ISIS fighter Khaled Sharrouf's wife and children are seeking to return to Australia. Three other Australian men associated with Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria now also want to come home.

Personally I think these people have a lot of gall to even use the word 'home'. They chose to sneak over to Syria, get involved with one of the most brutal fighting forces in recent history, and now want to come back to Australia. No one has any idea what their true intentions are.

These people could be planning to blow themselves up in a Sydney shopping mall. They could be planning to martyr their children in some grotesque plan we cannot fathom. What ever their agenda, its seems pretty damn selfish and I hope our government is not going to honour their request.

Too bad if Sharrouf's wife is sick of it, she should of thought about that before she went. Her dilemma doesn't have to be ours. Why isn't she seeking refuge inside one of the wonderful holy states of Islam?

My question to OLO is should Australia allow these people to return or not?

My own answer is "tough luck lady; you and your kids are not welcome, not now or ever." To the three men, "come back if you are willing to spend the next 30 years in prison, otherwise maybe try Yemen or perhaps Afghanistan might be another nice alternative."

Dear ConservativeHippie,

Our PM has vowed that foreign
fighters should face the full force of the law if they
return to Australia. And, he's indicated - that the lady
in question will face the full force of the law.

I can't understand any parent who would take their
children into a war zone.

//My question to OLO is should Australia allow these people to return or not?//

No. We're just going to lock them up, at considerable expense to the taxpayer (me). I can think of better uses for my taxes. If they wanted to go abroad we should do our best to assist them to stay abroad.

My first thought would be that if the Australian Government wants to revoke the citizenship of Isis fighters wanting to return to Australia, they would have to have proof (? a guilty verdict from a trial) before they did this, surely?

Would such proof be the onus of the Syrian legal system, or of the Australian one?
So, if they decide they should be tried by an Aussie court, then they would need to be brought home first.

Do we know for sure that this wife and children of the known terrorist are actually terrorists themselves?
Do we punish Aussie kids for the sins of their parents?
I think we are better than that.
Let them come home for a fair trial, and then jail them if they are guilty.

If posting photos of yourself and your kids holding up the head of some poor soul its enough proof for you Suse, then we may as well also pay their expenses for a First Class flight back and throw in a hero's parade while we are at it.

Come on Suse, being open minded and non-judgemental is one thing, but not assuming these people broke the law is just plain head in sand thinking.

Given the so called 'justice' some of our judges dish out, these ISIS fighters will probably be given a $100 fine and a suspended sentence if they are allowed a trial.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/aussie-khaled-sharrouf-teaches-sons-to-torture-girls-after-he-rapes-them/story-fni0cx12-1227193884267

I get Suseonline's point but wonder how that works in practice. Other than material which has been posted online how do we get evidence and witnesses out of that area to take part in a trial here? How do we deal within our existing legal system with children who have been part of the kind of brutality those kids have been part of and still take reasonable precautions against their future choices.

I'm undecided about Sharroufs wifes role in actual terrorism but given his history of extremism here and her apparent willingness to stand by that she is not someone I want back in this country.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/threat-to-lucas-heights-not-the-first/2005/11/14/1131951095332.html

It is not a simple issue, there are grave risks when we bypass our own legal processes especially the presumption of innocence but it's also a reality that those laws are not well designed to deal with the kind of situation involved here.

I don't have answers I'm happy with either way but sit a little more comfortably with leaving them to the consequences of choices they (or their parents) made than with exposing others to the serious long term risk that family poses to others if allowed back into Australia.

R0bert

They are war criminals having murdered and raped unarmed innocents in Syria so must be tried in the country of their crime, and by the legal system of that country.

I spent a couple of hours early this morning with some heavy equipment operators on a building site. They are all Irish, men and women, in their twenties and highly skilled and willing workers they are too and not shabby in their communication either. A pleasure to work with and while we are pleased to welcome the new one who arrive, we are sad to lose those who return home, often via some other travel.

I related those facts to prove, unnecessarily as it would be to anyone in construction but it would obviously be news to some here, that there are many young men and women in countries such as Ireland, Germany and so on who do not only want to work here for a contracted period, but would move permanently if offered. They are young, highly skilled, want to work and can provide unblemished records of good citizenship.

There is a proactive solution to the imported problem of racial hatreds, centuries-long ethnic wars, toxic political systems, values and traditions (remember Rotherham!) and that is to manage the risk by preferring the most suitable and best migrants in the first place.

The federal government, both sides, know that already. They have always known it. So what prevents the feds from:

1. reeling back the migration numbers, to well within the range that does not carry any risk of destroying the character and culture of Australia that is prized by us and is applauded around the world (but NOT by some migrants!) and are within conservative estimates of infrastructure growth and supply of energy, water and other necessities; and.

2. since it is a buyer's market for a peaceful, democratic, developed country like Australia, prefer the most suitable, best and brightest migration applications?

Some here seem to be so preoccupied with rubbing Australia's nose in the diversity-our-arrogant-feds-force-us-to-have (to improve Labor's and Greens' electoral prospects in marginal ethnic seats) that they bend over backwards to allow every possible excuse, leeway and leniency for scum who coldly, deliberately and covertly joined and supported ISIS.

