- Joined
- Apr 24, 2014
- Messages
- 8,761
- Reaction score
- 3,312
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I don't want to jump into the "blame all Muslims" bandwagon, but there is something fundamentally wrong with this whole picture.
The guy was a refugee. He was welcomed in Australia. Then he engaged in vociferous protests against the Australian government for its actions in Afghanistan. Then he was accused of no fewer than 40 sexual assaults. Then he was accused in the murder of his wife. He continued to walk around freely, then his actions resulted in the death of two innocent Australians.
Not that he doesn't have a right to protest the actions of the government. But he definitely doesn't have a right to sexually assault 40 Australian women, murder his wife, take hostages, and take the lives of two people.
Now, what would have happened to him if he had stayed in his home country and similarly vehemently protested against its government, then committed these crimes ("sins")? I think he probably would have had his hands chopped off for his first offense, and upon persisting, his head would have been chopped off.
So, Western tolerance resulted in what happened today.
It's like welcoming with open arms a scorpion, then getting fatally stung.
Are we Western societies becoming so politically correct that we then fail to protect our own people from a nutjob like this guy?
Sure, in retrospect, judgment is easier, but this seems like a really extreme situation. Shouldn't this guy 1. Be better screened, and his demand for refugee status turned down? 2. If admitted, then have his status revoked and be deported, after he started misbehaving? I mean, he should have a right of defense, as the crimes he was accused of were maybe still unproven, but I think it shouldn't take this long to realize that the Australians were in the presence of a scorpion - at the very least not let the man out on bail until further investigation. Two innocent Australians would still be alive, and the two of them and their families would have been grateful.
The guy was a refugee. He was welcomed in Australia. Then he engaged in vociferous protests against the Australian government for its actions in Afghanistan. Then he was accused of no fewer than 40 sexual assaults. Then he was accused in the murder of his wife. He continued to walk around freely, then his actions resulted in the death of two innocent Australians.
Not that he doesn't have a right to protest the actions of the government. But he definitely doesn't have a right to sexually assault 40 Australian women, murder his wife, take hostages, and take the lives of two people.
Now, what would have happened to him if he had stayed in his home country and similarly vehemently protested against its government, then committed these crimes ("sins")? I think he probably would have had his hands chopped off for his first offense, and upon persisting, his head would have been chopped off.
So, Western tolerance resulted in what happened today.
It's like welcoming with open arms a scorpion, then getting fatally stung.
Are we Western societies becoming so politically correct that we then fail to protect our own people from a nutjob like this guy?
Sure, in retrospect, judgment is easier, but this seems like a really extreme situation. Shouldn't this guy 1. Be better screened, and his demand for refugee status turned down? 2. If admitted, then have his status revoked and be deported, after he started misbehaving? I mean, he should have a right of defense, as the crimes he was accused of were maybe still unproven, but I think it shouldn't take this long to realize that the Australians were in the presence of a scorpion - at the very least not let the man out on bail until further investigation. Two innocent Australians would still be alive, and the two of them and their families would have been grateful.
Last edited: