From: thos@suite.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.asean
Subject: Re: **** Australian citizens kidnapped by Malaysian Prince ****
Date: 27 Jul 92 00:38:09 GMT
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd

In <1992Jul25.004454.7608@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad) writes:

>In article <thos.711961428@suite.sw.oz.au> thos@suite.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen) writes:

>: Admittedly some questions should be asked of the Immigration people,
>: but there is no country on the globe whose borders are proof against 
>: people who want to get in or out.

>If that were the case, the Australian government must prosecute the father.
>Have you ever tried to cross borders illegally? There is always a finite
>chance that you get caught either now or later.

I'm sorry, but that is the case. Even the East Germans couldn't stop
people escaping to West Germany, and their front line immigration officials
were armed with automatic weapons.

>	Just because borders are not foolproff, then why bother with immigration
>laws and customs. Surely your judgement is faulty. You are applying the 
>perfect case to be valid to through another view. Why can't I apply the same
>back at you. Can you prove conclusively that the father had kidnapped the
>children? If not then it should be otherwise. Use your common sense. Your
>biased views towards ISLAM has cluttered your brain.

For crying out loud, don't act deliberately dumb. Sure borders are not
foolproof, but neither is driving a car. We should all give up driving
because we may have an accident someday? National borders are secure in 
the majority of cases, and that's what they're designed for. There are
always ways for people to get in and out if they want to.

And yes, I can prove that the father kidnapped the children - he did
not have permission to take them out of Australia, and they are now
in Malaysia. As they are not of an age to make such decisions themselves
(ie. their mother is their legal guardian) he must have kidnapped them.

My brain is certainly not cluttered with biased views about Islam,
but yours certainly seems to be cluttered with something. My comments
were based on assumptions of citizenship and nationality. Nothing more.
Yet you seem to see an attack on Islam. You'd be better off seeing a
doctor.

>: The base point I'm trying to make here is that how the children are
>: being raised is no affair of anyone outside Australia except perhaps
>Even if they are Malaysian citizens. Come one what sort of common sense are
>you applying?

Ah, but what if they're Australian citizens, dwelling in Australia?
What sort of common sense or justice are _you_ applying, that the
children can then be taken from the mother?

>: the father. And all he can legally do is complain to the Australian
>It is already confirmed that the children are Malaysian citizens under the 
>protection of the Malaysian Sovereignty. They should never be Australian
> citizens even under the custody of an Australian mother. Father overrules
>mother in citizenship cases, I think even in Australia. The fact that this
>is injustice, has nothing to do with the law.

I'm taking this to mean that you completely dismiss any validity
to the children having Australian citizenship. In which case, I don't 
think we even have common ground to discuss this matter.

>: I'm not paying it particular attention because the father is a Prince,
>: nor because the children are being taken to an Islamic state. My 
>: interest stems from the fact that Malaysia is always complaining to
>: our government about how our TV shows show disrespect for them and 
>: their customs; and yet when Malaysian citizens break the laws of our
>: country, and kidnap citizens, their government shows no respect for

>Has he really broken the law? The Australian citizens in Malaysia were put on
>trial first before pronounced guilty. Here you are, pronouncing someone guilty
>even befor the evidence has been brought in.

>	The father has visitation rights. The duration is arguable. Custody
>to mother is only automatic if the children are young and can be contested time
>and again, especially when the children are Malaysian citizens. 


Yes, he has broken the law. And your argument about arguable duration is
specious and wrong. Parents in cases like these have visitation rights
for a set period of time, normally a weekend. Learn something about
what you're talking before you put your foot in it.

>	The father may now proceed with court case to contest the custodian
>right if he wants to. He may not want to. He just want to bring the children
>to Malaysia to observe our ISLAMIC custom in the true sense instead of being
>brain-washed by Australian society.

Well, now you're letting your Islamic bias clutter your brain.

>: our laws and customs. It does sound like double standards to me.

>Taste your own medicine then.

What double standards have I exhibited? Please, tell me. 

>: However, the double-dealing aside, the kidnapping of a country's 
>: citizens is an affront to all citizens of that country.

>To prove a kidnapping case, you must prove the the children were forcefully
>taken by the father. Their mother's statements are meaningless. It is most
>likely that that the children had gone willing. Whether they are cheated is not
>up to you to decide. You are proven to be biased.

You haven't managed to prove anything except your own bias. Listen to
yourself. Everything that disagrees with what you say is because the
person is biased against Islam? Get real, and accept arguments on their
merits, not whether or not you happen to agree with them.

>	View yourself in their positions. Would you listen to your mother to
>hate your own father? Not for us. Maybe you are full of hate even to your own
>father.

Huh? Are you getting personal here? Maybe you're an ignorant jackass with
the manners of a baboon, but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the
doubt. Which apparently, you're not willing to extend to others (unless,
perhaps, they're Islamic).

>	I am not a lawyer but I just apply the law of common sense in terms of
>justice. The argument that Australian Sovereignty overides Malaysian sovereignty
>is preposterous.

As is the argument that Malaysian Sovereignity overides Australian
Sovereignity. 


Obviously your position is based on the children being Malaysian citizens,
and not Australian. Mine is based on the reverse. Unless one of us is 
willing to change their base line we have nothing further to discuss.
Good day.

>Othman bin Ahmad, School of EEE,

-- 
thos cohen  				       |Softway Pty Ltd
 The best way to make a Japanese engineer wince|ACSnet:         thos@softway.oz
 is (when talking about an NSX) to say slowly  |UUCP: ...!uunet!softway.oz!thos
 'but its _not a Ferrari_ is it?' R.Bulgin, CAR|Internet:    thos@softway.oz.au
Newsgroups: soc.culture.australian