According to 'The Age' of October 2, Australia is preparing to overturn its policy of more than three years and launch a mission to "repatriate dozens of women and children, the family members of former Islamic State fighters who have been languishing for years in squalid detention camps in Syria".

Out goes the Coalition, in come the terrorists?

And let's not have this "women and children not terrorists" malarkey. The women supported the Islamist fighters, and the children have been brought up in a horrible atmosphere of hatred and violence that has no place in Australia.

A spokesman for Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil said that the Australian government’s overriding priority is the protection of Australians and Australia. Bulldust!

Waffle about whether or not there will be enough evidence to prosecute these terrorists' families would be and should be irrelevant if they stay where they are. They wanted to go there, knowing full well what the terrorists they joined were up to.

Presumably they are all Muslims, what’s wrong with a Muslim State giving them sanctuary and a new start in life.

Is Mise,
You'll never get a satisfactory answer from them but a lot of flak from our do-gooders !

The Labor government is misrepresenting these terror brides as 'victims', tricked into it!

It was very hard for them to get from Australia to the ME, but they did it. The media at the time was saturated with information about Islamic State atrocities, but they ignored that.

The Albanese government is dishonest and dangerous; certainly not to be trusted on this matter.

ASIO has given the green light after a visit to the
al-Roj detention camp.

Final risk assessments were also carried out on the
women and children and on their families back in
Australia.

It has been stressed that the Australian government's
priority is the protection of Australians and Australia's
national interest. That they are acting on the information
provided by our National Security organisation's advice.

Every pre-caution is being taken and not all women will
be repatriated.

For more than 3 years these children have been trapped in one
of the worst places in the world to be as a child. They've
been poorly nourished, have shrapnel wounds, have mental
health issues - and are barely hanging on.

Germany has repatriated 91, France 86, the US 26.
I believe Australia is considering roughly 20.

I guess its a moral choice that a predominantly Christian
country must make. A difficult choice - no doubt. However,
we have a government that is takine the advice and precautions
available to it. And for that we should be grateful.

Come on Foxy. We have a government that only got 35% of the vote & want to shore up the Muslim vote. Albo & co moral, you've got to be kidding.

OK Hassie, what in your opinion has the current government
done wrong thus far? Been too consultative for you? Tried
to keep the promises it made? Listened to advice? Invited
people of opposing views to the table? And the list goes on.

Times are changing and the football club mentality in
politics is being replaced. Perhaps you object to an
anti-corruption commission being put in place?

I go along with Foxy on this, someone has to do something otherwise
those kids will have no other natural path but terrorism.

On the other hand; "What could possibly go wrong ?"

Bazz

As long as they are kept in the ME, who cares what they become. They are not our concern, as long as they are not brought here.

Hi Bazz,

I guess it's easier to say "eave them where they are!"
However ASIO has given the government the green light.
Why do you think that is? ASIO is also doing risk
assessment not only the kids but their families back
in Australia which is an excellent idea.

These people are Australian citizens. If left where they
are their radicalization is probably a given. However,
perhaps ASIO has in mind to change and influence the kids,
at least give them a chance, here in Australia - taking
all the precautions necessary of course.

Leaving them there and thinking this won't affect Australians
is wrong. We end up paying the price for fundamentalism and
extremism. Think back to the BALI bombings and those suicide
bombers. Perhaps ASIO knows what its doing after all?

The very significant cost of this bleeding heart operation also has to be considered. Welfare payments; control orders to be policed; deradicalisation, which has not been very successful in the past.

Karen Andrews, the Coalition minister responsible when this nonsense was mooted in the previous government's time, is alarmed by the current threat by the Labor government to drag it all up again. She knows a lot more about it, and knows why her government refused to repatriate these people than the current government does; but her attempts to discuss the matter with them have been ignored.

We are now learning that the 32% Anthony Albanese is our most cringeworthy, intellectually inept PM ever. He certainly meant it when he said that he intended to change Australia, and it will not for the better.

Well at least our current Prime Minister does not
have a secret portfolio of jobs that he's appointed
himself to - like Scott Morrison did.
Albanese did not say - "I'm the PM of Australia and
I want all those other jobs as well."

Talking about Karen Andrews ? Did Scott Morrison ever
apologise to Karen Andrews for appointing himself to her
portfolio when she was Home Affairs Minister?"

What is the best way for Australia to produce terrorists?

1. Leave children to grow up (stateless?) in appalling conditions in the Middle East, knowing that they have been abandoned by Australia through no fault of their own but are being punished for their parents' sins. Will they grow up to love or hate Australia?

2. Rescue them and bring them to Australia, to the care of loving grandparents and extended family, and help them with medical and mental health support, education and career opportunities. Will they grow up to love or hate Australia?

What would Jesus do? Even for samaritans and muslims?

The lady in the silky slip in this thread is the best and most edifying presentation on it.

Cossomby,

You post reads as though both 1 a 2 are the best way to produce a terrorist, but I get what you are trying to say.

I should have made it clear that I am not interested in these women and children; I am interested in the safety of Australia and Australians. The best way to ensure that they don't become terrorists in Australia is to leave them where they are. They can be terrorists there, or farm camels. I don’t care. I don’t want them in Australia.

What would Jesus do? I don’t know. I know only what I would do and what I think the Australian government should do.

Dear Foxy,

You wrote:

"I guess its a moral choice that a predominantly Christian
country must make. A difficult choice - no doubt. However,
we have a government that is taking the advice and precautions
available to it. And for that we should be grateful."

Well said.

Hi Foxy,

Keep up the good fight, never let the bigots grind you down.

Paul in NZ.

Foxy
It helps to remember than most right-wing extremists are bitter, lonely and hateful people who resist change and are attracted to policies that are both unfair and cruel.

Apart from their place of birth and social opportunity, when it comes to intolerance there's not a lot of difference between those they condemn and themselves and ninety years ago they would have happily put self-condemned women and children onto trains and sent them off to camps.

Maybe as a compromise they'd be happy to bring them back and keep them on Manus Island for the rest of their lives.

Dear rache,

You wrote: "It helps to remember than most right-wing extremists are bitter, lonely and hateful people who resist change and are attracted to policies that are both unfair and cruel."

How many right-wing extremists do you know? How do you know your statement is accurate?

I oppose the policies of right-wing extremists and find those policies hateful, but I don't know that they themselves are bitter, lonely and hateful. Right-wing extremists may group with other right-wing extremists and not be lonely at all. I assume that they would not resist change if the changes were to their liking.

It is common to assume that those we disagree with are lacking in humanity, but they may not be. They just may be a product of a different milieu

As per usual, rache denigrates anybody whose opinions he is intolerant of by calling them names and describing them as bad or maladjusted.

What are 'right wing extremists'. They seem to be just ordinary people expressing views and beliefs that were mainstream before the world went mad.

Thanks for your post, davidf.

What are 'right wing extremists'.
The Academic Left, that's who !

ttbn,

So glad to read that you agree with David F., in this
matter. How about broadening it to include anyone
on this forum - who's views disagree with yours
and cutting out all the derogatory comments and
attacks. Whether it be about individuals or political
parties? That would be a nice change.

It seems that we might not be able to trust ASIO with our security either.

Simon Jeans, an immigration lawyer and one time member of the refugee tribunal casts doubt over ASIO which, he says, has a "very narrow vision" of what is a threat to our national security.

For ASIO, people have to be members of a terror organisation or directly in involved in a terror plot before they will even consider making an adverse security assessment. People who 'merely' hate us and our culture are not considered to be a threat.

Jeans says that ASIO "lets in people who are a threat to our national security" with the idea of turning them; even paying them; putting them under surveillance to see who they mix with.

Now, ASIO has too many people under surveillance, being followed, and they can't keep track of them all, which is why terrorists supposedly under surveillance have committed atrocities.

Thank You Steele, Paul, Rache, and Davif F.,

And as for ttbn?

Try just once looking on the "Bright
Side of Life!" (smile).

