Off Topic The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Should the UK remain a part of the EU or leave?

  • Stay in

    Votes: 56 47.9%

  • Get out

    Votes: 61 52.1%
  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
Staines R's said:
It seems to me anyway that it’s very easy for the likes of Ellers to cheer on the kicking out of scumbags like Begum.....but once that precedence in in place.....those self same bigots will be saying how unfair it is when used against themselves or their loved ones.
First they came for the Jews etc.....

Worrying
Click to expand...
we have the same going on here at the moment
girl moved from nz with the family when she was six and went to Australia where they became duel citizens
she thought it would be a good idea to head off and join in with isis
was arrested last week trying to get into turkey with her two kids
Australia has revoked her citizenship leaving her our problem
leave her in turkey I say
 
kiwiqpr said:
we have the same going on here at the moment
girl moved from nz with the family when she was six and went to Australia where they became duel citizens
she thought it would be a good idea to head off and join in with isis
was arrested last week trying to get into turkey with her two kids
Australia has revoked her citizenship leaving her our problem
leave her in turkey I say
Click to expand...

Slightly different but again if she was born, raised and lived in Australia then isn’t she Australian ? Until it’s used against us and just against ISIS sympathisers everyone is happy....unfortunately in another 30 years it might not just be them.
 
Staines R's said:
But that’s not my point Goldie....Who knows what this ruling might be used for in the future....we can’t answer that for sure and I certainly wouldn’t trust any government to just stop at ‘terrorist activities’.
I might be wrong but I don’t think Begum actually had dual nationality herself...only the right to joint nationality through her parents. Again if that is correct it’s VERY concerning as how far could they go back in the future...parents, great grandparents, further ?
We are a nation of immigrants and go far enough back we’ll all find someone who came over here as an immigrant.
Besides even if she is in hold of a Bangladeshi passport....what gives us the right to push our ‘problem’ on to them.
Like it or not, she’s British born and bred....and should be our problem to deal with and punish
Click to expand...

Begum has citizenship in Bangladesh in her own right. So the issue is the - pushing "onto them" one. The answer to that may be that she hasn't engaged in offences against Bangladesh, so they will accept her. The problem would come in a future case, if a terrorist committed offences against both states in which it had citizenship. Then it would be stateless.
 
Staines R's said:
Slightly different but again if she was born, raised and lived in Australia then isn’t she Australian ? Until it’s used against us and just against ISIS sympathisers everyone is happy....unfortunately in another 30 years it might not just be them.
Click to expand...
the aussies got in first with revoking citizenship
they do it all the time to criminals
send em back here even if they have no family
one that got sent back here in 2017 because Australia has enough homegrown crims was shot dead by the police on Thursday night
 
Goldhawk-Road said:
Begum has citizenship in Bangladesh in her own right. So the issue is the - pushing "onto them" one. The answer to that may be that she hasn't engaged in offences against Bangladesh, so they will accept her. The problem would come in a future case, if a terrorist committed offences against both states in which it had citizenship. Then it would be stateless.
Click to expand...

It’s not quite that clear though.....it seems rather unfair, and to me wrong, that someone who is born in this country and always lived in this country, is then made a citizen of another country purely from her parents heritage and place of birth. I can’t find anywhere stating she has held a Bangladeshi passport (but then again I didn’t check thoroughly).
It’s like saying my Mrs could be stripped of her British citizenship, for whatever reason, and thus becomes a Trinidadian problem and has citizenship of there through her father who came here in the 60’s....
It just seems ripe for unjust rulings in the future
 
  • Like
Reactions: Willhoops
Staines R's said:
It’s not quite that clear though.....it seems rather unfair, and to me wrong, that someone who is born in this country and always lived in this country, is then made a citizen of another country purely from her parents heritage and place of birth. I can’t find anywhere stating she has held a Bangladeshi passport (but then again I didn’t check thoroughly).
It’s like saying my Mrs could be stripped of her British citizenship, for whatever reason, and thus becomes a Trinidadian problem and has citizenship of there through her father who came here in the 60’s....
It just seems ripe for unjust rulings in the future
Click to expand...

