In a recent France 24 documentary on ISIS foreign women in the Kurdish-controlled Al-Hawl camp in north-eastern Syria, a camp director said that “when they [foreign ISIS women] gave themselves up, some of them told us that the IS group briefed them, telling them, ‘Surrender, go back to your countries, get your strength back and we will start again.’”

The Unsinkable Molly BOOM.

Trackback URL for this post:
https://www.margaretsoltan.com/wp-trackback.php?p=61057

5 Responses to “‘Experts are now warning that female members of ISIS are a serious security risk, especially those seeking to return to their countries of origin. “Many,” cautioned the head of the U.K.’s Metropolitan Police counterterrorism command, Richard Walton, “will pose just as much of a security threat as their male counterparts.”’”

  1. Total Says:

    The level of sexist hysteria (yes, word chosen deliberately) over these women is remarkable. Now, they’re going to be a fifth column in the west, incubating a new generation of terrorists who will someday rise up and overthrow civilization?

    Lovely moral panic we have going here.

  2. Margaret Soltan Says:

    I don’t think that’s quite it, Total. People in the relevant home countries rightly fear all ISIS adherents, male and female. There are specific things to fear from each gender, based on their activities – past and future – on behalf of the movement.

    What’s sexist is the assumption that women will be less dangerous than men.

    All of those who stayed until the bitter end and show evidence of continued adherence are extremely dangerous, and unless you’re comfortable dismissing much of the free world as simply suffering from cowardice and hysteria, you need to reckon with the strong disinclination, sometimes to the point of refusal, to have these people back in one’s country.

  3. Total Says:

    What’s sexist is the assumption that women will be less dangerous than men

    These women, as the article makes clear, were non-combatants and people are so panicked about their ideology that they’ve fallen back on the worst kind of misogynist logic. It’s the Manchurian Candidate domineering mother trope all over again.

    Next up: Trump announces that waves of ISIS moms are heading north through Mexico to overrun American daycare!

    dismissing much of the free world as simply suffering from cowardice and hysteria,

    Er…have you looked at the world recently? I’m pretty comfortable with saying that lots of reactions people have are both driven by irrational fears and by prejudice of all sorts. This is one of them.

  4. theprofessor Says:

    Actual treason is way better than imaginary collusion, eh, Total? When it comes to the US, these women either renounced their citizenship, in which case we owe them nothing, or they are guilty of treason under US 18.1.115 section 2381. Or are you going to pretend that ISIS is not an enemy of the US?

  5. Total Says:

    Or are you going to pretend that ISIS is not an enemy of the US?

    What they may be guilty of is not the same thing as any potential threat that they actually pose. I’m talking about the latter, not the former. Do try to keep up.

    My larger points (as I’ve made in multiple responses to multiple posts by UD) are that 1) these women are their countries’ responsibilities, and those countries should bring them back to the country and then, if the evidence is sufficient, let the legal system handle them (yes, with treason charges if necessary; 2) the threat that these women pose is actually negligible and so people are coming up with the worst kind of misogynist bullsh** as a substitute for actual thought. I’m embarrassed that UD seems to have that fixation as well; you, I’ve never been impressed by, so less so.

    Oh, one further note:

    these women either renounced their citizenship

    Really? They appeared in a US consulate and signed an oath of renunciation, which is the actual legal way of doing it?

Comment on this Entry

Latest UD posts at IHE

Archives

Categories