Indyvidual,

Yes, we know - it's always those academics!
The Forum should probably look into giving you
some sort of an Award of Diploma. That may help
ease your bitterness.

Presumably they are all Muslims, what’s wrong with a Muslim State giving them sanctuary and a new start in life.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 3 October 2022 5:42:45 PM

Foxy,
Have you already forgotten about the above post ?

Indyvidual,

You're the one on a roll against academics as
usual. I'm just trying to help. Perhaps if you
had some sort of an award yourself - you may
not be so anti. And in this case on the forum -
it could be for being the Winner of The Year's
ANTIACADEMIST AWARD! You could even frame it.

Perhaps if you had some sort of an award yourself - you may
not be so anti.
Foxy,
They don't award common sense, they prosecute it ! By "they" I mean of course the learned experts !

I'm not really sure we have any right to complain.
(But since when did that stop anyone)

For one, we made these people Australians.
- We gave them the thumbs up already.

Should we be mad about the Muslims, or mad about the pollies?

For two, look what we do in their countries.
How many people died in Iran over the last week or so?
And why?
- Because the US was mad they sent drones to Russia?
They want to overthrow the country anyway, probably want to steal all their oil wealth and keep the people poor like they do in Syria?

They sent a message, this is what America does.
Are we going to tally these deaths on the US scoreboard?

There will NEVER BE A PEACEFUL WORLD as long as the US is dictated by its own policies of permanent wars and war profits.
Both sides of politics in the US support it, and all western countries have to support the US.
We even have the AUKUS defensive pact, should the US or Britain start a real war, our kids have to go and die for it.

This world will never change for the better if the way the US engages with other countries doesn't change first.

The West uses money as a weapon.
the West uses trade as a weapon,
the west uses democracy as a weapon
The west willfully stirs up conflict and likes to overthrow governments and install rulers who support western interests, regardless of the impact on citizens.

The west doesn't even care about human rights anyway.
Does it care about the tens of thousands of conscripted Ukrainians.
It's happy for them to die to keep its agendas on track.

Hi AC,

Then what are you doing in the West?
Perhaps you should be living elsewhere?

Hi Foxy,

AC is right, he's only telling it like it is, re USA. Where I disagree is America is a one party state, it has no "two sides of politics", rather one side with two heads.

Thanks AC, a bloke who can really see through Uncle Sam and all his BS.. The last US President to step out of line was the bloke before George W in 1776.

AC

Perhaps you have had a bad day, but I can't believe that you are serious.

Hi Paul1405,
"Where I disagree is America is a one party state, it has no 'two sides of politics', rather one side with two heads."

- Can't really disagree there.

Hi Foxy,
"Then what are you doing in the West?
Perhaps you should be living elsewhere?"

Running away from your home country to join another's because you don't like how things are at home is a bit of a cowards game in my opinion, though I'm sure there are plenty of genuine situations where doing so is pragmatic.
Keep in mind however that the home country will never become a better country if all the well-educated and wealthy leave at the first opportunity.

The easy path might be to run away, whilst the harder path may be to stay and stand up for what you believe in.

What am I doing here?
- I was born here, and have indigenous and Anzac ancestors.

You once spoke about 'tolerance' and I countered by saying that there are pro's and cons to everything.
I showed you that 'intolerance' is just as important; depending on the situation.

You could point a finger at all the worlds problem nations.
But if the nation that leads the world has problems of attitude and character this may in fact be a much bigger problem in the grander scheme of things.
One may expect poor behavior from smaller less-significant countries, but the leader always has the attention of others and needs to lead by example, not by threats, bullying, underhandedness and intimidation.

Again, this world will never change for the better if the way the US engages with other countries doesn't change first.
The character of the United States includes a predisposition for global conflict in continuity.
If the US was a regular person it would be considered a dangerous sociopath capable of anything, would be locked in a mental health facility and prescribed medication so that it can't harm others.

When looking at problems between the West and others, you need to look carefully at 'causes' and 'effects' and not mistaken the two.

Hey ttbn,
"Perhaps you have had a bad day, but I can't believe that you are serious."

I never said I thought it was a good idea for the sons and brides of ISIS to return home to Australia, but I'm not sure there's anything we can do about it.

As soon as they can get away with it (without huge public backlash) I'm sure they will send them back to Australia, they've been talking about it for years.

And after all, the government seems to be far more interested in bringing them home than Julian Assange, as an example.

Armchair Critic,
I find her one of the most not deliberate hypocritical posters !

AC

Of course something can be done about it. The government can stop being stupid and refuse them entry. For all its faults, the previous government did exactly that.

As for the dear little children, the case of a woman reporter being told by little darlings barely of school age that they would kill her for not wearing a hijab is well known. They are already tainted with Islamic extremism, hatred, and misogyny.

There is no place for these people in Australia. They were told at the time that they would not be allowed back by a responsible government. We now have an irresponsible government saying that they will be allowed back. We already have too many enemies inside Australian in the lunatic left and, sadly, the ALP government; a government that the majority of voters did not want, despite failures of the Coalition.

If ordinary, decent Australians could be refused re-entry to their own country during Covid, these horrible creatures surely can.

No matter what is said here, it appears that the National Security Committee has finalised plans to bring "home" 16 women and 42 children.

At the same time, those of us who already knew, are reminded by adolescent and child psychologist, Clare Rowe, that culture, thoughts and beliefs are set in the few first years of life. Rehabilitation is complicated and difficult: not necessarily successful.

Another thing we need to be reminded of with regard to the 32% government, that is making Australia more dangerous place, is the adage, 'communism never goes away, it just changes its coat'.

Hi AC,

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has shown the world that
without American power or for that matter - Western
power - the world would definitely not be a better
place.

America and the Western powers are not perfect.
US President Joe Biden, was right when he stated at the
beginning of his presidency that the battle between
democracies and autocracies would be the defining
struggle of our time.

Russia's aggression has clearly shown the world that
Biden was right and why authoritarians and the authoritarian
idea itself is such a threat to peace and stability.

Russia invaded Ukraine, a democracy, because of the
ambition, recklessness and domination of one man,
Vladimir Putin. The countries that have rallied most
enthusiastically behind Ukraine have almost uniformly
been democracies, chief among them - the United States.
The notion that of any moral equivalence between
the United States and Putin's Russia has been rendered
laughable.

Russia's unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation in
Europe has put matters back in their proper framing. And any
suggestion that the US is a uniquely malevolent force in
global politics has now been resolved. In the span of a very
short time the world has been given a taste of what a
world where America grows weak and Russia grows strong would
look like.

To see America as a provocateur is rather odd. As it's been
Russia not the US that has been the world's most imperial
force for the past 3 decades. So arguments against the US
indicate that those critics are not really anti-imperialists
they just have an aversion to American and Western power.

We can only hope that - the day will not come when these
anti-Western people will find themselves in the odd
position of praying for the health and longevity
of not just the US, and the West, but Western power as well.

May none of us ever have to live under an authoritarian regime.
Be it Russian, Chinese, or any other. The US and Western
powers may not be perfect - but you really don't want to
taste the alternative.

.

Dear ttbn,

.

You wrote :

« Australia is preparing to overturn its policy of more than three years and launch a mission to "repatriate dozens of women and children, the family members of former Islamic State fighters who have been languishing for years in squalid detention camps in Syria" … whether or not there will be enough evidence to prosecute these terrorists' families would be and should be irrelevant if they stay where they are … »
.

According to reports, an estimated population of 65,000 men, women, and children from about 60 different countries are currently being held in detention centres in Syria. The majority are women and children.

As I see it, ttbn, countries have not only a duty to protect their citizens but also a moral, legal and political responsibility to recuperate their citizens that are being held in custody in the Syrian detention centres. We have about 60 including 47 children in the Al-Hawl and Roj camps.

Whether we like it or not, I think we should stop shirking our responsibilities and take charge of our own people.

