Chomper Higgot Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 13 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/61/section/40 see section (4A) It was for this reason why TEO were introduced See (as way of an example) Boris Johnson’s dual citizenship. See (as way of an example) Chris Froome’s dual citizenship. See (as way of an example) the thousands of British citizens claiming dual Irish citizenship in response to Brexit. Your reading of the law is embarrassingly bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evadgib Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 (edited) Her latest interview: Despite the above it wouldn't surprize me if HMG galloped to the rescue & had her back in UK courtesy of the taxpayer by next w/e. I hope i'm wrong. Edited February 17, 2019 by evadgib 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil B Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 1 hour ago, TopDeadSenter said: Unfortunately her child was born in Syria, so is not a British citizen. I believe that was the mad rush for her to give birth on British soil. Bad luck. I was thinking that as she was not born in the UK, thinking of the "by decent rule", but as she is mot probably a "Naturalized Citizen" therefore the child is probably entitled to British Citizenship. I do think that as long as a person who acquired citizenship by Naturalization and has (right to) another nationality they could have it removed for any "gross" act of anti British sentiment. I does seem unfair that British subject, who can trace there family tree back generations of British subjects, whose parents lived and worked in the UK, and they did also, but were for what ever reason born out side the UK can not always pass on there citizenship, yet seems this person not born in the UK, going to the aid of enemies of this Country, gives new meaning to "Sleeping with the enemy". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleopatra2 Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said: See (as way of an example) Boris Johnson’s dual citizenship. See (as way of an example) Chris Froome’s dual citizenship. See (as way of an example) the thousands of British citizens claiming dual Irish citizenship in response to Brexit. Your reading of the law is embarrassingly bad. In the context of the post responded to, was the womans citizenship could be revoked due to the possibility of eligibility for Bangladeshi citizenship even though she does not posses such. The provisions in UK law only allow for this in the circumstances were the British citizenship is by naturalisation. It would appear that the woman does not posses dual nationality and British by Birth, thus citizenship revocation is not possible. The UK is likely to issue a TEO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleopatra2 Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 1 minute ago, Basil B said: I was thinking that as she was not born in the UK, thinking of the "by decent rule", but as she is mot probably a "Naturalized Citizen" therefore the child is probably entitled to British Citizenship. I do think that as long as a person who acquired citizenship by Naturalization and has (right to) another nationality they could have it removed for any "gross" act of anti British sentiment. I does seem unfair that British subject, who can trace there family tree back generations of British subjects, whose parents lived and worked in the UK, and they did also, but were for what ever reason born out side the UK can not always pass on there citizenship, yet seems this person not born in the UK, going to the aid of enemies of this Country, gives new meaning to "Sleeping with the enemy". Where is the info about her not being born in the UK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evadgib Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 I'm posting this separately as it appears to be a longer version: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Orton Rd Posted February 17, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 17, 2019 (edited) Not a terrorist, but the wife of one and following a prophet who claimed he was victorious by terror. If she did not agree with terrorism why leave it until Isis were almost defeated to try and bail out to a comfy council flat and benefits for life provided by a society she hates? We must be mad, literally mad to let these evil people back into the UK. She was not just a housewife or a victim, she was a terrorist supporter cheering from behind her burka. Sorry darling supporting one of the most barbarous and evil movements in history WAS dangerous, stupid and wrong. Sympathy is with those butchered, burned, raped, hanged and flung off roofs while you smiled, NONE for you. Edited February 17, 2019 by Orton Rd 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil B Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 19 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said: Where is the info about her not being born in the UK I heard she came to the UK at the age of 3... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OJAS Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 49 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/61/section/40 see section (4A) It was for this reason why TEO were introduced All very well to quote UK legislation. But Bangladeshi law might also have a teeny weeny bearing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleopatra2 Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, Basil B said: I heard she came to the UK at the age of 3... In interviews she talks about returning to country of birth, presumed to be Uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleopatra2 Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, OJAS said: All very well to quote UK legislation. But Bangladeshi law might also have a teeny weeny bearing here. Bangladeshi law is irrelevant. It is the UK who can only remove her citizenship. This would have to be done under UK law. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton Rd Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 Just now, cleopatra2 said: In interviews she talks about returning to country of birth, presumed to be Uk You believe what she has to say about anything? Who cares where she was born, she should never be let back into the UK. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleopatra2 Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 19 minutes ago, Orton Rd said: You believe what she has to say about anything? Who cares where she was born, she should never be let back into the UK. If she is British , why should Britain be allowed to export their problem citizens and abdicate its responsibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil B Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 1 minute ago, cleopatra2 said: In interviews she talks about returning to country of birth, presumed to be Uk It was something I heard on the TV or Radio, maybe I was wrong. As much as I hope she does not come back, I do believe anyone that has been educated in the UK would find it hard to make their way in another country where the customs and language differ to the UK, but there again she seems to have done alright in an IS knocking shop. