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

[samran]

The new law is crap.

It creates a second tier level of Australian citizenship.

One for those born with Australian citizenship but nothing else.

Thos born with Australian citizenship, who happen to be born with another citizenship or who go out and get another one.

The latter group, which certainly includes me and many of TV erstwhile memberships kids (I'm sure), plus at least 4 million other australians estimated to hold another nationality, are now subject to ministerial whim based on secretive intelligence advisors. No judicial oversight to be seen.

The same advisors who brought us WMD in Iraq.

So we've created a second class tier of citizenship.

Populism at its worst. What is wrong with locking up proven terrorists for life?

Terrorists - those it will affect - won't care. They've taken up violence against the state anyway so it a little strange you are complaining about this law.

It's a win-win

Well you are making my point in another way.

Yes, they won't care about these laws.

But I, as a law abiding citizen do. It makes me a lesser citizen in the eyes of the law, subject to ministerial whim. Cause that is what it is, the whim of a minister can now decide who stays an australian citizen in the case they happen to have another passport.

This is a law which is ripe for abuse.

I agree with you.

But at the same time, I don't want my government giving succour to a chap who was born in Lebanon, became a naturalised Ozzie, and who plots to harm Australia and Australians (or Brits, or Americans, or anybody).

What do you suggest should happen?

I want to take two steps back.

Firstly, is this law going to discourage people to go off and do these things? Probably not. There are harsher penalties of jail and long term incarceration which would probably be more useful than this law.

With this law they get stripped of australian citizenship while overseas. They don't come back and we now have no way to monitor or restrict their movements.

So what is left? A legal division in australian law which puts some people on one category and dual nationals in another category, breaching the fundamental principal that in a democracy at least, citizenship entails equal treatment before the law. No oversight. Prone to abuse.

This law will stop no one. Judging by the responses here, it is a populist measure for the sheeple to think that the government is 'doing something'.

[luckytrev]

This is easily fixed. Abolish dual Nationality; surrendering your foreign passport should be a requirement for gaining a domestic one . Decide which Nationality your prefer and then share the benefits and burdens of that society; that way no more second tier citizens.

[ABCer]

Too many sides here.

Too many people to quote.

All the crap about two tier citizenship, all the crap about extreme right, extreme left and dead center (just between the legs), etc...- hold it to yourself.

This incoming legislation is a first, very small, timid, insignificant and ineffective step in the correct direction.

When all sections of populace will gather the courage to recognize that

* The War is ON already;

* This War is purely of Religious Nature;

* We have seen such Wars before;

* Under existing conditions We are Losers;

- Than and only than we will come to realization of what steps are really needed.

Edited May 27, 2015 by ABCer

[samran]

This is easily fixed. Abolish dual Nationality; surrendering your foreign passport should be a requirement for gaining a domestic one . Decide which Nationality your prefer and then share the benefits and burdens of that society; that way no more second tier citizens.

If you think that abolishing dual nationality will stop these blokes going to do what they do, you need your head read.

Religious zealots will be religious zealots, regardless of what passport they hold.

[simple1]

<snip>

Is it legal to travel to Iraq and/or Syria on an Australian passport? If not, what is the penalty?

Yes, however, travel to some parts of Syria, e.g. Syrian province of al Raqqa, without justifiable cause is illegal and subject to prison sentence (think max 10 years), also applicable to dual citizens. How this edict can be regulated is a good question, but I understand Oz government now has an arrangement in-place with Iran who allegedly have good intelligence capability to monitor travel of foreigners in Syria / Iraq. Also idiots constantly boast of their travel in social media that is of course monitored by Australian and other Western security agencies.

Edited May 27, 2015 by simple1

[F4UCorsair]

<snip>

Is it legal to travel to Iraq and/or Syria on an Australian passport? If not, what is the penalty?

