Why is the Media Sympathetic Towards the Women of ISIS?

A young blonde girl of eighteen once joined a legion of women fighting for a cause, listing among her motivations the need for the “feminine ideal of nurturance.” Over the course of the next four years, she and her fellow female devotees to the cause would marry leaders of the cause, immerse themselves in its ideology, and engage in acts of depravity themselves.

Some of them turned their own friends and families in for noncompliance, some fed their prisoners to guard dogs, and the most brutal of them all made a lampshade with the skin of babies. When Irma Grese and Maria Mandl were hanged for their crimes as Nazi guards, they didn’t show much emotion. In fact, Jenny Barkmann, the notorious officer of a prison camp, declared, “Life is full of pleasures, but pleasures are usually short.”

Seventy years on, revisionism abounds as ISIS wives and families claim to be victims. But these depraved women, just like other fascists before them, are no victims. Rather, they are a sign of the degradation of postmodern culture and a warning for the West to heed before it’s too late.

Recently, The Independent (UK) published a sympathetic portrayal of the ISIS wives now living in the “Little Britain of Raqqa.” The BBC joined in with its own story, which highlighted the voices of other women who had joined ISIS. Over the sound of mournful background music, an earnest BBC reporter asked the women questions about why they had gone with their husbands to ISIS territory—although a more honest questioner would have asked why these women fled their cushy Western lives to join a death cult with a murderous ideology that was killing people because of their religion and sexuality. Other media outlets have published similarly sympathetic stories, such as one about an affluent German girl who joined ISIS but now complains, “I just want to go home.”

Why is the media offering sympathetic airtime to terrorists? Is it because they happen to be women? In an era when social media, the Internet, and a 24/7 news cycle dominate the globe, it’s more than a little disingenuous to suggest that these women didn’t understand the ISIS agenda or the atrocities committed by its adherents.

Either they joined up for purely ideological reasons, knowing full well that they might possibly take part in a barbaric rampage, or they joined as thrill-seekers. Either way, they are responsible for their choices. The media wants to portray these women as merely deluded; nearly all the stories about them imply that, far from being murderous zealots, they are wives and daughters and mothers who were just susceptible to ISIS’s anti-Western conspiracy theories. Or, as one wife of an ISIS fighter said, she went to join ISIS because she wanted to live a good Muslim life under sharia law—as if that was a reasonable excuse for joining an Islamic extremist group (sharia law has been invoked to justify punishments such as crucifixion and stoning to death for people accused of homosexuality or adultery, for example, and regularly called upon to justify honor killings of women and female genital mutilation).

As the BBC reporter noted, in an epic understatement, “It’s hard to determine if the women who all escaped [from ISIS strongholds] are victims.” Even a lawyer who represents the families of some ISIS women and who spoke to the BBC noted that it’s impossible to distinguish between the women who now say they genuinely “regret” their decision to fight for ISIS and the ones who want to come back to further the goals of ISIS through terrorism. There is, after all, an all-female ISIS brigade called the “Khansaa,” that acts as a strict enforcer for ISIS, and women have been key players in the organization’s terror campaign. Take, for example, the infamous “White Widow,” a British woman named Sally Jones who went to Syria with her husband to fight for ISIS and became an “ISIS poster girl” and recruiter for the organization. News reports now suggest she, too, wants to come back to the UK. Should someone who acted as a “prolific propagandist for ISIS and has published ‘kill lists’ of targets and announced her wish to behead Christians online” be welcomed back to the West with open arms?

For years in many Western countries, healthy civic nationalism has been frowned upon by global elites; meanwhile, extremist ideologies draw recruits from across the globe. The human need to wave a tribal flag of allegiance manifests itself in the Black Flag of ISIS, which has rallied many people who were born and brought up in the West, but who never identified with Western Enlightenment values, to flock to an extremist society that gives their lives meaning.

After years of fighting and death and destruction, it should be clear that men and women who willingly joined ISIS do not share Western values. Why should the West welcome them back with open arms in the name of “rehabilitation?”