Josephus, are we sure that this obviously nasty Isis fighter's wife and kids raped and killed others while overseas?
Should they be punished for what he did?
Are we sure they were not merely his pawns in all this?

He is obviously a very violent person that I doubt his family would want to upset or disagree with.
I am not comfortable with maybe condemning innocent people...

Of course these grubs should not be allowed back into Australia. They hate us and our way of life. It is hoped that Abbott means what he says this time, and strips citizenship from these scum and all like them. What they have done is illegal, and they are not needed here to bludge off us.

Someone who assists another 1) who has committed a felony, 2) after the person has committed the felony, 3) with knowledge that the person committed the felony, and 4) with the intent to help the person avoid arrest or punishment. An accessory after the fact may be held liable for, inter alia, obstruction of justice.

If nothing else I would suggest there is a strong case against Sharrouf's wife for being an accessary after the fact, and/or an being an accomplice to his crimes.

I agree that being Sharrouf's wife probably includes little say in family decisions but when you lay down with dogs you wake up with flies. Once those kids were dressed in camouflage army suits, handed AK-47's and allowed to hold with lopped heads, in my view they graduated to mini-terrorists.

We don't need this family back in Australia, so why would anyone even entertain the idea?

"ISIS fighter", huh? Terrorist and callous killer would be more suitable.

How did his wife and family end up over there without the cooperation of his wife?

What does it take to flee to safety with your children when in an international airline terminal in Australia? -Where even the slightest nervous look results in close observation by plainclothes and uniformed security, airlines staff and other official and private employees in an airport. Look for a bit longer at security cameras or watching security and help is by your side instantly.

Australian authorities are now being forced to react to difficult problems that will never go away and will be enormously expensive.

All because federal governments have NOT exercised due care and diligence in screening for and giving preference to, the most suitable migrants.

Instead, federal governments have allowed the diversity idealism tail to wag the larger immigration policy dog. Federal governments are there only on the approval and sufferance of the public and they need to remember that they are the servants, not the other way around.

Australia has been dealt dreadful cards by deeply flawed Liberal and Labor PMs like Malcolm Fraser and Kevin Rudd, whose personal ambitions on the international stage, sheer arrogance and refusal to take advice resulted in decisions that continue to hamper and imperil Australia, from within and from outside.

Suseonline "are we sure that this obviously nasty Isis fighter's wife and kids raped and killed others while overseas"

Nope. There is thought a strong case that she has actively supported him in actions intended to bring great harm to others.

If you read the first link I posted earlier a case exists (not proven in court) that she has lived in a home where slaves were kept and that the children were involved in abusing those slaves. I have no idea how we would get those slaves to testify in an Australian court though. There is also very clear evidence that those children have been involved in horrors that leaves me wondering what treatment/safeguards we could provide that would ensure they did not repeat the harm here at some future date.

As others have pointed out getting onto an international flight presents a range of opportunities to escape if she had previously been held hostage. Admittedly a difficult mental process if your whole adult like has been bound up in extremist religious views.

I do wonder though if it's all a moot point, I get the impression that it's not that easy to leave IS and return to western countries for those who have gone there. Not exactly a culture that's likely to be supportive of her apparent desire to return to Australia.

R0bert

Maybe if Ms Triggs sits on the case the terrorist could get a payout just like the guy that beat up his wife.

I think we can all see the point that Susieonline is making re innocent
until proven guilty.

The but however is that we are at war. ISIS declared that when they
advocated attacks on Australia, Australians, and on oil tankers on the
way to Australia.

I suspect that there is a problem with Australia declaring that a
state of war exists between Australia and the Islamic state when it is
not recognised as other than an organisation.

However, there is a war, so we should apply the laws of war so that
anyone going to fight with ISIS or support anyone fighting there, is
guilty of treason and possibly war crimes.
I wonder if execution is still on the books for treason ?

The above applies to those with Australian citizenship.
If they were born overseas and then obtained citizenship by swearing
the oath on the Koran, then that is invalid as the Koran allows them
to lie to infidels, and so they are not Australians.

As far as the children are concerned they should be handed to the
grandparents, with the mother having supervised access.

Would that arrangement make you happy Susie ?

Ordinarily we have the presumption of innocence. We put the burden on the prosecution to prove its case before the jury is asked to find the accused guilty. However, in the case of joining a known terrorist organisation overseas the prosecution is handicapped in getting evidence of guilt. It is reasonable in such a case to assume guilt. It should in such a case up to the accused to provide evidence of innocence. The Australian judiciary system is not equipped to handle such a case. However, if the children are Australian citizens they should be entitled to come back since they should not be weighted with the crime of their parents. If there is some way of getting the children back they should be allowed to return and be educated in an Australian public school. There should be no government funds supplied to religious schools of any religion. The government should not be in the business of promoting religion either by subsidies to religious schools or chaplains in the public schools.

We shouldn't strip these people of their citizenship because doing so would remove our ability to send them to prison. Justice must be done.

Also, if they come to the belated realisation that fighting for ISIS is wrong, we must avoid putting them in a situation where they feel they have no alternative but to continue fighting anyway.

Suse I know you are a kind hearted lady & are feeling for this woman. She is a White woman that has made a bad choice in life by most Australian standards.

