Who's debated with someone and had the old "Muslims traded peacefully with Aboriginals" argument thrown at them?
If these twits bothered to take 5 minutes out of the day and research this they would find out, that isn't necessarily true.
Firstly, it was over 500 years ago and there are no documented accounts of the interactions, only modern day anthropologists INTERPRETATIONS of findings.
Monash University anthropologist, John Bradley (who I believe to be not only a muslim apologist, but an Aboriginal apologist also), comes to the conclusion that the contact between the two groups was a success: "They traded together. It was fair - there was no racial judgement, no race policy." Even into the early 21st century, the shared history between the two peoples is still celebrated by Aboriginal communities in northern Australia as a period of mutual trust and respect.
But others who have studied this period have come to a different conclusion regarding the relationship between the aboriginal people and the visiting trepangers. Anthropologist Ian McIntosh has said that the initial effects of contact with the Macassan fishermen resulted in "turmoil" with the extent of Islamic influence being noteworthy. In another paper McIntosh concludes, "strife, poverty and domination is a previously unrecorded legacy of contact between Aborigines and Indonesians." A report prepared by the History Department of the Australian National University says that the Macassans appear to have been welcomed initially, however relations deteriorated when, "aborigines began to feel they were being exploited leading to violence on both sides.
In 1916, two bronze cannons were found on a small island in Napier Broome Bay, on the northern coast of Western Australia. Scientists at the Western Australian Museum in Fremantle have made a detailed analysis and have determined that these weapons are swivel guns and almost certainly of late 18th century Makassan, rather than European, origin. Flinders account confirms that the Makassans he met were personally armed and their perahus carried small cannons.
In conclusion, one man ignores the evidence of the distrust and violence between the two groups (which makes him a shitty scientist, picking and choosing the bits that align with his bigotted views) and all our lovely lefties take only his account to paint the picture that Aboriginals prospered with the muslims while the Brits did horrible things (and they did).
But, let's not rewrite history to coordinate with our own views, let's actually look at ALL the facts. The evidence tells a different story than the apologists want you to know, you only need to look.