I, personally, see terrorism as an act of war against innocent civilian populations. Consequently, I should like to see the perpetrators of such acts, and all those aiding and abetting them brought to trial under our system of courts-martial and Defence Force Magistrate.

In this context, to be complete, I should add that I consider that capital punishment should be reintroduced in Australia to apply potentially to anybody under our jurisdiction found guilty of acts of terrorism.

.

The kids are Australian citizens. If citizenship means anything then they must be bought home. Equally the women, where they are also Australian citizens, cannot be forgotten. That's not to say that once they come back they shouldn't then be prosecuted for breaking Australian law by joining ISIS.

Of course, some of these women renounced their citizenship as a sign of their devotion to Allah and they should be left to wallow in their failed decisions. If they truly loved their kids, they'd allow them to be bought back while they remain to plead for forgiveness for their crimes. But that'll never happen.

So bring them all back and watch them like hawks while prosecuting to the full extent of the law, those who broke the law

AC continues to display his naivety in regards to international events even as, day in and day out, his failed assertions about Ukraine are shown to be so much dross...

AC writes: "How many people died in Iran over the last week or so?
And why?
- Because the US was mad they sent drones to Russia?"

No they died because they were protesting a totalitarian regime that seeks to restrict both their freedom and prosperity. A young women died at the hands of their so-called morality police for the crime of incorrectly wearing her headscarf. Others protested the death and they were similarly killed. Then still more protested the overall suppression that is wrought by the regime, and they were killed.

But in the fantasy world of AC, if something bad happens in the world, it is the fault of the US. Protestors killed in Iran? Must be caused by the US. No other possible explanation in AC's fantasyland.

So the protested were manipulated by the US in order to punish Iran for supplying Russia. Pretty convoluted but it seems to make sense to those with the level of misunderstanding exhibited by AC.

Of course it it also highly racist. In this telling, these stupid muslim protestors don't know what's what and are easily manipulated by the CIA. And the muslim women don't know that their opposition to headscarfs is really just a ruse used by the CIA to punish the mullahs. A twofer - racist and mysognistic.

That Paul thinks all this makes sense pretty much summarises its wrongheadedness

The death penalty is not equally applied. In terms of lives lost and general destruction the greatest terrorist in today's world is Putin. Will he be brought to justice? Have any of the presidents of the US been brought to account for Vietnam and deeds of 'shocks and awe' in Iraq? Will anybody in China be brought to account for the crimes in Sinkiang? The death penalty does not bring the victims of murder back to life and cannot be applied with justice. Australia in abolishing the death penalty is civilised in that respect.

Why The hell are these kids being called Australian.

They were not born in Australia. They should be taking the nationality of their fathers, as should be the mothers. We should be having nothing to do with them at all.

Agitate to change the rules if you like. But the current rule is that a child of a citizen (whether mother or father) born overseas is a citizen, although they do have to make application to have that recognised.

A nation that removes citizenship because of political views or, worse, the views of relatives, is no longer a free nation. We don't need to go there.

Hasbeen

Unfortunately these children are Australian citizens (I haven't seen anything to say that at least one of their parents is not a citizen).

But, so what! I wouldn't give them the time of day, let alone entry to a country they have never seen: one which is free of the atrocities and nightmares of the hole they were born in.

Any Australian who thinks that these creatures should be brought here is as stupid and as dangerous as the government responsible for the travesty.

People like mhaze, Banjo Paterson et al should be given the responsibility of them, along with all the risks.

The last I heard, our moronic government intends to make NO arrangements for these terrorist-bred creatures, except to bring them here, and let them loose. Whether public opinion might change that, who knows. There is not much opinion among the public anyway. Look how they accepted the Covid offences against their freedoms.

Just to calm people down a bit - because there's
so many misconception and misinformation being presented
here as facts - which is simply wrong.

It should be noted that the first Australian children to
be brought here back in 2019 are reported to be now
living normal lives in the community, attending school,
and playing sport. A decision to repatriate the remaining
children will provide them with the same opportunities.

People who may be concerned or are worried about radicalization
or if there should be any evidence of crimes committed - need to
be well aware that " Australia has a very robust judicial and
national security system that can respond and mitigate any
risks. All of the women have offered to co-operate fully
with law enforcement authorities and be subject to onerous
control orders upon their arrival here.

ttbn writes: "But, so what [that they are Australian citizens]! I wouldn't give them the time of day, let alone entry to a country they have never seen..."

Again, by law they are Australian citizens and are entitled to come back. Personally, I think the law matters and we head down a dire path when we start just making up which laws we want to enforce and which to ignore.

On top of that they are kids. Punishing kids for the views of their parents is a very dark path.

Australian citizens were banned from entering their own country during Covid. There was a $51,000 fine/5 years jail penalty for anyone who slipped in.

The 'right to freedom of movement' law can be restricted in "certain circumstances". I would say this is one of those circumstances. I am assuming that the previous government thought the same when they refused to allow these people back in - particularly as they had warned anyone ILLEGALLY leaving the country to take any part in a foreign war could not expect to be allowed back.

They ended up on the losing side, now they want to return. Tough titty.

Back 80 years and there was another lot of ttbn types who believed that children should pay for the "sins" of their parents as well.

I think that some people believe that these children are just like their own children, grandchildren, great grandchildren. They are not. They have been badly damaged by their parents and the terrible conditions they have lived in. They are likely to be permanently damaged. As a father, grandfather and great grandfather, this saddens and angers me.

Nevertheless, it would be grossly irresponsible to bring them here; or should I say, it will be irresponsible when they are brought here, as the crazy Labor government seems unable to see sense.

If the mob you support were in power, they would see "sense" would they not ttbn.

ttbn types who believed that children should pay for the "sins" of their parents as well.
Paul1405,
Very much the thinking within the guilt industry's Paul1405's over the past 80 years !

Indy,

If extremists were ever to come to power its easy to see how certain people would go along with so called "necessary" action. You and ttbn are typical of those types.

.

Dear David,

.

You note : « … the greatest terrorist in today's world is Putin » … and you ask :

« Will he be brought to justice? Have any of the presidents of the US been brought to account for Vietnam and deeds of 'shocks and awe' in Iraq? Will anybody in China be brought to account for the crimes in Sinkiang? »
.

Those are good questions, David. For obvious reasons, heads of state are well protected, but they are not totally immune from justice, political uprisings, and personal vendetta.

You mention Putin but let us not forget that Nicholas II of Russia, his wife, and five children were all executed in 1918. Who knows what fate awaits President Putin ? Erik Møse, Chair of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine indicated in his Sept 2022 progress report that Russian forces had committed indiscriminate attacks on both civilians and combatants, including torture and sexual and gendered-based violence. The age of the victims ranged from 4 to 82 years.

According to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), heads of state are immune for all acts performed during their time in power, including torture, genocide, and crimes against humanity. But the House of Lords in the UK considered in the case of Pinochet of Chili that the nature of the acts of mass murders, torture, and disappearances could not logically be considered official acts and that Pinochet was not entitled to immunity in the courts of the UK.

The Us, Canada, and, to a certain extent, the EU seem to be of a similar frame of mind.

We shall have to wait to see what the future brings.

Apart from Nicholas II of Russia, it’s worth recalling the fate of a few notable heads of state such as:

Mussolini (Italy) 1945 - executed by firing squad

Pétain (France) 1945 – death by guillotine commuted to life imprisonment

Ceausescu (Romania) 1989 - executed by firing squad

Saddam Hussein (Iraq) 2006 - executed by hanging

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

Pinochet (Chili) 2006 – died of a heart attack a few weeks after being charged with 36 counts of kidnapping, 23 counts of torture, and one count of murder – before he could be convicted.

Gaddafi (Libya) 2011 – hid in a sewage pipeline and was shot in the head

In the US assassination attempts have been made on 15 different heads of state, of which 4 have succeeded :

Abraham Lincoln 1865

James A. Garfield 1881

William McKinley 1901

John F. Kennedy 1963

Roosevelt (1912) and Reagan (1981) were both wounded and survived.
.

