy]

Yes, I think that this is wrong as it forces other countries to deal with British and American citizens.

This is a clearly false statement. No country is obligated to take these people.

The is no such place as nowhere. Every place is under the jurisdiction of a country. The only way for no country to accept her is for her to be killed, and even then that requires someone to take responsibility to kill her and dispose of her body.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Why is expressing remorse a requirement for returning. It's free expression and free thought in the West. Demanding she says certain things to return is abhorrent to western values. It's everything the West does NOT stand for.

How on earth do you think up such posts?



"Evaluations of remorse play a crucial role in a wide range of
criminal justice determinations. They influence sentencing
hearings; parole, probation, and clemency determinations;
forensic evaluations; decisions on whether to try a juvenile as an
adult; and even (counterintuitively) determinations of guilt or
innocence. "

And

"A defendant’s perceived
remorse or lack of remorse (based only on in-court observations
of the defendant) is one of the most important factors in jurors’
decision whether to sentence him to death (Haney, Sontag, &
Constanzo, 1994, p. 163)."

Remorse and Criminal Justice
http://www.susanbandes.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/remorsebandesER-3.pdf

Apples and oranges. It doesn't apply here. Supporting ISIS is an ideological stance. Not a criminal act. Branding it a terrorist organisation and then treating all its supporters as guilty of terrorism is a cop out. In that case everybody who supports USA is a terrorist and should have their American citizenship revoked because [insert any war USA has been in]. Great Britain went to war fighting the Nazis on ideological grounds. So we're obviously fine with people going to war on ideological grounds to fight what they believe in... sometimes. The fact that you pick a side that wins doesn't exonerate your sides war crimes.

We have to be magnanimous to the losing side of an ideological war or we have learned nothing from history. Best way to kill an ideology is to be nice to them when they lose. We learned that from WW2.

 

[ruby sparks]

Apples and oranges.

Remorse and free speech? Correct.

We were doing remorse. You made a point about it in relation to western values. I was just showing how that particular point was awry, that's all. It's central to western values concerning justice. Hardly surprising, given that it's central to western religion too.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Well, Hoda, at least, burned her passport and was an outspoken advocate.

She was also 20, not 15, And the other woman (whose citizenship status is less murky) was even older.

Well, if this one renounced her citizenship then who cares? She's not America's problem anymore. Let her die in a fucking ditch or something - it doesn't really matter.

My comments relate to cases like the British one I linked to earlier where she's still a citizen but the government is trying to revoke that because they they don't want to have an ISIS member come back home.

Yes, I think that this is wrong as it forces other countries to deal with British and American citizens. As an aside, I'm finding it real difficult to sympathize with these women. I actually wonder how their recruitment works: did they watch the civilians being beheaded or thrown off buildings and then did they think "oh that looks cool, I want to join that group".

That's how I tend to see it. It's more than a simple technicality.

 

[TSwizzle]

Supporting ISIS is an ideological stance. Not a criminal act. Branding it a terrorist organisation and then treating all its supporters as guilty of terrorism is a cop out.

You are way off the mark here. She wasn't just cheering ISIS from the sidelines like a burka clad Dallas Cowboys cheerleader. She was directly involved with a recognized terrorist organization. And supporting terrorist organizations, whether it be providing money, materials, babies etc is a criminal act.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

She comes across to me in that video as a very selfish person. She perfunctorily apologizes and says she is sorry. It is obvious she does not realize the seriousness of what she did. She says she is innocent because she was just a housewife, not out killing. She certainly didn't gain my sympathy from my watching that interview.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Apples and oranges. It doesn't apply here. Supporting ISIS is an ideological stance. Not a criminal act. Branding it a terrorist organisation and then treating all its supporters as guilty of terrorism is a cop out. In that case everybody who supports USA is a terrorist and should have their American citizenship revoked because [insert any war USA has been in]. Great Britain went to war fighting the Nazis on ideological grounds. So we're obviously fine with people going to war on ideological grounds to fight what they believe in... sometimes. The fact that you pick a side that wins doesn't exonerate your sides war crimes.

We have to be magnanimous to the losing side of an ideological war or we have learned nothing from history. Best way to kill an ideology is to be nice to them when they lose. We learned that from WW2.

Staying in the west and saying "Up with ISIS" doesn't make you a terrorist. Going and joining them over there does.