The Difference between Muslims and RattleSnakes from Planck's Constant

The joke goes this way,

Q. "You are confronted with a Muslim and a rattlesnake - which one do you shoot?"
A. "The Muslim of course, rattlesnakes will attack only if provoked; aside from that, even when provoked the rattlesnake will at least give you a warning."

Some will argue that this is silly, Muslims are just as moral as rattlesnakes and won't attack unless provoked. OK, I'll bite, what was the provocation for the attack on the WTC? Actually there was no direct cause; according to Bin Laden the US long ago declared war against Islam and so no specific tit is needed for a tat.

In 1998 Bin Laden declared: "the following fatwa to all Muslims: The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it." That's it - a standing order to attack us whenever possible, wherever a Muslim can do it. It is futile to look for a specific action that precipitates a Muslim barbarity against us. It's like Mao Tse Tung's order to the Chinese people to kill flies whenever they can, wherever they find them. A fly need not have done anything to deserve being swatted. To Muslims, men, women, children - we infidels are as insignificant as flies on a wall.

In 1786 Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to speak with Tripoli's Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. Jefferson and Adams asked the Ambassador how can Muslims make war on nations that have done nothing to them? The Ambassador replied:

"It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise."

Now I expect ignorant Muslim apologists to make excuse that perhaps Muslims were upset over the Crusades or some other insult to their religion, but as Christopher Hitchens points out, "It is worth noting that the United States played no part in the Crusades, or in the Catholic reconquista of Andalusia." As I said, Muslims will attack without provocation - the Quran commands it to be so and there is nothing to excuse a Muslim from that duty.

As usual I will get comments from stupid Jews who feel that we should not be intolerant of any religion even if that religion declares war against Jews. If I wrote that I am afraid of bears, very few would argue that I have an evil phobia. But if I warn my fellow man that the Quran requires unprovoked attacks against unbelievers, then some Muslim dhimmi will complain that I am a bigot and an Islamophobe. But would anyone say that Jews who feared Nazis were bigots or racists or Naziphobes? No, because their fear was completely justified. Well, what about before 1939, before the Final Solution was put into effect, before there was a premeditated plan for genocide? Would we still call any Jew a bigot who warned that Nazis were dangerous before the mass killings started?

History, not you liberal idiot Muslim apologists, will determine if what I write is a bigoted rant or a justified warning. I am not writing to be mean to Muslims; I am saying to my fellow infidel, "Watch your back."

Disclaimer: the photo above has nothing to do with Barbary Pirates - but in the alternate universe where my mind sometimes wanders into; the Barbary Pirates dress like this and take me prisoner and torture me by rubbing their bodies against me, you know, Abu Ghraib style.

As for shooting Muslims, it's part of a joke and I am not advocating unprovoked violence against any group, Muslim or otherwise; I am not, after all, a Muslim.