“Repeal Good Character Requirement For UK Citizenship!” Seriously?


  • Yes, seriously!

  • That’s what this pinko outfit is demanding!

  • ===
  • =Image result for Dr Zubaida Haque, the deputy director at the Runnymede Trust,

 

(NB – BME is the current pinko-speak for ‘coloured’)

  • What a slur!

  • Think about what she’s saying, this arrogant uppity from a ‘charity’ to which the Home Office of the UK government is a contributor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runnymede_Trust –

  • snout
  • How come the UK Government has been dishing out British tax-payers’ money to a brazenly political agitprop outfit?

  • =
  • If you or I were to suggest that non-white people, of any age or origin, were ‘disproportionately’ lacking in good character, all Hell would break loose.

  • Her statement can and should be deemed offensive by people of good character of all ethnicities.

  • =
  • c7c47-shame
  • The Guardian breathlessly tells us that hundreds of children, some as young as 10, who were born or who grew up in the UK were having their applications for British citizenship denied on the basis of convictions for crimes such as petty theft.

  • Related image

    Bloody good thing too.

  • Lawless brats grow up to be big bad scumbags, and so should not be granted the privilege of citizenship. Far better to send them packing, so some other country, the one they belong in, can handle their dishonest predispostions. .

  • Britain, unfortunately, due to ever-weaker standards of discipline both within the home  – Fresh call for smacking to be outlawed in the home – and in schools, where Eurogroveller John Major outlawed proper punishments years ago…

  • =

  • amajor

  • ..

  • …has plenty of British brats who need to be dealt with.

  • No need to hang onto anti-socials who aren’t British!

  • =

  • out with them
  • =

  • Yet – the very same Home Office that has been funding this outfit has already begun caving in to the rants  of the Runnymede ratpack  reportedly in receipt of largesse from the public purse.

  • Instructions have been issued to take into account “the child’s age and particular circumstances and any mitigating factors such as their ability to understand the consequences of their actions.”

  • hogwashmeterred
  • =
  • What about a question more important than whether the dirty little thieves understood that the consequences of stealing other people’s property…

  • =
  • Image result for  thieves
  • =
  • ….might include a boot on their criminal backsides that sends them back where they belong?

  • A MUCH better question, to ask each other, dear readers, is –

  • When you were ten years old, did YOU understand that thieving was wrong?

  • I did.

    • What child of ten does not understand that stealing is wrong? 

    .