Austria teenage girl jihadis 'want to come home’ from Isil

[Anny Nym]

Ah, okay. That makes a lot more sense. I don't know why that wasn't highlighted more in the news. I guess "Muslim girls in Austria run off to join Muslim terrorist organization" isn't as interesting as "Typical Austrian girls run off to join Muslim terrorist organization! Your daughters could be next!"

I am not sure what purpose this should have served in information terms? Could you specify that maybe a bit?

IMHO:

The existence of the terror organization ISIS does not stand for every muslim in the world nor does it falsify every single cause brought up by muslims. Like the Duggars are not representative for every christian large family.

True, the past years western society was quite quick to shut down a person who brought up the dangers of turning a blind eye to certain radicalizations within religious communities that are neither christian nor "autochthonous", but what we need to learn out of that is to stand our own ground more and have more faith in our own sovereignity. There is a need to search for root causes to see why it turned out that way it is now - in a pure objective way, even if the results are not to everyone´s liking.

[It'sFunToRun]

It's also considered in bad taste to bring up cultures of origin in multicultural societies when to do so could cause negative connotations - the Australian teenage boys who have gone to join ISIS are always described as "Australian teenager from city x", never "Australian Afghani Muslim" for example. These girls are legally Austrian, the young men from here are legally Australian, so they are described as such.

(I have no idea if the Australian fighters are from the Australian Afghani community, just using that as an example as I have no idea of their ethnic origins though their surnames would imply that they are the sons or grandsons of Muslim immigrants).

Political Correctness is greenish poop with visible chunks of corn in it.

Someone said in another thread that "lying by omission" is lying, and I'm not sure I agree with that, but "lying by omission" is deceit.

[It'sFunToRun]

I am not sure what purpose this should have served in information terms? Could you specify that maybe a bit?

IMHO:

The existence of the terror organization ISIS does not stand for every muslim in the world nor does it falsify every single cause brought up by muslims. Like the Duggars are not representative for every christian large family.

True, the past years western society was quite quick to shut down a person who brought up the dangers of turning a blind eye to certain radicalizations within religious communities that are neither christian nor "autochthonous", but what we need to learn out of that is to stand our own ground more and have more faith in our own sovereignity. There is a need to search for root causes to see why it turned out that way it is now - in a pure objective way, even if the results are not to everyone´s liking.

I'm not saying that every Muslim is a terrorist, but someone who was raised Muslim, even liberal Muslim, is more likely to join a Muslim terrorist organization than someone with no connection to Islam. ISIS isn't a group of terrorists who just happen to be Muslim; the whole reason they are terrorists is because of their religion.

If Josh Duggar became a resident of Turkey and then went and shot up a Mosque, then it would be relevant to say "American Christian shoots up Mosque" instead of "Turkish resident shoots up Mosque". If Josh Duggar got arrested for speeding, there's no reason to say "Christian arrested for speeding", because his Christianity is not connected.

[FaustianSlip]

A few people have brought up the question treason and trying these kids who gallivant off to the Middle East to join ISIL. From a US standpoint, I think it's extremely unlikely that kids who do this and then return to the US would be tried or, if they were tried, convicted. We haven't convicted anyone for treason since 1949, when we tried Axis Sally and Tokyo Rose, and even then, neither of them served their full sentences. Axis Sally served twelve years of a 10-30 year sentence, and Tokyo Rose was ultimately pardoned by Gerald Ford. And these were women who were, without question, giving aid and comfort to enemies upon whom we had formally declared war. Even John Walker Lindh, the guy who took off and joined the Taliban that was captured, wasn't convicted of treason- he was found guilty of a host of other stuff, ranging from providing material support to terrorists to conspiring to murder U.S. nationals, but not treason. If we didn't go after that in his case, I don't see us doing it in a case involving some teenage girl who read one terrorist Tumblr too many and ran away to Syria to find Prince Charming.

As far as their citizenship status goes, the US government doesn't make a habit of stripping people of citizenship. It can happen, theoretically speaking, but the threshold is very high precisely because we don't want to create stateless persons. However, the government is more than happy to revoke someone's passport, meaning that while they're still a US citizen, they wouldn't be able to travel, because their passport would be useless. In a case like that where someone changed their mind and wanted to get home, they'd have to get to a US Consulate or Embassy, where they would apply for (and probably be given, at least eventually) a limited-validity passport that's good for a one-way trip back to the United States, where they'd be met by police or other law enforcement personnel, presumably to be questioned and tried as necessary. In some cases, they'd be escorted on the flight by law enforcement personnel.

Hypothetically, I could be okay with allowing these kids to come back, debriefing the hell out of them and then assessing from there whether they're sincere and how to handle their subsequent treatment. That's essentially what South Korea does when North Korean refugees show up- get any intel they might have, put them through acclimation classes and set them up on their own. Obviously, any kid who joins ISIS and changes their mind can forget about the "on their own" part for a good, long time.

That said, these girls know exactly what ISIS is about. It's not a secret that these guys are running around sawing off people's heads on YouTube, enacting ultra-strict sharia law, et cetera. They may not fully grasp what that means for them in practical terms, but I don't have much sympathy for someone who watches a video of a guy getting his head cut off and goes, "Yep! That's the kind of lifestyle I want!" And I also harbor a great deal of skepticism as to how these girls are managing to make contact with their parents if they're expressing this degree of dissatisfaction with the regime. I have no trouble whatsoever believing that ISIS would use Western kids as decoys to send back to recruit or something, but if a citizen wants to return to the US, it's not as easy as just telling them to bugger off and help themselves.

[Mama Mia]

I am not sure what purpose this should have served in information terms? Could you specify that maybe a bit?

IMHO:

The existence of the terror organization ISIS does not stand for every muslim in the world nor does it falsify every single cause brought up by muslims. Like the Duggars are not representative for every christian large family.

True, the past years western society was quite quick to shut down a person who brought up the dangers of turning a blind eye to certain radicalizations within religious communities that are neither christian nor "autochthonous", but what we need to learn out of that is to stand our own ground more and have more faith in our own sovereignity. There is a need to search for root causes to see why it turned out that way it is now - in a pure objective way, even if the results are not to everyone´s liking.

Of course it makes sense to be aware if the mostly young people who are being radicalized are already raised in that religion or not. FWIW, it seems like most are Muslim initially, but many are not.

It makes sense because people need to find a way to counteract the super shiny messaging and first-person shooter game-type recruitment videos ( a tactic the U.S. Army also uses by the way), and social media romanticizing life with the hot ISIL husband and the thrill of being a militant war widow at 16.

And to counteract that you need to have a good idea of what is triggering these kids, and of course it's going to be a very different thing to go way over the edge extremist warrior in a religion you are already comfortable with, than to jump feet first into a completely unknown culture and religion and decide it's worth killing for.

[Anny Nym]

We maybe should delve into that more:

@MamaMia of course you have a point.

And @It´sFunToRun perception is indeed comprehensible.

I do not want to counter any of them.

The thing I may want to elaborate is, that a headline (or even a whole article, for the sake of argument) with "Muslim Austrian joins ISIS terror" may be only half way down the road.

Because yes! when they are joining they are already muslims. Many of them convertites (btw, anyone else familiar with the saying "convertites are the worst" it´s so fitting in case with ISIS), many did grow up being member of the muslim faith.

But aren´t many of them also typical girls or boys. pre-ISIS speaking?

Take Sabina and Samra, none of them even wore a Hijab or was über-modest. One wanted to go to the Handelsakademie, a Highschool which specializes in business and international economics. Their parents´ specific denomination is unknown so far, but they are clearly in a liberal one and far from any salafism. They did run off secretly.

And anyones daughter or son could be next, we need to face that. Like a 16 year old austrian boy from a christian background, who also made news.

The problem is not only (not only! to say it twice) the muslims joining the ISIS, the far bigger problem is that the current western society has not much to counter out of wrong understood and overeager "political correctness" and that the terrorist catch the typical teens and young men exactly there.

