You are here

Deport immigrants out of our overcrowded gaols and out of the country for good!

Australia's cultural problem of foreigners outnumbering Australians began back in 1853 when thousands of Chinese rocked up in their droves at the gold field along Victoria's Buckland River in north east Victoria in the 1850s and local violence erupted.

'Following the election of a coalition of the Liberal and Country parties in 1949, Immigration Minister Harold Holt allowed 800 non-European refugees to remain in Australia and Japanese war brides to enter Australia. Over subsequent years, Australian governments gradually dismantled the policy, with the final vestiges being removed in 1973 by the new Labor government.' [Read More].

Where are traditional Australians today? Many are marginalised and have hit underclass status and are victims of substance abuse.

Australians need to call for reform to our Immigration Act and the Australian Citizenship Act to automatically revoke citizenship and deport foreigners invited to our shores but who subsequently commit serious crimes and end up in Australian gaols.

Despite Australia's tolerance, generosity, freedoms, opportunities and its high standard of living, immigrants who go on to commit serious crimes demonstrate that they don't value what Australia has to offer them. Such people seem not to want to integrate with Australians but perpetuate their foreign life here and bring their foreign baggage with them. They have elected to bring their violent past and ethnic troubles with them.

Immigrants to our shores who flout Australian laws forfeit the right to live in Australia. Immigrant criminals downgrade Australian society and are an unwelcome burden.


Almost invariably a week does not pass without a news report of some serious criminal activity in each of these cities and almost invariably committed by an immigrant.

Yet the mass media hush the ethnicity for dubious political correctness. However, when the offender is Caucasian Australian or Aboriginal Australian in appearance the media are more than happy to report as such. In the media there is an immigrant bias against Australians. Why? Is it a cultural superiority complex that perceives traditional Australians (those born here and with ancestral heritage here) to be so privileged a demographic as to be accepting of bias against them? Does that same cultural superiority complex permit immigrants to receive special favouritism because they are perceived as the underprivileged?


Australia's immigration has concentrated in its capital cities. Why? The standard justification is 'jobs'. Most jobs are in the cities and many of these jobs are in government which at local, state and federal levels has actively encouraged immigrants in employment.

Subsequent immigrant arrivals so too target the cities, naturally preferring the familiarity of their own kind. This is a primitive animal trait that pervades all human cultures. English prefer to be with English, Irish with Irish, Americans with Americans, and if one travels overseas such as to Bali or Thailand or the UK, one will see Australians clustered with other Australians who have preceded them.

But ethnic clustering delays and inhibits integration with the broader traditional local community. It is integration that makes immigration work to the mutual benefit of both the immigrant and the incumbent broader population. Integration works when the local language is actively learned, practiced and adopted; when choice of place to live is outside the comfort of the ethnic enclave; when choice of work is with others outside the same ethnic demographic; when one chooses to send children to an ordinary school, when one actively seeks social and leisure pursuits that engage with the general population.

Idealistic Laboral governments since Whitlam have similarly perpetuated anti-assimilation and so ethnic clustering has exploded to the extent that now whole suburbs are dominated by single by a single ethnic immigrant group, effectively displacing the original inhabitants. It is like British colonisation of early Australia which pushed out the native Aborigines.

This rise of ethnic enclaves continues to have a divisive impact on the cohesiveness of Australia's urban societies between the ethnic groups themselves and between ethnic groups and traditional Australians. The 2005 Cronulla Riots are a case in point.


In Australia's innocent early 1970s before Whitlam's Muliculturalism Manifesto of 1972, crime in Australia was very low. Like any developed country although Australia had its share of crime, there were no drive-by shootings, no home invasions, no ethnic violence, no racial rioting, no employment slavery, no honour crimes against women, no criminal doctors, no tit-for-tat homicides between warring families, no gangland murders and even political assassinations!

The wave of such heinous crimes, previously foreign to Australia, were what we only read about happening in gun-toting American and in backward societies in the Middle East, African and Asia. But now those backward violent societies have been allowed to settle and continue their backward violent ways in urban Australia.

Anti-assimilation idealism has turned its back on traditional Australian values and instead encouraged new immigrants to retain their ethnicity and set up their foreign cultures and traditions here. Immigrants have done so and in so doing have had a harder time becoming accepted into Australian society. At the extreme where ethnic culture is clustered enclaves, where they don't speak English, where there is little interaction with the broader Australian community, such immigrants are disadvantaged socially and financially. Youths of immigrants are shunned and disaffected and many out of frustration and boredom turn to petty crime.

A great portion of foreigners (old word for 'immigrant') who commit crimes in Australia habitually have taken up residence in urban Australia, particularly in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth.

