Farage: Use 144-Year-Old Law Act to Strip Jihadists of British Citizenship

Never heard of it, but it would be excellent news. And don’t tell me it can’t be done. It has to be done for the sake of self-preservation.

From Breitbart London/ by Esmerelda Weatherwax

UKIP leader Nigel Farage has called on Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron to take a stand on the Islamic State and strip UK nationals who are fighting abroad of their citizenship and cancel passports using the little-known Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870.

UKIP leader Farage said in a press release today that; “in choosing to quit the UK to fight abroad, [UK National Islamic State Fighters] have rendered themselves effectively stateless by conforming to an ideology of wanting to create a terrifying caliphate. If they choose to leave the UK they simply should not be allowed to return. Where intelligence identifies UK nationals fighting for IS their repatriation absolutely should be blocked.”


The statement said that those fighting abroad should be stripped of their British citizenship, passports of British only citizens should be withdrawn and foreign nationals with a ‘right to reside’ in the UK should have that terminated immediately.

Farage insists Parliament should be reconvened to amend the Foreign Enlistment act 1870, which presently only covers enlistment in the armies of foreign states. As ISIS or the Islamic state is technically considered a non-state actor or transnational terror group, British citizens taking up arms in their name are not covered by the act.

In controlling the movement of British Jihadists, time is absolutely of the essence.

Mo Dog

Ken Roth, the Executive Director of Human Rights  (For Islamic Terrorists) Watch,  has left no doubt over the past 48 hours about his sympathy for an organization which not only terrorizes Israeli civilians, but terrorizes the Palestinians of Gaza as well.

Not for the first time, he defends Hamas’s terror tunnels, speculating that they are justified if they were intended to be used to kidnap soldiers. (source)

Hamas takes responsibility for #EyalGiladNaftali kidnapping, murder (video)

A senior Hamas official admitted for the first time on Wednesday that the organization’s armed wing, the Qassam Brigades, was behind the kidnapping and murder of Israeli teens Nafatli Fraenkel, Gil-Ad Shaer and Eyal Yifrah in the West Bank in June.–From JPost:EoZ)

 Rockets shot toward Tel Aviv, airport; terror chief Deif believed killed

Caroline Glick: Why Israel is losing the information war (EoZ)

For most Israelis, the international discourse on Gaza is unintelligible.
Here we were going along, minding our own business.
Then on a clear night in June, apropos of nothing, Palestinian terrorists stole, murdered and hid the bodies of three of our children as they made their way home from school.
Before we could catch our breath from that atrocity, they began shelling our major population centers with thousands of rockets, missiles and mortars, and infiltrated our communities along the border with Gaza through underground tunnels to kidnap and murder us.
And as the Palestinians did all of these things, they used their civilian population and the foreign press corps as human sandbags. They ordered their own people not to evacuate their homes from which Hamas, Fatah and Islamic Jihad terrorists launched their missiles, rockets and mortars at Israel. And they launched missiles at Israeli cities from outside the hotel where the foreign reporters were staying.
It doesn’t take a PhD to understand what the game is. And Israelis – even many with PhDs – understand what is happening.

2 thoughts on “Farage: Use 144-Year-Old Law Act to Strip Jihadists of British Citizenship”

  1. Britain is not a republic, it is a constitutional monarchy. We are not citizens of the UK but loyal subjects of the Crown. Thus, the Crown can remove or banish any subject that is not loyal to it ( it does not matter of your lineage goes back to Saxon times).

    Such a decision, if taken by the Crown, under advice of the first minister of the Crown (the PM), cannot be challenged in the Crown courts, as the courts themselves are subjects of the Crown.

    I suppose this may be true for Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and other Commonwealth countries that still retain the Crown as head of state.

    This may be our real “get out of a bind” clause.

    We need a constitutional expert here.

Comments are closed.