However she made her choice of her own free will to become a moslem & she firmly believes in type of Islam that is not even compatible with moderate moslems in Australia. The risk of contamination of others is too great to allow her & her children to return. She & her children must be stripped of their Australian Citizenship & never allowed to return.

I suspect the real reason she wants to return is to recruit more fighters for ISIS.

I believe keeping anyone who wants to join ISIS must be allowed to leave Australia so they can never pose a risk to Australians of any description. They must NEVER be allowed to return.

No keep her & her kids out, permanently.

//We shouldn't strip these people of their citizenship because doing so would remove our ability to send them to prison. Justice must be done.//

Justice? There are three reasons for imprisoning people:
a) Punishment. I think being stuck in the Middle East is an entirely appropriate punishment for the crime.
b) Rehabilitation. I really don't fancy these guys prospects of rehabilitation.
c) Protecting the wider community. Which easily is achieved by leaving them abroad.

It seems to me that leaving them abroad meets two of the aims of incarceration without costing the taxpayer a king's ransom in pursuit of some vague ideal of 'justice', whatever that may be. This is what we call a 'win-win situation'.

JayB, I don't care what colour or religion the woman in question is, that is not the point.
It has not been proven she is a member of Isis, or her children.
She hasn't been charged with any of the obvious crimes her husband has committed.

We want to be careful of what we wish for. It is a very slippery slope indeed if we start punishing all family members for the crimes of one member.
Where will that all end do you think?

It will start with so-called terrorists and their families, but what about any other crimes committed while overseas? If an Australian guy murders someone in America, will we revoke all the Aussie passports of his wife and children as well?
If not, why not?
Or are you only concerned with Muslim crimes?

I found an interesting article with a different slant on the situation of 'radicalization'.
It is worth a read.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/27/goodbye-citizenship-australia-takes-a-cynical-turn-on-muslim-radicalisation

david f, for the most part I agree with your post except for the bit about putting those kids in a public school. Kids who have been raised by extremists and been involved in brutality beyond what most of us can really comprehend. There is no way in the world I'd want them in a class or playground with any child I cared for, to much opportunity for spreading their families values and beliefs to other children (or retaliating using family values if other kids told them what they thought of their prophet).

There is a great likely hood given the views they have been exposed to all their lives that they would pose a serious ongoing risk to others.

R0bert

SOL: It has not been proven she is a member of Isis, or her children.
She hasn't been charged with any of the obvious crimes her husband has committed.

One of the things you don't understand Suze is that moslem women do support their & encourage their husbands in every way. This woman does going by her photo's on Facebook, in training with other women & her sister wives. Sister wives is probably what she is pi$$ed about. moslem women are quite active in their husbands activities, carrying ammunition, etc. The husbands keep their wives close, even in combat areas, because they don't trust their mates not to rape them while they are away.

You really go out of your way to be sympathetic to moslems of any description. These people & their abhorrent Religion are a danger to every Western person in the World.

No, She freely chose her personal hell, let her rot in her hell.

Suse - it is very clear from your last post that rather than accept any point anyone has said in response to your comments, you are not going to give an inch.

Quite frankly you are simply wrong about this issue and you are totally out of sync with 87% (+6% undecided) of the Australian population.

Your example of the terrorist laws being extended to include other crimes committed by Aussies and their families who are overseas is ridiculous and surely you are smart enough to know that would never happen.

Adamantly defending this woman's right to return to Australia is just a stubborn minded failure to accept the serious risk this woman and her children pose, as well as the precedent letting her return would present.

Is it agreed that there is a de facto war going on in the Middle East ? Australia supports one side with advisers and aircraft, in order to protect the people and legitimate government of Iraq, while some people and their families travel, of their own free will, to support, aid and abet, the other side which clearly - as those 'travellers' would know - is using the most brutal methods in prosecuting their war.

Call it what you like, but isn't that a sort of de facto treason ? Until recently, the death penalty was applied for only two crimes, murder and treason- that's how seriously treason was viewed. To aid and abet such vile enemies (really, of the people of the world, not just of the Middle East and Australia) is to put oneself knowingly and willingly on the side of those enemies.

Silly question: does ISIS issue passports ? If so, does one, in law, effectively surrender one's 'other' passport in order to take up ISIS' ?

Presumably this woman wishes to remain a Muslim, and to raise her poor kids the same way. As someone above pointed out, then why can't she take her family to a Muslim country, another country of the religion of peace, say Saudi Arabia or Turkey ? For her, it would be win/win, (for her kids, it would be another story) which is more than she deserves.

Joe

The woman and her children have my understanding and my sympathy but no support what-so-ever.
To allow them to return to Australia is to run an unacceptable risk.

There was a case (and not isolated) where DCS returned a young girl to her Indgeneous community only to be pack raped again. DCS feklt she was better suited in a barabic community rather than a loving 'whitefellas' home. If these children are allowed back to Australia they should be kept from any muslims that have the same ideology as their parents.

When one becomes an
Australian citizen one pledges loyalty first: loyalty to
Australia.

One also pledges to respect the rule of law.
There's a lot of sense in this pledge. Unless we have a
consensus of support about how we will form our
legislatures and an agreement to abide by its laws, none of
us will be able to enjoy our rights and liberties
without being threatened by others.

