PUP fraud €183k, should the guilty be stripped of citizenship?

Drop dual and multiple citizenships ,

That way there is little or no excuses to keep foreign criminals and failed asylum seekers , anyone with dual citizenship reverts back to their original country of origin citizenship

But we've failed in deportation across the board ,we've seen violent rapists get asylum here after committing serious assaults while on a student visa , numerous asylum seekers directly involved in people trafficking ,drug dealing and distribution and importing , murder , criminal gang activities , welfare fraud

Yet the absolute majority stay and go on to citizenship,

There is no consequences for foreign criminals coming here ,as pointed out by another one of the consequences is the right to reside ,

Yes I mean to become a citizen of Canada and then the us, I could not have ever committed a crime in any jurisdiction ever in my life, so I don't know how active criminals are obtaining the status(if they are, I haven't verified that's true?) I even had to provide multiple years of tax returns and details of all flights for the previous 5 years(like 40 flights)

Wat happens if the immigrant renounces their original citizenship. You cannot leave them stateless, under international law I believe.

I'm shuddering to think what you actually mean when you say that History shows us a clear dominant culture is what works? What does 'works' actually refer to? Safety and progress for everyone? Or the subjugation of a junior class by the ruling one which could and did include anything up to and including enslavement, colonisation, eradication of their history and even in some cases, genocide.

Pointing out that there are problems within native groups is not deflection, it is fact. It suggests that the members of both groups who behave as such are inclined to do so as much because of their own natural tendencies, than because they come from a particular culture.

Also, suggesting that double standards exist everywhere is not the vindication of the proposal in the OP that you think it is. Societies throughout human history have evolved and advanced through looking at such double standards and seeking to remove them. It's called progress and has been attempted so as to constantly move towards treating people fairly. And I'm not suggesting it is done and dusted, or done to the same level everywhere, but that it has most definitely the general trend amongst or species.

Finally, the nonsense of referring to something that has worked for centuries. FFS, we still talk about England and their 800 years occupation of Ireland, your argument would suggest that should have continued. And you could use the same argument for any modern day situation or environment that is now the case after decades/centuries/millennia of things being different. And again I'm shuddering slightly at your probably qualification of just what exactly 'works' implies. As throughout this period most of the countries on the planet suffered invasion, war, hardship and death the legacy of which still remains to this day in many places. And leaving all that aside, the use of the internet, the spread of social media, and the opportunity for easy travel has existed at no other point in human history up to pretty much our generation. Only someone deliberately trying to be ignorant of the facts would look to ignore these points or suggest they have not led to a greater homogenisation amongst the human race than any other singular event of cultural movement and integration. It's the 21st century, wake up and smell the pumpkin spice latte.

Yes that can happen already in Canada and the UK that I'm aware of. Only in cases of terrorism. The problem with this road is the slippery slope. Once we decide that citizenship is conditional, then it is second class citizenship. We don't know what administrations will come in the future, what new conditions they made add which may be prejudicial. Once this conditional citizenship exists you are basically saying that noone can be part of our club but we will let you stick around as long as we like you. Now if you want immigrants to fully invest their lives into your country you best offer them some security of status. I think we agree on filtering applicants though, for me the time to decide whether of not to grant citizenship is the important bit. Rigorous background checks should be applied, any indiscretion should void visas let alone citizenship applications. However in my belief, once they are citizens they should be legally indistinct from those born natively.

I should say I'm originally Irish, I naturalized(now I spell it with a 'z') to Canada and then USA. I don't know what the process is like to become an Irish citizen.

Again in simple terms .

Why should foreign criminals get to stay permanently in this country despite while claiming asylum commit serious crimes.