Shamima Begum: 'Groomed' or 'Indoctrinated'?

by Andrew Ash
December 7, 2022 at 5:00 am

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19198/shamima-begum

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) seems to have a short memory. Although it has only been a few years since the brutal Islamic State (ISIS) was defeated, from the tone of the BBC's recent articles -- featuring a female jihadi's returning to Europe from Syria -- you could be forgiven for thinking that the ISIS bloodbath was just another government-run women's empowerment initiative.
Take the sympathetic account of Shamima Begum, the Bangladeshi-British schoolgirl who felt compelled to make the hazardous journey from the British Midlands to the "ISIS capital", Raqqa, to marry a jihadist and join in the fun. By her own admission, within weeks she was used to, and evidently unfazed by, the sight of headless corpses and public executions.
Perhaps if ISIS had not been defeated, Begum would have given a plum role by now, maybe even in the ISIS "morality police". Instead of continuing her climb to the Islamist group's topmost echelons, however, she was arrested and incarcerated in a Syrian detention camp. After several attempts by lawyers to reverse the British government's decision to revoke her British passport, she is now claiming to have been "trafficked". She would like us to forget about her apparent enthusiasm for immersing herself in the most brutal forms of Sharia law, and instead is demanding sympathy and to be treated as a victim herself.
It certainly didn't take long for the BBC to set aside any revulsion for Begum's actions, and instead focus on the "human rights" of this otherwise fully paid-up box-ticker: Muslim, check. Female, check. "Of colour", check. Feminist? Perhaps not.
Although forgiveness is not high on the BBC's to-do list when it comes to trashing figures whose politics they oppose, female jihadis are apparently another matter altogether. Essentially, people at the BBC and other outlets would like the British public to join them in rebranding her as a victim as opposed to her actual role as an oppressor.
Being "granted innocence" as a child, they fail to point out, is intrinsically linked to certain criteria, such as coercion by one's parents to commit murder; but at what age is that excuse no longer credible? To suggest that it is the "system of oppression" and the "Islamophobia" of Begum's "Muslim-ness" that turned her into a figure of hate, is not only to excuse her behaviour, but tacitly emboldens a twisted ideology, in which this author was raised, whose ultimate goal is to rid the world of "unbelievers".
As far as indoctrination is concerned, there are no age limits. Indoctrinated children will most likely grow up into indoctrinated adults. The problem, therefore, is not the "manipulation of innocent children", but the ideology itself.
A malleable child at the hands of a fundamentalist parent, for example, will likely find it easier to accept the extremities of "Allah's will", or concepts such as martyrdom, than those who have not been offered those thoughts. The same goes for a disenfranchised Muslim, who, in the West, might feel persecuted or pushed into a corner, rather than praised for his "commitment".
Many of them, however, will already have been radicalised, and -- like "sleeper cells" -- are perhaps even unconsciously biding their time. They are not under direct orders from any human authority. Allah holds dominion over them. Should they fail to flourish within the alien "kuffar" society with which they have become entangled, or should they misread or excuse their lack of success as "oppression", this is when their indoctrination -- seeded as a child -- has a chance of re-emerging.
This changeability is part of the reason that Islam is so problematic: its chameleon-like tendency to adapt when necessary, and appear "moderate" if circumstances dictate. There is even a term for it, "taqiyya," meaning to dissemble, including the degree of one's religious identity when "in fear of persecution".
Of course, the perception of "persecution" is almost impossible to measure: it is often totally subjective. People with a tendency to feel offended can see it even if it may not actually be there. Feelings of being persecuted, sometimes referred to as paranoia, can be as just adaptable or acrobatic as the mind of any man, woman or child. In Islam, it often seems that the only requirement for perceiving persecution is if one can successfully make the argument to oneself.
All these people in ivory towers or at the BBC have one thing in common: they appear to have little idea of what Islam actually is.
Campaigning to bring jihadis back to Britain is a really bad, terrible idea. The situation is dour enough as it is, with the risk that refugees from the war-torn Middle East -- they and their terrorist cohorts displaced -- may one day "revert" to the fundamentalist Islam in which many of them were raised, as was demonstrated by 22-year-old Libyan, Salman Abedi, a who massacred scores of pop fans at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester in 2017.
"We will not tolerate hate towards any part of our community", declared the authorities after the Manchester bombing, demonstrating just how out of touch they are by issuing the warning -- not to terrorists -- but to the understandably outraged people of Britain.
The lack of awareness in delivering such a bizarre statement -- equating Islam with "equality" and "justice" -- is not surprising to me, having heard it all before, countless times from my religious siblings. The assumption that Begum and her friends were "targeted" however, is as laughable as the suggestion that my Muslim siblings were "targeted". Indeed, my sisters would be hugely insulted at it being inferred that they were targeted, and not "chosen" by Allah Himself. To misunderstand this point is to misunderstand what Islam is. The prism through which the West sees the world simply cannot be applied to Islam.
Similarly, the BBC's concept of "feminism" also sits awry next to "Islamic feminism", in that in Islam there is no higher authority than Allah -- very much a "male" entity, steeped in medieval traditions. All Muslims understand that their Creator's sensibilities and desires come before theirs, and if those sensibilities rub Western feminism the wrong way, then that is where their paths diverge.
Believing that the violence associated with Islam in the 20^th and 21^st centuries is unfairly depicted, is to stick one's head in the sand. Claiming that female jihadis, from Leila Khaled in the 1960s to Shamim Begum in 2015, are being "disrespected" for being "Muslim" -- rather than being disrespected for planning to massacre non-Muslims, "wrong" Muslims, or anyone-that-gets-in-their-way Muslims, is to be in denial.
What is the difference between "grooming" and "indoctrination"? One offers you "victim" status, the other does not. If it sounds oblique, it is probably meant to.
Despite a glut of recent cases, the police, working with counter- terrorism officers, are keen to make the point that there is nothing to worry about.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) seems to have a short memory. Although it has only been a few years since the brutal Islamic State (ISIS) was defeated, from the tone of the BBC's recent articles -- featuring a female jihadi's returning to Europe from Syria -- you could be forgiven for thinking that the ISIS bloodbath was just another government-run women's empowerment initiative.

