I've recently read a very interesting Editorial
in our local newspaper - "The Manningham Leader",
Wednesday, August 12th, 2009,
which may put things into perspective, and I quote:

"Our communities are known for their tolerance and
understanding. In the past 30 years, in particular,
we have welcomed migrants from a range of backgrounds,
including those from places where ethnic and religious
conflict are a part of daily life.

We have taken refugees from a number of countries
including Lebanon and Somalia. And we have welcomed
migrants from a spectrum of religions, from Christian
to Muslim.

Our neighbourhoods have shown a capacity to support
the migrants' social, cultural and religious differences.
Now, in the aftermath of the raids on several houses in
Melbourne's northern suburbs, we confront the fears
about extremists in our midst.

While no one believes complacency is a desirable approach
to alleged terrorist threats. It is also true that this
should not equate to chronic suspicion of outsiders.
Our communities should be made up of the vigilant, not
the vigilantes.

It is understandable that many neighbours of those men
who have been accused of being part of a terrorist plot
will be shocked at the events in their streets.

Yet they must know that the vast majority of law-abiding
Muslims are also shocked by these events.

Communities across Melbourne have shown their resilience
in the face of similar concerns before. They must do so
again to demonstrate how the fabric of our neighbourhoods
relies on an essential decency and tolerance to function
properly.

Extremism by its very definition is rare. We need to be
aware of its potential threat, but not be crippled by
fear."

Pericles, Fractelle and Foxy: hear, hear!

Banjo, you might be unpleasantly surprised by the percentage of Australian born from anglo and Christian background who behave daily with deep and utter contempt towards our courts and laws.

Why should they be allowed to get away with this? Why can't we send them 'back'?

Are you advocating two different classes of citizenship? You could be onto something here.

Perhaps the 'citizenship test' should be taken by everybody, and an oath sworn. When you pass you are a class A citizen and are allowed to vote. If you do not sit the test, or fail, but are born here, you are a class B citizen should basically shut up, are not allowed to vote or partake in any public institutions and probably pay a bit more tax, because the class A citizens have so much more to do AND have more responsibility, what with the rabble and all.

The privately schooled kids, who are the ones with capable goal orientated parents, of course will have no trouble passing this silly test, being coached to give the correct answers and at last we will have a meritous properly educated elite look after things.

Please note: I'm a new Australian, passed the test, swore my oath of allegiance to Australia, thus a keen bonafide class A citizen. And I know for a fact that there are many Aussie born citizens who do not have a clue would seriously bomb in the test. It bothers me that they get to vote in our elections and make wild statements about 'rights and responsibilites' of others on public forums.

Yes, Banjo, let's look at this all citizens being equal before the law crap.

Foxy,
Your post is interesting, but I think more suited to the thread in the articles section. 'Not in the name of our Islam'

This thread is about those that obtain citizenship here by lies and deception and, when exposed, what to do about that.

I did note the sentence regarding vigilance and agree that we must be vigilant and acknowledge that there will be some persons that obtain citizenship with absolutely no respect for us or our society.

My opinion is that the magistrate, in this case, should have ordered those that held our judicial system in contemp be charged and the immigration minister be requested to consider revoking citizenship.

If we value our society, our standards must be maintained and it is not good enough to simply ignore blatant contempt and hope it will go away.

I noted the comments of percles and Fractelle in relation to deportation, and simply say this is not my object as, if a persons citizenship is revoked, that person would then revert to the previous status of 'permanent resident', which still would enable them to a whole range of social benefits. There is specific criteria to be met before deportation can be considered.

People.
I understand all those awaiting charge were born in Australia.

Thus they are home growen citizens

Banjo

If you are an Australian citizen; you are an Australian citizen - equally subject to the laws of this country whether you were born here (how does that make you a better person?) or born in another country.

You are still arguing for a double standard. Do not insult our intelligence further.

Thank you.

But, it’s not just with “citizens”. We even have a problems deporting non-citizens who have behaved badly –sometimes, very badly.

Once someone gets a foot in the door – it seems all our civil liberty defenders can’t find it their bleeding hearts to say, GO! ( They must be real push-overs for door-to-door sales...persons!) http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2977#68985