South West Sydney for instance has become a ghetto for ethnic violence, drive-by shootings, home invasions, racial rioting, employment slavery, honour crimes against women, criminal doctors, tit-for-tat homicides between warring families, gangland murders and even political assassinations! South West Sydney since Whitam's mass immigration of the 1970s has transformed what was once working class areas of south western Sydney like Cabramatta, Liverpool, Lakemba and Bankstown into ethnic enclaves of violence. At night many males from these areas take to the streets of Sydney's CBD.

In Melbourne, it's the suburbs of the inner west, the north and outer west, where immigrants have clustered and eventually demographically have dominated. Suburbs like Maribyrnong, Broadmeadows, Dallas, Altona, Dandenong, and Springvale.

In Brisbane, the crime suburbs are Fortitude Valley and South Brisbane,;while in the south Beenleigh, Woodridge, Upper Mount Gravatt, Annerley, Browns Plains, Kingston, and Loganlea; in the south-west Goodna, Inala, Wacol and Redbank Plains; Aspley in the north, and Wynnum and Alexandra Hills in the east. [Wikipedia]

In Perth, the ethnic crime enclaves are Mirrabooka [Read about Somali crime wave], Balga, Bayswater, Beechboro, Kingsley and a good deal of Perth's northern sprawl suburbia.

Australia's state police forces are overwhelmed.

In New South Wales in 2005 there were '21 murders in 37 days: homicide police overwhelmed' [by John Kidman, Eamonn Duff and Erin O'Dwyer in Sydney Morning Herald, 12th February 2006] which made it "the worst new year on record"

'Homicide squad investigators are unable to cope, forcing the recruitment of officers normally assigned exclusively to unsolved cases.'

While the NSW Police Association believes about 3000 extra officers are needed statewide on any given day, as many as one in four top detectives are unavailable to investigate major sexual assaults, major robberies, drug deals and fraud cases.'

"There are armed hold-ups, rapes, homicides and extortions going on and we're being forced to cut back on the vital work of dealing with them."


Drive-by Shootings

1st September 2010 - Drive-by Shootings in Merrylands
'Woman injured in drive-by shooting' [The Daily Telegraph]

'A WOMAN suffered wounds to her head after shots were fired into a house in Sydney's west last night.

The woman, 40, was in a bedroom of a house in Desmond St, Merrylands West when it was peppered with bullets about 11.25pm.

A police spokeswoman said the woman suffered "superficial" wounds to her head but they were unable to say if it was from a projectile or flying shrapnel.'

If the culprits were immigrants - deport them to from whence they came!

'Sydney erupts with 3 shootings in 6 hours' by Chelsea White, Daily Telegraph, 2nd August 2010.

'A YOUNG man is dead and two others injured after a spate of shootings across Sydney yesterday.

A man, believed in his late twenties, was gunned down in broad daylight in a suburban park in Greenacre.

The man was shot several times under a picnic shelter in Roberts Park, near Waterloo and Napoleon Streets at 4.20pm.'

'Drive-by shooting in Sydney park' - August 28, 2010, AAP.

'A man has been shot in the leg in a drive-by shooting in a park in Sydney's west.
Witnesses told police the man was with a group in a park in Warwick Farm about 3.40am (AEST) today when a number of cars drove past and a shot was fired from one of them.

'Drive-by shooting in Kingsley(Perth) by Lee Rondganger, The West Australian, 11th April 2010.

'Police are investigating the possibility that a drive-by shooting at a house in Kingsley last night was gang related.

A gunman opened fire at a house in Dalmain Street shortly after 9pm. The house was hit by bullets four times.

Police spokesman, Insp. Bill Munee said the attack was targeted and it was not a random shooting. It is believed the incident is related to a fight that occurred a few weeks ago between two groups.'

Home invasions

'Victim critical after Sydney home invasion by Georgina Robinson, 2nd July 2010.

'A man is fighting for life in hospital after having his wrists and ankles slashed during a terrifying home invasion in Sydney’s south-west last night.

The 25-year-old was at home with his girlfriend, mother and stepfather when four men armed with a machete, an axe and a knife burst into the family's Clingan Avenue, Lurnea, house about 11.45pm, police said.'

'Three men invade home in Sydney's west BigPond News, 26th October 2010.

'Three men forced their way into a home in Sydney's south west and demanded money from the occupants.

Police are investigating the home invasion which happened at 8.30pm (AEDT) on Monday at Lime Street in Cabramatta. One of the men, who was armed with a shotgun, confronted a 25-year-old man, a woman aged 20, a three-year-old girl and a three-month-old girl, police said on Tuesday.'