Depending on the context or agenda of the day, the BBC seems unsure whether "radical" Islam, or "normal" Islam -- presuming the distinction can be made -- offers a path to the emancipation of women, or to their enslavement. The hijab, for example, may well act as a shield against the prying eyes of men, or a kind of "wife-branding" by husbands who treat their women as chattel, but to the BBC, it is also a "fashionable" symbol of "freedom" and "self-expression".

This muddled perception probably has more to do with how the BBC would like the world to be when it comes to Islam, rather than how things actually are. Take the sympathetic account of Shamima Begum, the Bangladeshi-British schoolgirl who felt compelled to make the hazardous journey from the British Midlands to the "ISIS capital", Raqqa, to marry a jihadist and join in the fun. By her own admission, within weeks she was used to, and evidently unfazed by, the sight of headless corpses and public executions.

Perhaps if ISIS had not been defeated, Begum would have given a plum role by now, perhaps even in the ISIS "morality police". Instead of continuing her climb to the Islamist group's topmost echelons, however, she was arrested and incarcerated in a Syrian detention camp. After several attempts by lawyers to reverse the British government's decision to revoke her British passport, she is now claiming to have been "trafficked". She would like us to forget about her apparent enthusiasm for immersing herself in the most brutal forms of Sharia law, and instead is demanding sympathy and to be treated as a victim herself.

Numerous sympathetic articles have appeared on the BBC's website, suggesting that they seem prepared to re-appraise the public's perception of her as a "black widow", stitching together suicide vests, and hunting down and punishing "bad Muslims". Conversely, she is pictured hijab-less, wearing "Western clothes", looking as fresh faced as the girl next door. Who could possibly object to her return?

It certainly didn't take long for the BBC to set aside any revulsion for Begum's actions, and instead focus on the "human rights" of this otherwise fully paid-up box-ticker: Muslim, check. Female, check. "Of colour", check. Feminist? Perhaps not.