PS: I´d like to add that, while I am certainly not a fan of "omission", I may need to pull the "it´s-a-cultural-thing"-card here too: while the Germans are much more straightforward and direct in their use of language, in the austrian use of it there is a lot of "coding" going on. We like to interlace things. As I understand, most foreign press just directly translated main parts, some even everything, of that one certian austrian article. There might be something lost in translation. We associate "bosnian" and "chechen" (for example uses) maybe way different as the american or british or australian reader.

[Mama Mia]

I understand the desire to be careful when using racial or ethnic or religious identifiers if it doesn't relate to the point of the story. But I think ItsFunToRun did a fantastic job describing the reasoning behind discussing the religious affiliation, in this particular situation.

I think sometimes people kind of fall all over themselves to add a thousand qualifiers about how " Most Muslims aren't like that!" And " It's just a few bad apples! I have Muslim friends and they are the nicest, most peaceful people on the planet!" I think that's understandable, given how Muslims are the current group that gets the most negative reaction from many people.

But, it's such a huge double standard here on a board designed to snark on people who take their religion to fanatical extremes. There are so many posters here who will make blanket hugely negative statements about Christians and Christianity, and it's accepted as ok. A few people might pop in with a " not all Christians are like that" , but the reaction is nowhere near what it would be if the topic and statements concerned Muslims. And it's not crying " Christians are persecuted!" to notice the disconnect.

Yes Christians are the majority, default religion in the societies of most people who use this forum. But how does that somehow mean that it can't be pointed out , without a thousand disclaimers, when extremists from another religion are doing fucked up shit?

Truthfully, I think the constant qualifiers are pretty insulting and condescending to Muslims. Maybe if you're commenting on YAhoo Answers or YouTube or your reactionary Aunts FaceBook page, you need to point out how Most Muslims aren't violent fanatics -- but IMHO it's not a good idea to add a string of qualifiers in most other situations. Like commenting on a thread on a site dedicated to snarking on religious extremists.

[Anny Nym]

I understand the desire to be careful when using racial or ethnic or religious identifiers if it doesn't relate to the point of the story. But I think ItsFunToRun did a fantastic job describing the reasoning behind discussing the religious affiliation, in this particular situation.

I think sometimes people kind of fall all over themselves to add a thousand qualifiers about how " Most Muslims aren't like that!" And " It's just a few bad apples! I have Muslim friends and they are the nicest, most peaceful people on the planet!" I think that's understandable, given how Muslims are the current group that gets the most negative reaction from many people.

But, it's such a huge double standard here on a board designed to snark on people who take their religion to fanatical extremes. There are so many posters here who will make blanket hugely negative statements about Christians and Christianity, and it's accepted as ok. A few people might pop in with a " not all Christians are like that" , but the reaction is nowhere near what it would be if the topic and statements concerned Muslims. And it's not crying " Christians are persecuted!" to notice the disconnect.

Yes Christians are the majority, default religion in the societies of most people who use this forum. But how does that somehow mean that it can't be pointed out , without a thousand disclaimers, when extremists from another religion are doing fucked up shit?

Truthfully, I think the constant qualifiers are pretty insulting and condescending to Muslims. Maybe if you're commenting on YAhoo Answers or YouTube or your reactionary Aunts FaceBook page, you need to point out how Most Muslims aren't violent fanatics -- but IMHO it's not a good idea to add a string of qualifiers in most other situations. Like commenting on a thread on a site dedicated to snarking on religious extremists.

You brought up a - IMHO - very, very important issue and I really would like to see a elaborate discussion about this problem. We discuss such minor things here sometimes, I would like to see how much and which response such a challenging subject would get, if ever FJ member would join and altercate with it.

[samurai_sarah]

I understand the desire to be careful when using racial or ethnic or religious identifiers if it doesn't relate to the point of the story. But I think ItsFunToRun did a fantastic job describing the reasoning behind discussing the religious affiliation, in this particular situation.

I think sometimes people kind of fall all over themselves to add a thousand qualifiers about how " Most Muslims aren't like that!" And " It's just a few bad apples! I have Muslim friends and they are the nicest, most peaceful people on the planet!" I think that's understandable, given how Muslims are the current group that gets the most negative reaction from many people.

