I'd just like to ask B_D, mikijo and all the other armchair Nazis here a simple question. If the Federal Government decided to round up Muslims and have them detained in detention camps, would you support such a move?

Further, would you support laws that would allow persons of Muslim origin to be killed?

I'm just trying to gauge where all this discussion is heading.

The Australian Newspaper is not alone when it comes to painting a false picture of Muslim Migrants throughout the world there are hundreds of different Newspapers doing just that,I have checked out all those Newspapers that published the cartoons of Mohammed , I was not suprised to find, the majority of the owners of those Newspapers belonged to the same political religious group, a group that I was part of wrote Letters to Editors, we manufactured the contents to find out what kind of letter would be published, racist letters always seemed to get published, During the Hanson period. I was told over 100 letters supporting her were sent to a Newspaper three were printed , they sorted through the letters to find the most racist, that says the Newspapers were not being fair, I am sure the propaganda department of most Newspapers promote the political views of the owners , that is why cartoons of Mohammed were published to insite violence, the wrong people were demonstrated against, our government and the media have been bashing Muslims for many years, ever since Hansonism raised its ugly head, all the racist ratbags came out of hiding, they even use the Australian flag to promote their hatred

Irfan,

Me thinks you are playing the "Devils advocate" and me also thinks you are after another century.

I am sure you know why Muslim males have a poor reputation. Muslim females do not attract complaints regarding their conduct.

The problem is that many Muslim males are unwilling or unable to co-exist or integrate with non-Muslims. How many is difficult to say but is far more than a few, and not restricted to the "Leb gangs".

People who have daily contact describe Muslim males as arrogant, rude, beligewrant, offensive and dictatorial. These Muslim males have attitudes that leave little doubt that they have no respect for others, our society, our laws or Australia in general. The PM is correct when he said their attitude towards women is poor. Everyone knows women are often their subject of abuse and foul language.

I suggest you should stop nit picking about some minor aspects of the Australian's editorial and try to absorb what the editor was getting at. Stop portraying Muslims as victims in our society and try to find ways to build a better reputation for your fellow Muslim males.

This can only be done by Muslims themselves. If not. I believe, at some stage, restrictions will be placed on Muslim immigration.

In unending procession the Muslims of the world find themselves needing to explain their actions and faith. Why is this so?

There needs to be as much soul searching within the faith as outside it. Exhortations of victimisation is not an answer to problems nor a validation for violent actions.

When tired calls for tolerance are repeatedly asked to accept the intolerable because the fault is always attributed to any but those responsible, intolerance is the inevitable conclusion.

The idiots who swarmed out at night and destroyed the cars and terrorised innocent people saw themselves as ambassadors of the Muslim faith. Why? What did the Muslim community do to bring them to justice?

The idiots at Cronulla who set upon the Middle Eastern men were subjected to almost nightly news broadcasts and denigration by their peers. Few escaped censure or justice and rightfully so.

It is time to look a lot deeper than newspapers to find answers.

Well Irfan our "Armchair Nazi Gazer" if we observe the activities of Muslim Nations they are doing exactly what you have suggested.They are rounding up other religions and belief systems and subjugating to their rule of law.Much like the Armchair Nazis whom you pretend to abhor.

I see the Muslim Religion as our new facism that uses the concept of a god to enslave freedom of thought and speech.

Be assured of this,we will fight you to the bitter end.

IRF.. fair question, and I'll give you an honest answer.

1/ Detention of Muslims.

It would depend on the level of conflict which was clearly 'Islam vs Rest' and how much that overflowed to Australia. If for example, there were mass demonstrations by Muslims about some aspect of our culture, such as free speech, publication of images offensive to Muslims, I would consider that close to an 'Act of WAR'. (the civil kind) If so much as ONE person stood on our streets with a sign saying "Kill those who insult the prophet" I would use Ariel Sharons methods, where he promised to bring 'peace' to Gaza in 3 months and did so. Such a person, would be thrown away to Baxter for a few years, faster than he could say S.A.W. and anyone who then demonstrated on his behalf, would join him.

2/ Laws to Kill Muslims ? (or anyone)

Invaders can be killed, if ur not invading, ur safe.

I have not the slightest interest in killing people 'because they are Muslims'. I have a strong sense of Australian nationhood, and the only time killing is legitimate is in defense of ones homeland.

If I used the 'Muslim' approach to such things, I would be killing people at the slightest excuse, no matter how convoluted.

TREATY OF HUDAYBIYA
Using Mohammed as the example, and Treaty of Hudaybiya where he used the incident of some tribesman allied to the Quraysh who killed some tribesman of a tribe allied to Mohammed, though the Quraysh tried to compensate, Mohammed decided to attack (now that he was stronger.)

But the 'Emporer' has a responsiblity to defend the state, and carries the 'sword' with that in mind (Romans 13)

WEAPONS. I would order the Army in to Lakemba/Punchbowl/Greenacre and do house to house searches for weapons.. Glock pistols.. semi auto weapons. Sharon used the approach "If any Palestinian was carrying a weapon, he was shot on sight" We wouldn't go quite that far.