Although forgiveness is not high on the BBC's to-do list when it comes to trashing figures whose politics they oppose, female jihadis are apparently another matter altogether. Yes, she might have aided and abetted the bloodbath in Raqqa, but now that her "mental health" is at risk after the collapse of "the caliphate'" and her confinement in a Kurdish detention camp, we are urged to re-appraise her "plight".

Essentially, people at the BBC and other outlets would like the British public to join them in rebranding Begum as a victim, as opposed to her actual role as an oppressor.

"Being a child usually means we are granted innocence," wrote Hanna Naima McCloskey, defending Begum.

"But that innocence is denied when children belong to marginalised groups -- in this case Begum's 'Muslim-ness' – under the system of oppression, Islamophobia – has her as a threat and a danger above all else".

Being "granted innocence" as a child, McCloskey fails to point out, is intrinsically linked to certain criteria, such as coercion by one's parents to commit murder; but at what age is that excuse no longer credible? To suggest that it is the "system of oppression" and the "Islamophobia" of Begum's "Muslim-ness" that turned her into a figure of hate, is not only to excuse her behaviour, but tacitly emboldens a twisted ideology, in which this author was raised, whose ultimate goal is to rid the world of "unbelievers".

While it is probably easier to indoctrinate a child than an adult, it probably made not the slightest bit of difference to any one of the five killed and 40 maimed by an "innocent" child in Afghanistan in 2019.

Or the nine people slaughtered in a Nigerian restaurant, when three children between the ages of 10 and 15 (Shamima Begum's age when she arrived in Raqqa) detonated their explosive vests.

Or the 10-year-old girl -- also in Nigeria -- who killed 16 men, women and children on market day, on behalf of her Islamist "handlers", Boko Haram.

Or the 16-year-old Palestinian suicide bomber, who, in 2004, blew himself up in a Tel Aviv market in Israel, in the wake of ten other children under the age of 18, whose attacks preceded his.

The list goes on. As far as indoctrination is concerned, there are no age limits. Indoctrinated children will most likely grow up into indoctrinated adults. The problem, therefore, is not the "manipulation of innocent children", but the ideology itself. The ideology drives a suicide bomber not to differentiate between maturity and immaturity. Any mind can be poisoned, no matter its age. The more discontented the person, the more likely a candidate; and at some point, probably, most people may not feel satisfied with everything. Thanks to the West's misadventures in the Middle East, resulting in a never-ending flow of migrants to Europe, the number of discontented people may constantly be on the rise.

Of course, people can tone down -- or at least claim to have toned down -- their views, as is Begum's current position, and many Muslims in the West find it easier to present themselves as "moderate" -- even if they are not.

Circumstances will often dictate how to "present" one's religiosity. A malleable child at the hands of a fundamentalist parent, for example, will likely find it easier to accept the extremities of "Allah's will", or concepts such as martyrdom, than those who have not been offered those thoughts. The same goes for a disenfranchised Muslim, who, in the West, might feel persecuted or pushed into a corner, rather than praised for his "commitment". Many of them, however, will have already been radicalised, and -- like "sleeper cells" -- are perhaps even unconsciously biding their time. They are not under direct orders from any human authority. Allah holds dominion over them. Should they fail to flourish within the alien "kuffar" society with which they have become entangled, or should they misread or excuse their lack of success as "oppression", this is when their indoctrination -- seeded as a child -- has a chance of re-emerging.

This changeability is part of the reason that Islam is so problematic: its chameleon-like tendency to adapt when necessary, and appear "moderate" if circumstances dictate. There is even a term for it, "taqiyya," meaning to dissemble, including the degree of one's religious identity when "in fear of persecution".

Of course, the perception of "persecution" is almost impossible to measure: it is often totally subjective. People with a tendency to feel offended can see it even if it may not actually be there. Feelings of being persecuted, sometimes referred to as paranoia, can be as just adaptable or acrobatic as the mind of any man, woman or child. In Islam, it often seems that the only requirement for perceiving persecution is if one can successfully make the argument to oneself. Indeed, Islamic scholars often depict taqiyya as being equal to, or even superior to, other virtues such as courage, fortitude or even martyrdom.