But, it's such a huge double standard here on a board designed to snark on people who take their religion to fanatical extremes. There are so many posters here who will make blanket hugely negative statements about Christians and Christianity, and it's accepted as ok. A few people might pop in with a " not all Christians are like that" , but the reaction is nowhere near what it would be if the topic and statements concerned Muslims. And it's not crying " Christians are persecuted!" to notice the disconnect.

Yes Christians are the majority, default religion in the societies of most people who use this forum. But how does that somehow mean that it can't be pointed out , without a thousand disclaimers, when extremists from another religion are doing fucked up shit?

Truthfully, I think the constant qualifiers are pretty insulting and condescending to Muslims. Maybe if you're commenting on YAhoo Answers or YouTube or your reactionary Aunts FaceBook page, you need to point out how Most Muslims aren't violent fanatics -- but IMHO it's not a good idea to add a string of qualifiers in most other situations. Like commenting on a thread on a site dedicated to snarking on religious extremists.

Interesting points, however I do somewhat disagree with you. Firstly, you say that the majority of users here come from countries where Christianity is the majority, or even default religion. Therefore it is implied that "not all Christians are like that" - everyone knows that. It's a point that requires less frequent repetition, because we are mostly already aware of that. Muslims are mostly a minority in users' countries, and get talked about as if they were one monolithic potential for terror.

You make that point, so I do wonder about how mainstream Islam is where you are. Is it common knowledge that Islam is not monolithic? Is "Muslim" used as short-hand for "potential terrorist"? Or maybe as "not one of us"?

Secondly, @AnnyNym pointed out that we tend to talk in code. If you're in the States "Christian" probably means "evangelical Christians" to you. in Germany, it means everyone who worships Christ. Subtle, but important difference. Hence, the way I read the headlines about the two girls who joined ISIS, wasn't about religion. To me, it basically read "oh shit, those foreign terrorists are recruiting our kids".

If we go by Itsfuntorun's logic, then my Catholic upbringing would have increased the danger of me running away to join the IRA during their heyday. The Irish Republican Army, back in the day, did commit a few acts of terrorism in Germany. "Catholic girl joins IRA" wouldn't have covered the bare facts. "German girl joins IRA" would have been the actual issue: Girl from nicely secular Germany runs away to join foreign terrorist organisation, what's wrong with her? Have we, as a society, done anything wrong? Are these people now preying on our children? How do we stop this from happening again?

Dismissing that as "Catholic girl joins Catholic terrorist organisation" misses the point. "German girl joins Northern Irish terrorist organisation" is a different ball-game. Inserting religion into that might actually worsen the issue.

FTR: Never, in my life, have I considered joining any terrorist organisations of any kind.

eta: Riffles and stuff

[2xx1xy1JD]

In dealing with extremist recruitment risks, there is a need to know exactly where people are coming from, what factors drove them to choose ISIS, and what short and long-term risks they may pose.

One pattern is 2nd generation kids in the west rejecting their parents' western lifestyles and embracing what they see as something both radical and authentic. The pattern of youth becoming more religious than parents and self-righteous is not new (I've seen it in other religious communities), nor is teen rebellion, but this version is particularly toxic and vile in its violence.

Another pattern is westerners with no prior connection to Islam who have a history of being violent and/or drug-addicted losers, who seem to be drawn to ISIS precisely because it's so anti-social and violent. If you are a total loser with a teeny weeny who feels desperate to prove that you are big and bad, you are more likely to self-radicalize. That seems to be the story with the 2 Canadian terror attacks this week.

ETA: As for the girls themselves, it's troubling that they didn't seem to have a problem with ISIS doing atrocities to other people. On a teen level, it wasn't that different than a girl wanting to be with the baddest gang leader. Now, they are whining because it's no longer fun. If they do somehow manage to get away and back home, there will be a question of whether they truly regret being with ISIS, and if they can have empathy for the real victims instead of just feeling sorry for themselves. Sometimes, personal stuff instead of moral awaking does manage to get people involved in bad organizations to "turn", and become valuable to intelligence agencies, but there's always a need to keep watch and be careful about trusting too much.

Burris: I don't want to see any young girls being victimized. In a situation of limited resources and high risk, though, I'd give first priority to those girls at highest risk. The Yazidi and Kurdish girls in ISIS' path are at extremely high risk of being killed or being forced into sexual slavery.