She doesn't have a Bangladeshi passport but it looks like she automatically had citizenship as both her parents were Bangladeshi. It's not 100% according to The Guardian. I understand what your looking at with your Mrs, but I honestly think we're a million miles from there. Begum is a woman who was a member of one of the worst terrorist regimes this world has ever seen in a country where civilization has fled. That's what singles this case out from the norm. And such is the debate on this, I just don't see any slippage from it. This case is for the worst of the worst offenders
 
Goldhawk-Road said:
She doesn't have a Bangladeshi passport but it looks like she automatically had citizenship as both her parents were Bangladeshi. It's not 100% according to The Guardian. I understand what your looking at with your Mrs, but I honestly think we're a million miles from there. Begum is a woman who was a member of one of the worst terrorist regimes this world has ever seen in a country where civilization has fled. That's what singles this case out from the norm. And such is the debate on this, I just don't see any slippage from it. This case is for the worst of the worst offenders
Click to expand...

But I read that her birth hadn’t been registered at the Bangladeshi HC, thus giving her no rights to Bangladeshi citizenship. Of course we are discussing things that even well paid and educated lawyers can’t agree on, however, morally I feel it unjustified and wrong to attain citizenship of anyone born and raised in this country, purely on the country of birth of their parents.
Respectfully mate, what is seen ‘out of the norm’ now...might not be in the near too distant future.
 
Staines R's said:
But I read that her birth hadn’t been registered at the Bangladeshi HC, thus giving her no rights to Bangladeshi citizenship. Of course we are discussing things that even well paid and educated lawyers can’t agree on, however, morally I feel it unjustified and wrong to attain citizenship of anyone born and raised in this country, purely on the country of birth of their parents.
Respectfully mate, what is seen ‘out of the norm’ now...might not be in the near too distant future.
Click to expand...

The lawyers can't agree, true. All I can say is, I think your fears are unjustified in practice, but agree there does seem to be a principle of two types of UK citizenship, which needs to be debated
 
  • Like
Reactions: Staines R's
Goldhawk-Road said:
The lawyers can't agree, true. All I can say is, I think your fears are unjustified in practice, but agree there does seem to be a principle of two types of UK citizenship, which needs to be debated
Click to expand...

It wasn’t that long ago that many in this country were applauding the government at the time for bringing in the CJA so it could be used against those damn ravers, taking drugs and dancing to ‘repetitive’ beats........
 
  • Like
Reactions: Goldhawk-Road and bobmid
84% of Black Brits Say Statue Toppling is Not Legitimate Protest



The overwhelming majority of black Brits are at odds with the statue toppling extremism of the leadership of Black Lives Matter, says a new report from the Henry Jackson Society. The issues of concern for black people in the UK are more substantive than statues, with black Brits more likely to believe there is a problem with police brutality (52% compared to 22% of the whole population), and that the UK is a racist society (58% compared to 29% of the whole population).

On statues just 16% believe tearing down statues is “a legitimate form of protest“, and similarly, just 25% of black Brits support replacing the British capitalist system with a socialist economy, compared to 23% of the population as a whole. The difference is within the margin of error.

Overall the findings suggest that radical left wing activists leading the Black Lives Matter organisation are not truly representative of the parts of society they claim to speak for. Read the report in full here.
 
qprbeth said:
I respect the decision, I do not like it but I respect it...I do not respect him in the slightest, a grubby human being.
Hence I am suspicious of everything he does including his attempt to discredit the SNP, the Scottish government and even the law makers. Is he trying to do this for the good of Scotland and the Scottish people or for some other maybe selfish reason.

Perhaps some of the Scottish members can come on here and tell us
Click to expand...

He's an odious character to be sure, and he's admitted to some pretty heinous behavior, but none of it illegal according to the courts.

However, that's not the issue at stake here - there has been a concerted effort by those in power to use all their influence to defame him. Sturgeons husband, who is the chairman of the SNP, is heavily implicated in the stitch up, text messages sent fron him asking for police involvement, CPS and others so that Salmond was fighting "from all sides". Other members of the SNP hierarchy are also implicated, and the redaction of a lot of the evidence, at their insistance, should be a red flag to us all.

Salmond may be fighting this case on personal grounds, but this will have grave consequences on the parliament as a whole. He's pointed the finger squarely at those at the top of the tree whos' positions of influenee caused the bungling of the case when it went to the courts, knowing that they would lose and still going ahead - resulting in £500,000 payment for Salmonds costs.

With an election only a couple of months away it'll be interesting to see how the opposition parties use this to their advantage. Whateeer the outcome, the SNPs reputation, dragged through the courts, has taken a bit of a hammerring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rangercol and qprbeth
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back