Yes, however, travel to some parts of Syria, e.g. Syrian province of al Raqqa, without justifiable cause is illegal and subject to prison sentence (think max 10 years), also applicable to dual citizens. How this edict can be regulated is a good question, but I understand Oz government now has an arrangement in-place with Iran who allegedly have good intelligence capability to monitor travel of foreigners in Syria / Iraq. Also idiots constantly boast of their travel in social media that is of course monitored by Australian and other Western security agencies.

Is that the same Iran, the foreign minister of which refused to entertain taking back 200 Iranian citizens who are illegally in Australia? He's the one who said that they can choose to live anywhere in the world they choose to do so, after entering illegally? We can't rely on Iran or any other middle eastern country for any help in anything.

[F4UCorsair]

It will be interesting to see how many people this law actually affects. Politicians sometimes spend a lot of time and effort to do something which has very little outcome.

I know some countries already make travel to Iraq illegal. It's clearly stated in the passport. I believe both the Philippines and the USA passports are invalid in Iraq.

Just as the US did with Cuba from about 1960 until recently, and Egypt (along with other countries) did with Israel, after they copped a pasting in the six day war back in 1967. Easy fix.......a loose leaf for the visa stamp in your passport.

Americans have been traveling to Cuba since the ban was put in place in violation of their government's directive, and Egyptians are probably disinclined to travel to Israel because they'd be less than welcome.

It may be more that Iraq isn't willing to accept US and PH passport holders, although allowing Americans in would give them a ready source of people to hold for ransom???

This certainly isn't about the US, or the Philippines, and Cuba is way off topic. Countries can make their passports invalid for travel to a particular country. It is stated in the passport. If someone violates that restriction they have broken a law and that is my point. It has nothing to do with the visa status or whether it is on a piece of paper. Years ago, Israel didn't make a mark in the passport.

If a country invalidates all passports for travel to a country, a passport holder can still travel, but the holder is given special permission to overcome that restriction and it is noted in the passport.

Is it legal to travel to Iraq and/or Syria on an Australian passport? If not, what is the penalty?

Dual citizens could no doubt use the other passport, unless it is also invalid for travel to that country.

No, it's not off topic.

It was showing how ridiculous it is for a country to ban its citizens from traveling to certain countries, and how easy it is to circumvent, e.g., Americans have been traveling to Cuba since the ban went on and all that is required is for the authorities in Cuba is to provide a loose leaf visa page for their passports.

[JockPieandBeans]

It will be interesting to see how many people this law actually affects. Politicians sometimes spend a lot of time and effort to do something which has very little outcome.

I know some countries already make travel to Iraq illegal. It's clearly stated in the passport. I believe both the Philippines and the USA passports are invalid in Iraq.

Scott,

I do not know where you are getting your info from.

USA passports are not invalid in Iraq. There are a large number of Americans working in Iraq in a number of various vocations, all have to get MOI approval, just like everyone else. This is done through the Company that they work for.

Likewise with the Philippines. There are a large number of them too. I doubt any of them snuck into Iraq illegally and gained illegal employment.

Check your sources please.

[Loptr]

This is easily fixed. Abolish dual Nationality; surrendering your foreign passport should be a requirement for gaining a domestic one . Decide which Nationality your prefer and then share the benefits and burdens of that society; that way no more second tier citizens.

I whole heartedly agree with this approach... The first people that should be examined are politicians that hold dual-citizenship...

[samran]

This is easily fixed. Abolish dual Nationality; surrendering your foreign passport should be a requirement for gaining a domestic one . Decide which Nationality your prefer and then share the benefits and burdens of that society; that way no more second tier citizens.

I whole heartedly agree with this approach... The first people that should be examined are politicians that hold dual-citizenship...

Given we are talking about Australia, the consitution requires all parliamentarians to renounce all non-australian citizenships.

So it is a non issue.

[Scott]

It will be interesting to see how many people this law actually affects. Politicians sometimes spend a lot of time and effort to do something which has very little outcome.

I know some countries already make travel to Iraq illegal. It's clearly stated in the passport. I believe both the Philippines and the USA passports are invalid in Iraq.