Which brings us back to returning jihadis and their supporters, whose "progressive" outlook matches that of many politicians who seem to dwell in ivory towers and BBC executives who have seemingly decided to back Begum's bid to return to the UK. All these people have one thing in common: they appear to have little idea of what Islam actually is, or worse -- how hardy and insidious an ideology it really is.

Campaigning to bring jihadis back to Britain is a really bad, terrible idea. The situation is dour enough as it is, with the risk that the refugees from the war-torn Middle East -- they and their terrorist cohorts displaced -- may one day "revert" to the fundamentalist Islam in which many of them were raised, as was demonstrated by 22-year-old Libyan, Salman Abedi, a who massacred scores of pop fans at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester in 2017.

"We will not tolerate hate towards any part of our community", declared the authorities, demonstrating just how out of touch they are by issuing the warning -- not to terrorists -- but to the understandably outraged people of Britain.

It was an apparently irony-free statement, whose implication appears to be that they care more about political correctness than the people they are supposed to serve.

One can sense the frustration of those faced with what must be this dismaying contradiction to the preferred narrative. If only a case could be made for Muslim female empowerment! You can almost hear the cogs turning: how to reconcile Islam with feminism -- despite the inconvenient polarities? How to align a "democracy-loving" public broadcaster with the values of a dictatorial 7^th century belief system? Easy -- contrive it by interviewing an outspoken, self-appointed female Muslim spokeswoman who shares the same fondness as the BBC for self-contradicting psychobabble.

"What struck me was the extent to which religious tradition can be used to excuse violence or challenge it", said a UK-based Iraqi migrant, Huda Jawad, upon hearing about female jihadis travelling to war-torn Syria.

"I was enraged to hear that Islam was used in the most perverse ways to maintain women's vulnerability and persecution and enable the perpetrators, who are usually men, to coerce and control them."

Begum's decisions, in other words, were ostensibly not her own. She was groomed, not by extremists she had met online, but by the patriarchy of coercive men -- probably including her father -- who over time presented her with a version of Islam that seeks to persecute and control "vulnerable women". She and her friends' misadventure, we are to believe, had less to do with their determined actions or quest for excitement, than it did with men's dominion over women. I wonder if Begum pondered this revelation as she sewed explosives and nails into suicide vests that would kill and maim both sexes indiscriminately.

"I share their [female jihadis'] hunger for wanting to learn and their confusion about Islam", Jawad continued.

"Like the young women who are targeted to make the journey to Isis-controlled territory, I sincerely believe in my faith, in the innate way it seems to call for justice and equality and for collective territory... for seeking the fairest & most just solution to problems – for the value it places on human life, whether human or animal. On reason, on learning and on equality."

The lack of awareness in delivering such a bizarre statement -- equating Islam with "equality" and "justice" -- is not surprising to me, having heard it all before, countless times from my religious siblings. The assumption that Begum and her friends were "targeted" however, is as laughable as the suggestion that my Muslim siblings were "targeted". Indeed, my sisters would be hugely insulted at it being inferred that they were targeted, and not "chosen" by Allah Himself. To misunderstand this point, is to misunderstand what Islam is. The prism through which the West sees the world simply cannot be applied to Islam.

Similarly, the BBC's concept of "feminism" also sits awry next to the "Islamic feminism", in that in Islam there is no higher authority than Allah -- very much a "male" entity, steeped in medieval traditions. All Muslims understand that their Creator's sensibilities and desires come before theirs, and if those sensibilities rub Western feminism the wrong way, then that is where their paths diverge.

"Islamic feminism can provide [potential female jihadis] with the intellectual and religious tools they seek", said Jawad, whose "passion" for it did not prevent her from moving to the West.

"I share their rejection of the media's portrayal of Islam and Muslims as inherently violent. I share their frustration at experiencing prejudice and disrespect for being a Muslim. And for being a woman and a Muslim woman, whether by mainstream society or their own religious communities. "

Believing that the violence associated with Islam in the 20^th and 21^st centuries is unfairly depicted is to stick one's head in the sand. Claiming that female jihadis, from Leila Khaled in the 1960s to Begum in 2015, are being "disrespected" for being "Muslim" – rather than being disrespected for planning to massacre non-Muslims, "wrong" Muslims, or anyone-that-gets-in-their-way Muslims, is to be in denial.