'Machete brandished in Perth home invasion by AAP, 29th October 2010.

'Police are searching for a man and a woman after a home invasion in Perth in which a machete was brandished and a man assaulted. The incident happened around 2am (WST) in the northern suburb of Ocean Reef, police said.

A young woman phoned police to say her stepfather was being beaten up but the offenders had fled by the time police arrived, a spokesman said.

The young woman received a cut during the incident but neither occupants of the house were badly injured and nothing was taken, he said.

In another incident around 5am in the southern suburb of Maddington a woman going to work at a Coles store was approached by two men who demanded she hand over her car keys.

She was grabbed by the neck but fought back and escaped into the store where she set off the alarm, the police spokesman said.

Police are seeking two dark-skinned men of thin build.'

Somalis again...?

Ethnic violence

'Australian Open explodes into ethnic violence by Terry Brown, Herald Sun 24th January 2009.

'A young woman was knocked out by a flying chair as the Australian Open again exploded into ethnic violence yesterday. Chairs were hurled around busy Garden Square and punches were thrown in the latest ugly incident.

Police believe the woman was an innocent bystander caught in the crossfire when tensions between groups of Bosnian and Serb men and teenagers boiled over. The groups had been watching Serb Novak Djokovic beat Bosnian American Amer Delic in a tight four-set match, and baiting each other. Witnesses said the trouble started about 4pm when a drink was thrown....The stoush is the second involving Bosnian supporters this week.

'Ethnic crime under Sydney scrutiny on late night news & current affairs TV programme hosted by Tony Jones on the ABC, 22nd August 2001.

'TONY JONES: Tomorrow, four young men will be sentenced over a gang rape which has ignited an explosive race debate in Sydney. There are claims that a group of men of Lebanese ancestry from the suburb of Bankstown, has targeted Caucasian women to rape.It is a community crisis which some say has been exaggerated.

LYNNE MINION: Reports of Lebanese men preying on young Caucasian women, gang-raping them in planned, horrific attacks, has caused an outcry, leading all the way to the highest levels.

BOB CARR, NSW PREMIER: They are criminals, they are committing criminal acts, they can't blame the ethnic community they come from, and they can't blame the Australian society, I won't accept that.

LYNNE MINION: The NSW Police Commissioner agrees, saying: "this is the largest immigrant population of (mixed) races in the world. It's going to be extraordinarily difficult to settle that melting pot down."

The scene of the crime, the melting pot of Sydney's Bankstown, is at boiling point now, with Caucasians responding.

Violence against the Middle Eastern community is skyrocketing and there have been threats of retaliatory rapes.

HELEN WESTWOOD, BANKSTOWN COUNCILLOR: Some women have reported being spat at, and having derogatory comments made towards them, and abusive comments and obviously that's because Islamic women are very easily identified because of their clothing.

LYNNE MINION: The Lebanese community is calling for calm, saying ethnicity does not predispose an individual to gang-rape, society does.

PHILLIP RIZK, AUSTRALIAN LEBANESE ASSOCIATION: Put them away for good, regardless of what nationality they came from.

I don't believe that plays any part whatsoever. It's the product of Australian society, the streets of Sydney. No more, no less.

LYNNE MINION: The Ethnic Communities Council says it's a political issue which dispels the image of an harmonious multicultural Australia, replacing it with an image of a society of different races -- and other ones are easy to blame.

SALVATORE SCEVOLA, ETHNIC COMMUNITIES COUNCIL: It's becoming prolific in society, this sort of behaviour, This sort of mentality is settling into the minds of Australians to the extent where they are being suspicious of their fellow Australian.

LYNNE MINION: The NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics has weighed into the story, releasing details saying 70 sexual offences were committed in Bankstown in 1999, but they were the work of one man.

One gang-rape has occurred in the Bankstown area this year, and in 2000, it rated below the State average for sexual assault.

The deepening concern on the streets of Sydney has lead to the police spokesperson on sexual assault appearing at odds with her boss.

CMDR LOLA SCOTT, NSW POLICE SERVICE: If we're naive or someone's out there thinking that it only will occur if you live in a particular area, that's putting other women at risk.

LYNNE MINION: Those who work with the victims say that politicising this issue has missed the point -- that 17 per cent of all sexual assaults are gang-rapes and we need to stop it -- society-wide.

JULIE BLYTHE, SEXUAL ASSAULT COUNSELLOR: Perpetrators come from all racial groups, all socioeconomic groups, class, culture, quite across the board.

LYNNE MINION: The one certainty in south-west Sydney, at least, is that the anger and fear generated by the gang-rape reports have triggered a vicious chain-reaction that looks set to go on and on, as will the trauma of the victims of the rapes themselves.

