₦airaland Forum

Goke7:
But she never mentioned that, and that's the same way many of us misinterpreted the US statement on single-entry visas for Americans by the Nigerian government, including the BBC.

And even for foreign spouses married to British, there is no direct naturalisation for them until they have lived in the UK for a while, so let's not make it look as if once a foreigner marries a British, they are becoming British citizens directly and that's why madam kemi knew what she was saying and didn't mention anything about her spouse. She was very clear on what she meant. She was trying to exploit her Nigerian heritage for politics as usual, knowing too well that she had probably rescinded her Nigerian citizenship before becoming a senior cabinet member when her party was in power ( not many Nigerians may be aware of that).

In light of the foregoing, citizenship can also be obtained if grandparents are Nigerians, and there are several cases like that, e.g., Ashley Plumptre, who plays for the Nigerian female national team and became a Nigerian citizen through her grandparents. Enough of the gas lighting, abeg, before Nigerians start becoming innocent victims of falsehood being peddled for political gains in the West.

Exactly. The bolded is what she what she was doing and it was very deliberate.

Is it not the same spousal route that they made substantially harder recently, for the spouses to even be able to come live in the UK at all before talking citizenship?

She, personally, proposed stricter measures beyond the increased salary on spousal visas, so that’s why she chose to lie about her children instead.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/33766077/migrant-salary-minimum-visa-kemi-tories/

RodgersAkpafu:
Better to pin it as that
.Because yall have nothing sensible to say.

If I didn't know women who have been at the short end of the stick on matters pertaining to this, I wouldn't be too pissed about it

Kemi own as much as I like her, her own is getting too MUCH BUT THE POINT SHE RAISED IS VALID

Okay.

RodgersAkpafu:
Kemi is right
All these ones you people are saying is just bollocks

We saw on full display today how a senator was locked out despite a court order

Land use act dey yet people are losing their land at the whims of low self esteemed men

and you are talking rubbish about "section 25"

Go ask Nigerian women with foreign husbands in Nigeria what they go through before they get cerpac for their husbands, talk less of even path to citizenship for them
Stuff that the men don't even go through

Continue fooling yourselves in that shytehole

Okay.

justwise:
Who know anything about this investment app: PiggyBank? Is the app genuine ?

Do you mean PiggyVest?

If so, it’s very reliable. They’ve been around a while and are regulated by the CBN (they acquired a MicroFinance Bank) and SEC so reasonably assured.

ehizario2012:
Ok let's agree, a child. A 13 year old is a teenager who can demand to sleepover outside the parent's house in this UK. Let's stop shielding them... Waiting till my children reach 13, we go know how far then. Wishing the parents all the best again.

😄

Boss take am easy o.

Seriously though, I find the idea of sleepovers weird (maybe it’s just how I was brought up but aren’t all the daytime hours enough to play with friends and then go and sleep under your parents’ roof?’ and especially with the way deviance and molestation has become so commonplace nowadays even among people one would least expect it from, I certainly would never approve a sleepover for a 13 year old child.

Goke7:
This is how the falsehood of Nigeria granting US citizens only single entry visas spread like wildfire, but why is Nigeria becoming a target these days with blatant falsehood and propaganda by the west, Is there a gang up against the country, I know our sins are plenty but make dem take am easy with these lies na Omo na wa o!

If Madam kemi doesn’t want Nigerian citizenship for her children that’s fine but she doesn’t need to lie to incite hatred against Nigeria.

To be honest at this point I’m convinced it’s a mental issue of some kind, because it’s something that’s so easy to verify and she must have known it would be fact-checked very quickly. I also cannot believe she didn’t know because again it’s such a basic thing that if she had ever done 1 minute of research to find out for the sake of her children, she’d know the real position.

Alternatively, maybe she just doesn’t care about the truth or being fact-checked because she knows the base she’s appealing to who jump on anything to justify their animus against immigrants (especially Africans) are too dumb/lazy to fact check anything.

I’m sure in the Daily Mail comment sections you’ll see this repeated over and over now till it becomes the truth in certain circles and if you try to educate them it’ll be as if you’re the one who’s lying or ignorant - much like all the tales of asylum seekers being given iPhones and luxury cars as they get off the boats.