Another British schoolgirl turned wannabe-terrorist, after being arrested in 2020, had all of her charges dropped. A Home Office "expert" concluded that she had been "groomed" online by an "extremist" in the US. She was 14-years-old at the time of the offence, only a year younger than Begum. The distinction between the two is that while Begum was presumably indoctrinated by her parents' devotion to Islam, the unnamed girl was "groomed". What is the difference between "grooming" and "indoctrination"? One offers you "victim" status, the other does not. If it sounds oblique, it is probably meant to.

In 2020, a 14-year-old boy who had recently converted to Islam was charged with plotting a terror attack. Within a month of converting, he was alleged to have "developed an extremist jihadist mindset". After learning online how to make explosives out of bleach, tin foil and screws, he also filmed himself in his own "martyrdom" video.

Despite a glut of recent cases, the police, working with counter- terrorism officers, are keen to make the point that there is nothing to worry about. The Hampshire Constabulary issued a statement reassuring the public that they believe the investigation to be an isolated one – "with no known wider risk to the community". Local MP Paul Holmes tweeted:

"I was briefed on this issue this afternoon and thank the police for their informative release. As they've said they believe this to be an isolated incident and speculation on social media is not helpful. Thank you to our police force."

The "speculation on social media", we can safely assume, counters this bright and breezy upbeat take on what could have been yet another terrorist outrage.

Meanwhile, the case against "the youngest girl" charged with terrorism offences in the UK has been dropped: the Home Office decided she was a victim of trafficking. The British schoolgirl, now 16, was accused of possessing instructions for homemade firearms and explosives. But "experts" decided she had been groomed online by a US-based extremist. The Derbyshire teenager, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, was arrested in October 2020 and was alleged to hold extreme right-wing beliefs.

This is the first time a terrorism prosecution has been halted after a decision of this kind.

Then there is the US case of Alison Fluke-Ekren, a convert to Islam, charged with organising and "leading an all-female battalion". She is also accused of teaching children to use assault weapons; and in the FBI affidavit, a witness is quoted as saying that one of Fluke-Ekren's sons was seen holding a machine gun. He was 5 or 6 years old at the time.

Fluke-Ekren allegedly trained women and children to use AK-47 assault rifles and suicide vests in Syria. She is also suspected of recruiting operatives for a potential future attack on a US college campus.

She also allegedly told a witness of her desire to carry out an attack on a shopping mall using explosives, and reportedly said that it would be a waste of resources if it did not kill a lot of people. She is charged with providing and conspiring to provide material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization and faces up to 20 years in prison if found guilty.

Details of the complaint were given in an FBI affidavit from 2019, which was released on January 29, 2022, after she was returned to the US to face charges. It alleges that in 2016, an all-female ISIS battalion, known as Khatiba Nusaybah, was set up in Raqqa, Syria. At the time, the city was the de facto capital of the Islamic State group. The battalion was said to be comprised solely of women who were married to male ISIS fighters.

The UK government now says it is targeting "terrorists, war criminals and spies" as part of a "shake up" of immigration law. If a new bill being debated in the House of Lords is passed, they will be able to remove someone's citizenship without telling them. This may be so, but that will not prevent the inevitable legal challenges that Begum's lawyers, and her acquiescent advocates, deem appropriate -- challenges that not only undermine the powers of a sovereign state, its legal processes and the will of its citizens, but fail completely to comprehend the actual problem with Islam, which unfortunately is that it is not compatible with Western sensibilities. If the media were to consider this thought and spent less time demonising matters that are not serious threats, they might have understood that by now.

Andrew Ash, born in Great Britain to Anglo-Egyptian, Muslim parents, is based in London, England.

