The only thing that attacking them with the most deadly force possible would do is get the group doing so ostracized and completely excluded from any sort of political life in the United States. If they were to meet muslims with deadly force, they would be vehemently opposed by Americans and would eventually be taken care of, with little influence on Americans as a whole. It would also make them look like victims and make people believe that "islamophobia" is real, and the people who are scared of muslims are just a bunch of nut jobs. The only thing that can be done is counter-protesting them and exposing the truths about islam. The only thing that will create any good would be to awaken the American people to the problem with islam. An information campaign against islam would be a much more effective tool, and eventually people would decide to take decisive or deadly force themselves in order to deal with the islamic threat.
Why are the tactics employed by the JDL under Rabbi Kahane's direction no longer relevant? The Rabbi himself made these threats against the Nazi's in Skokie; [emphasis; kicks to the head], I was reading yesterday that the JDL once threatened to hang Iraqi diplomats in NY if any one of 16 Jews that were arrested in Iraq in April 1971 were hung.[Wit and Wisdom Of Rabbi Meir Kahane pg.17] Why is it common sense tactics that were emplyed then we have to worry about getting banned from this forum for mentioning now? And why does it say nonviolent struggle on our website homepage as if we would never resort to violence, something I never really noticed before?
First of all, violence against Nazis is justified. But not every group is the same or would evoke the same response from the American public if treated violently. If people acted violently towards Nazis, most Americans simply wouldn't care, and many would actually applause violence to stop Nazis. If people were to start attacking muslims on the basis of them being muslim, this would cause an outroar in the United States. Not very many people would tolerate it, and your group would be denounced by a large segment of the American population. Threatening to hang Iraqi is just that, a threat. According to Rabbi Kahane in his book "The Story of the Jewish Defense League", those kinds of threats were meant to intimidate rather than actually be carried out. Of course this sort of pressure worked, and it's a very effective tactic, but keep in mind that it was directed against a few people. Not so many Americans would care about a threat from a group like JDL because most people don't care about a few Iraqi diplomats. Being violent towards an entire religious group IS something that Americans would get angry about. Furthermore, I'm not saying that violence against muslims is not justified. IT IS JUSTIFIED and is necessary to save Israel, America, and Western civilization. I'm simply saying that in today's political climate in the United States, attacking muslims would not be feasible at this point in time. It would not get anything done, and it would probably give the muslims more ammunition to prove that "islamophobia" exists. A much more effective campaign would be to inform America about the dangers of Islam, and the fact that there are no moderate muslims and that islam is a violent religion. Once Americans have the facts and understand that sharia law is an invasion of American sovereignty by foreign islamic law, they would stop supporting islam and muslims and wouldn't be to hostile to violent acts against them.
Poll
Topic: Islamic Demonstrations/Protests/Marches in US Cities. POLL (Read 4813 times)