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.