Lynn Minion, Lateline.'

Racial rioting
'2005 Cronulla riots

Employment slavery
Foreign students exploited as slaves by
Nick O'Malley, Heath Gilmore and Erik Jensen of Sydney Morning Herald, 15th July 2009.

'Thousands of overseas students are being made to work free - or even to pay to work - by businesses exploiting loopholes in immigration and education laws in what experts describe as a system of economic slavery.

The vast pool of unpaid labour was created in 2005 when vocational students were required to do 900 hours' work experience. There was no requirement that they be paid.

Overseas students remained bound to the system as completion of such courses became a near-guaranteed pathway to permanent residency.

Since then the number of foreign students enrolled in the vocational training sector has leapt from 65,120 to 173,432 last year - about half of all our overseas students.

The changes have created a $15 billion industry - comparable countries do not offer residency - but experts, teachers and students say many of the private college courses are little more than visa mills. Since 2001 the number of private colleges has leapt from 664 to 4892.

One university-educated overseas student told the Herald she spent $22,000 and two years doing a hairdressing course she will never use, to secure her residency. She did her 900 hours' work experience in a salon linked to the college, where students were required to pay a $1000 non-refundable bond to use the equipment.

Other colleges charge students thousands of dollars in "placement fees" only to advertise their supply of free labour to local business. A black market has sprung up in fraudulent letters of completion.

"If you wanted to make a corrupt system, this is absolutely how you would do it," said an immigration agent, Karl Konrad.'

Other ethnic crimes inflicted upon Australia involve Islamic so-called 'honour' crimes against women, foreign medical doctors committing criminal acts intentionally or negligently against trusting patients, vengeance Killings between warring families, the advent of gangland murders and narcotic drug importation as the following recent case of a Vietnamese on 6th November 2010 highlights:

'41 drug balloons removed from woman's stomach' [ABC, 6th Nov 2010]
If she is found guilty and was born overseas (possibly Vietnam) - deport her!


Australian gaols are full and new ones are being built to cope. In 2008, the Alexander Maconochie Centre at Hume cost more than $430,000 per bed, making it the second most expensive prison ever built in Australia.
[,strong>'New prison 'second most expensive' ever built', ABC, 4th March 2008].

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, back in 2003 Australia collectively housed some 23,555 prisoners and at the time the imprisonment rate was 153 prisoners per 100,000 adult population.


Some insightful statistics are provided by the ABS in the following year, 2004:

* The prisoner population in Australia has increased by more than 40% over the decade to June 2004, which is proportionately higher than the 15% growth in the Australian adult population in the same period.

* The female prisoner population doubled to 1,672 over the decade.

* The male prison population had increased by 40% to 22,499 during the same time.

* Overall, the adult imprisonment rate increased from 127 to 157 prisoners per 100,000 adult population over the period.

* The mean age of prisoners has increased from 31 years to 34 years.

* The proportion of unsentenced prisoners has increased from 12% to 20%.

* The proportion of sentenced prisoners serving an aggregate sentence length of 10 years or more has increased from 10% to 13%.

* Sentenced prisoners with a most serious offence of 'homicide and related offences' increased from 9% to 10% and 'acts intended to cause injury' (including assault) from 11% to 14%.

* At June 2004, there were 24,171 prisoners in Australia, an increase of 3% since 30 June 2003. The median aggregate sentence length was 3.2 years and the median expected time to serve was two years.

* Over 50% of prisoners were males aged 20-34 years.

* Females represented 7% of the total prisoner population.

* Almost 60% of male prisoners and 50% of female prisoners are known to have prior imprisonment.

* Nearly 1 in 2 sentenced prisoners had a most serious offence involving violence or the threat of violence.

[Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics, File: '4517.0 - Prisoners in Australia', 23rd December,2004.]

Of the above statistics, three are of most relevance here:

1. The last statistic about the high proportion of prisoners having committed a violent offence

2. The fact that the published prison statistics available from the ABS is six years old (2004)

3. The fact that ethnicity or demography is conspicuous by its absence.

So how many immigrants make up Australia's gaols?
Australian and State governments in their politically correct guise refuse to disclose this statistic. Why? Is it because the proportion is so high as to shock Australian society and likely spark ethnic tension?


Immigration costs local society - processing, financial support, preferential selection of immigrants in government agencies, demand driving costs of living such as inner urban rents and residential property prices, congestion of public services, infrastructure congestion (roads, public transport, hospitals, schools, childcare), cost pressures on utilities - water, electricity, gas, council rates), you name it! The cost of immigration is deeper than many realise.