[Mama Mia]

Interesting points, however I do somewhat disagree with you. Firstly, you say that the majority of users here come from countries where Christianity is the majority, or even default religion. Therefore it is implied that "not all Christians are like that" - everyone knows that. It's a point that requires less frequent repetition, because we are mostly already aware of that. Muslims are mostly a minority in users' countries, and get talked about as if they were one monolithic potential for terror.

You make that point, so I do wonder about how mainstream Islam is where you are. Is it common knowledge that Islam is not monolithic? Is "Muslim" used as short-hand for "potential terrorist"? Or maybe as "not one of us"?

Secondly, @AnnyNym pointed out that we tend to talk in code. If you're in the States "Christian" probably means "evangelical Christians" to you. in Germany, it means everyone who worships Christ. Subtle, but important difference. Hence, the way I read the headlines about the two girls who joined ISIS, wasn't about religion. To me, it basically read "oh shit, those foreign terrorists are recruiting our kids".

If we go by Itsfuntorun's logic, then my Catholic upbringing would have increased the danger of me running away to join the IRA during their heyday. The Irish Republican Army, back in the day, did commit a few acts of terrorism in Germany. "Catholic girl joins IRA" wouldn't have covered the bare facts. "German girl joins IRA" would have been the actual issue: Girl from nicely secular Germany runs away to join foreign terrorist organisation, what's wrong with her? Have we, as a society, done anything wrong? Are these people now preying on our children? How do we stop this from happening again?

Dismissing that as "Catholic girl joins Catholic terrorist organisation" misses the point. "German girl joins Northern Irish terrorist organisation" is a different ball-game. Inserting religion into that might actually worsen the issue.

FTR: Never, in my life, have I considered joining any terrorist organisations of any kind.

eta: Riffles and stuff

No, In my experience, with the vast majority of people I have interacted with in my area, Muslims are most definitely not considered to all be one big monolithic extremist threat. Or considered to all think or act or believe the same.

Interestingly ( to me anyway) the " all Muslims are the same and scary" comes from a completely different marginalized immigrant population in my area. And that's only from a couple of people I know, most people from that group that I know also believe that Muslims are like anyone else -- with a huge range of how their religion is practiced. And that, obviously, terrorists are not the norm. And the occasional tea party in-law on Facebook will make an obnoxious post, but it's really, really not common for people to make those blanket assumptions regarding Muslims. In my experience.

Similarly, I actually wouldn't automatically think Evangelical Christian. In fact of the Various sorts of Christians among my friends, family, co-workers, etc ( if I actually even know what their religious affiliation is) --- Evangelical Christian is among the least common. They are just more noticeable. If I think just generic " Christian" , I would assume it's someone who follows Christ in some way. Possibly going to church, possibly not. And the church could be anything from Catholic to Jehovah Witness to United Church of Christ to Episcopalian to Quaker to Unity to Baptist to Lutheran to whatever.

No offense, but there really seem to be a lot of assumptions about the United States and how people think that really don't apply to the whole country. Obviously you'll get some far-right conservative fanatics in the most lefty -left cities. And some socialist athiest left wingers in the most conservative rural areas of the Bible Belt. Because people are individuals. But in many areas the norm isn't to insert religion into daily conversation, or assume Muslim= Terrorist.

[samurai_sarah]

No, In my experience, with the vast majority of people I have interacted with in my area, Muslims are most definitely not considered to all be one big monolithic extremist threat. Or considered to all think or act or believe the same.

Interestingly ( to me anyway) the " all Muslims are the same and scary" comes from a completely different marginalized immigrant population in my area. And that's only from a couple of people I know, most people from that group that I know also believe that Muslims are like anyone else -- with a huge range of how their religion is practiced. And that, obviously, terrorists are not the norm. And the occasional tea party in-law on Facebook will make an obnoxious post, but it's really, really not common for people to make those blanket assumptions regarding Muslims. In my experience.

In that case, you deal with people who obviously know their stuff. I wish I could say the same for my experiences. For example, in the small village, where I grew up, the knowledge that not all Muslims are the same hasn't quite arrived yet. Paradoxically, there are some families who are practising Muslims, so one would assume that it would be fairly obvious. But it seems to be more a case of "oh, but they're decent people, and wouldn't blow us up".

