//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