You add :

« The death penalty does not bring the victims of murder back to life and cannot be applied with justice. Australia in abolishing the death penalty is civilised in that respect »
.

That’s true, David, death is irreversible, therefore society must defend itself from those who penetrate it and attempt to destroy it, just as any living organism must defend itself from microbes and viruses that penetrate deep inside it and attempt to destroy it.

The fight for life is a natural phenomenon that we all engage in, consciously or unconsciously whether we like it or not. For example, nature has equipped us with natural killer cells that identify and eliminate viruses and virus-infected cells and play an important role in helping us develop antiviral immune systems that protect us from future attacks.

By the same token, I consider that those who demonstrate by their heinous terrorist acts a complete lack of respect for the life and humanity of others have no place in society and should be eliminated. By the indiscriminate murder of many innocent people, they forfeit their own lives.

I agree that the scales of justice are not exactly balanced. The sacrifice of the lives of many innocent people far outweighs that of a few culpable, misguided terrorists.

Especially as I preconise it, the latter being euthanised calmly and comfortably, in the least painless conditions that modern science can allow, which, of course, would not have been the case for their innocent victims.

.

Another complication for those banging on about citizenship, which these terror supporters don't seem to value as much as their defenders and apologists do, is that some (number not revealed yet) are not citizens but permanent residents, further complicating the mess that the Albanese government is getting itself and the country into.

ttbn,

Why are you so anti Albanese?

He's not on his own making decisions like Morrison did.
He has an entire Cabinet. And he's also not been in
power for that long. Give him a break!

Besides all the decision being made are on the advice
of our Security agencies.

Paul wrote:" Back 80 years and there was another lot of ttbn types who believed that children should pay for the "sins" of their parents as well."

Do you really want to go there? I seem to recall that you defended the execution of the Romanov kids based upon the crimes of their parents.

______________________________________________________________________

ttbn,

As a father and grandfather, I find it extraordinary that people would be prepared to just abandon kids because of the errors of their parents.

I've written here before that the decision to bring in Muslims was a disaster given that a higher-than-usual percentage were always going to be and remain anti-West. That a percentage of those people were so radicalised as to go back 'home' to begin the conquest of the Levant is testimony to the original immigration errors.

Nonetheless, we bought them here and made them citizens. An error, yes. But we can't just wash our hands of that error at the expense of kids who played no part in any of this. Citizenship has to mean something.

If the government is able to simply withdraw citizenship because they don't like your policies or those of your parents, then they, the government, have ultimate power over everyone. What next? Withdraw citizenship because you don't buy climate change?

Our liberty is based on our citizenship. Endanger one and lose the other.

You and ttbn are typical of those types.
Paul1405,
Easier to write that than stating that "yes, the likes of me (you et al) keep blaming today's white generation for their forebears' wrongs" (you never acknowledge the rights) ! And, have compensation funding bleating on endless recordings !
Having said that, I just got word from a friend who told me that white Australian tourists are behaving like terrorists in places on Cape York. Highly derogatory graffiti on Aboriginal land signs, rubbish galore including toilet paper & associated bombs all over the place, mangroves being cut to access creeks, bullet shells lying around signs being shot at, new tracks made around closed off area signs, buggies running around tearing up the dried mud flats causing erosion, blaring dumbo music all night, rangers being disrespected etc etc.
You see, there are already enough home-grown terrorists, no need to bring in the spawn of the professionals as well !

.

Dear ttbn,

.

You wrote :

« Any Australian who thinks that these creatures should be brought here is as stupid and as dangerous as the government responsible for the travesty »
.

I indicated in my previous post, ttbn – that countries have not only a duty to protect their citizens but also a moral, legal, and political responsibility to recuperate citizens that are being held in custody in the Syrian detention centres.

It is not a “travesty” (of justice, of the law?) to “think” they “should be brought here”. It is a “travesty” of justice and our international obligations not to repatriate Australian citizens held in custody in detention centres in Syria.

If, as you indicate, the government is planning to repatriate them it is simply because it is our country’s moral, legal, and political responsibility to do so.

Obviously, it’s not without risk but it’s not some other country’s problem. It’s our problem and we have to manage it as best we can.

Apart from that, I don’t like it any more than you do.

.

Dear Banjo,

None of us - if we're honest - like it. But as you
point our - the government is behaving as it should.
And taking every precaution while doing so. We can't
ask for any more and should be grateful that we
have the kind of government that we do.

.

Dear Foxy,

.

Thank you for your comments.

You wrote earlier :

« It should be noted that the first Australian children to be brought here back in 2019 are reported to be now living normal lives in the community, attending school, and playing sport. A decision to repatriate the remaining children will provide them with the same opportunities »
.

Yes, that’s very encouraging, Foxy. The only problem is that severe traumatism at an early age often does not produce its worst effects until the child becomes a teenager or reaches early adulthood. In some cases, it can be quite devastating.

That is why it is urgent to repatriate young children to a safe, secure environment.

There is ample medical documentation on this

.

mhaze,

Abandoning, if you think that's the appropriate word, not because of their parents, but because of what they have become because of their parents. I have mentioned the psychological fact that culture/beliefs are set in the very early years of life.

You say "Citizenship has to mean something". It should of course, and does to most of us, but not to people who leave their country, to fight with or succour enemies of our country, culture and way of life. If they don’t value Australian citizenship - and I say that they don't - they do not deserve the benefits of that citizenship, which also carries responsibilities.

I believe in fairness and humanitarianism; but there are limits to everything, and I strongly believe that the government is exceeding those limits. Further, based on information I've come by, I don’t think that ASIO is up to the job, but that's another story; the elected government has to take full responsibility for this.

Banjo

I'm sure you mean well, but I'm also sure that you are wrong on this one

Dear Banjo,

We can only hope that these children were taken out
of that ghastly environment in time. So far the signs
are looking good. Let's hope they shall continue to
do so. The government is doing all it possibly can.
To safeguard both us and them.

Were these children born here or there ? Why are adults born here or arrived here as toddlers & have no questionable record being deported just because they weren't naturalised ?
I would suggest that if these ISIS brides/mothers are willing to denounce the organisations they voluntarily aligned themselves with then the Australian authorities should request the UN to find a place at the cost of Australia until they're deemed sufficiently recovered to their original Australian culture to return to Australia.
There are more than enough poor quality citizens here already !

The kids are Australian citizens.
mHaze,
How so ? Weren't they born in another nation to which their parents swore allegiance ?
I'm afraid that as much as I feel for innocent children, do you really believe that they won't be carrying an unmanageable baggage in the near future ?
Do you want to take that chance & if they do turn out bad will you be supportive of sending them back ?
That's why I think severe pressure needs to be put on the UN to pull its fingers out & send them anywhere but to their mother's country of birth until they're deemed de-indoctrinated or whatever the word may be !

.

Dear ttbn,

.

You wrote :

« Banjo, I'm sure you mean well, but I'm also sure that you are wrong on this one »
.

I appreciate your kind assessment that I argue in good faith, ttbn, and have no hesitation in reciprocating with a similar assessment of the sincerity of your arguments.

That being the case, I guess you will not be too surprised to learn that you have literally taken the words out of my mouth when you conclude : “I'm also sure that you are wrong on this one” !

Great minds think alike, n’est-ce pas ?

.

.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

You evoke various situations and circumstances relating to the Australians currently held in the Syrian detention centres and pose a certain number of questions regarding their projected repatriation to Australia.

Here are a few observations that you may like to consider.

Since these people have been held in custody for several years now following the terrorist-associated lifestyles they had been leading prior to their incarceration, I would not be at all surprised if their administrative documents – passports, birth certificates, Australian consulate registrations, etc. – are not in order.

