Firstly, some weeks ago ASIO estimated there were about 200 of our citizens associated with the fighting in Syria.

Most of these young men would have been born here so are Australian with no dual citizenship. They are putting their lives on the line for their beliefs.

It seems that ASIO fears are that, when they return to Aus, they will be experienced in urban warfare and other military matters. Many could be radicalised and this posses a danger to our community.

Banjo

I have to disagree

There is evidence that Somalis who were accepted as refugees have gone back to fight for al-Shabaab:
"Muslim extremists are recruiting young Somali refugees in Sydney and Melbourne for what a Somali community leader fears could be a terrorist attack in Australia...'We know that some people left Australia to join the jihad of the Islamic Courts (a faction in the Somalian civil war) and have even been killed,' Dr Hilole said.'We know there are supporters in Australia who want to recruit young Somalis to go back or support financially the Islamic Courts.'"
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/extremists-recruiting-australian-somalis/2007/04/13/1175971295162.html

And this has been a phenomenon that we have seen repeated in the USA, Canada and the Scandinavian countries.

Further, there is evidence that at least some of the Lebanese jihadis were not born in Oz:
" the Australian Federal Police swooped on a cell of Somali and LEBANESE-BORN Australians accused of providing support to radical groups in Africa."
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/madrassa-lessons-worry-somalis/story-e6frg6nf-1226725553794

Besides, all the quasi-refugees let-in under Frasers generous "Lebanese concession" must be in nearing prime fighting age by now.

Now I just got this to-day & it came out yesterday, 4 pages already.

Banjo: There is another body of thought that suggests we allow those who want to go there to let them but then cancel their passports or other means to not allow them back.
OTB: Revoke their dual citizenship immediately.
Hasbeen: Yep cancel their passports.
Suseonline: However, if they commit serious crimes (like war crimes/murder etc) while overseas, then they should have their citizeLet them. People who are keen to run off to be shot, maimed and killed are examples of Darwinism in action. nship revoked and not be allowed to return.
TL: Let them.
Planet3: ...let them go and revoke their Australian passports.
Bazz: The very least they can be denied by their country and passport and citizenship cancelled.

Thank you Banjo, OTB, Hasbeen, suseonline, TL, Planet3, & Bazz. I have advocated this on here before & wholly support that idea.

OTB: What are the flaws in the immigration programs that have these unintended negative consequences and why hasn't there been stern corrective action before now?

What! an' deprive some poor Lawyer of an honest living?

The ploy of going to provide Humanitarian Help is a farce & they know it. Those going feel safe because they have duel citizenship. The ones that haven't been granted citizenship can't go back yet because.

Cont.

Excerpts from the UNCHR Handbook.

Can these people be expelled from Australia. Yes.

Article 32 Expulsion

1. The Contracting States shall not expel a refugee lawfully in their territory save on grounds of national security or public order.
Article 33 Prohibition of expulsion or return (“refoulement”)

2. The benefit of the present provision may not, however, be claimed by a refugee whom there are reasonable grounds for regarding as a danger to the security of the country in which he is, or who, having been convicted by a final judgment of a particularly serious crime, constitutes a danger to the community of that country.

Cont

Annex III
1967 PROTOCOL RELATING TO THE STATUS OF REFUGEES 30 The States Parties to the present Protocol,

Considering that the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees done at Geneva on 28 July 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Convention) covers only those persons who have become refugees as a result of events occurring before 1 January 1951,

Considering that new refugee situations have arisen since the Convention was adopted and that the refugees concerned may therefore not fall within the scope of the Convention,

Considering that it is desirable that equal status should be enjoyed by all refugees covered by the definition in the Convention irrespective of the dateline 1 January 1951,

Can Australia remove it's self from the Convention. Yes.

Article VII
Reservations and Declarations
1. At the time of accession, any State may make reservations in respect of article IV of the present Protocol and in respect of the application in accordance with article I of the present Protocol of any provisions of the Convention other than those contained in articles 1, 3, 4, 16 (1) and 33 thereof, provided that in the case of a State Party to the Convention reservations made under this article shall not extend to refugees in respect of whom the Convention applies

Article IX
Denunciation
1. Any State Party hereto may denounce this Protocol at any time by a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

2. Such denunciation shall take effect for the State Party concerned one year from the date on which it is received by the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

2. Reservations made by States Parties to the Convention in accordance with article 42 thereof shall, unless withdrawn, be applicable in relation to their obligations under the present Protocol.

3. Any State making a reservation in accordance with paragraph 1 of this article may at any time withdraw such reservation by a communication to that effect addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

4. Declarations made under article 40, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the Convention by a State Party thereto which accedes to the present Protocol shall be deemed to apply in respect of the present Protocol, unless upon accession a notification to the contrary is addressed by the State Party concerned to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The provisions of article 40, paragraphs 2 and 3, and of article 44, paragraph 3, of the Convention shall be deemed to apply mutatis mutandis to the present Protocol

SPQR,
You said, "Besides, all the quasi-refugees let-in under Frasers generous "Lebanese concession" must be in nearing prime fighting age by now".

If I recall correctly the big influx of muslim Lebs occurred in the 1970s, This would make those leaving here to fight in Syria second generation and born here. That is if the info is correct that those going are mainly Lebs. I appears they find their religion/politics more important than being Australian. We have seen how serious they take their religion by the muslim riots in Sydney a year or so ago.

ASIO may have some very valid concerns if these citizens return further radicalise and as experienced fighters.

I know nothing about the recruitment of Somarlis to fight in Africian countries. Thanks for the links