Tagged: statelessness Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • ross1948 14:46 on December 1, 2019 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Peter Maurer, Red Cross, statelessness,   

    Rotten ‘Charities?’ Add The Red Cross To Your List! 

    I can remember a time when the Red Cross commanded universal respect, an organisation helping those in need for a hundred years or more!


    American Red Cross image



    Times are a’changin…

    Not A Penny More To The Red Cross!

    Surely that should be our watch-word when contemplating Christmas giving this year, after Peter Maurer, the Red Cross International Committee chairman’s strident attack on Britain’s policy of removal of citizenship from adherents of the ISIS rape-gang.


    Most of us would prefer that the sectarian scumbags’ heads be removed!

    The ass argues the policy ‘is “not conducive” to long-term peace in the region

    • .
    A shooting range in Liverpool is offering customers an image of Shamima Begum as a target


    …an essentially irrelevant argument, in support of which he adduces the outrageous example of the filthy vixen Shamima Begum.

    Maurer “failed to see” how depriving the evil ISIS sow- and other satanic Islamists of citizenship would help a crisis made more complex by the recent Turkish invasion.


    IICRC’s Maurer

    Dumbo Maurer does not seem to get it!

    Can he really ‘fail to see’ that if every ISIS pig were buried six feet under, the Middle East and the world as a whole would be a cleaner, safer place? In what possible way is it preferable to bring them ‘home?’ 

    Satanic evil should have no home, except deep in unhallowed ground.



    Traitors, sows like Begum and swine like Usman Khan ( thanks again, BTW, to the cop who put that pig down the other day!) who repudiate their duty of allegiance to the country they have lived in, and lived off, instead declaring fealty to a foul jihadist ideology, have NO right to the nationality of the nation they betray.

    • Tam Birnie 18:12 on December 1, 2019 Permalink | Reply

      As I said yesterday, your words to the wise make hard reading but the truth needs to be told.
      Nothing will persuade most of these politicised charities to change their ways.
      A lot of them even get their hands on our money without our permission, via local and national government or from Brussels.
      They should be stripped of charitable status.
      If I see a Salvation Army band then I will donate without a moment’s hesitation, otherwise, Scrooge Rules OK!


  • ross1948 14:45 on January 2, 2019 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Prakash ISIS, stateless, statelessness   

    Pig Prakash – Belated Congratulations To Australia! 

    Neil Prakash

    Neil Prakash, ISIS pig, behind bars in in a maximum-security prison in Turkey


    …has been stripped of his Australian citizenship.

    While it would be much better to report that the swine had been hanged, it’s good to know that Un-Australian activities can have such a consequence, namely that he can no longer claim to be Australian.

    Unfortunately this does not happen to all such vermin, the excuse being, as far as I know, that the Australian government is bound by some damfool convention…

    Image result for un statelessness mandate

    …that inhibiits sovereign states rendering even the vilest of jihadists stateless…

    … i.e. Oz can only do what has been done to Pig Prakash if the pig in question has another nationality, in PP’s case Fijian, although, perhaps understandably, Fiji is disowning the mangy brute.

    This situation should be rectified.


    If it is clear that some ‘Australian’ puts sectarian supranational allegiance above that owed to Queen and Country, then, regardless of what other passports may be in any pig’s possession, Australian citizenship should be annulled.

    And of course we’re not talking only of Australia.

    All civilised nations should repudiate that idiotic covenant, but needless to say, there are some leaders, like the UK’s Weasel-Woman…


    Image result for ISIS theresa leaveeu


    …who will never do that, nor even lock up ISIS vermin allowed back in.



    • Keith Milner 16:02 on January 2, 2019 Permalink | Reply

      If they just had the sense to execute them, we wouldn’t be having all this fussing around about citizenship.


    • Uncle Oz 19:03 on January 2, 2019 Permalink | Reply

      Australia doesnt need citizens who make war on Australia.
      There must be thousands here, all those Hizbut Tahrir traitors for starters that should not be here and we would be well rid of.


  • ross1948 21:05 on November 15, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , legal challenge, , , , statelessness, , , ,   

    Cast-Iron’s Anti-Jihad Strategy – Hitting ‘Legal’ Obstacles? 

    When the Battle of Britain was raging and all four of my offspring’s grandparents were in the uniforms of their respective homelands, all serving Queen and Country, did Churchill’s brilliant rhetoric come under scrutiny to see if his exhortations to fight on the beaches etc. would stand up to legal challenge?


    • churchill
    • ———-
    • I think not.

    The UK had, back then, not admitted millions of migrants a significant percentage of whom owed allegiance to an alien supranational ideology.

    Nor were major parts of its media/political establishment more concerned with ‘human rights’ than with the well-being of their own nation.


    Nor of course was the realm subject to dictates emanating from a non-British authority on the Continent of Europe – that’s after all what the Battle of Britain was about! 

    A few thoughts that arise from reading another interesting article at ConservativeHome, by Paul Goodman, on Cast-Iron Cameron’s latest wobbly counter-jihadist speechifying. I was particularly fascinated by this part.

    Those who volunteer to be prosecuted or monitored may be admitted earlier – and it is this possibility that allows the Prime Minister to claim that government would not be rendering such people stateless.  We may see what the courts make of that.  It could be that he would have liked the time-frame for the ban to be longer, and has chosen one that he thinks will stand up to legal challenge.


    Who can launch a legal challenge to the law? If parliament passes legislation, it supersedes previous laws that it might contradict, not so? Thus if MPs vote to make traitors stateless, they are.

    If MPs were to evokes a million cheers from the British public by re-instating the death penalty for treason (and any ISIS terrorists who went out on a UK passport IS a traitor, because Britain is part of the coalition fighting ISIS) then that, too, would be the law. 

    If you break the law, you end up in court, if you don’t like the law, tough, you campaign to change it, but it’s not what the courts make of that.

    It’s their job to enforce it, like or no like.

    So what’s the problem? 

    Supranational sticky-beaks, given the right to stick their beaks in by parliament – a gift which can be retireved by parliament. Cameron has to go th mile – withdraw from any treaty that hnders British self-defence.

    The EUSSR and the European Convention on Human Rights are two obvious targets, but the UN Convention on Statelessness too appears to be getting in the way.

    • oooo
    • no-un
    • ooo
    • Scrap that nonsense and civilised countries could start kicking out disloyal scumbags instantly.


Compose new post
Next post/Next comment
Previous post/Previous comment
Show/Hide comments
Go to top
Go to login
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
%d bloggers like this: