[marron]

It annoys me that they insist on calling these people “British”. And that the Brits allow it.

The old paradigm for immigration was that people who took up citizenship did so because they wanted to be your fellow countrymen, that there was something in the national character they wanted to share.

That should still be the standard.

There are few muslims who would ever qualify by that standard. Maybe some Christian refugees from the muslim world.

[oh8eleven]

The old paradigm for immigration was that people who took up citizenship did so because they wanted to be your fellow countrymen
Who needs angry immigrants? We've got (at least) 12% of the population who were born here who don't want to be fellow countrymen.

[tbpiper]

It annoys me that they insist on calling these people “British”.

Yes and in Brittan they are called 'Asian".

[PghBaldy]

The other thing is once someone takes up arms for a foreign entity, are they still citizens of their supposed homeland (the UK in this case)? Should they be stripped of their citizenship upon joining a foreign army or terrorist group? I think they should. Not sure what UK law is.

[elpadre]

I seem to recall in days gone by those taking the oath for citizenship had to renounce their previous citizenship and claim allegiance to the US and no other. In other words, there was no dual-citizenship. If that is true, then when did the change occur and why?? - signed: an octogenarian+