Quinkla Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 In the Australian context with its potential for death and destruction, anyone who starts a bushfire is a terrorist. A bushfire is effectively a weapon of mass destruction so the terrorist label fits. Terrorism is the attempt to achieve a political outcome through violence or threat of violence. Sometimes I weep that my beautiful language is being destroyed by sheeple who misuse words they heard on TV but didn't quite understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 I think you are being disingenuous to imply that those who disagree with deporting this chap have sympathy for him. My reasoning is based on morality and procedural fairness. If we have a problem with fire raisers, we should jail them in accordance with the law. But deporting one just because he happened to be born overseas looks to me like being punished twice when someone else would be punished only once. Plus, it has the potential to break families apart. Plus, it is not fair on the country to which the person is deported. This is exactly the point. Why can't more people on here look beyond the actual individual, looking into the actual impact on the rights of individuals and dependants and freedoms overall? We have had similar disagreements before on another topic with regards to banning groups to which the mob applauded in the main regardless of implications to freedom. I wouldn't bother arguing another thread in what is obviously an abuse of government power yet again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Country vic Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Seems to me all foreign governments, especially New Zealand, should reciprocate and remove all rights given to Australians who live there. If New Zealand treated Australians living there in the same way New Zealanders are treated here it would either cause Australia to reconsider its disgraceful treatment of NZ'ers, or at least it would remove the insult to injury to know that Australians have proper human rights in NZ while NZ'ers here are the lowest form of life. PM Key should start by rounding up all Australian born criminals and send them to a disgusting internment camp while they await deportation. The UK should do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rachel Tilley Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 In the UK we have the Human Rights Act where there is a section for the 'right to family life' and many immigrants in the UK who deserve to be booted out have been allowed to stay here due to this legislation. Sometimes it's damned infuriating that we have to put up with foreign scum (as well as our own) due to the Human Rights Act, but then there are deserving cases that some people who would have been deported are rightly allowed to stay. However, I would never condone any adult who had lived in the UK since they were one year old being sent back to another country against their will all by themselves just because they were born there, it's pretty ruthless, especially, as has been mentioned, some of them don't even speak that language and/or the culture is totally alien. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 This is exactly the point. Why can't more people on here look beyond the actual individual, looking into the actual impact on the rights of individuals and dependants and freedoms overall? We have had similar disagreements before on another topic with regards to banning groups to which the mob applauded in the main regardless of implications to freedom. I wouldn't bother arguing another thread in what is obviously an abuse of government power yet again. It is actually obvious that those on the far right of the political spectrum would welcome this. Many would advocate death sentences or 'lock em up and throw away the key' for most* crimes. A policy that effectively involves a life sentence on offenders but at a reduced cost to the taxpayer must be manna from heaven. *Exceptions probably being white collar crimes such as fraud and embezzlement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggie2012 Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share Posted November 9, 2015 How ironic that in 1876 my grand grand grandpa, got convicted for stealing grain to feed his family and shipped to Australia as a punishment with no possibility of return to the UK ever. Leaving behind a wife and 3 kids - nobody cared then and it was different times. But he was 27 and he eventually remarried here. And my grand grand grandma also survived back in the UK. Funny, I just see the resemblance of the law applied here not much has change since. The other thing and again, regardless of how he caused that bush-fire, wouldn't be more beneficial for Australia to let him stay home (because I think home is where you spend the most of your life) and keep paying back in form of taxes etc. to this country? I d not think everything is or has to be black and white all the time. Someone has mentioned, that what if you are much older than this man: let say he was 70 years old and facing the same faith. Would that really not to be considered? As humans, have we not grown to become better or more than medieval witch hunters? I would hope to think so.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skani Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Sometimes I weep that my beautiful language is being destroyed by sheeple who misuse words they heard on TV but didn't quite understand. Your "beautiful language" is full of words which no longer have their original meaning. It hasn't destroyed the language in any way. Language evolves continually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 He says that and then in the same breath uses the made up word sheeple too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skani Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Seems to me all foreign governments, especially New Zealand, should reciprocate and remove all rights given to Australians who live there. It's nothing to do with "all rights". However, if you live in a foreign country without becoming a citizen and then commit a crime - especially a serious crime which warrants a 15 months gaol sentence - you should fully expect to be deported.....from any country. I should add that there have been other highly publicised cases over the past few years - and before this current crackdown. These included people who arrived as very young children and were deported back to their birth countries after criminal convictions. Two in particular involved a Swede and a Serbian who had no knowledge of their birth country language. These cases should have given anyone without citizenship reason to ponder their own status...and at least resolve not to commit a serious crime if they wanted to maintain their non citizenship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 It is actually obvious that those on the far right of the political spectrum would welcome this. Many would advocate death sentences or 'lock em up and throw away the key' for most* crimes. A policy that effectively involves a life sentence on offenders but at a reduced cost to the taxpayer must be manna from heaven. *Exceptions probably being white collar crimes such as fraud and embezzlement. Yes I expect you are correct. The right wing's preferred emphasis on punishment and revenge rather than cause and effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Easy to resort to personal attacks when the substance of your argument is not doing the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robfromdublin Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Don't be silly.A bushfire is effectively a weapon of mass destruction so the terrorist label fits. Read up on the Black Saturday bushfires in Victoria. Some fires deliberately lit killed scores of people. A weapon of mass destruction is more of a Blair/Bush thing and has nothing much to do with terrorism. In reality, a terrorist attack can be carried out with a kitchen knife as has been demonstrated multiple times. What makes something a terrorist attack is a political motive. Hence, someone opening fire in an office can be a terrorist attack (Charlie Hebdo) but not if it's just a crazy with a gun (one of the many mass killings in the USA). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robfromdublin Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Terrorism is the attempt to achieve a political outcome through violence or threat of violence. Sometimes I weep that my beautiful language is being destroyed by sheeple who misuse words they heard on TV but didn't quite understand. I was about to point out the irony in using 'sheeple' in that post, but it turns out it's in the Oxford dictionary! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinkla Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 I was about to point out the irony in using 'sheeple' in that post, but it turns out it's in the Oxford dictionary! Did you think I hadn't checked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 So sheeple is a much loved part of your beautiful language. If you can get away with that then anyone can get away with anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinkla Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 So sheeple is a much loved part of your beautiful language. Sometimes a word comes along that is so perfect it makes me want to sing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diane Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 If only he'd been a citizen, or even better, a policeman! He could've started a bushfire then had the charges dropped! ..or a Catholic Priest. One of the Priests at a local school has recently been found guilty of distributing child pornography whilst living and working at the school - his punishment? He's been sent to live out the rest of his years at a beautiful country winery. Tough life for some. Sorry, off topic a little, but I was so grrrrr when I heard this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpodom Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Sometimes a word comes along that is so perfect it makes me want to sing. so apt, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Terrorism is the attempt to achieve a political outcome through violence or threat of violence. Sometimes I weep that my beautiful language is being destroyed by sheeple who misuse words they heard on TV but didn't quite understand. Ah, the beautiful language. Not a term I am familiar with in regards to the English language. Now a famous French auteur, suggested French when spoken correctly was akin to the angels in heaven singing. English to my mind is great. It is very functional. Easy enough to learn, even if pronunciation is senseless in many cases. But beautiful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggie2012 Posted November 12, 2015 Author Share Posted November 12, 2015 Here you go, now it made the news in the UK too; and here is another article, this one is the Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/nov/12/british-citizen-in-australia-for-50-of-51-years-faces-deportation-for-scrub-fire much more information than the original article. "Wightman was convicted last year for a fire he lit in 2011. The blaze burned less than an acre of scrubland and did not destroy any property or threaten life.Wightman served 15 months in jail, his first serious criminal conviction. He had previous driving convictions and low-level drug offences but none that attracted more than a fine. The court heard Wightman had lit the fire as he battled serious mental health problems brought about by drug abuse. But Wightman was apprehended immediately on leaving prison and detained at Yongah Hill detention centre, 90km east of Perth, for eight weeks before he was suddenly flown to Australia’s offshore detention centre on Christmas Island in the middle of the night" When Wightman was released from jail in September, Western Australia’s prisoners review board noted he had completed all rehabilitation programs and had demonstrated “a motivation to change his offending behaviour”. “A limited criminal history indicates an ability to lead a pro-social life,” it said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinkla Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 Thanks for posting additional info - it helps to see the man as a real person. But ultimately, the nature of the offence is immaterial, the guy belongs to Australia and he is for Australia to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speakeasy Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 And here I thought we needed to increase the population in the colonies.. I think this will get up a lot of countries noses. Especially those already full to the brim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silencio Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 The article in the guardian makes it clear what I've assumed that he failed the character test long time ago and we know that even minor drug convictions prevents somebody of becoming an Australian citizen keeping in mind that a drug problem usually evolves over years/decades. Quote: 'He had previous driving convictions and low-level drug offences but none that attracted more than a fine.' The next sentence makes it clear why he is due of being deported under the new government rules. The lawyer's strategy that would have worked fine for an Australian citizen actually backfired for him as a visa holder (though with an Australian accent, family roots and his upbringing here). How can society or the government be sure that when he battles his drug abuse that we won't lit a fire again? My conclusion is this chap got away with a lot of (smaller) things but arson in combination with 'serious mental health problems' + 'drug abuse' was an invitation for the immigration department to deport him. Under the new policy that are exactly the people this government wants to get rid of. Quote: 'The court heard Wightman had lit the fire as he battled serious mental health problems brought about by drug abuse' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinkla Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 He was accepted as a permanent resident when one year old. He has lived in Australia since then. This is not a situation in which the character test should apply. Even if this chap is worse than Hannibal Lecter, he is totally connected to Australia and he is Australia's problem to deal with. Deporting him to a country he has never known goes against natural justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpodom Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 He was accepted as a permanent resident when one year old. He has lived in Australia since then. This is not a situation in which the character test should apply. Even if this chap is worse than Hannibal Lecter, he is totally connected to Australia and he is Australia's problem to deal with. Deporting him to a country he has never known goes against natural justice. I wonder how some people have the gumption to get out of bed in the morning:swoon: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.