We are entitled to decide who comes here

One of the primary functions of a state is to maintain the security of its citizens. Naturally, a state cannot guarantee the security of its citizens, but it must take reasonable steps, or it has failed in its responsibility. A state which willfully ignores obvious threats is even more derelict in its responsibility. Quote:

Sir Harry Gibbs’ advice was succinct: ‘…a state is entitled to prevent the immigration of persons whose culture is such that they are unlikely readily to integrate…’ That counsel was ignored and, once again, Allah’s will has been inflicted on a society whose misguided generosity opened the gates.

…The past four successful terrorist attacks on Australia’s soil have all been carried out by Muslim terrorists, some of whom had successfully applied for refugee status before the Australian authorities. For instance, Islamic State’s most influential recruiter in Australia, Muhammad Ali Baryalei, is a Muslim refugee that the government allowed to stay in the country. End of quote.

A nation-state is also defined by its borders, which it is entitled to control. Who a nation lets in, how many, and who it refuses, are all decisions a nation-state must make.

As John Howard famously said, “We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come”. Quote:

Australia has a population of approximately 24 million and around 500,000 of its people are Muslims. The number of Muslims has risen dramatically over the last thirty years. Over 300,000 of them use Arabic at home. Needless to say, most Muslims are not terrorists but, unfortunately, all terrorists consider themselves to be faithful Muslims. While security measures are not specifically directed against the broader Muslim community, terrorists are, of course, drawn exclusively from this specific religious group. End of quote.

As I’ve written before on Whaleoil, we are constantly lectured about “the vast majority of moderate Muslims”, but it’s too often a bit hard to figure out just who they might be. Quote:

The problem is that we simply do not know who to trust amongst a religious group that largely despises our democracy, culture and laws, and that do not even accept the principle of religious tolerance and separation of powers.

Although jihadists are not drawn exclusively from the first-generation Muslim immigrants, a large Muslim immigration to Australia invariably provides a larger recruiting ground for terrorists and other Islamist militants. Both the influx of asylum seekers from dysfunctional majority-Muslim countries and the constant influx of Muslim immigrants to Australia naturally exacerbate the threat of Islamic terrorism on our soil. End of quote.

The state dereliction of responsibility begins right at the top. Quote:

The last federal electoral campaign coincided with a string of terror raids and major overseas terrorist attacks across the globe. At no point did our then-prime minister, Malcolm Turnbul [sic], use his authority to make the case to fight against radical Islam. Instead, our previous prime minister constantly expressed his utmost admiration for the Islamic religion. He would never utter the terms ‘Islam’ and ‘terrorism’ in the same breath, probably because he believes that Islam is not the source of the problem and that criticising the more troubling aspects of the Muslim religion can make the country less safe. End of quote.

Which raises the question: if criticising Islam makes us less safe, just how moderate are Muslims, really? Quote:

Here it is worth reminding the words of Sir Harry Gibbs, formerly Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia:

“While it would be grossly offensive to modern standards for a state to discriminate against any of its own citizens on the grounds of race, a state is entitled to prevent the immigration of persons whose culture is such that they are unlikely readily to integrate into society, or at least to ensure that persons of that kind do not enter the country in such numbers that they will be likely to form a distinct and alien section of society, with the resulting problems that we have seen in the United Kingdom.”

I wholeheartedly agree with Sir Harry Gibbs. Indeed, if it becomes less and less likely that the actions of this faction within the Muslim community can hardly be prevented, then the most effective way to protect the basic rights of our people and reduce the risk of further terrorist attack is by tightening Australia’s immigration policy, which involves reducing — even to the point of virtually halting — any further inflow of Muslim migrants to this country. End of quote.

A state is also entitled to withhold residency and citizenship, and to eject those who offend its laws and societal norms.


Do you want:

  • Ad-free access?
  • Access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • Access to daily sudoku?
  • Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?
  • Access to podcasts?
  • Access to political polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs. 

Click Here  to support us and watch the number of services grow.

Who is Lushington D. Brady?

Well, a pseudonym. Obviously.

But the name Lushington Dalrymple Brady has been chosen carefully. Not only for the sum of its overall mien of seedy gentility, reminiscent perhaps of a slightly disreputable gentlemen of letters, but also for its parts, each of which borrows from the name of a Vandemonian of more-or-less fame (or notoriety) who represents some admirable quality which will hopefully animate the persona of Lushington D. Brady.

To read my previous articles click on my name in blue.

Listen to this post:
Voiced by Amazon Polly
62%