Dual-citizen terrorists will be stripped of their Australian passport under a govt plan

[simple1]

The trouble is obviously not all Muslims, but the groups and leaders who purport to represent them foster a group feeling of victimhood and grievance. They may not condone or advocate violence, but they facilitate it by the attitudes they express. The statements I have read from the Australian Muslim representatives are an almost perfect parallel to the utterances of CAIR in North America.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/jihadists-not-the-only-problem/story-fni0ffxg-1227113810921?sv=9d476ee02e3fb2e80bd41f1182219211#.VFsI7Amlh_M.facebook

p.s Note that in among the whining about civil liberties being infringed is the plea to constrain other peoples liberties by limiting freedom of speech.

I watched that session of Q&A some months back and the article is correct there were some spouting off, a number about local area issues, but Brandis handled them quite well.

With so many representative groups there will always be divergence of opinion and some outright stupidity. However, the AG and other senior members of government and law enforcement have met with other representatives of the Australian Muslim community that they say have been helpful & constructive in efforts to combat Islamic extremism within Australia.

Edited May 30, 2015 by simple1

[samran]

A woman a week is murdered as a result of domestic violence in Australia. How many have been by beheading this year?

Anyway, I'm sure you approve of the following behaviour. All part of the defense of all things good I take it....

http://m.canberratimes.com.au/victoria/good-samaritan-assaulted-after-standing-up-for-muslim-women-who-were-abused-on-melbourne-train-20150526-gh9j6x.html

You can go off topic faster than anyone I know. My post above was meant as a stab at that.

Cheers

I call it pointing out hypocracy. Not accusing you of this, but plenty of the others in the hang them high crew are hypocrites par excellence.

But if you invited someone into your home, and then they murdered your wife and children and then they said you should still let them live in your home after that or else he would also kill you as well, would you let that person continue living in your house ?

I guess you Samran would, because to say otherwise would be hypocritical in light of you comments about this proposed law to kick out terrorists. And remember it's only terrorists - people promoting violence - so I wonder why you seem so outspoken on this issue?

Go back and re read my posts.

Where have I said it's okay for terrorists to do anything? Plenty of people here must have reading comprehension problems.

The law is a dangerous precedence where citizenship can be stripped at the whim of a minister. No evidence. No due process. My estimation about 4 to 5 million australian citizens will now be subject to draconian laws.

It is a dumb law ripe for abuse.

[Time Traveller]

But if you invited someone into your home, and then they murdered your wife and children and then they said you should still let them live in your home after that or else he would also kill you as well, would you let that person continue living in your house ?

I guess you Samran would, because to say otherwise would be hypocritical in light of you comments about this proposed law to kick out terrorists. And remember it's only terrorists - people promoting violence - so I wonder why you seem so outspoken on this issue?

Go back and re read my posts.

Where have I said it's okay for terrorists to do anything? Plenty of people here must have reading comprehension problems.

The law is a dangerous precedence where citizenship can be stripped at the whim of a minister. No evidence. No due process. My estimation about 4 to 5 million australian citizens will now be subject to draconian laws.

It is a dumb law ripe for abuse.

You already can be detained indefinitely at the discretion of someone without ever going to court already so what is your problem with this?

It's aimed only to target terrorists. The fact that a dual citizen australian could commit terrorism offences and then still receive all of benefits of australian citizenship welfare or diplomatic assistance overseas is a ridiculous waste of money - it's like an employee of yours stealing your customers for another company's benefit then you are expected to keep them employed.

It's commonsense proposal which other countries are following and needs no justification for people who oppose and whose only argument is ohhh it's open to abuse......well so are the laws against Murder, or Defamation or Speeding or Lese Majeste or voting.....whatever is a law can be abused as well.

But ultimately - and this is why I ask you Samran why are you so opposed to it - all citizens naturalizing are required to state an oath to uphold laws and values of the country. To do that and commit terrorism against the state is argubably obtaining citizenship by fraud. In which case should be revoked.

But in Australia democracy will prevail so what ever the majority says, all shall receive

Edited May 30, 2015 by Time Traveller

[samran]

But if you invited someone into your home, and then they murdered your wife and children and then they said you should still let them live in your home after that or else he would also kill you as well, would you let that person continue living in your house ?

I guess you Samran would, because to say otherwise would be hypocritical in light of you comments about this proposed law to kick out terrorists. And remember it's only terrorists - people promoting violence - so I wonder why you seem so outspoken on this issue?

Go back and re read my posts.

Where have I said it's okay for terrorists to do anything? Plenty of people here must have reading comprehension problems.

