Shamima Begum is the daughter of Bangladeshi immigrants to the U.K. In 2015, when news of the Islamic State (ISIS) first reached Great Britain, Begum — then aged 15 – knew where she most wanted to be. Inspired by tales of Islamic State fighters decapitating Infidels, she immediately set out with two classmates from school to join the paradise on earth being created by her Muslim soul mates in the Islamic State. She later told a British journalist that she had no qualms or doubts about that practice of decapitating enemies; it was a matter, she said, “of Islam.” A week after she arrived in Islamic State territory, she married an ISIS fighter and had the first of three children she was to have by her ISIS husband. All three died in childbirth. More on the hapless, hopeless, morally moronic Shamima Begum, who is now trying to be allowed back into the U.K. can be found here: “British public broadcaster gives platform to banished jihadi bride Shamima Begum with 10-part podcast,” by Thomas Brooke, ReMix News, January 11, 2023:
The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has been accused of giving terrorists a platform following the release of a new 10-part podcast with former British national Shamima Begum.
The BBC series of 10 podcasts will give Shamima Begum, who has turned into quite a fetching 23-year old, a platform to gain a following. Her good looks will no doubt beguile many into supporting her attempt to be allowed back in the U.K. And the BBC will have aided and abetted her efforts to make us forget her involvement in crimes, including the genocidal attempt by the Islamic State to wipe out the Yazidis.
Begum fled the U.K. in 2015 with two other schoolgirls to join the Islamic State death cult in Syria and, following its demise, sought to return to Britain. Her citizenship was revoked by then-Home Secretary Sajid Javid, a decision that was upheld on appeal to Britain’s top court in February 2021.
Begum’s attorneys have argued that she was not a citizen of Bangladesh, so that stripping her of her British citizenship would leave her “stateless.” But the judges of Britain’s High Court did not agree; they insisted that held dual citizenship, and would not be made stateless by the action taken by the U.K. Home Office. They upheld the revocation.
The decision sparked outrage among the British left, who argued Begum, to quote Labour’s former shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott, was a “desperate groomed teenager” and there were “plenty of good reasons” to allow her to “return home.”
Diane Abbott is wrong. Shamima Begum was not a “desperate groomed teenager.” No one “groomed” or inveigled Begum to leave Britain and join the Islamic State. She told an English journalist that she had gone of her own volition. On February 13, 2019, The Times’ war correspondent Anthony Loyd found Begum at the al-Hawl refugee camp in Northern Syria. He reported that she wanted to return to the UK to raise her child, but did not regret her decision to join ISIS. She said she had been unfazed by seeing the head of a beheaded man as he was “an enemy of Islam,” but believes that the Islamic State did not deserve victory because of its corruption and oppression.
Come again? Yes, you heard right. Shamima Begum did not regret joining the Islamic State; she still supported the decapitation of “enemies of Islam.” What bothered her were not the mass murders, some by beheading, of Yazidis, Christians, and Shi’a Muslims, nor the mass rapes of Yazidi women and girls. All of that was fine; she was “unfazed.” What did disturb her was the “corruption” and “oppression ”of ISIS. The “corruption” meant that ISIS leaders helped themselves to whatever property they had seized from the Infidels they had killed or driven out. By “oppression,” Shamima Begum meant the mistreatment of their own women and girls by Islamic State fanatics; something she was not prepared to endure.
At the time of the revocation of Begum’s citizenship, Sajid Javid told the House of Commons the decision was “morally right, absolutely right, but also legally correct and the right one to protect the British people.
“I won’t go into details of the case, but what I will say is that you certainly haven’t seen what I saw,” he told lawmakers, adding: “If you did know what I knew, because you are sensible, responsible people, you would have made exactly the same decision – of that I have no doubt.”
Sajid Javid no doubt knows far more than he is revealing, about Shamima Begum’s activities in the ISIS-supporting phase of her wretched existence. Perhaps she watched with pleasure, or just possibly, took part herself in the sexual abuse of Yazidi girls. There is something in her Islamic State past that Sajid Javid feels must not be made public, but that has convinced him that under no conditions must she be allowed back into Britain.
On February 18, five days after she was found by the journalist Anthony Lloyd in the al-Hawl refugee camp in northern Syria, she was interviewed by another British journalist, Quentin Somerville. She asked for “forgiveness,” and said she still supports “some British values.” One wonders which ones she still rejects. She told him, repeating previous remarks to Andrew Lloyd, that she was inspired to join ISIS by videos of fighters beheading hostages and also was attracted by the “good life” — Islamically upright — that it was possible to live in the Islamic State. Somerville noted that she continued to espouse the ISIS ideology and to try to justify its atrocities. When asked about the Manchester Arena bombing, she claimed it was wrong to kill innocent people, but that ISIS considered it justified as retaliation for the coalition bombing of Islamic State-held areas. When questioned about the rape, enslavement, and murder of Yazidi women, she tried to defend it with a grotesque tu-quoque: “Shia do the same in Iraq.”
