Shamima was smuggled in by WESTERN inteligence!

[denso13]

UK granted itself powers higher then the Bangladeshi parliament and the Bangladeshi courts.

No they didn't. They applied a natural meaning to words, nothing more.

 

[Mottie]

Still amusing yourself with trolling, but nothing to add to the debate, as usual.

I've added the obvious - that you’re wring and should stop digging and admit defeat.

 

[Pat ex]

I've added the obvious - that you’re wring and should stop digging and admit defeat.

Is that your best contribution?
Best keep them to yourself.
And I'm not wring, whatever that is supposed to mean.

 

[Pat ex]

This really is explained in the judgement, in detail.

Of course it did, on UK terms and with UK's interest at heart.

All Sajid Javid had to do was to pick up the phone to his Bangladeshi counterpart and check his interpretation of Bangladeshi laws.
Of course he couldn't do that, it would have destroyed his reasoning.

 

[Pat ex]

No they didn't. They applied a natural meaning to words, nothing more.

That's called interpreting others' laws.

Then there's the unfair issue of the children of immigrant parents being potentially liable to a punishment that can't be applied to the children of indigenous parents.
That makes the children of immigrant parents second-class citizens.

 

[denso13]

That's called interpreting others' laws.

Yea, imagine the courts thinking that a child is a Bangladeshi citizen from birth because that's what the law says. How stupid of them.

Then there's the unfair issue of the children of immigrant parents being potentially liable to a punishment that can't be applied to the children of indigenous parents.
That makes the children of immigrant parents second-class citizens.

Haven't a clue what you are on about.

 

[denso13]

All Sajid Javid had to do was to pick up the phone to his Bangladeshi counterpart and check his interpretation of Bangladeshi laws.

Irrelevant.

 

[Pat ex]

Irrelevant.

Of course it's not irrelevant. Any sensible person would check out their interpretation of another country's laws before acting on it.
But as I said. if he had done that it would have rendered his reason null and void.

 

[Pat ex]

Then there's the unfair issue of the children of immigrant parents being potentially liable to a punishment that can't be applied to the children of indigenous parents.
That makes the children of immigrant parents second-class citizens.

Haven't a clue what you are on about.

If Shamima had been born to indigenous parents the penalty applied by the Home Secretary could not have been applied.
Therefore it makes children born to immigrant parents second class citizens, and liable to having their citizenship revoked.
That's evidently unfair and possibly racist.

 

[denso13]

Any sensible person would check out their interpretation of another country's laws before acting on it.

Absolute nonsense. Their response is wrong in law anyway, what's the point.

 

[denso13]

But as I said. if he had done that it would have rendered his reason null and void.

No it wouldn't, all explained in the judgement.

 

[Notch7]

What is clearly morally wrong is that this country has a 2 tier citizenship model.

a child can have their British citizenship taken away from them by dint of them having parents from another country.



Shamima Begum appears to be stateless, as she has been left in a situation where she can’t obtain csitizenship anywhere.

 

[denso13]

a child can have their British citizenship taken away

Anyone can, if they have dual nationality. It is rare though and usually in exceptional circumstances.

 

[Pat ex]

Anyone can, if they have dual nationality. It is rare though and usually in exceptional circumstances.

If people apply for dual nationality they would be totally aware that one of those citizenships can be revoked.
If someone has dual nationality without their consent, knowledge or desire, then it is, as Notch7 says, morally wrong that one of those citizenships can be revoked. It is not a possible penalty for children born to indigenous parents, therefore it's morally wrong that a child born to immigrant parents can be stripped of that citizenship and it is legally unjust to make them stateless.

 

[denso13]

then it is, as Notch7 says, morally wrong

It's morally wrong to do something so bad that your citizenship is removed. Don't blame the system.

it is legally unjust to make them stateless.

Yes it is.