Just as the US did with Cuba from about 1960 until recently, and Egypt (along with other countries) did with Israel, after they copped a pasting in the six day war back in 1967. Easy fix.......a loose leaf for the visa stamp in your passport.

Americans have been traveling to Cuba since the ban was put in place in violation of their government's directive, and Egyptians are probably disinclined to travel to Israel because they'd be less than welcome.

It may be more that Iraq isn't willing to accept US and PH passport holders, although allowing Americans in would give them a ready source of people to hold for ransom???

This certainly isn't about the US, or the Philippines, and Cuba is way off topic. Countries can make their passports invalid for travel to a particular country. It is stated in the passport. If someone violates that restriction they have broken a law and that is my point. It has nothing to do with the visa status or whether it is on a piece of paper. Years ago, Israel didn't make a mark in the passport.

If a country invalidates all passports for travel to a country, a passport holder can still travel, but the holder is given special permission to overcome that restriction and it is noted in the passport.

Is it legal to travel to Iraq and/or Syria on an Australian passport? If not, what is the penalty?

Dual citizens could no doubt use the other passport, unless it is also invalid for travel to that country.

No, it's not off topic.

It was showing how ridiculous it is for a country to ban its citizens from traveling to certain countries, and how easy it is to circumvent, e.g., Americans have been traveling to Cuba since the ban went on and all that is required is for the authorities in Cuba is to provide a loose leaf visa page for their passports.

Yes it is off-topic and for US citizens it is not a ban against traveling to those countries. It is a ban against using a US passport to travel to those countries.

This thread is about Australia.

[samuibeachcomber]

Strip them of citizenship and then put them in jail.

I don't know that I want them in another country when they have intimate knowledge of a western country.

An exchange program with someone on a boat would do for me.

now there's a good idea!

[Seastallion]

Terrorists - those it will affect - won't care. They've taken up violence against the state anyway so it a little strange you are complaining about this law.

It's a win-win

Well you are making my point in another way.

Yes, they won't care about these laws.

But I, as a law abiding citizen do. It makes me a lesser citizen in the eyes of the law, subject to ministerial whim. Cause that is what it is, the whim of a minister can now decide who stays an australian citizen in the case they happen to have another passport.

This is a law which is ripe for abuse.

I agree with you.

But at the same time, I don't want my government giving succour to a chap who was born in Lebanon, became a naturalised Ozzie, and who plots to harm Australia and Australians (or Brits, or Americans, or anybody).

What do you suggest should happen?

I want to take two steps back.

Firstly, is this law going to discourage people to go off and do these things? Probably not. There are harsher penalties of jail and long term incarceration which would probably be more useful than this law.

With this law they get stripped of australian citizenship while overseas. They don't come back and we now have no way to monitor or restrict their movements.

So what is left? A legal division in australian law which puts some people on one category and dual nationals in another category, breaching the fundamental principal that in a democracy at least, citizenship entails equal treatment before the law. No oversight. Prone to abuse.

This law will stop no one. Judging by the responses here, it is a populist measure for the sheeple to think that the government is 'doing something'.

OK. that makes sense....therefore, all citizens should be equally liable under the law...which takes us to Dexterm's excellent point that ANY Ozzie fighting for a foreign government or entity should face equal consequences.

Whether it be fighting for Hezbollah or the IDF (which is a valid entity to mention as they are facing allegations of war crimes and, in a broad sense, terrorism), Australians should be banned from fighting. It should not be just about ISIS.

[luckytrev]

This is easily fixed. Abolish dual Nationality; surrendering your foreign passport should be a requirement for gaining a domestic one . Decide which Nationality your prefer and then share the benefits and burdens of that society; that way no more second tier citizens.

If you think that abolishing dual nationality will stop these blokes going to do what they do, you need your head read.

Religious zealots will be religious zealots, regardless of what passport they hold.

Samran, I am glad you said "If" because I don't think religious zealotry is so easily cured. Smarter people then us have been working unsuccessfully on this for ages. My post said no more second tier citizens it did not no suggest no more religious zealots.

