₦airaland Forum

icon8:
Now, this is the danger. It is terrorism they are using today - and we all agree that terrorism is a heinous and abominable crime - but it could be applied to any crime tomorrow or in 50 years. Imagine the government removing your grandchildren and repatriating them to Nigeria (which they possibly never lived or even visited) on some trumped up charges, simply because their grandparents’ roots can be traced to Nigeria. Yes, it is a possibility. Anything is possible in an unjust society, and what happened to the Jews in Hitler’s Germany started as a noble cause. Then it went on and on until it was used to target a specific set of people, and the rest is history.

No one is holding court for the girl. No one here is in support of terrorism. We are only looking beyond the thin veil of this litmus test case, and expressing our concern for the dangers it portends for the future of our children, and their children after them, just because their forebears were recent immigrants. The only reason the government was able to take Shamima’s citizenship away was because her parents were immigrants. Maybe not racism, maybe not islamaphobia, but it certainly has discrimination written all over it, whatever name you choose to call it. And that should concern you, because of its potential future implications.

Hope this helps?

icon8:
Let me help you out...

We know that she chose to join a terrorist organisation and she may have committed heinous and unspeakable crimes, but like every accused, she should have the right to face her accuser. We denounce her and condemn her choice in its entirety, but, bring her home, charge her, try her, sentence her (if she’s found guilty), and lock her up forever (if that’s what she gets). No one cares. Let justice be done, but in the right way!

We also know that it is reprehensible and illegal to render someone stateless. She only has (well....like someone pointed out yesterday, had) British citizenship, and taking that away from her effectively rendered her stateless, which is a violation of her fundamental human rights and against the United Nations Human Rights Convention. But Her Majesty’s Government’s argument was that even though she only had British citizenship, she could potentially be able to acquire the citizenship of her parents’ birth country, if she applied. Therefore, taking her British citizenship away technically should not render her stateless, since she can apply for the citizenship of her parents’ birth country, to which the Bangladeshi government responded as not possible, which makes her stateless as we speak!

Now, this is the point and our concern for our children and their children after them. The British State has created a 2-tier natural citizenship, and with it, 2-tier rights and privileges, which should be a source of concern for every new generation immigrant. The first tier is for those who can only trace their roots to Britain (3 generations maybe) with its own set of laws - including not being able to revoke their citizenship even if they commit terrorism, because they have no other country to potentially claim. The second tier is for those who could trace their roots to somewhere else (possibly up to the 3rd generation) and the fate of this people (including all our children and their children’s children) is that their citizenship, which they acquired as a right when they were born (like every other natural born British citizen) could be taken away from them unilaterally (without trial, without fair hearing, just by the order of the Home Secretary) if they commit an act deemed terrorism by whoever is in charge at that point. This has now been challenged up to the Supreme Court and the Government has won.

Now, this is the danger. It is terrorism they are using today - and we all agree that terrorism is a heinous and abominable crime - but it could be applied to any crime tomorrow or in 50 years. Imagine the government removing your grandchildren and repatriating them to Nigeria (which they possibly never lived or even visited) on some trumped up charges, simply because their grandparents’ roots can be traced to Nigeria. Yes, it is a possibility. Anything is possible in an unjust society, and what happened to the Jews in Hitler’s Germany started as a noble cause. Then it went on and on until it was used to target a specific set of people, and the rest is history.

No one is holding court for the girl. No one here is in support of terrorism. We are only looking beyond the thin veil of this litmus test case, and expressing our concern for the dangers it portends for the future of our children, and their children after them, just because their forebears were recent immigrants. The only reason the government was able to take Shamima’s citizenship away was because her parents were immigrants. Maybe not racism, maybe not islamaphobia, but it certainly has discrimination written all over it, whatever name you choose to call it. And that should concern you, because of its potential future implications.

Hope this helps?

nihilistjnr:
If you follow the case closely, you will find that Shemima lost her case at Supreme Court specifically because of a private admission from their foreign ministry to the UK high commission in Dhaka that she was a Bangladeshi Citizen.

It was after that admission, that their foreign ministry changed tack from saying she's not a citizen to she would tried as s terrorist and sentenced to death if she returned to Bangladesh.

Edit: it's interesting to note that Shemima legal team(funded by UK taxpayers btw) never even attempted to argue to the appeals court that the UK government has made her stateless thus breaching her human rights

Instead, she was arguing that she should be allowed to come to UK so that she could continue her appeal process

See below

brainz360:
Sorry guys, still about the driving thing.
The attached images clearly show I can drive with my international driving permit for a period of 12 months. Can't I use my international license to insure the car and drive for a period of 12 months from the day I enter the UK?
Don't know if there is another meaning in contrast to what I'm seeing.

wonlasewonimi:
Do you guys know of any app or way to send pounds from here to dom account with gtb in pounds?

umarwy:
No need for app use online banking

wonlasewonimi:
Which bank? Halifax don't, HSBC doesn't work

wonlasewonimi:
Which bank? Halifax don't, HSBC doesn't work

umarwy:
Barclays. Even new gen banks

Halifax and HSBC doesn't do swift transfers?