Our Attorney-General and our Prime Minister have made it
quite clear that this woman will face the full force of
the law and so will any foreign fighters if they return
to Australia. It will be the courts who will decide the
their guilt or innocence. And that is the way it should
be under our democratic system.

Foxy: It will be the courts who will decide the their guilt or innocence. And that is the way it should be under our democratic system.

You are right Foxy. Can I be on the Jury, ppplease, can I, can I, huh, huh, ppppleeease! :-)

Sar'major! March the guilty ba$tard in!

"Prisoner & Escort! Attention! Quick march, Left, right, left, right, Right wheel, Halt! Left turn! Your Prisoner Judge! ;-)

Dear Jayb,

Is that the best you can do.

Dear Jayb,

Sound off, one, two
Sound off, three, four
Had a job for twenty-five bob
Socked the Sargeant in the gob
And I left, I left, I left, right, left!

Keep marching! ;-)

Foxy: Is that the best you can do?

Nah! but that's all your Post was worth, really. :-)

Hi there SUSEONLINE...

I fully understand your compassion for this lady and her children, who depending on their ages, are clearly innocent of any crime. The trouble is, to use that old aphorism '...you lay down with dogs, you get up with fleas...' whether she actively aided and abetted her terrorist husband in any criminal act, there's always the risk she's fully and utterly under the influence and domination of her old man, who's proven irrefutably, to be a capricious individual harbouring a very murderous and barbarous disposition ?

If it were up to me, and this woman and her kids were allowed to return to Oz, I'd immediately isolate them from her, 'in perpetuity', and allow them to be adopted, in order they may have some reasonable chance in life, far away from the psychiatric instability of their murderous parents !

Dear Jayb,

Fair enough.

That makes us even.

ICUR
ICUB
ICUR
2 X TREE Mmmmmmm
4 me!

As a side comment, it is interesting how the positive prejudice towards women mates with patronising attitudes to immediately deny any possibility that a 'wonderful woman' could ever do wrong unless somehow forced.

The strength of Islam and of the Roman Catholic Church too (add Judaim?), which has a lot in common with Islam, is the women adherents. The hand that rocks the cradle and makes the rest of the family respect and pay religious observances, rules the world, or at least is the solid teaching base in the home, that props up Islam.

Maybe the first concern of women is stability and a noxious creed that gives them that base and predictability is better than none. Perhaps freedom can be threatening to that predictability.

In any event, women have choice in Australia and they must be held responsible for those choices. It is patronising and wrong to pretend that this woman was not making choices by her won free will, just as she chose her husband and Islam. White Knights are not needed.

Should be 'Judaism' and later, 'her own free will'.

Dearest Foxy,

As you say,

"Our Attorney-General and our Prime Minister have made it
quite clear that this woman will face the full force of
the law and so will any foreign fighters if they return
to Australia. It will be the courts who will decide the
their guilt or innocence. And that is the way it should
be under our democratic system."

Yes, that may be how it all pans out eventually. But a period of weighing up the legal options for and against letting such people back in to Australia, perhaps six months' assessment of their cases, one by one, may be required.

As to the suggestion that they can be used to deradicalise other dumb-@rse youth, I suggest that they be kept away from dumb-@rse youth as far and as long as possible.

Of course, this stupid woman's kids should be immediately be removed from her influence - that goes without saying. The poor little buggers should immediately be adopted out, perhaps to a loving and devout Atheist, Christian or Jewish family.

So when are the authorities going to open up a solitary confinement prison somewhere north of Oodnadatta, until the ear is well and truly over ?

Sorry if that seems a little negative, Foxy.

Love,

Joe

The children should be placed with their grandparents.
They should go to a public school. The other kids might give them a
hard time for a while, but with a properly instructed teacher who
could watch for problems and who could explain to the pupils it should
enable them to recover from any of their mental problems.

The problem we have is that this is a new form of warfare, or at least
it is on a wider scale. The old UN rules of warfare no longer work and
need to be urgently rewritten.
As far as letting the wife back surely it would be a greater punishment
if she were forced to stay there rather than reside in one of our holiday camps.
Someone asked if ISIS issues passports, yes I saw a reference to that
but no country recognises them.

They went to fight for ISIS. Some people equate that to treason. I don't know if I agree with that but I do agree that people who want to fight for those murderous cnuts are not the sort of people we want should welcome back into Australia.

The war is still ongoing and now some of these murderous cnuts want to turn and run back to Australia with their tail between their legs. That is definitely a betrayal of the ISIS cause.

In Dante's Inferno, the lowest level of hell is reserved for traitors. What should we do with those twice guilty of treason? Opening up a tenth circle of a fictional afterlife presents certain practical difficulties.

Even if they're just garden variety traitors they're not the sort of people we want over here; if they're doubly treasonous than they deserve worse than freezing in Cocytus.

Bazz you are too kind hearted. Sharrouf's children are damaged psychologically in ways we cannot imagine. No family should be subjected to risking their children being in the presence of these kids. There is no telling how messed up these potentially brainwashed children might be, now or in the future. If they love their father they may literally turn out to be time bombs he sent back to Australia. Same goes for Sharrouf's wife; how do we know she is not planning to blow herself up spectacularly?