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanemax Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said: If she is British , why should Britain be allowed to export their problem citizens and abdicate its responsibilities. As she isnt in the UK , there would be no need to "export" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanemax Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 28 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said: In interviews she talks about returning to country of birth, presumed to be Uk If that is so important , she should keep her child in its country of birth 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Opl Posted February 17, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 17, 2019 I tend to believe these schoolgirls received from their parents an education that made them easily receptive to radical islamism propaganda. They were well aware of the ideology and the crimes ISIS claimed responsibility for in the UK and in Europe. Since they made their choice to leave for Syria and join ISIS, the UK owes them nothing. 6 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katana Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 There's an argument to be made that rather than bring her back to the UK, she, along with the other captured ISIS fighters in Syria, should be put on trial in the country she broke the law in. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simple1 Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 trump is threatening to release all foreign ISIS prisoners if their home countries refuse to take them back for trial. Stable genius at work....LOL 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopDeadSenter Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 7 hours ago, Basil B said: I heard she came to the UK at the age of 3... yes I heard this too. Cant fin a source and her wiki page claims she was born in the UK. Will try to find it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Orton Rd Posted February 18, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 18, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, cleopatra2 said: If she is British , why should Britain be allowed to export their problem citizens and abdicate its responsibilities. British now it suits her, up until now she has identified herself as Muslim Jihadist. Britain was a place she turned here back on and despised when she was off to help fight against western values. She asked for sympathy but had none for those innocents with their heads cut off, she was quite happy about that. It's not Britain exporting it's problems, it's Islam. Edited February 18, 2019 by Orton Rd 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Credo Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 I think it was Robert Frost who said, "Home is where, when you have to go there, they have to take you." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malagateddy Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 All these scummy isis fighters and their " wifes " should be kept in syria..tried in syria..found guilty the dealt with under syrian law. trump is threatening to release all foreign ISIS prisoners if their home countries refuse to take them back for trial. Stable genius at work....LOLSent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malagateddy Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Sorry..THEN dealt with etcSent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simple1 Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 8 minutes ago, malagateddy said: All these scummy isis fighters and their " wifes " should be kept in syria..tried in syria..found guilty the dealt with under syrian law. Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app They are not held by the Syrian government, but by rebel forces, mostly SDF supported primarily by US forces. trump has no remit to dictate to allied countries as to how they should process captured nationals. trump threatening to release foreign fighters held by SDF is the utmost stupidity, seems he can only threaten, not negotiate, the guy is the idiocracy incarnate. It was the unbelievably ignorant policies during the US occupation of Iraq that led to the creation of ISIS in the first place. Logically it is US responsibility to deal with them under the Rule of Law. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opl Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, simple1 said: trump is threatening to release all foreign ISIS prisoners if their home countries refuse to take them back for trial. Stable genius at work....LOL yes.. and according to Trump, Saudi Arabia is the good guy.. as long as oïl prevails. Did Trump tell MBS to stop funding ISIS ( US legacy of 2003) ? Edited February 18, 2019 by Opl 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post xylophone Posted February 18, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 18, 2019 On 2/14/2019 at 7:23 PM, overherebc said: So now she wants to come 'home' and take advantage of the social services in UK. I can't post the words. To be supported, clothed and fed by the very country that she abandoned and betrayed for a "better life"..... The very thought of that makes me cringe and worry about the mental capacity of those in charge who would welcome this terrorist and radicalised supporter back to the UK........what happened to the old saying, "you've made your bed, now lie in it". 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post malagateddy Posted February 18, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 18, 2019 Think most people are well aware of certain nations foreign policies.However..as a Brit..I remember the atrocities committed by the likes of scummy isis members/supporters/wifes etc etc. Manchester Arena for example.I also am a " spades a spade " man.The world would be well rid of the isis scum..treat them the way they treated other people.Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Orton Rd Posted February 18, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 18, 2019 11 minutes ago, simple1 said: They are not held by the Syrian government, but by rebel forces, mostly SDF supported primarily by US forces. trump has no remit to dictate to allied countries as to how they should process captured nationals. trump threatening to release foreign fighters held by SDF is the utmost stupidity, seems he can only threaten, not negotiate, the guy is the idiocracy incarnate. It was the unbelievably ignorant policies during the US occupation of Iraq that led to the creation of ISIS in the first place. Logically it is US responsibility to deal with them under the Rule of Law. Logically as they are Islamist fanatics they should be dealt with under sharia law, it's their right as an oppressed minority! What is the punishment in sharia for troublemakers, banishment, cutting off limbs or Crucifixion. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opl Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Orton Rd said: Logically as they are Islamist fanatics they should be dealt with under sharia law, it's their right as an oppressed minority! What is the punishment in sharia for troublemakers, banishment, cutting off limbs or Crucifixion. and then they'll be entitled to turn into asylum seekers thanks to our democratic laws Edited February 18, 2019 by Opl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now