More proof that Badenough is a pathological liar:

Interview: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/20/world/video/gps0720-britain-immigration-badenoch

Rebuttal: https://www.thecable.ng/badenoch-my-children-cant-get-nigerian-citizenship-because-im-a-woman-yet-nigerians-easily-become-british/

Direct link to Nigerian constitution to preempt those who would rather rely on quotes from random people saying what they want to hear, as usual: http://www.nigeria-law.org/ConstitutionOfTheFederalRepublicOfNigeria.htm#Chapter_3

Section 25. (1) clearly states that her children can get citizenship through her. Why on earth would she tell such a blatant lie?

Lincoln4u:
Thank you I’m reapplying i just don’t want to make same mistake but so far no lead

Your case is complex. Contact a lawyer. It’ll have a cost attached but will be worth it.

jedisco:
I seriously don't understand your mortgage advisor. Are they working for you or someone else?
While its not a good idea to take out credit before completion, yours has already been done. Besides its not a new credit application and it'd be a few days- weeks before your new credit balance feeds thru to your credit report.

Some lenders do make a final check before exchange but I don't see how it's the role of your mortgage advisor to raise issues where there are none.
Given what you've said, this should likely be a non-issue. Worst case, Barclays might ask you to repay it if it'd affect your affordability. If you have enough room, then they may overlook it.

I would seriously be weary of such a mortgage advisor

I am quite confused as well.

The initial message D1uncle posted was that it was the state agent (which implies the seller's rep, unless it was a typo) who asked if they hadn't bought things. What's the business of the estate agent with that and why would they be getting in touch with OP's lender?

OP, I think you should contact both your mortgage advisor and the estate agent and find out if they've contacted Barclays. If they haven't just tell them that you're paying everything off and clear it since you have the cash.

If they haven't, then jury wait and see what Barclays says. I think it's an extremely minor issue especially since it wasn't a new line of credit, and won't cause any delays. Barclays will likely just say you should pay it off, if that.

Zahra29:
😂😂😂

How am I misinforming others when I simply shared a direct tweet from the US embassy? Is it my information? Lol

The below link explains that the new visa policy targets non-immigrant visas(so your example about your friends spouse visa is not valid here) and brings this category into alignment with Nigeria's existing visa policy:

Nigeria also offers single-entry visas valid for three months only for those planning to visit the country from the US....

An aide to former Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari said he believed the US was not reciprocating but showing its displeasure with Nigeria.

Bashir Ahmad posted on X that President Bola Tinubu‘s recent visit to Brazil for the Brics gathering was behind the move.

Immigration lawyer Godwin Oke thinks differently and told the BBC: "This is a classic case of visa reciprocity under international diplomatic practice. Countries often align their visa terms to reflect mutual treatment.

"The US had been issuing Nigerians five-year multiple-entry visas, while Nigeria only offered Americans short-term, single-entry visas. From a policy standpoint, it was only a matter of time before the imbalance was addressed."


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx23ywg9w82o

I think Oke's reasoning makes more sense.

The only reason why it makes more sense to you is because it fits the narrative you love to push, and your MO of hiding behind other people's statements when you're unwilling to take a stance of your own or too lazy to do the checks neccessary to find things out for yourself.

Otherwise, why couldn't you just Google it and find out if it was the case the Nigeria only granted 3 month visas to Americans? Didn't you even consider whether it's plausible from a common sense standpoint?

Here are some links that might help educate you - https://immigration.gov.ng/info-center/visiting-multiple-entry-visa-f6b/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Nigeria/comments/1am3lo2/2024_nigerian_visa_for_us_citizens/

NOWHERE in any of the US government's communications did they state that the measure was in response to Nigeria only issuing 3 months visa to Americans so there's really no basis for the 'reasoning' that you adopted.

By the way, one wonders why a news organisation like the BBC could not simply definitively confirm whether Nigeria was only issuing three months visas to Americans or not, and instead had to rely on a random lawyer's soundbite, but then it makes sense because how else will they mislead the Zahra29s of this world without explicitly lying and getting called out for it?

ehizario2012:
Hi friends, a property vendor is asking me to pay for ID checks after the seller accepted my offer... I do not understand, is this right? I like the property and intend to proceed especially as the offer has been accepted but this £75 ID check charge is putting me off.