© 2024 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Related Topics: United Kingdom

Recent Articles by Andrew Ash

Socialized Medicine Is No Cure: Britain's Broken Benefit System, 2022-11-15
UK: Welcome to the Medieval Era of 2021, 2021-09-01
Britain: Two-Stepping Toward Totalitarianism, 2020-11-15
The BBC Thought Police, 2019-10-30
UK: Last Call for Boris Johnson's Brexit Bus, 2019-10-18

receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free gatestone institute mailing list.

Comment on this item

31 Reader Comments

cammo99 • Dec 8, 2022 at 14:03

I had reason to recall a portion of the Nuremberg trial drama. It explains why many anti-Semitic Muslims are nazis at heart.

Reply->

Terry Taylor • Dec 8, 2022 at 10:32

Why does a taxpayer-funded, government-controlled BBC even exist?

Reply->

Stephen • Dec 8, 2022 at 02:57

I said to my partner the other day after watching BBC stooges talking about the Begum woman, 'Do you remember when the BBC was on our side?'

Reply->

John S • Dec 7, 2022 at 18:54

She made her choice and her choice lost. Now she would have us believe that it was all a childish error. She can never be trusted to behave like a normal person again- She will cost millions to observe over the rest of her life. Why put the British public at risk to satisfy someone from a religion that hates us. As for the BBC I forgot about them years ago. Anything Christian or white working class they - the liberal elite - hate.

Reply->

Ram • Dec 7, 2022 at 17:35

Why is she coming back to the land of the "Infidels". She should migrate to the land of the pure and believers in true god, She knows she will not be permitted to enter their lands and she now wants to be back in Britain that she denounced and mocked. She is not innocent and these are not acts of innocence. It so happens that ISIS was vanquished and she wants back to her secure life. The lands of the infidels are way better and she knows it.

Reply->

Ron Thompson • Dec 7, 2022 at 17:19

I agree with the author's comments. His piece prompts the question, is there any sort of 'index' on the threat from Islamic terrorism, or the more insidious threat from (relatively) non-violent Islamic political takeover in the various countries of Western Europe? Are there any indicia of these threats beyond the brute fact of demographic creep? I assume that Belgium, esp Brussels, followed by France, may be at most threat, perhaps followed by
Sweden and then Germany. Is there any such comprehensive index for all the countries of Western Europe?

Reply->

SB • Dec 7, 2022 at 16:52

Shamima Begum: 'Groomed' or 'Indoctrinated'?
Should read: Shamima Begum: 'Groomed' or 'Indoctrinated'? or just a devout Muslim.

Reply->

Eliot Schickler • Dec 7, 2022 at 14:34

The BBC is equally bad to the New York Slimes!

Reply->

Paul Symons • Dec 7, 2022 at 12:58

BBC determined to get his woman back into the UK. BBC has key agenda in this.

Reply->

Duane Hayes • Dec 7, 2022 at 11:18

Consider that the Moors tried to militarily conquer all of Europe and were defeated, now the same invaders are being welcomed into Europe today and will eventually change Europe into an Islamic kingdom.

Reply->

satori • Dec 7, 2022 at 11:16

The BBC has always given more space to Muslim causes. I wonder where they get funding from?

Reply->

Stephen

satori • Dec 8, 2022 at 05:29

They get funding from the mugs like me who pay £13+ per month for the compulsory poll tax to listen to this bigoted rubbish.

Reply->

Harvey Radnor • Dec 7, 2022 at 08:36

Enoch Powell half a century ago was ostracized for saying the streets of the UK will be covered in blood if unfettered immigration is allowed to continue. It was and this is the result, as the writer has stated, they haven't a clue. Ask any one who has served in the armed forces in Iraq Afghanistan what radical Islam is about. It is Islam that has the problem of people who are non-believers the same ethos as the Nazis had if not on the same page to be killed no exception women children babies, no difference.