The law is a dangerous precedence where citizenship can be stripped at the whim of a minister. No evidence. No due process. My estimation about 4 to 5 million australian citizens will now be subject to draconian laws.

It is a dumb law ripe for abuse.

You already can be detained indefinitely at the discretion of someone without ever going to court already so what is your problem with this?

It's aimed only to target terrorists. The fact that a dual citizen australian could commit terrorism offences and then still receive all of benefits of australian citizenship welfare or diplomatic assistance overseas is a ridiculous waste of money - it's like an employee of yours stealing your customers for another company's benefit then you are expected to keep them employed.

It's commonsense proposal which other countries are following and needs no justification for people who oppose and whose only argument is ohhh it's open to abuse......well so are the laws against Murder, or Defamation or Speeding or Lese Majeste or voting.....whatever is a law can be abused as well.

But ultimately - and this is why I ask you Samran why are you so opposed to it - all citizens naturalizing are required to state an oath to uphold laws and values of the country. To do that and commit terrorism against the state is argubably obtaining citizenship by fraud. In which case should be revoked.

But in Australia democracy will prevail so what ever the majority says, all shall receive

This affects natural born dual citizens in exactly the same way. We aren't just talking about those who have naturalised.

Even those indefinite detention laws are subject to judicial review and importantly, the same standards are applied regardless of birth.

This is discrimnatory, and goes against the principal that citizenship offers all citizens equal protections.

A sole citizen does terrible things and is subject to the full due process of the courts.

An australian citizen who happens to be born with another passport who only has to come under the suspicion of a minister and can be stripped of nationality.

It's unfair. And with the discretion in the hands of the third most populist ministerial position after the treasurer and he PM. It is prone to abuse.

[simple1]

But if you invited someone into your home, and then they murdered your wife and children and then they said you should still let them live in your home after that or else he would also kill you as well, would you let that person continue living in your house ?

I guess you Samran would, because to say otherwise would be hypocritical in light of you comments about this proposed law to kick out terrorists. And remember it's only terrorists - people promoting violence - so I wonder why you seem so outspoken on this issue?

Go back and re read my posts.

Where have I said it's okay for terrorists to do anything? Plenty of people here must have reading comprehension problems.

The law is a dangerous precedence where citizenship can be stripped at the whim of a minister. No evidence. No due process. My estimation about 4 to 5 million australian citizens will now be subject to draconian laws.

It is a dumb law ripe for abuse.

You already can be detained indefinitely at the discretion of someone without ever going to court already so what is your problem with this?

It's aimed only to target terrorists. The fact that a dual citizen australian could commit terrorism offences and then still receive all of benefits of australian citizenship welfare or diplomatic assistance overseas is a ridiculous waste of money - it's like an employee of yours stealing your customers for another company's benefit then you are expected to keep them employed.

It's commonsense proposal which other countries are following and needs no justification for people who oppose and whose only argument is ohhh it's open to abuse......well so are the laws against Murder, or Defamation or Speeding or Lese Majeste or voting.....whatever is a law can be abused as well.

But ultimately - and this is why I ask you Samran why are you so opposed to it - all citizens naturalizing are required to state an oath to uphold laws and values of the country. To do that and commit terrorism against the state is argubably obtaining citizenship by fraud. In which case should be revoked.

But in Australia democracy will prevail so what ever the majority says, all shall receive

This affects natural born dual citizens in exactly the same way. We aren't just talking about those who have naturalised.

Even those indefinite detention laws are subject to judicial review and importantly, the same standards are applied regardless of birth.

This is discrimnatory, and goes against the principal that citizenship offers all citizens equal protections.

A sole citizen does terrible things and is subject to the full due process of the courts.

An australian citizen who happens to be born with another passport who only has to come under the suspicion of a minister and can be stripped of nationality.

It's unfair. And with the discretion in the hands of the third most populist ministerial position after the treasurer and he PM. It is prone to abuse.

Not only dual nationals, also under consideration is sole citizens, but being resisted by some in Cabinet:

"even an Australian-born citizen, without any other citizenship, could be stripped of Australian citizenship at the discretion of the immigration minister alone, without a suspect being charged or facing a court"

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/cabinet-revolt-over-tony-abbott-and-peter-dutton-plan-to-strip-australians-of-citizenship-20150526-gh9q8y.html

I guess some people supporting right wing polices don't comprehend, that as history teaches us, without democratic restraint they also will be at risk of cannibalisation.