Lifetime Legal, right?

It's unfortunately common for the vendor's agent to ask this payment, although 75 is on the high side. The fee is for them to conduct AML checks as part of their compliance obligations. Normally the vendor ought to pay since they're the one getting a service but many agents are now pushing it onto the buyer so they can reduce the costs they charge to the seller and market themselves as cheaper than their competitors as a result.

You could push back and see what they say - it all depends on if you're willing to lose the purchase and if your seller's willing to lose the sale.

ehizario2012:
@Lexus and all, should I use the property agent's solicitor or I search for one? I got a quote of £2053 from the agent...

No you should NEVER use the agent's solicitor. Get your own that's working exclusively for you.

They'll try to push you on it and make it seem as if without it the sale won't proceed but you're much better off getting a separate solicitor to represent you in the transaction.

RodgersAkpafu:
A Naturalised citizen is not gonna get deported
Especially a white one
Especially a rich white one
A rich white male billionaire
All these are theatrics

The only lesson to learn here is NOT to give oxygen to far right donkeys because this is what always come out of it

Whether he actually gets deported or not is irrelevant to the lesson I meant.

Although saying that, I recognize we can all see different lessons from any issue so it's alright that your takeaway is different.

The sweetest thing about this latest Muck v Rump catfighting is how Rump has now joined in emphasizing that Musk's "home" is actually in South Africa.

Before it was just fringe far right figures that talked about how Musk is actually an immigrant himself (and in some cases said he should be deported) but now Trump has joined in too.

There's a lesson here for those who care to take note.

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/donald-trump-threatens-to-slash-tesla-subsidies-elon-musk-tell-him-to-cut-it-all-8806183/amp/1

lavida001:
They can’t cross the big blue Atlantic to the USA hence they are coming to a city near you. Many hotels to house them in clackton.

Exactly!

See, even you understand the point.

Zahra29:
Very interesting, as I've [b]never heard you criticise him on this forum, even when he was widely accused of making racist, incendiary comments.
[/b]
I've noticed and called out your bias from the start. Everyone is free to their own opinion, but I find it rather strange the depth of your obvious hate for her and that she is the only individual you routinely call out, as if there are no "incompetent loudmouths" in the actual governing party - you know, the ones who should be scrutinised more deeply and held to account. (If you don't know any, I can forward some names over for you to take a look at).

But like I said, opinions are like noses. Everyone's entitled to theirs, even ugly ones😂

Which racist comments? About the UK becoming an island of strangers? I didn't think it was racist and I said that the attempt to equate it with all the things Badenough has said, is absurd. By the way, I dislike her, not hate.

I think Starmer's current stance with regard to this conflict is foolish and misguided especially in light how how easily Trump has been willing to discard the 'special relationship' and I have said that.

As to other incompetent loudmouths in various parties, we'll have to agree to disagree because I firmly believe Badenough’s track record as an incompetent loudmouth is one of a kind and no one in UK politics matches up to her.

Zahra29:
1. Thank goodness you have finally acknowledged your strange, extreme bias.

In any case, our competent PM appears to agree with the incompetent Kemi that "Tehran's atomic programme was 'a grave threat to international security" and that the "US has taken action to 'alleviate that threat". Sounds like he supports the attacks (not surprising as when it comes down to it, we will almost always side with the US).

2.What is not truthful/accurate was your claim of a "new" migration crisis, when there has been a significant Iranian migration crisis for a few years now. Clearly you were unaware.

Of course Iranians cannot sail or cross over to the US ( neither would Trump allow them in tbh) but to follow your reasoning, that is where they should be headed.

Also, I thought this was clear but apparently not.

People displaced by a war are refugees looking for where to escape to. They don't have the luxury of going to where they 'should', which is why I highlighted that the UK would be making a foolish decision by facilitating a crises that it'll bear the brunt of while the USA goes mostly unscathed.