[Credo]

How would this affect anyone serving in the military of another country? Some dual nationals do their military in the country of origin. Could they potentially get into difficulty for fulfilling an obligation? A soldier might not be fully aware of how the actions of his country might be perceived by others.

[Steely Dan]

Too many sides here.

Too many people to quote.

All the crap about two tier citizenship, all the crap about extreme right, extreme left and dead center (just between the legs), etc...- hold it to yourself.

This incoming legislation is a first, very small, timid, insignificant and ineffective step in the correct direction.

When all sections of populace will gather the courage to recognize that

* The War is ON already;

* This War is purely of Religious Nature;

* We have seen such Wars before;

* Under existing conditions We are Losers;

- Than and only than we will come to realization of what steps are really needed.

Well put, a voice of reason. The fact that such legislation may not be that effective and may be prone to abuse are but side issues. We are where we are, which is a yet to be acknowledged clash of civilizations. Every member of ISIS knows this, as too do the estimated 1 billion Muslims who want to live under Sharia law, wherever they happen to live. This announcement is significant because such legislation is the start of a pattern. The UK and France are both passing laws enabling greater surveillance by security forces. The West has the ability to prevail in such a war but to do so will need to reverse a lot of the freedoms and rights which have been cynically used against us.

I expect more of this sort of legislation in future, much more and at an increasing pace for at least a decade.

[louse1953]

It is well known fact that it's good to be a criminal in Australia as the government will avail the wrong doers with state sponsored and funded, non limit free legal advise, not to mention the many organizations that somehow elect them selves as the protectors of the under dog and will also master funds and legal aids to such people, to top it all up, are the Aussie

judges, a bunch of softies and merciful lot that will rather err on the side of caution and give a ridicules penalties and in most case repeat offenders are being sent home on a ' good behavior ' promise. so good luck to Australia enforcing the stripping and jailing ISIS combatants.....

Revoking the Oz citizenship of dual nationals will be a Ministerial decision, not the remit of the Courts

Wrong.Appealed in the courts,several times.Gotta have some sensible people overseeing,right wing facists.

[simple1]

<snip>

Is it legal to travel to Iraq and/or Syria on an Australian passport? If not, what is the penalty?

Yes, however, travel to some parts of Syria, e.g. Syrian province of al Raqqa, without justifiable cause is illegal and subject to prison sentence (think max 10 years), also applicable to dual citizens. How this edict can be regulated is a good question, but I understand Oz government now has an arrangement in-place with Iran who allegedly have good intelligence capability to monitor travel of foreigners in Syria / Iraq. Also idiots constantly boast of their travel in social media that is of course monitored by Australian and other Western security agencies.

Is that the same Iran, the foreign minister of which refused to entertain taking back 200 Iranian citizens who are illegally in Australia? He's the one who said that they can choose to live anywhere in the world they choose to do so, after entering illegally? We can't rely on Iran or any other middle eastern country for any help in anything.

Who said Oz is relying on Iran, only getting some intelligence input. I suggest Iran is more than interested in working with those seeking the destruction of DAESH and their foreign fighters. However, why not write to Julia Bishop and advise her of your concerns.

[Time Traveller]

This is easily fixed. Abolish dual Nationality; surrendering your foreign passport should be a requirement for gaining a domestic one . Decide which Nationality your prefer and then share the benefits and burdens of that society; that way no more second tier citizens.

If you think that abolishing dual nationality will stop these blokes going to do what they do, you need your head read.

Religious zealots will be religious zealots, regardless of what passport they hold.

I'm glad you said that. And I personally don't want them in my country. So cancleling their citizenship is the perfect solution. But the only alternative is to eliminate dual citizenship.

Edited May 27, 2015 by Time Traveller

[louse1953]

Strip them of thier Oz passports then Tar & Feather the Fack ers! then send em back to whence they came

That would only leave the blackfella's.They'll be happy.

