On Thurseday 16th August 2007 an Australian Muslim cleric has sent an open letter to Prime Minister John Howard about:
-the situation of Muslims and Non Muslims in Australia,
-discrimination about the reaction of Australian government to terrorist acts when the suspect is Non Muslim ,
-also regarding Muslims who have been insulted,
-advising and warning! John Howard about few issues such as possible future problem for the Australian National Security if the discrimination continues and Muslims get insulted more than this.

Sheikh Haron in his letter to John Howard has said: " Dr ... commented that he was surprised that the trained doctors in the UK had opted to use explosive devises when they were clearly amateurs, instead of utilizing their medical knowledge and skill, for example in the spread of diseases, to be far more effective."

Sheikh Haron has asked the Prime Minister: " Isn't it instructing terrorist? Isn't it a proposal for their next operation to choose a better target to be more effective? Isn't it giving a message and guideline to terrorists?"

This Muslim cleric is trying to question Prime Minister why the reaction of the government to terrorist acts made by Muslim suspect is not similar to the Non Muslim suspect?

Do you think Sheikh Haron is right? Do you think there is not any difference between Muslims and Non Muslims if they instruct terrorism?

Now you should get this right

Is a muslim a person or a religious meaning that this person has taken the faith of islam fully.

When you refer to non muslim are you refering to a person who has not taken on the faith of islam.
Refereing to catholics,prodostants,buddists, jewish,mormons and the list goes on.

If they wish to portray themselves as per their religion instead of iraqi australian, Indian australians and so forth then why should we take them shoving their religon down our throuts as such.

When they decide to keep their religon and call themselves appropriatly then things may change,but until they work out that this is australia and we have laws to protect what freedoms we have then the problem will be solved.

"Writing letters to heads of State" is without question a VERY 'Islamic' thing to do.
Once Mohammad had unified most of the Arabian Peninsula, he set his imperialistic gaze further afield and sent letters to the Persian and Byzantine Kings. (I'd love to see the one he sent to the king of Ethiopia, because the Muslims only survived due to his protection when the fled Mecca)
In essense, his letters said as follows:

"Accept Islam and you and your property will be safe" (sounds like an outright extortion threat to me)

So, letters to heads of state should be interpreted in THAT light, as it would very much be in the mind of those such as this Sheikh as he wrote them.

AMAZING INTERACTION.
Muslims, non muslims in UK TV forum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8AJ7KvYPD8 9 mins

In this video, we see some interesting sociological phenomena.

1/ 'Christian' filtration of Islam by converts TO Islam from Irish Catholicism. The lady who is a former Irish Catholic is actually expressing CHRISTIAN values as she combats the more educated and Islamically correct Anjem Choudary. She simply cannot accept the real Islam that Choudery is ranting at her. Why? because her Christian background simply does not contain those values of tolerance, love and not forcing people into your faith.

2/ Islamic Fundamentalism. Anjem Choudery is trying to dominate the discussion at the slightest deviation from true "Islam".

CONCLUSION. Many Westerners with 'Christian' background convert to Islam from total ignorance of its true nature. Then...its too late.
So they try to re-shape "Islam" in their minds to be more compatable with the tolerant values of their own former faith.
Then, to their shock, they meet a 'real' Muslim....like Choudary.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya9xypqB5eo

Wow, I've never seen thursday spelt with an 'e' before.

I stopped reading at this point;

"...-discrimination about the reaction of Australian government to terrorist acts when the suspect is Non Muslim ,..."

YA got some examples of this?...

Hi Tapp and BOAZ_David

Thanks for your comments but you both talking about different subjects , you didn't answer my question.

The question is:
Do you think the reaction of Australian government to terrorist acts made by Non Muslim suspect will be similar and equal to its reaction to Muslim suspect if both of them have instructed terrorism on the air in a live show "Sunrise" on national TV? Or you think that the Australian government will discriminate between Muslim victims and Non Muslim victims?
If Dr Mohammad Haneef would make such statements on Wednesday 4th July 2007 in a live program on Channel 7 , instead of Dr Keith Suter, do you think the reaction of the Australian government would be the same? Please try to be fair , don't take any one's side , think about this question and truely try to be realistic, then let me know what you think? Thanks

P_Dox,

For a good example of how Australia might react to a non-islamic fundamentalist terrorist attack, have a look at America when they realised that it was a white christian guy who blew up the Oklahoma state building.