Grendel wrote on Jan 28^th, 2009 at 9:12am:

That's a possibility, unless the offender had not already renounced his previous citizenship (which his/her lawyer may recommend had they not already done so) or the first nation point blank refused to accept them. The latter is a real possibility where a politician is expected to explain to an outraged public why they should have a crim from another nation returned home where he has not committed a crime and may demand all the 'rights' of the innocent.

With the law as it stands now, what is the procedure where the birth nation refuses to allow repatriation?

Grendel wrote on Jan 28^th, 2009 at 9:46am:




Grendel,

It was in 2006.

When Hezbollah and Israel had their last scrape.




p.s.

Those ppl were not Australians.

They were muslims.

Devout muslims give their total allegiance only to ISLAM.

N.B.

Devout muslims have frequently made that claim of themselves, in moments of candour.

Grendel wrote on Jan 28^th, 2009 at 9:46am:

And it can get nuttier. I know a family whose kids have four - Two via descent (parents from Europe), one via birth (born in New Zealand) and one via naturalisation (Australian).

But, anyway. I can't imagine any measurable criteria of integration that would after the fact determine that a new citizen is no longer eligible to hold citizenship. Anything reasonable (such as fluency in English) is best placed as a prerequisite. If the misfit upholds Australian law, how could it be justly determined that the new citizen isn't good enough to remain in Australia?

The whole idea to me appears to have more holes than Swiss cheese.

Wow, where do you get the idea of anti-immigrant teachings in schools? The multicultural ideals are being constantly reinforced to children in schools from primary school. You obviously have no grasp on the curriculum taught in schools. Packs of immigrants youths engaging in gang violence , raping young girls and bashing people is what causes the frustrations.

In fact when iI think about it, Howards ideas were poisonous because we are encouraged to welcome you with open arms. Now we are paying the price.

Yeah I cant say how tired I am of having 15 year old kids try to wow me with the virtues of communism.

I have a general question to those who have been trumpeting this as some kind of expression of oppressed frustration of 'european australians'- do you actually think that getting drunk, destroying public property, assaulting police and passers-by is an acceptable way to express this?

even if I agreed there was a legitimate grievance (which I do not)- is this really the right and acceptable way to voice that grievance?


as to manly itself- it's always been an aggressive area, both towards women and people of a different colour/appearance. it's something I've certainly witnessed every time I've been down there- like the time I passed some guy by and he yelled "you wog b1tch" at me. mmm lovely.

these kids who are 15-18 are not expressing some sort of politicised angst about immigration and its effects on employment etc etc- they just regurgitating the same kind of aggressive crap that bubbles under the surface of their every day lives. and they take a day centred around nationalism to let it all out because they think it's acceptable.

Gaybriel wrote on Jan 28^th, 2009 at 2:19pm:


I have never implied that this type of behavior is acceptable, from immigrants or our own. I am just saying that the frustration mixed with alcohol can be a volatile combination. Also, you may not see e legitimate grievance, but that only means you haven't been exposed to it, not that it doesn't exist.