Edited May 30, 2015 by simple1

[Steely Dan]

And now Canada.

http://www.omaha.com/news/world/canada-to-strip-citizenship-of-dual-national-terror-convicts/article_1b2f158c-c2d0-5d82-82d4-da0e1dd8802c.html

As I observed before, how effective such laws are is debatable and their potential for abuse is almost a given. What is significant is the clear and accelerating trend towards authoritarian legislation. I welcome it not because I don't believe in democracy or can't see the dangers in such a trend, but because without temporarily removing some freedoms I struggle to see how Western civilization can save itself. This is the paradox we face.

[otherstuff1957]

^ I would take a different viewpoint about these kinds of laws.

If we view the Islamic-Western conflict as a simplistic Democracy vs Authoritarianism conflict, then, by becoming more Authoritarian ourselves, we have lost the conflict.

[NeverSure]

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

- - Benjamin Franklin

[samran]

And now Canada.

http://www.omaha.com/news/world/canada-to-strip-citizenship-of-dual-national-terror-convicts/article_1b2f158c-c2d0-5d82-82d4-da0e1dd8802c.html

As I observed before, how effective such laws are is debatable and their potential for abuse is almost a given. What is significant is the clear and accelerating trend towards authoritarian legislation. I welcome it not because I don't believe in democracy or can't see the dangers in such a trend, but because without temporarily removing some freedoms I struggle to see how Western civilization can save itself. This is the paradox we face.

I very rarely agree with you but an honest answer. It is a huge paradox. I'm not there yet on the forfeiture of liberties on this, especially when there are plenty of other tougher measures we can take.

[NeverSure]

Some people seem to think the government is the answer. The governments have caused all of these problems. The people are the answer.

A truly free man isn't really afraid of much. A man who has given up his freedom to rely on his government to protect him should be very afraid.

[Steely Dan]

^ I would take a different viewpoint about these kinds of laws.

If we view the Islamic-Western conflict as a simplistic Democracy vs Authoritarianism conflict, then, by becoming more Authoritarian ourselves, we have lost the conflict.

That's a nice sound byte and a dilemma articulated by Nicholai Sennels, the Danish psychologist who observes Islam. I would argue that during the second world war many civil liberties were suspended, whether we like it or not I believe we are at war. This is not a war on terror or something so simplistic, it's not a race war, but a clash of civilizations. The left never refuted Samuel Huntington however much they strove to discredit his treatise.

[simple1]

Some people seem to think the government is the answer. The governments have caused all of these problems. The people are the answer.

A truly free man isn't really afraid of much. A man who has given up his freedom to rely on his government to protect him should be very afraid.

Armed private militias / vigilante groups in Oz? - NO. Already more than enough stupidity with assaults on Muslim women, mosques, verbal abuse of Muslims in public places etc. "The people' as you put it are not the answer, society would quickly descend into chaos.

[Thaddeus]

Some people seem to think the government is the answer. The governments have caused all of these problems. The people are the answer.

A truly free man isn't really afraid of much. A man who has given up his freedom to rely on his government to protect him should be very afraid.

Armed private militias / vigilante groups in Oz? - NO. Already more than enough stupidity with assaults on Muslim women, mosques, verbal abuse of Muslims in public places etc. "The people' as you put it are not the answer, society would quickly descend into chaos.

Just maybe if all the fine upstanding muslims could persuade their muslim chums to stop killing non-muslims, none of what you said would happen or be needed.

[Thaddeus]

Some people seem to think the government is the answer. The governments have caused all of these problems. The people are the answer.

A truly free man isn't really afraid of much. A man who has given up his freedom to rely on his government to protect him should be very afraid.

Armed private militias / vigilante groups in Oz? - NO. Already more than enough stupidity with assaults on Muslim women, mosques, verbal abuse of Muslims in public places etc. "The people' as you put it are not the answer, society would quickly descend into chaos.

Just maybe if all the fine upstanding muslims could persuade their muslim chums to stop killing non-muslims, none of what you said would happen or be needed.

And not to mention killing their own Muslim chums.....

HOLLY: "And Cloister spake, `Lo, I shall lead you to Fyushal, and there we shall open a temple of food, wherein shall be sausages and doughnuts and all manner of bountiful things.

The picture changes to one showing the pseudo-Lister standing in front of a sausage and doughnut cart on a beach, with palm trees.

HOLLY: "`Yea, even individual sachets of mustard. And those who serve shall have hats of great majesty, yea, though they be made of coloured cardboard and have humorous arrows through the top.'"

LISTER: Does it say what happened to the rest of the Cats?

HOLLY: Holy wars. There were thousands of years of fighting, Dave, between the two factions.

LISTER: What two factions?

HOLLY: Well, the ones who believed the hats should be red, and the ones who believed the hats should be blue.