Zahra29:
1. Thank goodness you have finally acknowledged your strange, extreme bias.

In any case, our competent PM appears to agree with the incompetent Kemi that "Tehran's atomic programme was 'a grave threat to international security" and that the "US has taken action to 'alleviate that threat". Sounds like he supports the attacks (not surprising as when it comes down to it, we will almost always side with the US).

2.What is not truthful/accurate was your claim of a "new" migration crisis, when there has been a significant Iranian migration crisis for a few years now. Clearly you were unaware.

Of course Iranians cannot sail or cross over to the US ( neither would Trump allow them in tbh) but to follow your reasoning, that is where they should be headed.

I said there will be a new migration crisis. How does the fact that one already exists disprove that? Your logic, such as it is, needs a lot of work tbh, but let me try to break it down for you:

Look at this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_refugee_crises You'll see that many countries (regions) appear multiple times as new wars or other crises break out. Do you understand now?

As an aside, look at that list and try to count how many were not precipitated or inflamed by US/UK interventionism. The results won't surprise you, lol.


On Starmer, I think it would be a monumentally foolish decision to take the UK into the war, especially if its for as nonsensical a reason as "we will almost always side with the US". I like the man and support him overall but he's not perfect or free from criticism.

As to my bias against Badenough, did it take you this long to see that? How disappointing. I have a bias for incompetent loudmouths who treat politics and governance like a reality show because their actions have real detrimental impacts on people. It's that simple.

Zahra29:
[/quote]1. Starmer is the UK PM. He is responsible for any UK military action, not Kemi or Reform or anyone else.

Yes. The blame will go to Starmer and everyone else involved, including the leader of the opposition who is pressuring the government to take a more hawkish approach. I named badenough because of her ridiculous proxy war comment, and frankly just because I enjoy pointing out her tomfoolery. Before you say I am biased - yes I know; I don't make any bones of my dislike for the incompetent loudmouth that she is.

2. The UK has stated that the government was aware of, but not in any way involved, in the attacks on Fordow and other sites.

Okay. We'll see how that plays out. https://www.lbc.co.uk/politics/uk-politics/keir-starmer-us-iran-nuclear-strikes/

3. There is already a massive irregular migration issue with Iran. For a number of years running, Iranians have been in the top 5 (actually #1) of nationalities crossing the English channel by boat.

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/people-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/

Maybe they'll switch over to the US instead as they are the direct combatants in this conflict, and not the UK.

Not quite truthful or logical, as usual for you.

First, the UK has been direcly involved in destabilising Iran over several decades, in its role as America's trusty sidekick in global intervensionism to 'spread democracy' at the barrel of a gun and leaving fresh crises, millions of innocents dead and displaced, and new aggrieved, very well armed and well-trained (courtesy of UK SAS and SBS troops in many cases) factions in their wake. Of course, when these factions become 'terrorists' and cause the deaths and displacements of more millions, the USA, UK and other countries put on their shocked pikachu faces and act as if they have no idea where they came from. Read - https://theconversation.com/us-and-iran-have-a-long-complicated-history-spanning-far-beyond-israels-strikes-on-tehran-259240

Secondly, they can't switch quite as easily to the USA for geographical reasons. So maybe the UK and other countries that'll be directly affected by a migrant crisis should apply their senses this time and avoid inflaming a conflict that'll more directly affect them while Uncle Sam sits secure far away, protected by a couple oceans and a few seas.

Do you understand now or you'd like more help?

justwise:
Trump just hit Iran with massive bomb.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg3rzj8emjt

Another "underlying causes" of a new 'irregular migration' crisis in the making... All encouraged of course by people like Badenough and her "proxy warriors".

Of course, all of them will pretend history started just yesterday when the issue starts.

Zahra29:
My bad.

I naturally assumed

Fixed.

No worries. Go and sin no more.

Actually read what people say and respond only to it ehn. 👍🏿

As for your insults, it’s alright as well. I understand and sympathize.

Zahra29:
Lol....always trying to paint me as a villain...

It was Labour who ordered this inquiry, whom you regularly praise as being non/less racist, so why have you made this a race or Zahra issue?
If you disapprove of the inquiry, you should direct your energy towards Starmer.