Similarly, I actually wouldn't automatically think Evangelical Christian. In fact of the Various sorts of Christians among my friends, family, co-workers, etc ( if I actually even know what their religious affiliation is) --- Evangelical Christian is among the least common. They are just more noticeable. If I think just generic " Christian" , I would assume it's someone who follows Christ in some way. Possibly going to church, possibly not. And the church could be anything from Catholic to Jehovah Witness to United Church of Christ to Episcopalian to Quaker to Unity to Baptist to Lutheran to whatever.

No offense, but there really seem to be a lot of assumptions about the United States and how people think that really don't apply to the whole country. Obviously you'll get some far-right conservative fanatics in the most lefty -left cities. And some socialist athiest left wingers in the most conservative rural areas of the Bible Belt. Because people are individuals. But in many areas the norm isn't to insert religion into daily conversation, or assume Muslim= Terrorist.

"Evangelical Christian" was the wrong term. I meant Protestants, and yes, I made assumptions, based on having heard the term used that way, and various assurances that Catholics aren't really Christian ( both NOT from you!). I presumed that was the common usage, but stand corrected. Thanks for clarifying the usage. Sorry.

[Anny Nym]

People... I though I need to come around and tell you about this update on the girls, because it´s a bit of a game-changer here:

The 15 year old Sabina gave a (text message) interview with a french magazine, in where she states she´s happy living with her husband, a "soldier", in a 3 room flat and is currently not pregnant. And so does her friend Samra too. She further tells, she has no ambition to return and "feels free here. Free to practise (her) religion. (She) couldn´t do that in Vienna."

(link to the french interview)

http://www.parismatch.com/Actu/Internat ... ste-638124

The austrian news broadcasted a review of the article today... which is also our National Celebration Day.

Any discussions of their return are now pretty much obsolete.

[It'sFunToRun]

People... I though I need to come around and tell you about this update on the girls, because it´s a bit of a game-changer here:

The 15 year old Sabina gave a (text message) interview with a french magazine, in where she states she´s happy living with her husband, a "soldier", in a 3 room flat and is currently not pregnant. And so does her friend Samra too. She further tells, she has no ambition to return and "feels free here. Free to practise (her) religion. (She) couldn´t do that in Vienna."

(link to the french interview)

http://www.parismatch.com/Actu/Internat ... ste-638124

The austrian news broadcasted a review of the article today... which is also our National Celebration Day.

Any discussions of their return are now pretty much obsolete.

Couldn't practice her religion of cutting off the heads of infidels in Vienna. Boo hoo. So oppressed.

There is the possibility that she didn't really write that text though.

[shedemei]

They could have been text messaging with anyone.

I wonder what's really going on, and which story is more true.

[16strong]

They could have been text messaging with anyone.

I wonder what's really going on, and which story is more true.

I tend to think that the first story is the most true. They got there with romanticized ideas of what the lifestyle would be like and found that it was not what they thought it would be. They contacted home saying that they didn't want to be there anymore, and could someone rescue them? The men they were with found out, got angry, and messaged their family or a newspaper claiming to be them and said that everything was okay, despite reports.

Who knows what the actual state of those girls is.

[samurai_sarah]

Bumping this thread, because a Dutch woman got her daughter out of IS's clutches in circumstances similar to the two Austrian girls: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30111040

(Link not broken, because it's the BBC)

[BrownieMomma]

Bumping this thread, because a Dutch woman got her daughter out of IS's clutches in circumstances similar to the two Austrian girls: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30111040

(Link not broken, because it's the BBC)

That seems incredibly brave to me, the mother went there, got her daughter and brought her back.

Saw this paragraph tho :(

Aicha, 19, is one of a number of teenage girls and young women who have made the journey to join IS. Two Austrians, aged 15 and 17, went to Syria in April and one was reported killed.

So one of the Austrians has been killed? :(

[Anny Nym]

... one was reported killed.

I would really love to see the reporter´s source for that. They probably recycled that from an old (around summer 2014) article yet again.