The vast majority of the British public have remained opposed to allowing Begum to return to Britain, with a YouGov poll conducted in November 2020 showing 70 percent of Brits were against her homecoming.
When asked in an interview with Sky News in 2019 if she was aware of beheadings conducted by IS, Begum replied: “Yeah, I knew about those things, and I was okay with it… From what I heard, Islamically that is allowed. So I was okay with it.”
Even her family in the U.K. are appalled – or at least are claiming to be so. On February 24, 2019, after the interviews with Anthony Lloyd and Quentin Somerville had appeared, her father Ahmed Ali said that “if she at least admitted she made a mistake then I would feel sorry for her, but she does not accept her wrong.” Begum reacted to this by saying she regretted speaking to the media and complained that the UK “is making an example out of me.” Poor, misunderstood Shamima Begum. What did she do, what did she say, what did she think, that deserves such unfeeling treatment by British authorities?
As for Shamima Begum’s husband, ISIS killer Yago Riedijk, he was interviewed in March 2019 at a Kurdish detention center in Syria by the BBC. Though completely unapologetic about his participation in mass murders, he said he wished to return to the Netherlands with his wife Shamima. Amazing, isn’t it, what these people think they have a right to ask, in the crazed hope of letting murderous bygones be bygones. The Dutch government has stated that it is not going to repatriate him. He and his wife will just have to come up with a Plan B. Let. no one drop a ready tear for this couple from hell.
The BBC is now promoting a 10-part podcast with the former ISIS bride, who married Dutch convert Yago Riedijk in an Islamic ceremony in Syria back in 2015. However, the broadcaster has come under fire from many on social media who accuse it of giving a platform to a known terrorist.
Wasiq Wasiq, a fellow at the Henry Jackson Society, tweeted: “While the victims of grooming gangs are still trying to be heard and get justice, Shamima Begum manages to land 10-part podcast on the BBC.
“Will the BBC dedicate this much time to them?” he asked.
The conservative Taxpayers’ Alliance campaign tweeted: “License fee cash should not be supporting this disgraceful PR exercise to spin the sob story of an Isis bride!”
“The BBC has used license fee payers’ money on giving terrorist Shamima Begum a podcast in which she says ‘I’m so much more than ISIS,’” commented the Defund the BBC campaign, which called on Brits to “switch to on-demand and stop paying this anti-British corporation.”
The hideously left-wing BBC, so pro-Islam, anti-Israel, and anti-West, deserves to be defunded. The license fee that British taxpayers are forced to pay for programs many of them have come to hate, should no longer be imposed. Let the BBC compete with private stations, without being able to count, year in year out, on the gigantic government subsidies that are exacted from the public.
Terrorism and national security expert Kyle Orton slammed the BBC for the podcast with an “IS jihadist who celebrated the ‘caliphate’ and when she was found then switched her story to one of victimhood.”
“Enabling these people to become celebrities after what they have done is shameful,” he added.
Defending the series, the British public broadcaster claimed the podcast would provide a “full account” of “what really happened” during Begum’s escapades, insisting her account would not be “unchallenged” and calling the podcast a “robust, public interest investigation.”
Why should the British taxpayers be paying for a 10-part podcast that will inevitably present Begum as an attractive young woman – which, physically, she is — who will now present herself as having gone off to join ISIS as a hopelessly naïve 15-year-old, led astray by propaganda that lured her to the Islamic State, and once there she was in fact horrified by the killings? She will assure us that her previously quoted remarks, made nearly four years ago to British journalists, about not being “fazed” by beheadings, was a bit of self-protective bravado that was misunderstood. She had not wanted to condemn ISIS outright to the journalists because at the time she was living in the al-Hawl camp — she now lives in the al-Roj camp — alongside many fervent supporters of the Islamic State; once the journalists left, things would have gone very badly for her had she openly denounced the beheadings.
Given that she fled the Islamic State and ended up in a Syrian refugee camp surely shows, her sympathetic BBC handers will editorialize, that her heart was in the right place; she was never truly a supporter of ISIS. And her desire to return to Great Britain was prompted, the BBC podcasts will insist, by her deep attachment – an attachment that only now she fully understands, and vows never to stray from again, as Allah is her witness, to the country where she had been born and raised. Her only wish, now, is to return to “my country” and “to help, by my own story, to dissuade other young and impressionable Muslim girls” from making the same “mistakes” she did. She says plaintively that she “is not a bad person,” and “I’m not the person that people think I am.” No matter how cruel and unforgiving the British government may be, surely the British people will protest on her behalf, that she be allowed to return to hearth and home, in the country that above all others, she loves. All she asks for is the chance to prove it.
Is that really too much to ask?