Toni,I agree with your comments in principal but I fear they are not returning to Australia with their tail between their legs; I think there is every possibility they are returning to do serious damage.

We can never trust these ex-ISIS fighters/supporters to live among us; they have got to be kept out of Australia permanently.

Suse reads and recommends The Guardian. Now, there's a surprise.

One way I'd let them back. Heads on a plate. Looks like that just might happen. Saves us the trouble of a debate, ay.

Notably those two nongs - The inimitable Abbott and his side-kick Dutton were rolled by the rest of cabinet on their nutty idea to give power to the Minister to strip sole Oz citizens of their citizenship.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/tony-abbott-rolled-by-his-own-ministers-over-stripping-terrorists-of-citizenship-20150529-ghcuxf.html

"Turnbull objected: "A person's citizenship is of enormous importance, intrinsic to themselves. Take me. The only people who've lived in Australia longer than my family are Aboriginal. I have no other identity. Are we seriously saying some minister could take my citizenship?"

Only if you're a terrorist, was the rejoinder. "Only if you are someone the minister thinks is a terrorist," Turnbull corrected.

This was Barnaby Joyce's central objection too – the lack of hard proof, the lack of a trial, the absence of a jury, the lack of real rigour in a decision to take away a basic human right. "Isn't that what we have courts for?" Joyce posed. The deputy leader of the National Party went to the heart of the matter: "If you don't have enough evidence to charge them in a court, how can you have enough evidence to take away their citizenship?"

According to participants, Dutton replied: "That's the point, Barnaby. You don't need too much evidence. It's an administrative decision."

This was too much for George Brandis: "I am the Attorney-General. It is my job to stand for the rule of law."

Christopher Pyne was forceful on this point too: "This is a matter for the judiciary to decide, not the minister."

The Education Minister was insistent on another point, too: "A sole Australian citizen, terrorist or not, is our responsibility. We can't wash our hands of the fact. We can't pretend they're not Australian when they are."

Etc....

Hi Poirot,

Yes, put people on trial who are suspected of aiding terrorists, no probs.

But let's imagine for a moment, hypothetically: a bloke in Barcaldine or Bendigo or Burracoppin, kills another bloke and hacks his head off for no particular reason; his son holds the head up for photos; his mother does nothing.

I would respectfully suggest that the police may regard these actions as offences, at least the killing, and perhaps the hacking of the head off. Social services may launch multiple and interminable investigations to determine whether or not some sort of disturbance has occurred which may or may not impact on the children's well-being and of course decide that it hasn't.

Perhaps, as you might lightly suggest, nothing would come of it, perhaps a $ 50 fine.

So perhaps a woman who goes to a war-zone should have completely free travel rights to go and come as she pleases. Perhaps she should be able to expose her children to the rough and tumble of real life in other countries, it might strengthen their character, after all. Australian kids need that. Perhaps you're right to slag Abbott and his ministers, what do they know, after all ?

I'm puzzled why pseudo-leftists feel the need to defend the most vile reactionaries. I've been thinking that it may because of a similar underlying craving for authoritarian control, certainty, direction, submission. Could that be it, Poirot ?

Joe

I was reading my fave paper again today, The Guardian, and as usual it tells it as it is, and not the world according to paranoid anti-Muslim worry-worts!

One paragraph particularly amused me:
"Not to mention the apparent contradiction of cancelling the citizenship of those already fighting overseas so they don’t come back at the same time as Australians are being urged to call the national security hotline with information about anyone planning to travel to the conflict zones so they can be prevented from leaving."

Isn't that the truth?

My feeling is that Abbott, and his other Islamophobe good Ol' boys, are using this supposed threat to Australia as a smokescreen to keep the heat off the real issues, like taking money off the poorest people in our society (pensioners and the disabled).

"I'm puzzled why pseudo-leftists feel the need to defend the most vile reactionaries...."

Nice straw man, Loudy....I wasn't defending anyone - merely pointing out the latest brain fart from our stoooopid PM.

We have a judicial system and courts of law...

At least, for the time being.

Suseonline,
I wish you could tell the truth sometimes.
My wife and I are pensioners and we received a rise in our pensions just last week. Where is your evidence for your claim?

Gee Josephus, have you been living under a rock or something?

Check out the Abbott's budget plans for poor part-pensioners that are yet to come.
All the pensioners I know are worried about the coming pension cuts and loss of benefits they currently enjoy.

You really should keep abreast of the political news.

Meanwhile, Abbott is in trouble with his own senior ministers with his scheme to 'strip' Australian citizenship from people overseas, without trial.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/tony-abbott-rolled-by-his-own-ministers-over-stripping-terrorists-of-citizenship-20150529-ghcuxf.html

He never even informed his foreign minister of the supposed details of his plans before having his press team 'leak' the vague info to the next morning's paper!
Trouble in paradise?

Susie said;
are using this supposed threat to Australia as a
smokescreen to keep the heat off the real issues,

Supposed threat ? Are you kidding. One of their most recent threats
is to interrupt the supply of fuel to Australia.
It would not take much effort to put that into action.
A small number of RPGs would do the job.
The upshot would be at worse starvation for all Australians.
If you think that is an exaggeration then you do not understand the true situation.