But the full cost of immigration is not measured and it is certainly not politically correct nor convenient to report it.

Immigration harm is not perceived by government and business's short-term selfish economic benefits - jobs filled by foreigners.


Auto deportation of immigrants convicted of serious crimes is long overdue. It must not matter if the person has residency status or has been granted citizenship. If they then commit a serious crime and are convicted they have breached their residency conditions.

Anyone born overseas who is convicted in Australia of a serious crime needs to be automatically deported - residency status, citizenship status - either made null and void - and ousted never to return!

As if Australia doesn't have enough criminals of its own? Who needs more?

Indeed all countries should reciprocate - deport criminal Australians back to Australia to serve their time at Australian taxpayer expense. Quid Pro Quo! All is needed is for the Australian Government to negotiate bilateral standing agreements with the relevant countries.

Had we had this Aussie-respectful policy in place, Corby and the Bali Nine would be in Australian gaols now - rightly or wrongly. But we'd have only Australians in Australian gaols!

Australia has enough of its own criminal element without inviting more!

Image icon Gaol.jpeg6.08 KB


I could not agree more and am intensely angered by the fact that we Australians have been overtaken by ethnic people not seeking asylum in aid of 'living better, safer lives with an appreciation of Australian culture' but moreso looking to take over whole suburbs and bring that violence with them.

The number of times I have been verbally abused by ethnic men, spat on through my car window, sideswiped in my car, etc. is unacceptable! I fear for my children - if we have no protective rights and continue to roll over & not only accept but ENABLE these violent people to bring their hostilities to Australia then what rights will my children have in 20 years time?! God help us all. Does the rate of violent crime not speak for itself? How dare Government Officials expect honest, hardworking tax payers to condone, let alone continue to PAY FOR these people to be put up in overcrowded prisons? Sentences are reduced as a result of overcrowding, meaning that these people are back on the streets putting the rest of us at risk within no time at all. Television in prison? Give me a break. Perhaps if these criminals knew they were going to be deported back to their country of origin they would reconsider those acts of violence. Why not put our good money toward a plane trip back home or (considering we just LOVE advocating for the rights of boat people), put them on a boat back home!! Here's another idea - where there is clear evidence of a violent crime having been committed, use that money to bring back the death penalty, then see what happens. At the very least it will either help gain back some control agains those alientating, polluting and endangering our country and our lives, or help start controlling this overwhelming and worsening population crisis we are all doing our best to survive!

Stand up Australia. Fight for what is right - for us!!

Editorial comment: Whilst we don't think that privileges should be allowed for immigrants or those applying for refugee status and that they should not be an undue burden on the Australian taxpayer and we are in favour of the law being applied firmly of immigrant lawbreakers as well as native lawbreakers, we also are in favour of good standards of human rights and procedural justice.

We certainly oppose the death penalty. As for the issue of television in prisons, we are not in favour of prisons being unduly harsh to any prisoner. The deprivation of liberty should be a harsh enough imposition upon a prisoner. The mere provision of TV sets (with the usually second-rate entertainment they provide) would hardly make prisons overly luxurious.

Murder carries the death penalty in Alabama and the Australian government is seeking assurance honeymoon killer Gabe Watson would not face capital punishment should he be found guilty in his home town.
Watson is now being held as an illegal immigrant at Melbourne's Maribyrnong detention centre.

The law of double jeopardy should be applied in the case of so-called honeymoon killer Gabe Watson, according to one of Australia's most respected barristers, Robert Richter QC. He has already been charged with manslaughter by accident, in Queensland.

Mr Richter said Watson should not have to face another trial at all!

No wonder we have so many crimes in Australia, with such "soft" approach to criminals!

Watson killed the very person in his care, the person he vowed to love and hold "till death us depart". Watson is accused of turning off Tina's air supply, holding her underwater until she passed out and then opening the oxygen valve before swimming to the surface to raise the alarm. His motive, they say, was to claim her life insurance!

His crime was one of the worst, the betrayal and killing of the person who should have been able to trust him above all.

Justice should be allowed to take its due course, and he should be sent back to Alabama. Australia should not be a place where murderers can be assured of not facing up to the full penalty for their crimes.
We have all sorts of "human rights" in the western world, but little attention is being given to its counterpart - "human responsibilities".

Capital punishment is not murder, but justice - especially as there is little doubt about his guilt, and motive.

Yes, Gabe Watson once found guilty ought to have been deported to his country of birth - the United States.

