What does Djokovic have to do with securing Australia's borders?
Is Djokovic a terrorist? Nope.
Criminal? Nope
Illegal immigrant? Nope. He had a Visa.
Djokovic has won the Australian Open a massive NINE times beating all records. And went back home every time.
He has no interest in living in Australia.
He has been allowed into Australia without a valid visa, on the strength of a document issued by a state government which has no constitutional power to authorise entry to Australia.
Is Djokovic a terrorist? Nope.
Criminal? Nope
Illegal immigrant? Nope. He had a Visa
Again, not a valid visa. He had a conditional visa, that was conditional upon him providing a vaccine exemption that met the standards required by Australian law on arrival. He did not have such an exemption, so his visa was not valid.
Djokovic has won the Australian Open a massive NINE times beating all records. And went back home every time.
He has no interest in living in Australia.
Border Security isn't just about keeping out people who want to live him permanently. It's also about securing the borders against people who only want to come here temporarily.
I don't believe any of the hijackers on 9/11 had any sort of permanent right to stay in America - did they? So why do people on Freerepublic think border security is only about permanent immigration. It isn't.
Nor is it, in this case, about whether or not Djokovic is some sort of threat. It's about whether or not the rules set by the Australian government on entry to Australia are actually rules or not.
The cornerstone of Australia's border security policy is this - we decide who comes here and on what terms. It's that simple.
The Australian government can set any rule it likes on who is allowed into Australia - and nobody else gets to tell them differently.
It's that basic. It's that simple. Because it's that important.