I was wondering about the legal position regarding the revocation of

[Luis Anaconda]

Miss Belgium's UK citizenship; luckily, the British Nationality Act of 1981 is as clear as clear can be:

BNA 1981 Section 40 part 2:

The Secretary of State may by order deprive a person of a citizenship status if the Secretary of State is satisfied that deprivation is conducive to the public good.

BNA 1981 Section 40 part 3:

Subject to the provisions of this section, the Secretary of State may by order deprive any British citizen to whom this subsection applies of his British citizenship if the Secretary of State is satisfied that that citizen -

(a) has shown himself by act or speech to be disloyal or disaffected towards Her Majesty; or

(b) has, during any war in which Her Majesty was engaged, unlawfully traded or communicated with an enemy or been engaged in or associated with any business that was to his knowledge carried on in such a manner as to assist an enemy in that war;

So there we go, we can all move along, there is nothing more to se here.

wd sajid javid.

What about the babby?

[Monty92]

What about the babby?

What about the baby? It remains a British citizen, obviously

[Burney]

What about the baby? It remains a British citizen, obviously

Or a Dutch one.

[Monty92]

Or a Dutch one.

Yes but that would be his parents' decision, rather than the UK Government's.

[Burney]

Yes but that would be his parents' decision, rather than the UK Government's.

Not really sure why they should get any say at all, tbh. Besides, as I understand it, Dutch law is much more paternalistic in these matters and regards the child of a Dutch father as automatically being a Dutch.

Even so, I can't imagine they'll be clamouring to get the spawn of two fùcking jihadis on their books any time soon.

[Monty92]

It is pretty odd that parents routinely have their kids taken away from them for negligent behaviour such as alcoholism, smacking their kids around a bit. And yet a woman with avowed sadistic motivations is allowed to keep hers.

Not really sure why they should get any say at all, tbh. Besides, as I understand it, Dutch law is much more paternalistic in these matters and regards the child of a Dutch father as automatically being a Dutch.

Even so, I can't imagine they'll be clamouring to get the spawn of two fùcking jihadis on their books any time soon.

[Burney]

It is pretty odd that parents routinely have their kids taken away from them for negligent behaviour such as alcoholism, smacking their kids around a bit. And yet a woman with avowed sadistic motivations is allowed to keep hers.

I think we've probably established by now that there is virtually no principle of social care, jurisprudence or policing that we are not prepared to ride roughshod over if it involves Allans.

In fact, the reason this decision is causing such a stir is that for once we haven't just rolled over.

[Sir C]

Not really sure why they should get any say at all, tbh. Besides, as I understand it, Dutch law is much more paternalistic in these matters and regards the child of a Dutch father as automatically being a Dutch.

Even so, I can't imagine they'll be clamouring to get the spawn of two fùcking jihadis on their books any time soon.

Oh Mijneer Rutte will be positively falling over himself to demonstrate the essential Dutch qualities of, you know, being leftards.

[Burney]

Oh Mijneer Rutte will be positively falling over himself to demonstrate the essential Dutch qualities of, you know, being leftards.

He's pretty fùcking mouthy for a bloke who's only in the job because of an anti-Wilders protest vote, isn't he?

Speccy cùnt.

[Luis Anaconda]

What about the baby? It remains a British citizen, obviously

Ah - I missed the bit where the baby was born. I was wondering if someone is stripped of citizenship while pregnant what would the status of the baby be. But then again I don't really care