Foreigner to Australia, Gabe Watson was found guilty of manslaughter by an Australian court for the death of his wife Tina Watson. The Queensland Supreme Court at Brisbane in June 2009 imposed a custodial sentence on Gabe Watson. Rightly or wrongly, the trial judge sentenced him to one year in prison, with a further three and a half years suspended. Subsequently, Watson's failed appeal increased his sentence by a further six months. [Wikipedia]

What should have happened was on the same day as the initial sentence being handed down, Watson, as a foreigner to Australia ought to have been immediately deported by the Australian Government at US Government expense back to his country of birth - the United States. His sentencing should have been served there and his appeal case processed and heard in the United States. the full cost of the appeal process ought to have been rightly borne by the United States as the country of birth of the convicted offender.

This a simple, fair, unambiguous and universally consistent approach to foreigners convicted of serious crimes outside their country of birth. Such justice ought to apply reciprocally and indeed globally.

No country and its citizens have a moral responsibility to harbour foreign criminals. That responsibility lies with the government of the country of birth of that criminal.

Birth country is not of anyone's choice, committing crime is!

Disparity in Penalty

That the state of Alabama imposes the death penalty is a separate issue. The issue then becomes what bilateral agreement Australia and the US are prepared to put in place when sentence is handed down in the trial country (where the crime was committed) that is more lenient than the sentencing country (where the sentence is to be served). As close countries, they should be able to negotiate a mutually acceptable outcome.

That a person born in a country which legally permits the death penalty, should not be an excuse to allow that person commit a serious crime in another country and be granted immunity from deportation back to that person's country of birth.
Else it risks a precedent for all the criminals from the following countries who still permit the death penalty to emigrate to countries like Australia. It would send a ludicrous message that of preparedness of harbouring serious foreign criminals in their gaols.

The following countries permit the death penalty, and so in my view may be characterised as brutal, uncivilised and backward:

Antigua and Barbuda
China (People's Republic)
Congo (Democratic Republic)
Equatorial Guinea
Korea, North
Korea, South
Palestinian Authority
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Saudi Arabia
Sierra Leone
Trinidad and Tobago
United Arab Emirates
United States

[Source: The Death Penalty Worldwide]


Ethical businesses should not trade with such countries. Ethical governments should condemn their backward practice publicly at at International forums like the UN. Sensible travellers should avoid them like the plague and hope their international tourism sectors collapse.

It would be wise for Australians never to visit these countries.

In the case of the Bali Nine in Indonesia, six of whom are on death row,with names like Andrew Chan, Si Yi Chen, Michael Czugaj, Renae Lawrence, Tach Duc Thanh Nguyen, Matthew Norman, Scott Rush, Martin Stephens and Myuran Sukumaran, perhaps many of these convicted criminals were not born in Australia and so should not be entitled to deportation to Australia, but rightly and consistently to the country of their birth.

Well John I suppose I better keep my nose clean seeing as I wasn't born in Australia. I wouldn't be too quick to pass any judgement on individuals such as Andrew Chan or Si Yi Chen, for all you know they could be sixth generation Australians descended from the very mid 19th century Chinese immigrants you refer to earlier in your article. Or don't they fall under the banner of "traditional Australians"? Is a traditional Australian a white person or just someone who has lived here a long time and made a contribution? Or Both?

If Andrew Chan or Si Yi Chen were born in Australia, then unequivocally they have an absolute right to Australian nationality and protection and are entitled to committed unending support from the Australian Government to get them home.

Even if they committed serious crimes overseas, while they each must be tried by that country, they should be deported to Australia to serve the court imposed sentence.

If Matthew Norman, Scott Rush, Martin Stephens, with names that may sound more Anglicised Australian, were in fact not born in Australia, then consistently such non-Australian borns should in the same way be deported not to Australia, but to their country of birth. It is a simple unambiguous rule.

Scott is looking for racist undertones that do not exist.

The test is one of birth country, not ethnicity or foreign sounding name or skin colour, or religious preference.

But Scot is right to challenge such policy for racist bias.
Scott, the intention is for such policy to be international.
It is absolutely fair.

The contributors to this thread relative to “the Australian” seem to be both skirting around the edges, perhaps reacting to the agenda of the political correct social engineers and bourgeoisie, or a confusion - lack of knowledge of Australian history.

I doubt you would find any of these attitudes amongst the Chinese or Japanese people, as they have no intent to second-guess themselves for recognizing, and insisting upon their biological community. They stand in good steed for “advancement” in the coming decades of this century.

The confusion may arise from the overuse of the term “traditional” by the largely Gubba driven Aboriginal Industry. For Scott’s information, Gubba is the description used by our Aboriginal People to define those whose Aboriginal blood has been denuded by mixing with other races. The paler these Gubba are, the more vocal the whining/disgruntlement about life, and “traditional” claiming, seems to be.

