Aiden, they are already alienated, if they are open in any way, to joining Islamic State. It is not our function to appease this scum, if they are open,at all, to joining the criminals.
They have to accept the obligation to support the community upon which they have inflicted themselves, and show some gratitude, not aggression, to their benefactors, and be deprived of citizenship if they neglect to do so. This has not, to any degree, penetrated Snaky’s thick skull.

//Mallah's veracity may be taken with a grain or two of salt.

The religion that he espouses says that it is OK to lie to infidels.

So how do we know when he is telling the truth?//

How do we know when anybody's telling the truth, Is Mise? Polygraphs are decidedly dodgy. I did read an interesting article some time ago about 'human lie detectors' - people with the ability to tell when people are lying with far greater accuracy than a polygraph - but apparently people with this talent are few and far between, and they still suffer the same limitation as ploygraphs insofar as they can't tell when a man is telling lies if said man believes those lies to be true.

Leo Lane
"Aiden, they are already alienated, if they are open in any way, to joining Islamic State. It is not our function to appease this scum, if they are open,at all, to joining the criminals."
Reducing further alienation is likely to be a lot more effective in preventing them joining ISIL than harsher laws. So if the objective is to stop people from joining ISIL, sensibly responding to their questions is absolutely our function!

Unfortunately the government's aim seems to be to look tough on terrorism rather than to actually do anything that would prevent it.

The ABC can ask all of the "tough questions" they like, Aiden. provided that they abide by their founding charter to be fair and impartial about it.

Toni Lavis,

We have to trust that people are telling us the truth but how can we place trust in those whose religion tells them that they may lie?

That is one of the great fundamental differences between most other religions and Islam.

LEGO, firstly, have you any evidence they haven't been fair and impartial about it?

Secondly, what counts as fair and impartial? Should the tough questions be evenly distributed? Or should more of them be directed at those proposing controversial policies?