Am I missing something? Are Poirot and Suseonline saying they would support stripping citizenship from proven Australian terrorists / ISIS fighters, as long as it is a decision made by the Court after a fair trial?

That's fine by me also.

Now, can we also agree to lock up they worst offending ex-pat ISIS members (based on their own first hand Facebook photos and bragging) from the time they return until the end of the Court precedings.

Surely we can't allow them to return and be immediately free to do whatever possible sinister acts that they feel are fully justified in this nation of infidels.

Bazz, I haven't seen much about this ISIS 'threat' actually causing issues in Australia. I imagine our law enforcers are keeping all those Muslim fundamentalists at bay then?

I see much more about bikie gang crimes and murders actually.
Shall we deport all those guys to their ancestral countries too, just to be sure?

Conservative Hippie I doubt anyone would not want to punish a known terrorist for their crimes.

SOL: We have a judicial system and courts of law... At least, for the time being.

Well, at least until it’s replaced by Sahria., anyway

SOL: Check out the Abbott's budget plans for poor part-pensioners that are yet to come. All the pensioners I know are worried about the coming pension cuts and loss of benefits they currently enjoy.

They are all self-funded retirees with heaps going on Ocean Cruises twice a year & crusing around the neighbourhood in their BMW’s. That the whole idea of being self funded. The Government should only have to provide for those who are on the lowest Pension.

SOL: Meanwhile, Abbott is in trouble with his own senior ministers with his scheme to 'strip' Australian citizenship from people overseas, without trial.

A better plan would be to inform ISIS that these people want to leave Syria then the Government wouldn’t have to worry about stripping them of their Citizenship. Or, we could let the Guilty Ba$tards home, convict them & send them back.

JayB "They are all self-funded retirees with heaps going on Ocean Cruises twice a year & crusing around the neighbourhood in their BMW’s. That the whole idea of being self funded. The Government should only have to provide for those who are on the lowest Pension. "

Rubbish!
There are many pensioners on a part pension who have a tiny bit of super payments each fortnight who have had their aged pension reduced accordingly.
These people who worked hard all their lives to put away some super for their retirement will be the new poor, when many of their medical bills and other expenses will need to be paid in full, rather than the current system.

Certainly there will be no incentive to save for retirement anymore, as all average wage earners will be sure to spend everything before they retire, in order to collect the full age pension.
Won't that do wonders for the budget?

As for the dreaded ISIS fighters and terrorists from Australia, I believe there are about 100 of these persons overseas at present. Yes indeed, a terrible threat.
I would be more concerned with crime gangs activities here in Australia, of which the vast majority are not Muslim.

G'day POIROT...

Your comments are 'spot on' ! If we allow 'a minister' to arbitrarily strip an Australian citizen of their nationality well we're no better then these murderous ISAL fools.

Don't misunderstand me, it was I who originally advocated contemporaneous execution of any and all ISAL/ISIS individuals who were subsequently apprehended, having immediately engaged in a terrorist act on our soil. But in the cold light of day, a 'suspect' having voluntarily returned home to Oz, MUST be placed before a properly constituted court of law in order he may be thoroughly examined as to his whereabouts, together with his actions whilst abroad.

To do otherwise, utterly subverts and comprises our entire democratic model. A model that enshrines our legal process , moreover our system of criminal jurisprudence. The notion that a single individual, 'A Minister' actual possess a power to 'strip the nationality' from a person born here, is an abomination in itself.

Well congratulations Suse, I see a small concession has been given: "As for the dreaded ISIS fighters and terrorists from Australia, I believe there are about 100 of these persons overseas at present. Yes indeed, a terrible threat."

But this in nonsense - "I would be more concerned with crime gangs activities here in Australia, of which the vast majority are not Muslim." You'll say anything rather than ever admit there is a Muslim problem, and I don't mean a problem caused by every Muslim.

To date no bikie gang has threatened jihad or to start cutting people's heads off.

The reality is we have far more to fear from some idiot lone wolf who fashions himself an IS operative than we do from the bikie gangs who tend to limit their violence to other gangs. One lone wolf can do a whole lot of damage in the name of Allah and a car bomb.

Conservative Hippie "One lone wolf can do a whole lot of damage in the name of Allah and a car bomb."

And yet, they haven't in Australia yet, have they?

On the other hand we have had murders like those committed by Martin Bryant and Ivan Milat, not to mention the "bodies in a barrel" murders, committed by non-Muslims, just to name a few.

With only 2% population of Muslims in Australia, I would suggest we have more to worry about from crime gangs, and random gun-toting murderers than we do with 'jihadi's'.
All this scare campaign is aimed at gullible people like yourself, and now even Abbott's own senior party members are starting to see that.

How can you possibly be so confident Suse, that there won't be a deadly terrorist attack by a lone wolf radicalised Muslim on our shores? Internal security agencies all around the world are acting to defend their countries, and you just write off the possibility because "not all Muslims are bad."

1% of the 450,000 Muslims in Aus are extremist or fundamentalist we have 4,500 potential baddies. If 100+ have already shown their colours and joined ISIS overseas do you really think there aren't any staying back, to fight the war here? You are too smart and too old to be that naive.