Reply->

Morris Givner • Dec 7, 2022 at 08:22

The BBC has a long history of being an apologist for those committing crimes in the name of Islam. The BBC does not report the news but only events and behaviour that conform to their ideology.The BBC is antiSemitic, anti Israel and only reports events that portray Jews and Israel in an negative light. In the recent Gaza war, they ignored the rockets sent over by Gaza Arabs into Israel to kill and maim Jews for life. The BBC ignored that Gaza Arabs used their own children as shields, that Palestinian schools teach their children to hate and kill Jews, that UNRWA buildings and staff are used as storehouses of explosives and weapons against Israel and the Associated Press building in Gaza was used to store weapons and house Palestinians in their endless war against Israel. UK Parliamentary inquiries into the bused and one-sided reporting by the BBC have totally failed in changing the BBC from being an instrument of propaganda for the Palestinians particularly and for Islam generally. It should also be noted that British war and oil industries benefit in the trillions every year from sales to Arab nations and sourcing Arab oil and gas natural resources. British financial and real industries benefit in the trillions from Arab businesses and undoubtedly influence how the British media select and report the news from Arab particularly and Islam sources generally. It is also a hard fact that EU regulations make Muslim immigration into Britain totally out of control and the UK, like France and Belgium are rapidly becoming Muslim nations and have lost the Christian influence in their societies.

Reply->

Dorothy Davies • Dec 7, 2022 at 08:07

I gave up on the BBC long ago; I think I am not alone. But I am grateful to Andrew Ash and others for keeping up the attempt to expose Islam for what it is. Our nation, once steeped in Christian morality and values finds the deviousness and dissimulation of Eastern religions hard to understand. Yet we are an apostate nation and are beginning to reap what we have sown.

Reply->

Terry Halse

Dorothy Davies • Dec 7, 2022 at 17:55

Well said. Judeo Christian values are no longer seem as the foundation of Western Civilisation. The BBC along with many are effectively crapping in their own nests. This kind of unguided moralizing is destroying western society.

Reply->

Hamish MacDonald • Dec 7, 2022 at 07:44

The enemy that white ants every Christian endeavour, in fact white ants any belief in the afterlife from Islam to Christianity to Judaism to every religion that supposes there is an afterlife, after all, is alive and well, and has spread in a ubiquitous fashion globally, both laterally and integrally as is evidenced by the legalisation of abortion.
This is why the UK is in perilous state, not only because of its migrant problem, but mainly because law itself is now being laid upon this "anti-God" foundation.
What to do?
The churches many of them have not woken up, and those who want to dialogue continue with the hideous parlance that ongoing narrative which everybody now suspects is false, that Islam is somehow a religion of peace.
It is not just ISIS, as history shows, but from Tamerlane who beheaded 90,000 in one day to India partition of 600,000 dead Hindus and Sikhs in just one week to over 42,000 independent terrorist actions since 9/11.
If some of the nonsense in European countries were to go on in Australia, for instance people would be in an uproar, but the continent is so conditioned, that they simply let all go they don't seem to care.
Apathy when it sets in dilutes the defense so much that it makes it easy for the enemy to just walk in and take over.
Important article.

Reply->

Ron Thompson

Hamish MacDonald • Dec 7, 2022 at 17:10

Pardon my unawareness, but what does the phrase "white ants", apparently a verb, mean?

Reply->

Raymond Tonns • Dec 7, 2022 at 07:42

Mr. Ash, your article ought to be required reading for all high school students in the US. The BBC clearly has capitulated to Islam. have they begun to broadcast the call to prayer 5 times a day?

Reply->

Sandra Lee Smith

Raymond Tonns • Dec 7, 2022 at 13:08

I'd say 7th grade & up. Most religions, if not gov'ts, consider a person 14 yrs or older to be accountable, as an adult, for his thoughts, words, and deeds, ergo they should know that for which they might soon be held to account, by the Highest Court. Age 12 is not too soon to learn just what that might be.

Reply->

MZT • Dec 7, 2022 at 06:53

Brilliant. What a superbly written article. Tempering this volatile debate/issue with flashes of gentle, but spiky humor is quite the achievement. Well done.

Reply->

JohnB • Dec 7, 2022 at 06:06

She has never apologised for her conduct. She simply wants to return to the UK and live a life on benefits, 'free' council house, 'free' social security, 'free' child benefit, all courtesy of the UK dhimmi tax payers.
She is permanently unemployable, and would be on a permanent security watch list and knows if she ever returned to the UK she will never be deported and destined for a life of freebies.
Once again, 'human rights' legislation will be used to benefit and protect the guilty, and not protect the innocent.