Confusion may also be added to through elements of our bourgeoisie using the term in their fawning reference to “traditional” Aboriginal landowners at assemblies, etc – even for tribes that have consciously interbred themselves out of existence generations ago. Of course, never in such consciousness is the sacrifices of our military during the Pacific War, and which enabled our very existence today. The inner glow is more important!

Whilst Australian history is being phased out by our so called elites, and therefore immigrants cannot expect any real exposure, nevertheless even a cursory glance over the story of our Australian People reveals that the descendents of our settling and pioneering stock took the common terminology of “NATIVE AUSTRALIAN”, and it has been ingrained for generations.

A Native Australian is a person of our Soil and of European descent, and like the Chinese and Japanese, Australians do not need to second-guess themselves.

In the historical formalization of our identity by our Trade Union Movement, supported by our people under the idealism for a new nation, minor numbers of “others” who remained living here were acknowledged under our well-formed tolerant values, and outlook, but were just expected to enjoy their life in our Australian Community, not much else.

I note the contributor Scott seems to feel the need to be coy in identifying himself as “someone not born here”, as against an immigrant, possibly due to Australians now largely “sick to the back teeth” of immigrants and their detrimental effect on our civilisation. This attitude of Australians is exacerbated through the gall of such who derogatively infer by questioning our unique historical identity as Native Australians, even if as a people we are in decline through the intent of the capitalist class.

But to the capitalist class and their minions - we are not done with yet!

I can assure you Bill that I am quite familiar with many aspects of Australian history including the relatively miniscule period that Europeans have occupied this land. My understanding is that the first Australians coined the term “gubba” to mean the white man. It was a shortening of government or gubba-min and was most definitely not a term of endearment. I myself went to school in Roebourne and can’t say that I ever heard that term used amongst the aboriginal people who made up 90% of the population. Maybe it’s a NSW thing.

Nor was I aware that there were tribes of aboriginal people that consciously bred themselves out of existence. I would laugh except I am so offended by your notion that the paler these people are, the more they complain. Reading your comment is like reading the transcript of a talkback radio show hosted by Wilson Tuckey. I don’t suppose there is any room in your version of events to include aboriginal enslavement, rape, murder and theft of children? Does it not occur to you that the only people that consciously tried to breed the aboriginal people out of existence were the Europeans themselves?

“A Native Australian is a person of our Soil and of European descent” – that’s a good one. Sounds like something from a Goebbels speech. Europeans are no more native to Australia than a fox or a rabbit.

Scott's reference in his comment above to "gubba gubba" is a racist slur, which has no place in Australia. The comment heading should be removed from this website. What colonists did to indigenous Australians was despicable and unforgiveable.
But Scott clearly is prejudiced in targeting those born in Australia who are not indigenous, and even specific about skin colour. Scott's comments are racist. It is another example of reverse racism by immigrants.

Scott quotes from somewhere “A Native Australian is a person of our Soil and of European descent”. That is also a racist slur. A native Australian is someone born in Australia - ethnicity is irrelevant.

Scott has previously confirmed that he was not born in Australia and now denegrades Australians. He labels anyone not indigenous Australian as... "no more native to Australia than a fox or a rabbit".
Why the derision?

Such derision has frequently come from New Zealanders (usually to Brisbane; less so to Perth) with a cultural inferiority complex of Australians - bit like Fairfax columnist Elizabeth Farrelly, an Aucklander who regularly casts dispersions upon Australian society. [Cases in Point]. Perhaps Scott was born in New Zealand. I wonder if he has pledged his loyalty to Australia and become a citizen?

It is the type of foreigner who does not respect Australian values and who denigrates Australians that is unwelcome.

Point taken John, I have changed the title. My posting was actually a reaction to Funnelweb Bill's comments that included the claim that “A Native Australian is a person of our Soil and of European descent” which I find to be a very racist comment. My references to skin colour were once again to Bill's assertion that :

"The paler these Gubba are, the more vocal the whining/disgruntlement about life, and “traditional” claiming, seems to be."

particularly in the context that Bill believes "gubba" to mean:

"the description used by our Aboriginal People to define those whose Aboriginal blood has been denuded by mixing with other races"

I must say that I've never been accused of being racist. Misanthropic perhaps but not racist. Perhaps I'm being a little oversimplistic in my definition of the word "native" which I generally interchange with "indigenous" - I think it's got something to do with my biology background.