The competent Australian authorities will obviously have to take into account the exceptional circumstances of their previous terrorist-related activities and subsequent incarceration in determining who has the right to claim Australian nationality and who hasn’t, and how each individual, man, woman, and child, must be processed administratively. Nobody should be left stateless.

Some of the detainees may have double nationality and if one of those nationalities is Australian, those persons are legally entitled to return to Australia.

For children born overseas to at least one Australian parent, an application must normally be made for citizenship by descent. No doubt, there will be several cases in this category that will have to be regularised before the children can be repatriated with their parent of parents.

All this will take time.

Your suggestion that we should pass on our responsibilities for these people to the UN, I’m afraid, is a no-go. We not only have a duty to protect our citizens but also a moral, legal, and political responsibility to recuperate those that are being held in custody in the Syrian detention centres.

It’s our problem and we have to manage it as best we can.

.

Well, here is one asylum seeker who wont be getting asylum in Australia or elsewhere.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-63174835

Like Russia's terrorist state campaign of murder and destruction in Ukraine, the murder wont attract much interest from some here unless it can be pinned on the United States or Israel, or failing that some other western democracy.

Your suggestion that we should pass on our responsibilities for these people to the UN,
Banjo Paterson,
I didn't suggest that at all, what I do suggest are places that the UN arrange with countries to temporarily provide safe refuge for these people at the expense of the mother country of the childrens mothers until such time that all identities are proven & acceptable to go to the country they claim to be from & are accepted by ! Exposure to other cultures may just provide the turning point for adopting a healthier & more respectful mentality !

"The thought makes me sick to think that the cowardly escapee’s from conscription will be welcomed as hero’s and afforded special privileges such as refugee status here in Australia.

Rape seed has a bright yellow flower as the author of this piece of drudge paints himself in yellow, the universal colour of cowardice."

Exactly! What we need are people with the guts to rape and murder innocent Ukrainians, nor should we be excluding those enterprising candidates prepared to hunt down gays and hack off their heads with blunt knives. I think that sort of civilisation is seriously lacking in Australia. What a shame.

"he kids are Australian citizens.
mHaze,
How so ? Weren't they born in another nation to which their parents swore allegiance ?"

Under Australian law, it doesn't matter where they were born. All that matters is that least one parent was/is an Australian citizen.

If that parent formerly gave up their Australian citizenship BEFORE the kids birth, then that changes things. But that doesn't appear to be the case.

I find it passing strange that so many people here, who would consider themselves conservative or at least law-abiding, are so anxious to ignore the law when it suits. Its been happening a lot. Let's call it the 'lockdown effect'.

Heaven forbid that we ever turn over 'responsibility' for our affairs to an 'irresponsible' organisation like the UN.

mhaze,

You are concerned about "people here, who would consider themselves conservative or at least law-abiding, are so anxious to ignore the law when it suits …".

I would have thought, as one of those people yourself, you would be more concerned about people who ignore the law and go off to involve themselves against foreign wars, despite being warned that it is illegal, and they cannot expect to be readmitted to Australia.

As for your concern about citizenship, I have advised that the 'freedom of movement' available to citizens can be varied - as it was during the Covid panic - and citizenship can actually be cancelled.

Australians need to think more about the safety and well-being of their law-abiding fellow citizens instead of emoting and virtue signalling about people who hate them, and wish to harm them.

And, those fussing about children need to realise that, as they raise their own children in accordance with their culture, values and beliefs, so do parents who are terrorists.

ttbn,

"people who ignore the law and go off to involve themselves against foreign wars, despite being warned that it is illegal, and they cannot expect to be readmitted to Australia."

Those people aren't being invited back. You keep equating their kids with the actions of the father as though you can't separate one from t'other in your mind. The kids didn't head off to fight foreign wars. They didn't break any Australia law. They cannot be punished for the crimes of their parents - or at least they shouldn't be.

If we allow such a principle to stand, where does it stop. Government removing kids because their parents broke lockdown laws?

It is true that Australian citizens were prevented from returning at the height of the covid hysteria. But that was never going to be permanent and was reversed pretty quickly given that it was both illegal and immoral and was as much a matter of logistics as any thing else.


You just assume that the kids are radicalised beyond redemption. But there is no evidence for that. Again its a very dark place to punish people for crimes you assume they'll commit.

The kids didn't head off to fight foreign wars.
mhaze,
They went there with their fathers & were born there & now their mothers want to bring them here !
Australian you say ?

mhaze

What is more important to you? Your own country and your own family, or kids you don’t know? Those kids are already tainted. You don't need "evidence" when it is a psychological given. You have always seemed be a reasonable sort, but I have to say that you are a bit obsessive on this one. I suppose the kids could be regarded as collateral damage from their parents' behaviour, and that's tragic; but that's the way it is, and heads should be overriding hearts.

Children are always the victims & in a lot of cases by their parents as in this case. I find this situation akin to abortion.
Many do-gooders wouldn't object to Hitler's mother or the mothers of terrorists in 9/11 having an abortion in hindsight. Here we have quite some foresight yet some are still blind to see the consequences !
Why not let in good poor children from these countries of conflict ? Why not support the poor here ? No, do-gooders want to shove our own poor out of the way & bring in those of bad gene mixing who weren't even born here !
If do-gooders want to really help rather than just demand others do all the supporting of their idealism then they should go there & help the poor who produce children to suffer for their unfathomable mentality. How many times have we heard mothers of suicide weirdos etc from those countries say they wished they had more children to sacrifice ?
I'm all for helping poor decent folk but I'm afraid I have to draw the line at those former Australians who took on Citizenship & swore allegiance to ISIS !
How on Earth are we ever going to find peace when so many of our own people are so stupid ?

Why is it we never get to hear the views of the Australian indigenous as to how they feel about this ?

.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

You wrote :

« … what I do suggest are places that the UN arrange with countries to temporarily provide safe refuge for these people at the expense of the mother country of the childrens mothers until such time that all identities are proven & acceptable to go to the country they claim to be from & are accepted by ! »
.

It’s our problem, Indyvidual, not the UN’s problem or anybody else’s problem. If that’s what we want, we have to do it ourselves. We are very good at it. We’ve been doing it for years.

We parked illegal would-be immigrants in long-term offshore detention centres on Christmas Island, Papua New Guinea, Nauru, and Manus Island. We also parked some in onshore detention centres in Port Hedland and Curtin on the west coast of Western Australia.

We parked so-called short-term would-be immigrants in various centres in or near Melbourne, Sydney, Perth, Darwin and Weipa in Queensland.

In addition, we operate a number of Immigration Residential Housing Centres (IRHCs), Immigration Transit Accommodation Centres (ITACs) and Alternative Places of Detention (APODs).

So, we’re fairly well versed in the question of finding temporary accommodation for people in transit without having to ask the UN or anyone else to do it for us.

The only problem is we have a pretty deplorable track record of the way we run these detention centres. It has been reported that refugees have been regularly subjected to beatings, racial slurs, and sexual assaults. Long-term detention has caused severe mental illness and suicide as well as rioting among the detainees.

Organisations such as refugee advocates, Amnesty International, the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Human Rights Watch, and the United Nations have all accused us of committing human rights abuses.

If we do repatriate these men, women and children from the Syrian detention camps, we need to mend our ways and do it in a much more civilised manner and treat them with respect.

I don't think that's too much to ask.

.

Banjo

We need to "mend our ways" and treat terrorists "with respect"? Really?

ttbn wrote: "but I have to say that you are a bit obsessive on this one."

I admit it. I am obsessive about the rule of law. The law is they are Australian Citizens. The law is you can't prosecute people for things you think they might do in the future. The law is the government can't withdraw citizenship without due process.

I think the law matters. Its the only thing that separates us from groups like...ahem...ISIS.

mhaze

I am not interested in prosecuting these people: I just do not want them here.

The only law applicable is part 5.5 of 'Foreign incursions and recruitment offences', which says that it is an offence for Australians to join foreigned armed forces. Life imprisonment is the punishment.

Perhaps your 'obsession' extends to only certain laws.