It’s hilarious because that’s exactly what you’ve done again.

My post was literally 6 sentences or so and nowhere did I mention inquiry, race, or Labour, so where on earth did you get all this from? I haven’t even ever said anything about the inquiry on here as far as I remember.

Thanks for proving my point. 👍🏿

RodgersAkpafu:
Well...
Let's agree to disagree then ✌️ ✌️

Since you cannot see the under handedness going on here
1. And this your summary is NOT my position on the matter AT ALL
I'm not against punishing people who committed crimes

What I am against is giving it an ethnic face and making a political theatre of this whole thing

2 Even if I explain 100 times, you will still NOT GET IT, so there is no point further trying to explain to you
Just know on a final note, that the monster some of you are ignorantly feeding will grow and consume you all one-day
Ask Latinos of America what they are now going through under a Trump second presidency that they enabled..

Esp the Cubans

Peace ✌️

1. Yes - Zahra29's specialty is the strawman argument. She makes up her own issues by deliberately misrepresenting what you've said and then makes arguments against them, without engaging your point at all.

2. Correct. Don't waste your time. Everyone will realize it for themselves sooner or later just like I did.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/06/11/reform-meant-to-be-trusted-on-immigration/

Lol. The ever-confused Farage Inc. party strikes again.

Lexusgs430:
O yes.... I did a module on EC legislation........ 😊😂

Oh I see 👍🏿

By the way, I'm sure this conversation about compelling childbirth would be very different if the participants were female, lol.

Lexusgs430:
How would they stop the small boats..... This is the million dollar question, labour and conservative government, could not solve....... 😁😂

If i was in charge of home office or the government of the day, I would start by repelling that useless ECHR...... Then those that travelled down by boats, would be immediately processed the second they arrive and sent back within 96 hours...... This would be the only positive deterrent....... 😁😊😂

Have you ever read the ECHR?

Viruses:
Given a change in circumstance, people will practice what they condemn and justify their actions to their gullible faithfuls.

It's up to you to assume I'm referring to religious faithfuls to suit your narrative.

Mó ti gbọ́. Mó ti gbà.

Viruses:
When made under duress, then it wasn't a choice.
We all have choices we can make freely, it depends on what is at stake.

By the way, I used politicians to make examples of their actions before and after they enter power, I don't know why you twisted it to religion. What is your motive?

I really don't want to engage further on this but because you've implied I'm being dishonest, I have to say you should check what you posted.

You referenced gullible followers twice, and it's the second that was in relation to politicians. The first was still about people who change what they do as per religious beliefs in response to things being outlawed where they live.

Perhaps you meant something else, but I responded to what you said and only that.

Viruses:
We all have choices, it all depend on what is at stake.

And when people make those choices under duress, it means they were deceiving gullible people ab initio àbí?

Makes sense. 👍🏿

Viruses:
It's obvious, hence I said people would practice what they condemn given a change in circumstance. While at it, they will find a way to justify their actions to their gullible faithfuls who would also see reasons with them.

Why do you think politicians always know the right things to do until they get into power and their gullible followers defend them before and after.

So, in a place like China where Christians (among other religions) are not allowed to practice their faith freely, cannot carry bibles openly in some cases, cannot teach their children the bible, cannot congregate to pray etc etc, you think that people complying is normal and reflects them justifying their actions to gullible people?

You don't think it's because people have no choice in the face of repression and violation of their rights?

Zahra29:
1. You are the one who forever claims that X is infinitely worse than Y; and my point is that just because Y is more covert doesn't mean that it is much better than X such that it is only X that deserves your scrutiny and criticism. That's a biased and narrow minded position. Hope you understand now.

2. I'm not sure there are many Reform admirers here and those who have spoken out in favour of Reform/Farage in one way or another do not appear ignorant of their stated or potential policies. Just as many discerning and educated people voted for Trump in full awareness of his character flaws and predilections.
It's a free choice.
Afterall, all the ethnic minorities who voted for Labour solely because they believed they were more immigrant friendly and would introduce lenient policies - that's not how it's played out has it.

Okay.