[samran]

Firstly, is this law going to discourage people to go off and do these things? Probably not. There are harsher penalties of jail and long term incarceration which would probably be more useful than this law.

With this law they get stripped of australian citizenship while overseas. They don't come back and we now have no way to monitor or restrict their movements.

So what is left? A legal division in australian law which puts some people on one category and dual nationals in another category, breaching the fundamental principal that in a democracy at least, citizenship entails equal treatment before the law. No oversight. Prone to abuse.

This law will stop no one. Judging by the responses here, it is a populist measure for the sheeple to think that the government is 'doing something'.

I want to take two steps back.

OK. that makes sense....therefore, all citizens should be equally liable under the law...which takes us to Dexterm's excellent point that ANY Ozzie fighting for a foreign government or entity should face equal consequences.

Whether it be fighting for Hezbollah or the IDF (which is a valid entity to mention as they are facing allegations of war crimes and, in a broad sense, terrorism), Australians should be banned from fighting. It should not be just about ISIS.

Then we are simply having a policy discussion. Should you be allowed to fight for foreign forces?

Yes, no?

Yes, but with exceptions.

We have the latter at the moment. i'm generally confortable if it is with Allied forces. We just had Prince Harry over seconded to the ADF, so it goes both ways. And I think on balance it isn't a harm.

The IL forces is not a question that should be raised right now...but they aren't an enemy of Australia and I think that is where the line has to be drawn. National interest. Pure, simple, and yes, self serving....

Fight with foreign terror forces opposed to Australia- go to jail.

IF we want to be blunt about it, we want to exile people.But that somehow isn't bogan PC enough.

[samran]

Too many sides here.

Too many people to quote.

All the crap about two tier citizenship, all the crap about extreme right, extreme left and dead center (just between the legs), etc...- hold it to yourself.

This incoming legislation is a first, very small, timid, insignificant and ineffective step in the correct direction.

When all sections of populace will gather the courage to recognize that

* The War is ON already;

* This War is purely of Religious Nature;

* We have seen such Wars before;

* Under existing conditions We are Losers;

- Than and only than we will come to realization of what steps are really needed.

Well put, a voice of reason. The fact that such legislation may not be that effective and may be prone to abuse are but side issues. We are where we are, which is a yet to be acknowledged clash of civilizations. Every member of ISIS knows this, as too do the estimated 1 billion Muslims who want to live under Sharia law, wherever they happen to live. This announcement is significant because such legislation is the start of a pattern. The UK and France are both passing laws enabling greater surveillance by security forces. The West has the ability to prevail in such a war but to do so will need to reverse a lot of the freedoms and rights which have been cynically used against us.

I expect more of this sort of legislation in future, much more and at an increasing pace for at least a decade.

Talking up the scope of 'big brother' and yet you have your avatar as such...

[harrry]

It is well known fact that it's good to be a criminal in Australia as the government will avail the

wrong doers with state sponsored and funded, non limit free legal advise, not to mention

the many organizations that somehow elect them selves as the protectors of the under dog

and will also master funds and legal aids to such people, to top it all up, are the Aussie

judges, a bunch of softies and merciful lot that will rather err on the side of caution and

give a ridicules penalties and in most case repeat offenders are being sent home on a ' good

behavior ' promise. so good luck to Australia enforcing the stripping and jailing ISIS combatants.....

Not sure that you have that right about state sponsered legal aid. it is only given in rare cases, The USA is the country that guarantees legal representation,.

[evadgib]

A real conservative will be chocking on their weeties with a fragrant disregard for the basic principals of law, checks and balances

Can some expert in Australian slang decipher this for the rest of us?

This Pom got it in one Edited May 27, 2015 by evadgib

[Morakot]

Yes! Every country should do this. These people aren't real citizens.

Then they would not hold any citizenship.

Probably wouldn't matter some might say as they are no "real" people. Or what?

[Morakot]

The new law is crap.

It creates a second tier level of Australian citizenship.

One for those born with Australian citizenship but nothing else.