"The only law applicable is part 5.5 of 'Foreign incursions and recruitment offences', which says that it is an offence for Australians to join foreigned armed forces. "

But....but.....but the kids didn't join the foreign armed forces!!

You go round in circles saying you know it was the parents and then wanting to blame the kids.

The kids are damaged goods that you wouldn't want near your grandchildren; but you know that's not going to happen. It’s so easy to be virtuous when it's other people who will have to bear the consequences. It won’t effect the politicians either. It won't affect me. It’s just I feel for the people it will affect.

mhaze,
What are you prepared to do for these people ?

ttbn,
It could affect you if you happen to be where the bomb goes off.

.

Dear ttbn,

.

I wrote :

« If we do repatriate these men, women, and children from the Syrian detention camps, we need to mend our ways and do it in a much more civilised manner and treat them with respect »

And you replied :

« We need to "mend our ways" and treat terrorists "with respect"? Really? »
.

Yes, ttbn, that seems to be the “spirit” of our federal terrorist laws which stipulate under the section that deals with “Rights under a preventative detention order” (Division 105 of the Criminal Code Act 1995) :

« A person detained under a preventative detention order has the right to :

• be treated humanely and not be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment

• contact a lawyer

• contact family members and employers to let them know they are safe

• not be questioned

• have a copy of the preventative detention order, which contains a summary of the reasons for making the order

• an interpreter if they have difficulty with English.

• Children under 16 years old cannot be detained. Someone at least 16 years old but under 18 can be detained but must be detained separately from adults. They can have a parent or guardian visit them while they are detained »

Perhaps the government will promulgate legislative amendments to our current laws to deal with the specific case of men, women and children repatriated from foreign terrorist detention centres. But, though the “letter” of the law would change, the “spirit” of the law would not, to respect detainees’ human rights.

Nevertheless, ttbn, as I indicated in my post on page 7 of this thread, I, personally, see terrorism as an act of war against innocent civilian populations. Consequently, I should like to see the perpetrators of such acts, and all those aiding and abetting them brought to trial under our system of courts-martial and Defence Force Magistrate.

I respectfully suggest that capital punishment should be reintroduced in Australia to apply potentially to anybody under our jurisdiction found guilty of acts of terrorism.

.

• Children under 16 years old cannot be detained. Someone at least 16 years old but under 18 can be detained but must be detained separately from adults. They can have a parent or guardian visit them while they are detained

I'm not sure that's technically true.

detention
noun: detention; plural noun: detentions

the action of detaining someone or the state of being detained in official custody.
"the fifteen people arrested were still in police detention"

http://behaviour.education.qld.gov.au/procedures-guidelines-forms/disciplinary-consequences/Documents/fact-sheet-detention.pdf

A detention is a consequence that schools may use to address inappropriate student behaviour. Detentions can
be applied during school hours, out-of-school hours or on non-school days (for example, a Saturday morning).
Principals make a decision about what happens in their school in consultation with their school community,
and if detentions are to be part of the disciplinary consequences used in the school then this must be clearly
explained in the Student Code of Conduct.

Should after school hours detentions not be considered that a person under 16 is being detained?

Does it make any difference that one is enacted by a school and the other is enacted by police?

.

Dear Armchair Critic,

.

Here is the link to the federal government's web page on the subject of "Preventative detention orders" :

http://www.ag.gov.au/national-security/australias-counter-terrorism-laws/preventative-detention-orders

.

These people, children or adult, should be left where they are. Given the government that we have, voted for by a mere 32% of the population, this is unlikely: terror will be brought to Australia by that government, aided by a piss-poor opposition who has nothing to say about anything, and the lunatic Greens and riff-raff in the Senate.

This country is well and truly finished. I have watched several of the speeches and ramblings at the recent CPAC conference held in Sydney. So-called conservatives are anything but: naive, gullible and, in many cases, plain bloody stupid, bleating for people to vote Liberal after what they did over their past three terms. The Marxists are in control; they have thoroughly infiltrated main stream politics. I am glad that I am at the end of my lifetime, not just starting out.

not the UN’s problem or anybody else’s problem.
Banjo Paterson,
Why on Earth not ? They are playing a major indirect part in most of the problems on the planet !

Indyvidual

Good on you mate.

ttbn,
Where did you get that figure of 32%?

.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

I wrote :

« It’s our problem, Indyvidual, not the UN’s problem or anybody else’s problem »

And you replied :

« Why on Earth not ? They are playing a major indirect part in most of the problems on the planet ! »
.

The United Nations (UN) is an intergovernmental organisation whose stated purposes are to maintain international peace and security, develop friendly relations among nations, achieve international cooperation, and be a centre for harmonising the actions of nations.

It “coordinates and harmonises” its member states It reminds them of their moral, legal, and political obligations as members. It does not substitute itself for them. That is not its mission. It is not equipped to do the work of its total membership of 193 independent sovereign nations.

One of its primary purposes is "promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms, and member states pledge to undertake "joint and separate action" to protect these rights.

The UN Special Rapporteur wrote in February 2020 to its member states, including Australia, concerning the repatriation of their nationals from the detention centres in Syria and Iraq.

Here is the letter :

http://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-terrorism/return-and-repatriation-foreign-fighters-and-their-families (click on "Statement on repatriation and prosecution of foreign fighters and their families ...)

Then, in January 2021, the UN wrote to 57 states, including Australia, reminding them of their Human Rights obligations and urging them to repatriate their nationals from the Syrian detention camps.

Here is Australia’s reply of 23 August 2021:

http://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadFile?gId=36517

That's where we stand today. We have not yet honoured our human rights obligations.

.

Is Mise

Their primary vote. I might have left the decimal off, but that's all they votes they got - even less than the Coalition, who didn't deserve to be in government any more than Labor does, although a sensible system would see them doing so.

It is the ridiculous preferential system that lands us with idiots. We all go along with it because our vote would be informal if we didn't. When I vote, I want the candidate I put number 1 against, none of the others. The Senate is a different matter.

Labor and the Coalition will continue to haunt us and bugger us up because we can't punish them. Opposition for a short time is no big deal for the overpaid bastards.

ttbn,
First t the post is the most undemocratic voting system that exists, where as preferential always gives a result where the preferred candidate gets over 50% approval.

Thanks for your opinion, with which I totally disagree. I don’t think countries like the UK and Canada are less democratic than Australia, particularly after the Covid fiasco, and the fact that associates of terrorists can be brought into Australia without a by-your-leave from the 32% government.

ttbn,
It’s quite simple really.
If 4 people stand for election, which is not uncommon, A, B, C and D and A gets 23%, B gets 24%, C gets 25% and D gets 28% then under First Past the Post, D gets elected.
Now D is a dole bludging.alcoholic who only stood for election because some of his useless mates put him up to it is elected.
But under Preferential 72% of the electors hated his worthless guts and voted accordingly and A, who is an upstanding citizen, hard worker, drinks only in moderation and runs the local Op Shop ( and incidentally makes sure thar D is always reasonably dressed) is preferred by a majority of the electors and is duly elected with over 70% of the vote.

The majority won.

It’s easy to see which system is the more democratic.

The United Nations (UN) is an intergovernmental organisation
Banjo paterson,
That's the theory, then why don't they prevent suffering instead of making cushy carres out of all the misery they're supposed to prevent ? Instead of pushing Democracy down Ukraine's throat & upsetting Russia which is causing so much suffering now !
Anyhow, that's how I see it by the evidence befor me. You might choose to view it from their bureaucratic perspective !
I'd have thought UN Forces would prevent fighting rather than sit back & collect living away from home allowances.

(carres)
typo- should be careers

This meddling-in-sovreignty UN wants to be a world government with total control over all countries; and, given the appalling standard of Australian politics, we will be one of the first to fall.