Of course you also deny Monis was a terrorist; but what about the two guys that were caught planning an attack recently. Or the teenager who was planning to behead a policeman?

I am not gullible, I am awake; and you are choosing denial over reality. If, and hope I'm wrong, a serious terrorist attack happens in Australia, what are you going to say Suse... that even though the terrorists last words were Allah Akbar, he wasn't really a Muslim?

Finally, why didn't you confirm one way or the other whether returning Australian ISIS fighters should be locked up until a trial decides their fate. My bet, going on your track record is you'd prefer they are free on bail and back on welfare, with a tax payer funded attorney to boot.

Conservative Hippie, I think I have already said somewhere that of course returning criminals, who have been proven to have committed crimes, should be jailed in Australia on their return.

I doubt anyone would deny that shoulld happen, whether the criminal was a Muslim fundamentalist, or a Christian abortion clinic murderer, or whoever.

My point is, why this hysteria re what could happen, when we have plenty of nasty criminal activities that are already happening?
I think too much is made of the race or religion of one small group in society, which says more about the paranoid accusers than the minority group in question.

I dont believe that choosing to return, with family or not, to their birth Country to join isis in their fight against humanity, should be condoned in any way shape or form. We all know what this terror group represents and how insanely murderous they are. Refusal of re-entery to Australia and revoking of Citizenship period. This group and other splinter groups feel and behave above the law, disrespect their own countries leaders and have thousands living in fear of their lives. I for one would not anyone who believes in and supports these extreme terrorists groups to enter our Country at all. To face charges, imprisonment, deportation whichever. They made their choices and the Australian people should not have to wear the costs and responsibility. Remember these are the people who readily kill missionaries and the like when they are there solely to try and save innocent lives. Our prisons are full of offenders of all sorts, probably a small portion of brutal murderers and many having committed crimes that are not even considered crimes to the likes of isis.
They are not innocent victims so they dont need saving, and are certainly not a positive to the Australian economy or civilized society. So yes SAY What?!

Just to add, this subject is not to do with racism or religionism? Or all bikies are crims or all priests are pedophiles. More comparable to the extremisms of the Klu Klux Clan or Hitlers brain washed Neo nazis, all of which have no place in modern society.

conservativehippie good comments.
I keep reading more on this subject and OLO comments. If we allow isis fighters back into Australia and send them to court how does this work? At who's expense, they are not going to swear on the bible, certainly not acknowledge the judge if its a female, and in the end admit to nothing because they dont respect infidels and their laws, they certainly do not fear them. Finally whatever inhumane acts they were a part of, they believe is their right and they are serving their God allah with %100 dedication.
Innocent til proven guilty seems inapplicable in this case. The guilty verdict was immediate once they joined isis. I dont believe there would be many 'innocents' in a group like this other than young ones in training.
As they are going to their country of origin to kill their own country men, women and children, they should be dealt with by their own laws and government. The govt and military need to strengthen up, step up and take control. Stop enabling these terrorist groups. Start prosecuting and eliminating. Their punishments i would imagine are very tough as is their environment, but Im guessing their prisons would not hold many rapists or child molesters, top dogs and terrorist criminals, more likely poor petty criminals who have nothing and no power whatsoever.
We are from different worlds, accepted behaviours in their society (crimes against females for eg.)are reprehensible to us and we are spending millions $$ in raising awareness, assistance in the hope of wiping it out. Any member of isis is part of a major criminal gang with the mentality and intentions that are not acceptable by the other 99% of humanity. Therefore they must be be dealt with in their own country, by their own leaders. All power status and weapons removed and convicted as the criminals that they are.
Some people dont really seem to have grasped who isis are and what they really do to suggest any innocence. Please keep them out.

Sorry suseonline. I dont think you are really on the right track. I dont believe there was mention of race or religion. Just members of a murderous criminal following. Not being nasty just pointing something out.

Suseonline, "I doubt anyone would deny that shoulld happen, whether the criminal was a Muslim fundamentalist, or a Christian abortion clinic murderer, or whoever". Why do you mention Christian abortion clinic murders.
How many Christian abortion clinic murderers are before Australian courts or imprisoned in Australia? You have mentioned them! Contrast how many murders have been performed on the unborn? You casually accept this, and as a result we have an ageing population without the Youth to support them.
Interfere with natural events and we have problems down the line.

jodelie,

Firstly, let me say that I believe ISIS is as depraved as it appears to get when humans lose the plot.

However, I'm interested in your opinion that:

"Innocent til proven guilty seems inapplicable in this case..."

"Innocent till proven guilty" is at the bedrock of our system of law...toss it out for one cause, and you may as well toss it out for the rest.

I don't suppose it's occurred to you that someone could accuse you of something - and, before proceedings get underway, the presiding judge could rest his hands behind his head in lackadaisical fashion, and utter the words from your brave new world:

"Innocent til proven guilty seems inapplicable in this case."

Presumably you wouldn't be so much in favour of waving the rule of law if it was you in the dock?

Notwithstanding that giving a minister sole discretion to wipe out a person's citizenship - merely on a whim or a suspicion is nutso - as you point out - "in a modern society".

Or as Dutton put it so eloquently:

"You don't need too much evidence. It's an administrative decision.