Reply->

Sandra Lee Smith

JohnB • Dec 7, 2022 at 13:10

That would be my assessment also.

Reply->

Jeff Page • Dec 7, 2022 at 05:57

The BBC is the British people's enemy in more ways than one. They are hell-bent on presenting a solely left-wing agenda and the reason for this is that at present there are over 40,000 known terrorists walking the streets of Britain thanks to our ignorant, and wholly stupid politicians. Multi millions of pounds are spent on security services as a direct result of the government not bothering to check the backgrounds of immigrants, they simply held the door open and invited every man and his dog into Britain. Today of course they refuse to acknowledge any stupidity or wrongdoing on their part, they just expect the taxpayers to foot the bill for their gross mistakes. Britain is by far the only country with a load of ultra-gullible fools in power, the same is happening all over Europe, and yes in the US! Shamima Begum was 15 when she left Britain with 2 other girls of the same age. At 15 you are fully aware of what you are doing, you damn well know the difference between right and wrong. All 3 of these girls knew exactly what they were doing and for the lawyers and the good old BBC to say differently is simply garbage! What the media right across the world needs to do is grasp the nettle, stop the pretense that Islam is a religion of peace, and fully accept the reality of the situation. Politicians and the Media need to own and admit they got it wrong!

Reply->

Sandra Lee Smith

Jeff Page • Dec 7, 2022 at 13:15

Absolutely agree. They had NO excuse for it either. It's not as if past history in Europe & the US hadn't long since proven what Islam is! Nor is there any indication it has, or ever intends to be, been different.

Reply->

Jayell • Dec 7, 2022 at 05:55

Excellent article, which sums everything up beautifully. It's interesting to see them trying every predictable ploy to get this repulsive specimen readmitted to the UK even though she's proved her complete unsuitability for the British citizenship that she no longer has. First they tried the publicity campaign with the photoshoots featuring her attired as a 'good British girl-next-door' with tinted hair (no headscarf) and dressed Oxford Street designer clothes. Tha failed, so then they tried the 'Responsible patriotic British Citizen' approach where she offered to advise the Government about the evils of the ideology that we all know that she knows rather too much about but never actually said that she was going to leave. But the UK authorities already know enough about the various versions of the 'religion of Peace' in general and Ms. Begum in particular, and don't need anymore 'advisors' apart from the ones already in British jails. So now she's apparently been 'groomed' and a 'victim', but this lame excuse has been done to death by the Disciples of the Great Prophet when visibly trying to wriggle out of the consequences of the depravities prescribed by their beliefs and no one's buying it anymore. So, Ms. Begum has made her own bed, and now she should relax on it for the rest of her days. Sweet dreams, but not about the UK, please!

Reply->

VictorMc • Dec 7, 2022 at 05:53

Who on earth is there left who takes any notice whatever of the BBC 'news?'
This woman Begum is a proven terrorist, who cares about her? May she rot in hell.
Whilst I am at it who is paying for her legal 'advice' and actions?

Reply->

Doug Graves • Dec 7, 2022 at 05:46

The only citizenship she now has is Bangladeshi. She committed her crimes in Syria and should be tried by a Syrian court according to Syrian law.

Reply->

Paul Symons

Doug Graves • Dec 7, 2022 at 14:33

That seems proportionate.

Reply->

Jeff Page

Doug Graves • Dec 8, 2022 at 05:53

The Bangladeshi government doesn't want her either Doug. But she would never want to go there anyway, despite the fact she will have relatives there. Begum knows that should she be allowed back into Britain, it's a council house, eventually a marriage of some description, and no doubt she'll churn out a few potential jihadis supported by the NHS and Benefits provided by a country she hates.

Reply->

Andy Paul • Dec 7, 2022 at 05:33

Early reports into Begum noted that her uncle was heavily steeped in Jihadist activity in London, so perhaps any of the supposed "grooming" came closer to home?

As for the broader question of Islam, it is entirely incompatible with Western liberal principles and values and anyone who claims otherwise is deluded or a fellow-traveller.

Reply->