Yes Issy,

I recall that election, Mr D was from the Shooters and Hooters Party, whilst Ms A was an upstanding citizen from the Greens. Is that correct? Maybe not, the Shooters and Hooters scored 0.1% of the vote at the last Federal election, not much chance of topping the vote ever.

Herr Goebbels,
Still smarting from having your.FirearmLicence cancelled?
Get over it.

Hi Banjo Patterson,

I think the link you gave me regarding 'preventative detention' relates to how long police can detain a person without charge.

Kids under 16 who commit other offenses can be placed in youth detention.
http://www.qld.gov.au/law/sentencing-prisons-and-probation/young-offenders-and-the-justice-system/youth-detention/about-youth-detention/basics-of-youth-detention

Youth detention centres are secure places for people aged 10 to 18. They exist to:
- protect the safety of the community
- provide consequences for offending
- prepare detained young people to live productively in the community.

The system as it currently exists (out of control kids, not specifically relating to terrorism) is far from ideal.
- In fact, in relation to youth offenders the system is so bad that one might say it's broken.

.

Dear Armchair Critic,

.

You wrote :

« I think the link you gave me regarding 'preventative detention' relates to how long police can detain a person without charge »
.

It’s an extract of the Anti-Terrorism Act (No. 2) 2005. Here is the link to the full text of that law :

http://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2006C00754
.

You might also be interested to read this paper published by ScoMo and his Home Affairs Minister, Karen Andrews entitled :” Safeguarding Our Community Together, Australia’s Counter-Terrorism Strategy 2022” :

http://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2022-03/apo-nid317321.pdf

.

The kind of people supporting the "bringing them home" are the same who support disunity !
I for one do not want to abandon these children I just believe that bringing them here is not the right move. As I said earlier, there should be places all over the world where such mothers & their children can live safely, supported by the Govt of the country of birth of the mother.
The UN could arrange such places by tomorrow if it had any interest in helping the children.
Australia could harbour children from other countries & vice versa. The import factor is that they get exposure to another mentality & hopefully wean off their indoctrination that made their stupid mothers to leave for the conflict zones in the first place.

'The kind of people supporting the "bringing them home" are the same who support disunity'. Yes!

Our PM supports disunity.

Albanese is interested only in spin and politics. He sees power in division, which is why he believes in multiculturalism and in undermining unifying symbols such as the Crown, and dividing Australians by race (the Voice). He is using education to inflict guilt and shame upon the nation until such a time that his warped views and those of the communistic left are accepted as normal.

Bringing terrorism, fear and unrest to Australia is part of the plan.

A couple of things need to be said.

1) It's a critical point in international law that
the women and children in question are Australian
citizens and have a right to enter Australia.

2) It is the youngest, most unwell and most vulnerable
of Australian children who will be the first ones
repatriated to Australia.

3) Some of the mothers could face arrest and potential
charges upon their return to this country.

4) All of the adults in the group are subject to
Australian law and could possibly be prosecuted for
engaging or preparing to engage in terrorist acts.
Our security agencies have made it clear that charges
could be laid upon the adults entering Australia
and they could face arrest on landing.

5) It has been made clear that there would be "an ongoing
monitoring provided by our security and intelligence
agencies who will stay in contact with these people and
monitor them once they arrive back in Australia."

6) The women in Roj camp have volunteered to be subject
to government control orders when they are returned.

It should be re-assuring to most Australians that the
first Australian children that were brought home in 2019
are now reported to be living normal lives in the
community, attending school and playing sport.

A decision to repatriate the remaining children would
provide them with the same opportunities.

Criticizing our government for doing the right thing is
encouraging disunity and division and produces nothing
constructive. The government is doing all it possibly
can within the letters of the law and morality and is
being advised by our security and intelligence agencies.
No government could do any better.

the women and children in question are Australian
citizens and have a right to enter Australia.
Foxy,
How so ? Didn't they denounce Australia & Australian advise not to go there & adopted ISIS citizenship ?

Indy,

Did you not come from somewhere else? What have you done for Australia, didn't join the military when you could have, got a pension for the rest of your life, for some Australia is the lucky country. Never have said where you came from and why.

Paul1405,
I don't denounce Australia & swear allegiance to a terrorist group. I only denounce hangers-on citizens such as yourself who are only interested in dividing people & destroying society harmony ! What have you ever done for this Nation ? Not as much as I i"m certain of that !

.

Dear Indyvidual, Dear ttbn,

.

You consider that :

« The kind of people supporting the "bringing them home" are the same who support disunity »

Australia has responsibilities towards its citizens both domestically and internationally. We have signed international conventions which we must respect.

We have a moral, legal, and political obligation to repatriate Australian citizens held in custody for their terrorist-related activities in the detention camps in Syria.

Assuming our responsibilities and respecting our international obligations can by no stretch of the imagination be construed as “supporting disunity”.

It is simply our duty. Failure to assume our responsibilities and honour our signature could only confirm the shaky reputation we have already acquired by ScoMo’s (mis)handling of the submarine “contract of the century” with France.

We should not be guided by fear. We have to take stock of the situation and face reality. The problem is not just the people we have to repatriate from the detention camps in Syria. There are probably many more potential terrorists amongst us that we ignore.

We need to take a holistic approach to the problem and eradicate it intelligently, preventively, and effectively. I suspect we have a lot to learn from our woefully misguided compatriots who continue to languish in those insalubrious Syrian detention camps.

.

Australia has responsibilities towards its citizens both domestically and internationally.
Banjo Paterson,
Of course just as Australian Citizens have responsibilities towards Australia !
When Citizens choose to denounce their responsibilities, Australians have every right to denounce them & leave them to the results of their deliberate choice !
Govts don't usually fail their Citizens, it's Citizens who, in their capacity & duty as bureaucrats who fail their fellow Citizens as do greedy Citizens !

Indyvidual

Exactly.

I am of two minds on this;
I think we should bring them back. Atleast we have a couple of
detention centres we could send them two for a "Reordination"
procedure to give a longer examination than could have been done
in Syria.
Depending on the results release to their families or to a
detention centre near their families.
A compromise of course, but it should sort them out.

we have a couple of
detention centres we could send them two for a "Reordination"
Bazz,
Being back here they'll not appreciate how good they had it here before & will only become more stroppy if not let free straight away. That's why it is vital that they go somewhere else first ! Australia can still pay for it but at least they'll have to learn to toe the line somewhere else first !

Banjo,

You claim that"

"Australia has responsibilities towards its citizens both domestically and internationally. We have signed international conventions which we must respect".

Can you direct us to these "conventions" where it says Australia has responsibilities for citizens who defied the law to leave Australia to join terrorists in a foreign war?

'Conventions' just state they way things are 'usually done'.

I feel that you are merely saying things that you think 'should' be done, or you are repeating something someone else has said.

.

Dear ttbn,

.

You wrote :

« Can you direct us to these "conventions" where it says Australia has responsibilities for citizens who defied the law to leave Australia to join terrorists in a foreign war? »
.

What I wrote was :

« Australia has responsibilities towards its citizens both domestically and internationally. We have signed international conventions which we must respect. We have a moral, legal, and political obligation to repatriate Australian citizens held in custody for their terrorist-related activities in the detention camps in Syria »
.

Several binding UN Security Council Resolutions – 2178 (2014) and 2396 (2017) – impose a legal obligation on states to bring terrorists to justice and to develop and implement appropriate prosecution, rehabilitation, and reintegration strategies for returning foreign terrorist fighters.

Also, article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), States “undertake to ensure the child such protection and care as is necessary for his or her well-being” and the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. The rights to education and health are not (sufficiently) being provided in the detention camps.

The CRC requires states to protect children from all forms of physical and mental abuse and that States should promote both physical and psychological recovery and reintegration as a result of any form of neglect, abuse, torture, or armed conflict. All of this strongly suggests that states must repatriate and take care of the children rather than leave them in the misery of the camps.

Also, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963 stipulates that states should provide assistance to their citizens, in particular safeguarding the interests of minors.