Another picture, showing the holy wars. It looks like a scene from the Bayeaux Tapestry. Incidentally, the artist stuffed it up -- both sides are wearing red hats!

LISTER: Do you mean they had a war over whether the doughnut diner hats were red or blue?

HOLLY: Yeah. Most of them were killed fighting about that. It's daft really, innit?

LISTER: You're not kidding. They were supposed to be green.

[simple1]

Some people seem to think the government is the answer. The governments have caused all of these problems. The people are the answer.

A truly free man isn't really afraid of much. A man who has given up his freedom to rely on his government to protect him should be very afraid.

Armed private militias / vigilante groups in Oz? - NO. Already more than enough stupidity with assaults on Muslim women, mosques, verbal abuse of Muslims in public places etc. "The people' as you put it are not the answer, society would quickly descend into chaos.

Just maybe if all the fine upstanding muslims could persuade their muslim chums to stop killing non-muslims, none of what you said would happen or be needed.

Nearly all street level abuse is aimed at Muslim women, even those accompanied by children, by the upstanding defenders of Australia, not at men of 'middle eastern appearance'; frankly just cowards & indefensible.

[simple1]

Fink the ones cutting folks heads off with their hands tied behind their backs are the cowards and indefensible...............If a Muslim faction wants the world to see their premeditated murders then the Muslim community who choose to live in Christian countries must expect a backlash.

No argument with your first point.

Don’t see why a Muslim woman minding her own business walking down the street, on public transport and so on must expect abuse, fortunately mainstream political leaders condemn such behaviour.

As a point of detail those being abusive are often members of far right organisations such as Australian Defense League, who have no solutions and are essentially dick@#$%

Edited June 1, 2015 by simple1

[Thaddeus]

Some people seem to think the government is the answer. The governments have caused all of these problems. The people are the answer.

A truly free man isn't really afraid of much. A man who has given up his freedom to rely on his government to protect him should be very afraid.

Armed private militias / vigilante groups in Oz? - NO. Already more than enough stupidity with assaults on Muslim women, mosques, verbal abuse of Muslims in public places etc. "The people' as you put it are not the answer, society would quickly descend into chaos.

Just maybe if all the fine upstanding muslims could persuade their muslim chums to stop killing non-muslims, none of what you said would happen or be needed.

Nearly all street level abuse is aimed at Muslim women, even those accompanied by children, by the upstanding defenders of Australia, not at men of 'middle eastern appearance'; frankly just cowards & indefensible.

You are right of course, and I feel really sorry for the women who are on the receiving end of that sort of abuse.

But, who put them there?

They are the real cowards, hiding behind the weakest shield and treating them like chattels that are expendable.

[NeverSure]

Some people seem to think the government is the answer. The governments have caused all of these problems. The people are the answer.

A truly free man isn't really afraid of much. A man who has given up his freedom to rely on his government to protect him should be very afraid.

Armed private militias / vigilante groups in Oz? - NO. Already more than enough stupidity with assaults on Muslim women, mosques, verbal abuse of Muslims in public places etc. "The people' as you put it are not the answer, society would quickly descend into chaos.

This talk reminds me of people ignoring Hitler, thinking it wouldn't come to their house. That as he expanded territory and terror.

What is apparent to me is that society is already in chaos.

Just turn the the terrorists loose in Texas please. It isn't "in chaos" at all. It's very much under control - of the people.

[JockPieandBeans]

For all those hopping up and down with indignation, over what may / or may not happen with undesirables.

How many of you want to take this angelic little person home, and try to rehabilitate him ?

I will not post other photo's. I am certain most people will have seen him playing with severed heads.

[JockPieandBeans]

muslims who are dobbed extremists are usually the one's that feel marginalised in their adopted society(not all).There will always be such people no matter how much anyone wants to help them.The moderate one's need to get off their backsides and denounce them and excommunicate them from their faith.

Australia could take a leaf out of saudi arabia and ban all religions from being practised in australia other than christian.Personally i am all for the tough stance australia is promoting,the more restrictive the better.This is not a time to be soft,liberal,politically correct,its a time to face up,take seriously, this menace of islamic extremism.

Looks like Tony Abbot also agrees with you

"Daesh [iS] is coming, if it can, for every person and for every government with a simple message: 'Submit or die','" Mr Abbott said in his opening remarks. "You can't negotiate with an entity like this, you can only fight it."

"This is not terrorism for a local grievance, this is terrorism with global ambitions."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-33089970

[samran]

Who would have thunk? The law looks to be unconstitutional...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-12/legal-hurdle-govt-bid-to-strip-suspect-terrorists-citizenship/6543242

What a bunch of facist retards have running the joint.