On Q&A
Ken Lambert writes: Re. “Worse than Alston: Turnbull’s hypocritical jihad against the ABC” (Friday). Yeah right. Zaky, that crazy mixed-up kid, is all our fault. In a curious way that is true. He is a product of the weakness and cupidity our authorities and the hand wringers who bow down to outrageous nonsense because they lack moral fibre. You might call it Leftist LMF syndrome. Monis was also a harmless idiot given to making outrageous outbursts according to our court system and gullible experts … and what was the result? A country with pride in its values and tradition and a resolve to defend same would have found a new home for Zaky long ago.
Mary Sinclair writes: Tony Abbott has an interesting way with metaphors and other speech devices that is often surprising. None more so than his suggestion yesterday that “heads should roll” at the ABC. This expression unfortunately and directly invokes the beheadings that are one of the more horrific manifestations of the Islamic State “death cult”. And presumably concern about support for Islamic State was the main reason for his statements about the ABC.
Trust in the ABC
Carole Tozer writes: Re. “Whose side are you on?” (Friday). Given the choice between Abbott and the ABC I choose the ABC every time. In the current brouhaha Abbott is sounding more and more like a spoilt child not getting his own way.
Mark Scott, fearless leader
Peter Matters writes: Re. “Great Scott! ABC boss returns fire to defend broadcaster” (Friday). Nobody with an open mind could have possibly disagreed with Mark Scott’s passionate, articulate defence of the ABC. People sure in their heart of their conviction enjoy the luxury of a measured, logical exposition of their case. It was emphasised by the inanity of Education Minister Pyne’s reply to Mark Scott.
Accusations v charges
John Gleeson writes: Re. “On Assange” (Friday). Can Korinne Northwood tell me exactly what crime Assange has committed?
Ken,
Zaky Mallah is Australian born of Lebanese parents. He only has single (Australian) citizenship. Not even retrospective legislation to strip citizenship for suspected terrorism would affect him. Unless the legislation is reverse-Biblical and the punishment extends back to the ancestors 3 or 4 generations. So that parents have their citizenship stripped for the supposed crimes of their offspring.
Wayne, please try not to follow the Crikey red herrings. What occurred on the programme was seen by the overwhelming majority of Australian Citizens to whom I’ve listened – and I’ve gone out of way to LISTEN to them without pushing one way or the other is:
They’d accept almost any legislation needed to deal with him effectively.
They’d deal even more harshly with those who ran the programme and those who defended the makers of the programme.
I can live happily with the fact that I don’t always have majority support for what I believe.
Perhaps the Crikey Collective finds this beyond them?
Wayne,
Does having Lebanese parents entitle one to a Lebanese passport? I don’t know. I do know that having a British born parent entitled one to a British passport not that long ago if not currently.
If the same applies in the Lebanon, then Zaky might be entitled to a Lebanese passport, in which case he could be deported to the Lebanon.
Nothing to do with stripping his parents Wayne, nor his grandparents if none have committed any crimes in Australia
Got it?
Ken,
Does Zaky Mallah have the right to Lebanese citizenship? According to the Wikipedia, he does if his birth was registered in Lebanon by the time he was 22 (his right comes via his father). I can’t imagine that any retrospective law could be applied to him – the Australian government would be very unlikely to get confirmation from Lebanese authorities that his birth was registered there.
He’s an Australian citizen. He’s our ‘problem’, just like any other Australian born citizen who behaves badly – in our eyes, whether being a drunken lout or a misogynist or whatever.
Ken, stop spoiling their fantasies by introducing facts. You do know this is Crikey Land.