Thos born with Australian citizenship, who happen to be born with another citizenship or who go out and get another one.

The latter group, which certainly includes me and many of TV erstwhile memberships kids (I'm sure), plus at least 4 million other australians estimated to hold another nationality, are now subject to ministerial whim based on secretive intelligence advisors. No judicial oversight to be seen.

The same advisors who brought us WMD in Iraq.

So we've created a second class tier of citizenship.

Populism at its worst. What is wrong with locking up proven terrorists for life?

Sorry, but thats a load of tosh. Im a dual Brit/Aussie & I certainly dont feel like 2nd tier Australian. I am in fact please that the government is finally enacting something which will protect all Australian citizens, both dual & single alike.

It doesn't matter what you feel, but what judicial reality has been created by this piece of legislation.

If you were found guilty of certain terrorism charges you will not be an Australian citizen any more, regardless how you feel about it.

It's rather arbitrary because the UK is in the process of adopting similar legislations and it would become a matter which of the two countries would declare you a non-citizen.

Edited May 27, 2015 by Morakot

[Steely Dan]

Too many sides here.

Too many people to quote.

All the crap about two tier citizenship, all the crap about extreme right, extreme left and dead center (just between the legs), etc...- hold it to yourself.

This incoming legislation is a first, very small, timid, insignificant and ineffective step in the correct direction.

When all sections of populace will gather the courage to recognize that

* The War is ON already;

* This War is purely of Religious Nature;

* We have seen such Wars before;

* Under existing conditions We are Losers;

- Than and only than we will come to realization of what steps are really needed.

Well put, a voice of reason. The fact that such legislation may not be that effective and may be prone to abuse are but side issues. We are where we are, which is a yet to be acknowledged clash of civilizations. Every member of ISIS knows this, as too do the estimated 1 billion Muslims who want to live under Sharia law, wherever they happen to live. This announcement is significant because such legislation is the start of a pattern. The UK and France are both passing laws enabling greater surveillance by security forces. The West has the ability to prevail in such a war but to do so will need to reverse a lot of the freedoms and rights which have been cynically used against us.

I expect more of this sort of legislation in future, much more and at an increasing pace for at least a decade.

Talking up the scope of 'big brother' and yet you have your avatar as such...

Glad you noticed. In order to defeat the third jihad that is currently underway it will be inevitable that freedoms are sacrificed. The only alternative is for our leaders to capitulate to it by pretending there is no problem. The latter scenario needs an Orwellian abuse of language, hence we have Islamophobia and the lies and moral relativism of the left leaning press all backed up by government attacks on freedom of speech etc.

In other words, if the conservatives fight for our civilizations freedom will be curtailed, if the libs surrender on all our behalves it will also mean curtailment of rights in order for them to silence dissenters. So there you have it, welcome to a more authoritarian future whoever prevails.

[Morakot]

IF we want to be blunt about it, we want to exile people.But that somehow isn't bogan PC enough.

Exactly that's the whole issue. Banishment has been outlawed for centuries and we now see a serious move back to the dark ages.

It's a kick in the mouth of justice as people might never face trail when they are "banished" by non-judicial proceedings overseen by a home sectary or what not.

Edited May 27, 2015 by Morakot

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed. This is about a proposed law. Not about past actions.

[gigman]

Always the same one side story.

1.Why those youngsters are so eager to go and risk everything ??? what kind of promises IS is giving them that Aussie government can not ...??

2. Today stripped from citizenship for this and "tomorrow for ...who knows ??? maybe we should punish parents too

3.What kind of life and future our governments are giving young people that makes them to do so drastic steps ?

I still remember communistic absurd rules which made people to scare of each other to be accused or dobbed by snitch ....

Deja vu...???

Is it only kind of punishment we was able to find who break the law ???

Why not to accept euthanasia ..... ( NOT ...because can be manipulated ...this is the same with citizen rights... just let it go and nobody can stop it later)

Everyone quickly forgot that we were young and stupid once in our past...??

Edited May 27, 2015 by gigman