I find it difficult to believe. Use the web platform not the Mobile app.

Irenenwaka:
Hello guyss... quick one please does anyone need naira?? I need some pounds

Mamatukwas:
You can. That’s what we did for a year before getting our UK drivers license.

starboychan:
Good morning �

Please like how much did you pay for insurance during that period?

And which insurance company did you used?

Mamatukwas:
Mine was Admiral. About £900. Arnold Clark sold my husband theirs for his 1st time. It was cheaper I think £600 with intl drivers license. But their renewal was expensive so he also moved to Admiral and we now do multi car for savings.

starboychan:
Many thanks

The amount you quoted is for the 12months period right?

akanniade10:
If the UK could deport a 5yr old boy born On british soil, then how much more a 20 year old terrorist.

https://www.nairaland.com/2109122/uk-wants-deport-5yr-old/6

Divine88:
As this is a new application and your first in this country. You will need to apply by post. Why? Because you will need a passport photograph and also someone to sign that they know you (a guarantor)
You can only apply online if you are renewing or upgrading to a full license.

Osed:
Good evening all, if my dependents are in Canada and I am currently in the UK for my Post-graduate studies and they need to come over here.
Do they need to show maintenance and also do the tuberculosis test? If they need to show maintenance money, can it be in Naira account or Canadian bank?

icon8:
If a white-looking person says this, we will all be up in arms screaming racism. Alas, “we” seem to be our own worst enemies.

Your post has no basis in law, just so you know. A child born on British soil to a settled parent is an automatic British citizen. As British as it gets. No matter where the parent came from, once they attain settled status, any child born of them afterwards is a British citizen at birth. That’s the law!

I’m not one to play the race card, but this case reeks of racism and islamophobia, and sets a very dangerous precedent like others have rightly suggested. It’s that Jihad-loving girl today but it could be anyone’s child tomorrow, for a far less crime. If the colour of her skin were to be white, she would have been treated differently. For the avoidance of doubt, I denounce her and her association with the so-called Islamic State, but she’s British and should have been brought back home and tried in a British court, under British law, and sent to a British jail if found guilty. Not passed on to her parent’s birth country that she never had any connection to.

By your logic, because the PM’s father is Turkish (although born in the UK), the Johnson family should be sent to Turkey if they commit a crime, because according to you, the father’s father was not born here, they applied to live here blah blah blah, and are therefore second class British citizens. But you wouldn’t say that, would you? Why because they look white to you and the grandfather was clever to have changed his name from Osman Kemal to Wilfred Johnson. If the girl's name were to be Sharon Bellingham instead of Shemima Begum, you all will be singing a different tune.

Some of you are just full of inferiority complex and believe the white skin is superior to yours. As for me, my children are not second class to nobody in this land (and they know that!). I may be second class, I understand that, and that’s fine because I’m a bloody immigrant. But my children and their children? No way! I’ve paid that price for them. Everyone’s parents came from somewhere, and it doesn’t matter how long ago. Even the Queen’s family came from Germany and changed their name to Windsor to sound British somewhere along the line. So was her husband Philip, who was Greek but also changed his name to appear English. But all that does not matter because they all look white to you?

You may gloat all you want about this case, but they are only starting with their discrimination, and the girl’s case was just the litmus test. Like someone said, the day someone wakes up on the wrong side of the bed and decides to revoke your children’s legitimate citizenship because their parents or parents’ parents were immigrants, you will understand what precedent means and why you should be careful what you wish for.

Enough of the rant. Back to work!

Irenenwaka:
Hello guys, for the frequent travellers in the house... my mum is due to come with virgin Atlantic next week to the uk. To maximise her baggage allowance she intends using ghana must go bags instead of suitcases.
I heard a rumour that virgin doesn’t allow passengers check in ghana must go bags

LagosismyHome:
Let her use proper luggage.... how much weight can she saved with ghana must go, max 2 or 3kg but the stress when it tears. There are many light weight luggage even Large duffle bags

Dont know if it banned on Virgin but twitter showing yes for KLM and Airfrance

icon8:
I’m not one to play the race card, but this case reeks of racism and islamophobia, and sets a very dangerous precedent like others have rightly suggested. It’s that Jihad-loving girl today but it could be anyone’s child tomorrow, for a far less crime. If the colour of her skin were to be white, she would have been treated differently.