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

newsletter-signup
  • Gee

    Rehabilitation for Islamofascists = hanging

    • b.a. freeman

      well, that would end the problem, but i think that islam should be treated like a disease. rather than allow the vectors into our countries, we should isolate them. on occasion (admittedly rare), muslims will listen to others and turn away from their vile mind disease, so some contact should be allowed. we *must* spend time inoculating our populations against islam by teaching its history and publicizing its mass murders (anywhere from 180 million to 350 million victims, from what i have read).

      to handle the disease within our nations, we need to recognize that islam is at war with us. in a shooting war, there are certain rules of engagement that western nations use to handle enemy soldiers, but this war is different, so they must be handled differently. there can be no further immigration from islamic-majority nations. no visas except diplomatic and the occasional tourist visa must be issued to members of the ummah. pious muslims (the monsters who emulate muhammed) who are not citizens must be deported immediately. those who are citizens must be scrutinized carefully; if they have espoused islamic piety, they must be put on trial for treason, and if convicted, have their citizenship revoked. once their prison terms have been served (separately from all non-islamic prisoners), they must be deported immediately. all islamic citizens must be watched closely so as to spot signs of islamic piety, in much the same way that law enforcement used to watch immigrant communities when they developed criminal gangs (before PC bulls**t stopped effective law enforcement).

      if we do all these things, at least as a start on addressing the problem, we have a chance to survive the onslaught of islamic criminals. there would be no guarantee that it is not too late already, however; civilization may actually be ending.

  • Mathias Worcke

    Today many educated Muslims want to leave Islam but are afraid that they will be killed by their fellow religionists. Hence the Muslims must be first shown a safe path so that they renounce Islam but does
    not arouse suspicion among their fellow Muslims. See
    http://sanatanaparishad.blogspot.in/

  • sarah

    God, we all KNEW this was coming. I remember very clearly, when Isis first announced itself to the world (and we saw those photos of cavalcades of Muslims riding in late model Toyota’s across the desert sands – remember the storm that caused?) and all those Muslims around the West started flocking to join them – that I – and a huge number of other people pointed out that when Isis eventually comes crashing down, the survivors will start playing the victim and demand the right to come home.

    And where are we? Exactly where we predicted we’d be.

    Let the animals rot. Those women are even worse in some respects, than the male fighters. The males have done atrocious, unforgivable things. The women have done the same AND willingly and repeatedly bought children into that world – AND exposed them to Isis and all the horrors we’ve seen come out of their ‘caliphate’.

    As a woman, I expect better of other women. Especially mothers. I do not forgive, I do not forget and I do not care what they want. They only thing ANY of them deserve, is to stand in front of a firing squad.

    Do not let any of them back in – and truth be told – do not let ANY of their kids in, either. Those kids have essentially undergone some hardcore rewiring and brainwashing thanks to their Mother’s and Father’s and Isis. Each child is a ticking time bomb to our nation’s. Make them stateless. Let them rot. Let the Iraqis clean up the mess and do what the Iraqis do best.

  • neluroman

    I do think that it is not about bad people, but that it is about bad ideology. In my country there are approximately 400,000 Muslims. From what I know, only one, a converted one, has ever been accused of terrorism. In fact, even that one was accused only of terrorist propaganda. Maybe, maybe, a simple improvment of this ideology, a revolution within it, would save the things. A revolution like that which took place within Christianity years ago. The problem that slow things in this regard might be that we, the non-Muslims, call, ”liars” those Muslims who say that Islam is a religion of peace. For example, in my country a Muslim converted has posted on YouTube a lot of Islamic propaganda, where he said that Isalm is peaceful, very humanistic, a religion which respects human rights, that Muhammad did only good things and so on. I, who know Islam very well from a theoretical point of view, replied to him saying:” You are lying here, the Quran urges people to do this and that, and Muhammad was not a holy man because he did this and that”. Now, I ask myself whether I didn”t make a mistake by bashing him. Perhaps it would have been better if I pretended that I didn”t observe the discrepancy between what he said and what is written in the Quran. That is because it is much better- isn”t it?- as a Muslim to believe that Islam is about peace, than one to believe it is about war.

    • mark

      Deluded or just another lying muslim?