It's obvious that these Johnny come lately's who publically show complete contempt for the laws and customs of this country have only acquired citizenship to give themselves a secure platform from which to launch their attacks on us. As Banjo says they have obtained citizenship fraudulently. They knowingly and willingly swore and oath and knowingly and willingly broke it.

This cannot be likened to a "mere" criminal act. Most criminals have the objective of personal gain or gratification not the complete overthrow of the Government and the conversion of Australia to a fundamentalist religious state. The objective of these individuals was/is ultimately treason.

The only fitting response to this behaviour is revocation of citizenship and deportation. If this is seen as a double standard then so be it.

Banjo,
There are existing parallels to the two tier “citizenship” scheme you’ve mooted:

Many firms currently (& quite legally) utilize such a system. New employees often go through an probationary period .If during that period they do anything untoward, your employee status may be terminated .

And , if one gains employment under false pretences ( i.e. misstating qualifications & experience ) the may similarly have their employee status terminated.

(seems we are more particular about choosing employees than citizens!)

Foxy,
Not that it will make an iota of difference –but just a couple of corrections to your piece.

The gentleman we both referred was:
--Deported to Serbia not Croatia
-- WAS BORN IN FRANCE!
--Had a father who was a Serbian citizen and resided in Serbia

In dealing with Australian immigration matters –we should never say never.
Anyone deported or rejected today is likely to re-apply and be admitted tomorrow.

Peter the believer,

Your first post mentioned "John Wilson, and he is being medicated with warfarin, to keep him quiet."

Warfarin is a blood thinning drug, used for treating cardiac conditions. Only if too much were used would it keep anyone quiet (permanently)

Where on earth do you suck up this BS?

Reading the rest of your posts I would suggest you give the thinners a rest.

Horus,
I have not proposed a two-tier system or a probationary system for citizenship, nor do I intend to, although I am aware of such things.

What is needed is for our governments to insist that our existing laws be upheld when there are blatant acts that clearly show persons were not honest when obtaining citizenship.

In this case a person who was an Australian citizen clearly showed contempt for one of our basic institutions and no action was taken. We granted this person citizenship and his actions demonstrated he was fraudulant in getting citizenship. He should be charged with contempt of court and the minister should use his power to revoke citizenship.

It seems another instance of 'cultural privilege' where we turn a blind eye to wrong doings by some.

Foxy,
I think you well know that I am only referring to those to whom we have granted citizenship. You would also know i am not talking about deportation. Most people are open and honest when gaining citizenship, but the are some that obviously gain theirs by deception and when exposed they should not continue getting that benefit.

A foreign person, a visitor, a temporary or permanent resident and a born here citizen can show disrespect and contempt for us and all aspects of our society. But a person granted citizenship cannot without disclosing that he obtained his citizenship fraudulantly.

I am a bit surprized that you think that a person can gain a benefit by deception and still retain that benefit. A welfare cheat obtains benefit by deception and when exposed he loses the benefit, and rightly so. It is not often a citizenship cheat is exposed and when it does happen, it should be acted upon so as the integrity of the process is maintained.

Dear Banjo,

So what sort of punishment are you advocating
exactly? - I'm a bit confused here - because I
thought you were talking about deportation.
And, please, make sure that the punishment is
not a disproportionate punishment
for the "crimes," they've committed.

The Minister has to be very careful so as not to make
the same mistakes as in the past cases of Vivian Alvarez
Solon, Cornelia Rau, Robert Jovicic... (google them
to refresh your memory).

Dear Horus,

Thanks for correcting me in the case of Robert Jovicic.
However the fact remains - he came to Australia as a
2 year old, and lived here for all of his life. He'd
only ever been to Serbia once - did not speak the language,
and at the age of 42 was deported because of some burglaries
that he'd committed to satisfy his heroin addiction.
He became ill and was found desolate and living on the
streets of Belgrade. The Immigration Minister re-instated
his permanent residency back to Australia and said the
"incident," was "regrettable."

I think that we'll all have to agree to disagree on this
particular subject

Foxy

I agree. The Robert Jovicic case was one of bureaucracy gone mad. All that needed to be done was for Jovicic to serve his time in an Australian prison for his crimes.

Banjo

I don't think I understand you any more either. You are still demanding that Australian citizens who migrated here be treated differently to those, who through accident of birth, were born here.

People don't just step off the boat or plane and are automatically granted citizenship, there are applications, assessments and criteria to be met. Please start doing your homework:

http://www.immi.gov.au/migrants/

There are no special attributes for people who happen to have the luck to be born here.

Just as an example (not to enter into a game of Australian born versus migrant criminals PLEASE) Martin Bryant was born in Australia, after murdering 35 innocents, one could hardly claim he showed respect "for the laws and customs of this country".