I can assure you that I suffer no cultural inferiority complex and I am not from New Zealand. As an 11 month old "British subject" it was not necessary for me to attend an Australian citizenship ceremony nor would I have remembered it anyway. Still, if you want to lump me in with the immigrants who have no right to criticise Australians then that's your perogative. You sound like a seventh generation Australian with a superiority complex to me. I'm not going to throw the "r" word around any more John, you've done enough of that already

So essentially you are advocating the creation of a second-class tier citizenship. In otherwords, naturalised citizens will always be considered inferior because they have a sub-clause that can see that citizenship revoked while those who inherited their citizenship get away scott-free.

Naturalised citizens have the same duties and obligations as those who inherited their citizenship. They pay the same taxes, they are bound by the same laws and they will be conscripted just like everyone else if Australia finds itself in a great war. Therefore they should receive the same treatment in the criminal justice system.

As a naturalised citizen, I consider myself of equal value as everyone else in this country. No more and no less. The only difference between naturalisation and inheritance is the means of obtaining citizenship.

Re: Two comments above, respectively from 'Funnelweb bill's comment 'Behaving one's self' and 'drogo's' comment 'Second-class Citizenship' (each 15th November, 2010).

In reply, yes.

Australian citizenship is a privilege highly globally valued. It is not a right. Therefore, privileged citizenship has prerequisite conditions and performance conditions, else all Indians, Asians, Africans, Europeans and Americans could argue entitlements to swamp Australia.

Bugger that! That would be unjust on Australia and Australians - a fairness justification any country would stand by. As if Australian Aborgines haven't suffered from successive waves of colonising immigrants from the British torrent and then succumbed to British authorised foreign herds every since?

If one looks at the facts, Australia is being overwhelmed by immigrants. The problem is pathogenic.

Some of these immigrants are committing serious crimes once in Australia. Immigrants who have a record of criminality and foreigners visiting Australia who then commit serious crimes while they are here are rightly automatically deported.

So why should similar serious crimes be immune from deporting the perpetrator simply by Australia's honourable process of residency or citizenship?
Answer: It shouldn't!

Such defence of citizenship has no basis for someone who has breached the conditions of citizenship, flouted Australian laws and cause serious crime in Australia. Once convicted they deserve to be deported to their country of birth.
Simple rule, Fair rule. Try doing same overseas. Name one country that would be more lenient than Australia for such crimes by 'new' citizens!

Apply this rule universally and I challenge that any genuine injustice could emerge.

-- But let me rebuke Funnelweb's claims:

First, I presume this writer is not Australian-born because he feels insulted. (Australians wouldn't).

Second, the waffle about 'skirting around the edges', 'politically correct agenda', 'social engineers and bourgeoisie' is nonsensical, so I have nothing to add.

Third, Australian citizenship offers are hardly second class. I would argue that Australian citizenship is a world-leading privilege and don't millions of humans around the planet well know it?

But logically, posing the worst scenario, that all of India's and China's now millions of educated decided Australia is better than India and China, what condition would protect the incumbent local Australians from immigration invasion? Think of it!

Only birth rights present the fairest universal test. Else Australia risks being overrun by the world's populations that have a life less ideal than Australians.

Economic immigration is a form of human gravity. Humans flow to the attractive countries of least resistance. And at present our ethnic-biased Laboral governments keep the immigration door open despite no local electoral mandate permitting the bastards on Capitol Hill to do so.

To reiterate, the simply test ought to be that if one is not born in Australia, one's citizenship privilege is conditional on performance. If you commit a serious crime in your new host country - then simply that is a fundamental breach of your citizenship conditions and you have voided your privilege and entitlements.
Of course your offspring cannot if they were born here.

In response to Drogo's claims, 'second class citizens' are indeed those who breach Australian laws. This issue is about serious crimes in Australia by foreigners, so what are you advocating?

Your notion of 'inherited citizenship' is a make believe fantasy. Either one is born in Australia or not. Simple. How can one then have inherited citizenship?

Yes, so-called 'naturalised citizens' agree to comply with the "same duties and obligations as those who were born in Australia.

If they breach those duties and are permitted to stay in Australia, then what message does that send to wannabe 'crims' overseas?

And think about it. This rule is not just for Australia. It should be universal.
The only losers are the criminals.

So what ulterior motives do 'Funnelweb Bill' and 'Drogo' have. Are they ethnic 'crims' living it up in Australia at Australian expense?

With all the ethics in Australian gaols it is about time they were deported and Australian draft and vote for a Conditional Citzenship Bill - foreigners are welcome as Australian citizens according to Australian conditions - be law abiding, speak English, assimilate, accept Australian traditional culture, rescind any cultures that conflict with Australian cultures.

Simple, fair and just.

Postscript: 'Funnelweb Bill' and 'Drogo' have inspired me to upgrade this comment to an article, thanks.