In a recent court case in Belgium, the judge decided that this obligation also has to be upheld by Belgian diplomatic and consular services. The court ordered that Belgium should do everything in its power to bring back six children and their mothers from detention camps in Syria.

Here are some articles on repatriation obligations :

http://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Executions/UNSRsPublicJurisdictionAnalysis2020.pdf

http://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20220622-un-calls-on-australia-to-repatriate-nationals-in-syria-camps/

http://www.hrw.org/news/2021/03/23/thousands-foreigners-unlawfully-held-ne-syria

.

.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

You wrote :

« … Australian Citizens have responsibilities towards Australia ! »
.
Quite right, Indyvidual.
.

« When Citizens choose to denounce their responsibilities, Australians have every right to denounce them & leave them to the results of their deliberate choice ! ».

That sounds like good logic to me, Indyvidual. Indeed, I think that is generally the case when some Australian individual commits a crime in some other country. Take, for example, the case of Julian Assange – poor chap. He has been largely left by the Australian government “to the result of [his] deliberate choice”, to battle it alone against the United States that is out for his blood.

The case of the men, women and children in the Syrian detention camps is different. These people have been associated with international terrorist activities and Australia is a signatory to various international conventions that invest in it the moral, legal, and political obligation to repatriate them to Australia.
.

« Govts don't usually fail their Citizens, it's Citizens who, in their capacity & duty as bureaucrats who fail their fellow Citizens as do greedy Citizens ! »

Well, I guess nothing is perfect, Indyvidual – not even governments.

.

.

Oops ! I forgot to post this one too :

http://twitter.com/RojavaIC/status/1372518844720353282/photo/1

.

Banjo,

I will repeat the question:

"Can you direct us to these "conventions" where it says Australia has responsibilities for citizens who defied the law to leave Australia to join terrorists in a foreign war?"

You have not answered it. You cannot answer it. Going all 'lawyerly' won't help you. Australia is a sovereign country, entitled to make its own decisions as to what it does. The previous government knew this, and refused to bring these people back. There were no repercussions from the tinpot would-be world dictatorship, the UN, because there was nothing they could do about it. They can't do anything about China breaking all the international 'laws' on trade, building illegal islands in the South China Sea, and all the other things China does against "conventions" and "binding" bits of paper.

International 'law' is a crock. It is undemocratic and unenforceable. Russia and China and other non-Western countries give it the middle finger, while Western countries, especially those with leftists governments, cower before the bullying UN.

At the moment, Australia is one of the most gutless because of its wet left government and equally wet left opposition.

Hey ttbn,

"Bringing Terror to Australia"
Who exactly are the terrorists?

Are we talking about Islamic extremists?
Or the pollies, NGO's and other do-gooder wokes?

"Australia to offer six months paid parental leave by 2026"
http://www.9news.com.au/national/australia-paid-parental-leave-to-offer-six-months-leave-by-2026/bf4d4294-b8ea-4499-9748-a210d6861e22
- This doesn't benefit all workers as at least 25% of people in this country are casuals.

These idiot politicians try to fix one problem and just create more.

Or the pollies, NGO's and other do-gooder wokes?
Armchair critics,
Sanctioned by an uncaring public !

.

Dear ttbn,

.

Australia ratified the ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) on 13 August 1980. Under Article 2 of that Covenant, Australia voluntarily signed and accepted an obligation :

“to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognised in [the Covenant]”.
On 25 September 1991, Australia voluntarily signed and accepted another commitment : the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR.

Under Article 1 of this Protocol, Australia recognised the competence of the Human Rights Committee “to receive and consider communications from individuals subject to its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by that State Party of any of the rights set forth in the Covenant”.

The signature and ratification of a treaty is a voluntary action under which a state knowingly contracts to uphold certain obligations.

Complying with a treaty that we, as a nation, have signed and accepted does not entail a violation of sovereignty.

Quite the contrary, the International Court of Justice described a state's entry into international obligations as “an attribute of State sovereignty”.

The notion of sovereignty has evolved, ttbn :

http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1472

.

Banjo Paterson,
All this waffle flies out the window as soon as a citizen gets grief from incompetent & indifferent bureaudroids in any authority !

Indy,

We brought YOU to Australia from Sh!tsville, that has been terrifying enough. Are you going back any time soon? Me hope so, and save us poor suffering taxpayers.

Paul1405,
Lucky for all of us you're one of a kind because if there were two like you thousands of immigrants who kept you would head back !

.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

You wrote :

« All this waffle flies out the window as soon as a citizen gets grief from incompetent & indifferent bureau droids in any authority ! »
.

There are no windows, Indyvidual, and our discussion here has nothing to do with what you imagine to be “waffle” about childish films of droids and make-believe "star wars". It is about the tragic reality of heinous war crimes committed by terrorists against innocent civilian victims.

As I indicated previously, I consider that those Australian nationals currently held in Syrian detention centres for their association with terrorists should be repatriated back to Australia in accordance with our international obligations and brought to trial under our system of courts-martial and Defence Force Magistrate.

In my view, an act of terrorism committed against innocent civilian victims, whether it be state terrorism or individual terrorism, committed by our own nationals or by foreign nationals, is an act of war and should be treated as a war crime.

It follows that our own nationals should be charged with treason and foreign fighters (or so-called freedom fighters) as prisoners of war.

I should also like to see the death penalty reintroduced in Australia for all those persons, irrespective of their nationality, found guilty of terrorism.

.

Nah Indy,

95% agree with me, you know about the infamous 95% you are always banging on about, well, they have switched sides and are now with me. All jokes aside, as a migrant I'm sure you have made a valuable contribution to Australia, the vast majority of migrants do, and we are a better nation for that. p/s That's not going to stop me from giving you the razz when I feel like it.

Hi BP,

I've been in total agreement with you on this until I read your last line;

"I should also like to see the death penalty reintroduced in Australia for all those persons, irrespective of their nationality, found guilty of terrorism."

I totally oppose the death penalty under any circumstance. Terrorism can and does involve horrendous acts of barbarism against the innocent, as does some other murderous crimes. Calling for the death penalty is the result of emotion brought on by anger and disgust at the actions of these individuals, fully understandable. I understand the desire for vengeance is very strong within us humans, but what does it achieve, does it make us better persons for it? I think not, a discussion for another time.

.

Dear Paul1405,

.

You wrote :

« I totally oppose the death penalty … Calling for the death penalty is the result of emotion brought on by anger and disgust at the actions of these individuals, … I understand the desire for vengeance is very strong within us humans, but what does it achieve, does it make us better persons for it? I think not … »
.

I understand and respect your position, Paul. I think it’s probably shared by most of our compatriots.

It is certainly shared by David f. to whom I explained my point of view earlier on this thread.

I honestly don’t think it’s motivated the slightest bit by emotion or desire for vengeance. I’m afraid it’s coldly rational. Here it is again for your convenience :

Death is irreversible, therefore society must defend itself from those who penetrate it and attempt to destroy it, just as any living organism must defend itself from microbes and viruses that penetrate deep inside it and attempt to destroy it.

The fight for life is a natural phenomenon that we all engage in, consciously or unconsciously whether we like it or not. For example, nature has equipped us with natural killer cells that identify and eliminate viruses and virus-infected cells and play an important role in helping us develop antiviral immune systems that protect us from future attacks.

By the same token, I consider that those who demonstrate by their heinous terrorist acts a complete lack of respect for the life and humanity of others have no place in society and should be eliminated. By the indiscriminate murder of many innocent people, they forfeit their own fundamental human right to life.

I agree that the scales of justice are not exactly balanced. The sacrifice of the lives of many innocent people far outweighs that of a few culpable, misguided terrorists.

Especially as I preconise it, the latter being euthanised calmly and comfortably, in the least painless conditions that modern science can allow, which, of course, would not have been the case for their innocent victims.

.

Death is irreversible,
Banjo paterson,
So are the many losses & deaths due to criminals & generally bad & greedy & incompetent in authority !