Hi Poirot,

I can appreciate your wanting to give everybody equal opportunity to demonstrate that they haven't associated with killers and rapists, and I agree with that. But if one does willing join, and associate with killers and rapists, one does risk a charge of complicity, and as the months go by, that charge does appear to firm up. I don't know how long one must associate with killers and rapists before complicity becomes an issue, but I would have thought it would have been fairly short, say a few days.

As for the other issue of cancelling someone's passport, once that first charge is proven, then that may be a reasonable option, once the sentence for the earlier offence has been served.

But it's a bit moot, since - presumably - people returning from their association with killers and rapists may have to serve quite lengthy sentences, during which the legalities of eventually cancelling their passports can be explored in a leisurely way. No rush.

On the other hand, citizen or not, passport or not, it would still be within the powers of a government to refuse entry back into Australia to people who have allegedly associated with killers and rapists. Perhaps such people could be tried in a special Australian court set up in, say, Iraq, and once the charge is proven, handed over to the Iraqi authorities, just in case they have broken some Iraqi law by associating with killers and rapists of Iraqis. Iraq is quite sunny at this time of year.

Joe

Hi there SUSEONLINE...

You're quite correct when you assert, we all should worry about other serious crimes being committed in this country, other than that exclusively of Islamic origin ? Nevertheless, there is a very clear, very real threat, of many (less erudite) Islamic fundamentalists wishing to completely extirpate our way of life by creating a climate of fear and suspicion throughout our community.

Many from this precise demographic are younger, less educated and lack any real purpose in their lives. Therefore the thought of engaging in an armed rebellion or Islamic jihad, appeals to their sense of purpose and fills the emptiness that hitherto occupied much of their existance ? It's from this particular group that emanates the more 'Lone Wolf' style of Jihad ? Of course there're exceptions, where well educated, even 'gifted' students have wished to pursue a similar path of personal destruction, by viewing themselves as romantic fantasists, all the while possessing thoughts of glorious Islamic fundamentalism ?

From my understanding it's more of this random or arbitrary, 'Lone Wolf' threat that's worrying our security agencies at this time, rather than a concerted terrorist act, properly staged and strategically planned. The biggest problem facing more legitimate, potential terrorists, is the scarce availability of necessary asserts or hardware, rather than any absence of will. If that changes, and it will change, then we'll all be in much more trouble, regrettably.

Maybe there is a better way of stopping them from returning.

UNCHR Conventions & Protocols.

Article 1

C. 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;

F. The provisions of this Convention shall not apply to any person with respect to whom there are serious reasons for considering that:
(a) he has committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity, as defined in the international instruments drawn up to make provision in respect of such crimes;
(b) he has committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
(c) he has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and Principles of the United Nations

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
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.

Now I believe that the Woman has Aided & Abetted, Provided Moral & Material Comfort & is an Accessory before & after the Fact. He husband is a proven Terrorist.

Oh come on,

Treason is treason. Our soldiers, are our Australian sons and fathers.

These returning Jihadists would willing kill them when they join Isis.

Also referring to the families of the returning Jihadi fighters, these fighters would

Not spare our families when they let a bomb off at the local shopping centre.

When will people understand we are at war.

Hi there CHERFUL...

I've not seen your epithet on The Forum before, therefore welcome !

Your short commentary is absolutely correct, we are at war and our leaders should recognise that fact, sooner rather than later ! Though I must say, it would seem inter alia, both Bill SHORTIN and Tony ABBOTT have taken a bi-partisan perspective on this whole ISIL matter, and 'appear' to be on the same page, lets hope so at least ?

Definately !
If the government recognised ISAS then anyone fighting for them or
supporting them would acquire ISIS nationality and could be shot as
they got off the plane, metaforically anyway, as they would be an
enemy alien.

What would have happened if japanese soldiers got off a plane during the war ?

Dear Bazz,

Perhaps we could bring back internment camps as we
did in the past:

http://naa.gov.au/collection/snapshots/internment-camps/index.aspx

Ahhh yes Foxy, that would be the just the job.
Trouble is we would have to support them.
Naa, repatriate them as soon as possible.

Of course if they have no pay book or a serial number then they are
spies and under the laws of war we can execute them.
Now if the government would only declare war, for indeed we are at war
and it was not us that changed the rules, so almost anything we could do would be legal.

Then after all that the politicians could get down to real work !

Dear Foxy,

No, simply arrest anybody coming back from Syria or Iraq if they are suspected of having worked for ISIS, try them properly to see if they are guilty of murder or rape or enslavement or any of the other vile crimes they may have committed, and jail them appropriately.

Dual citizens are a special problem: if they manage to return to Australia, then see above. If they apply to come back, their case can be investigated before they are allowed back, and if they have committed any crimes while working for ISIS, then their Australian citizenship can be cancelled, and that's the end of it.

After all, this may apply only to a few hundred criminals.

Love,

Joe

Hi, O Sung Wu,

Thank you for your kind greeting.
Pleased to meet you also on the wonderful online opinion.

Hi there CHERFUL...

You are very welcome my friend. Indeed, I hope you have a very long and beneficial association, with both OLO and the Forum. They're all a great bunch of people !

Bye for now.