The Forum > General Discussion > What to do about Aus citizens going to fight in syria?
What to do about Aus citizens going to fight in syria?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Page 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- ...
- 12
- 13
- 14
-
- All
Posted by Jayb, Tuesday, 14 January 2014 1:37:12 PM
| |
"Yesterday, Andrew Parker, the Director-General of the UK’s intelligence service MI5, announced that hundreds of British Muslims have traveled to Syria to take part in "terrorist tourism." Today, we present exclusive video footage and interviews with British nationals fighting with al Qaeda in Syria. In the film, two young men with British accents echo the sentiments expressed by Lee Rigby's killer Michael Adebolajo and declare jihad against the UK and United States."
http://tinyurl.com/mswc8nn British jihadists who fight in Syria having their UK citizenship stripped "Since May 2010, the passports of 37 people with dual nationality have been revoked by the Home Secretary Theresa May. British jihadists who fight in Syria are having their citizenship stripped to prevent their return to the UK. Home Secretary Theresa May has revoked the passports of 20 people this year - more than in her previous two-and-half-years combined. The measure has been used against 37 people with dual nationality since May 2010, according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. .. Security services are concerned that Syrian jihadists are bringing violent extremism back to the UK." http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/british-jihadists-who-fight-syria-2954402 Posted by onthebeach, Tuesday, 14 January 2014 2:52:17 PM
| |
God help us ! What a bloody mess we've got ourselves into, with all this 'open door' refugee policy ! Indeed, I remember well when Mr Fraser opened the door to all these Lebanese asylum seekers ! It's true, they didn't arrive by boats. It was all furnished through our HARD EARNED TAX money, that provided them with the wherewithal to establish another Beirut, right here in downtown Bankstown and it's environs.
It really worries me greatly, for the future of my grandchildren, and all the other millions of offspring, together with their heirs and successors ? When they ask grandpa, why did you all voluntarily hand over this once great country and nation of ours, to a bunch of predatory foreign Oligarchs ? Of course my only answer could be '...Oh Kids, it was our politicians that did it, not us...' ! And my eldest would rightly say after a long moment, '...what a weak group of bastards, you and your kind were...' as I crawled away ashamed, like a mangy yellow dog ! Posted by o sung wu, Tuesday, 14 January 2014 3:41:19 PM
| |
So true o sung wu, of course Fraser was already half way round the bend by that time. Like Rudd to follow, he had ideas of grandeur as well, in some vague hope of becoming the UN secretary general in his dotage. He, like Rudd was prepared to screw the people of OZ to attain his grand dream.
Fortunately mate, we both know that these people don't like a real fight. A bit of shooting in the air, bashing up some women, children, & a few unarmed blokes, or bombing a bus, is more their speed. There is only one bunch from the middle east that developed some guts, & that took many decades in cold climates to develop. We are more likely to have real trouble with the Afghans. They are many undesirable things, but lacking in courage & sheer guts is not one of them. Once they are established, if they start wanting a fight, we will damn well know all about it, much to our cost. Posted by Hasbeen, Tuesday, 14 January 2014 4:28:45 PM
| |
If an Australian citizen enters a foreign country to engage
in hostile activity on behalf of armed forces that are not part of the foreign government they can be charged under Australian Law of the Crimes (Incursions and Recruitment Act) which has broad provisions relating to the support and financing of armed foreign groups. They can also be charged for supporting hostile activities. I believe that ASIO has already charged several men. Australian citizens have always had strong views on international conflicts and Australians have fought on the side of non-government forces in East Timor, Sudan, Afghanistan, Cambodia, and Sri Lanka among others. Could they have been charged under the Crimes - Incrusions and Recruitment Act? I don't know. However, the following link gives a good summary of why some people are concered about this issue: http://www.smh.com.au/national/emotions-run-high-for-australias-muslim-youth-risking-all-to-fight-in-the-syrian-war-20131206-2ywof.html Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 14 January 2014 4:32:11 PM
| |
Foxy,
Thanks for posting that link, it may give others an insight into the problem. I guess it will be up to the Fed police and ASIO to keep tabs on and asses whether or not some will be charged on their return. On a broader front, We need to abolish Multiculturalism, which encourages the retention of old alien cultures and divides us into groups or tribes. Secondly we need to disallow immigrants from groups that have shown us they cannot/will not integrate and hold our laws and social standards in contempt. There are not many groups that need to be excluded, most immigrants do well at integrating, but a few groups do not. This is all to do with culture. Our actions need to be aimed at building a cohesive society. We need to be more selective on the immigration and refugee front. Posted by Banjo, Tuesday, 14 January 2014 5:20:13 PM
|
CHAPTER III – CESSATION CLAUSES
A. General
113. Article 1 C of the 1951 Convention provides that:
“This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:
(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or
(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily re-acquired it; or
(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or
(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he left or outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution; or
evidently ceased to exist. Cf sub-sections (5) and (6) (paragraphs 135 to 139 below).
(5) He can no longer, because the circumstances in connexion with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, continue to refuse to avail himself of the protection of the country of his nationality;
Provided that this paragraph shall not apply to a refugee falling under Section A (1) of this Article who is able to invoke compelling reasons arising out of previous persecution for refusing to avail himself of the protection of the country of nationality;
(6) Being a person who has no nationality he is, because the circumstances in connexion with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, able to return to the country of his former habitual residence