Ummmmmmm, you do know we haven't had an attack since 911 when Bush went on the offensive, compared to the numerous attacks under Clinton when he didn't do shit. Also several attacks were prevented under Bush's inititives. I dunno, sound logical to me. Stop being a haterBraddock wrote:
Hollywood movies have a lot to answer for. They play a large part in the formation of the bullshit right-wing belief that the US can out-bully any enemy in the world because they are "the best" or because they have some sort of "special" spirit within them. Chuck Norris took the "Delta Force" to Palestine and single handedly defeated the Palestinian terrorists so it must be possible, John Wayne fought a glorious struggle against the Viet Cong tyrants in "The Green Berets" because the 'good guys' always win... it's "Team America" style bullshit that glosses over the realities of cause and effect and basic human motivation.
When you talk about fighting them over there so as to show that you "won't be pushed around anymore" or that you are going to "stand up" to them you sound like someone who has completely lost touch with reality. Fighting a war in a foreign country does not prevent 9/11 attacks... thorough security checks at airports and stringent immigration controls prevent 9/11 style attacks... but fine, keep sending your fellow citizens out to the desert to die if it gives you such a patriotic boner.
Typical short-sightedness and brash stupidity. You should get a job in the banking sector. You can't police the world and America will get attacked again, whether or not their army has encroached on every corner of the globe it will happen again, and again. To think otherwise is ridiculous. To take actions that multiply the number of people that desire to take such action is also ridiculous. Prevention is key. Treat the cause, manage the effect prudently mindful of the cause. Launch as many cruise missiles as you want at their training camps but don't think steam rolling over nations and rebuilding them in your likeness is going to solve any longterm problems or save any American blood that wouldn't ultimately get spilled anyway.lowing wrote:
Didn't say you could prevent it, I said it happened, and it happened under Clinton, who did nothing about it, we were not at war in 2000 therefore the Cole is not a target. It was in Yemen with permission from Yemen.
Sorry, I do not view kissing Islamic ass in hopes they don't hurt me, as a preventative. Especially since they do nothing but exploit all weakness, like letting your gaurd down and extending an "open hand"
Last edited by CameronPoe (2009-02-10 09:16:51)
Okay, one cause of radical Islam is the schools and wabbi nutcases funneling money and bombs through Saudi Arabia.CameronPoe wrote:
Treat the cause, manage the effect prudently mindful of the cause.
How to we treat that cause if not with bombs?
How many Americans have died in Iraq and Afhganistan during the Bush regime? Did they not die in "attacks" or was it all friendly fire incidents?lowing wrote:
Ummmmmmm, you do know we haven't had an attack since 911 when Bush went on the offensive, compared to the numerous attacks under Clinton when he didn't do shit. Also several attacks were prevented under Bush's inititives. I dunno, sound logical to me. Stop being a haterBraddock wrote:
Hollywood movies have a lot to answer for. They play a large part in the formation of the bullshit right-wing belief that the US can out-bully any enemy in the world because they are "the best" or because they have some sort of "special" spirit within them. Chuck Norris took the "Delta Force" to Palestine and single handedly defeated the Palestinian terrorists so it must be possible, John Wayne fought a glorious struggle against the Viet Cong tyrants in "The Green Berets" because the 'good guys' always win... it's "Team America" style bullshit that glosses over the realities of cause and effect and basic human motivation.
When you talk about fighting them over there so as to show that you "won't be pushed around anymore" or that you are going to "stand up" to them you sound like someone who has completely lost touch with reality. Fighting a war in a foreign country does not prevent 9/11 attacks... thorough security checks at airports and stringent immigration controls prevent 9/11 style attacks... but fine, keep sending your fellow citizens out to the desert to die if it gives you such a patriotic boner.
Also, have you not considered that your newfound sense of domestic security might be down to increased vigilance on the home-front and might have nothing to do with soldiers fighting in the Middle East? You haven't even attacked the country where the 9/11 hijackers came from (and where they were radicalised) so how does your cause and effect logic address that little fact?
We will be attacked again, I agree, and under Obama I will almost guarantee itCameronPoe wrote:
Typical short-sightedness and brash stupidity. You should get a job in the banking sector. You can't police the world and America will get attacked again, whether or not their army has encroached on every corner of the globe it will happen again, and again. To think otherwise is ridiculous. To take actions that multiply the number of people that desire to take such action is also ridiculous. Prevention is key. Treat the cause, manage the effect prudently mindful of the cause.lowing wrote:
Didn't say you could prevent it, I said it happened, and it happened under Clinton, who did nothing about it, we were not at war in 2000 therefore the Cole is not a target. It was in Yemen with permission from Yemen.
Sorry, I do not view kissing Islamic ass in hopes they don't hurt me, as a preventative. Especially since they do nothing but exploit all weakness, like letting your gaurd down and extending an "open hand"
Our soldiers died fighting, not on their knees hoping and praying that Islam does not blow up their kids schools. Sorry if you do not see the difference. How sad.Braddock wrote:
How many Americans have died in Iraq and Afhganistan during the Bush regime? Did they not die in "attacks" or was it all friendly fire incidents?lowing wrote:
Ummmmmmm, you do know we haven't had an attack since 911 when Bush went on the offensive, compared to the numerous attacks under Clinton when he didn't do shit. Also several attacks were prevented under Bush's inititives. I dunno, sound logical to me. Stop being a haterBraddock wrote:
Hollywood movies have a lot to answer for. They play a large part in the formation of the bullshit right-wing belief that the US can out-bully any enemy in the world because they are "the best" or because they have some sort of "special" spirit within them. Chuck Norris took the "Delta Force" to Palestine and single handedly defeated the Palestinian terrorists so it must be possible, John Wayne fought a glorious struggle against the Viet Cong tyrants in "The Green Berets" because the 'good guys' always win... it's "Team America" style bullshit that glosses over the realities of cause and effect and basic human motivation.
When you talk about fighting them over there so as to show that you "won't be pushed around anymore" or that you are going to "stand up" to them you sound like someone who has completely lost touch with reality. Fighting a war in a foreign country does not prevent 9/11 attacks... thorough security checks at airports and stringent immigration controls prevent 9/11 style attacks... but fine, keep sending your fellow citizens out to the desert to die if it gives you such a patriotic boner.
Also, have you not considered that your newfound sense of domestic security might be down to increased vigilance on the home-front and might have nothing to do with soldiers fighting in the Middle East? You haven't even attacked the country where the 9/11 hijackers came from (and where they were radicalised) so how does your cause and effect logic address that little fact?
The lack of terrorist attacks is a direct result of Bush administration initiatives. You have to admit this, or admit that if we were attacked under Bush again, you would not be blaming him or his genitives.
Doesn't matter who's in charge. Not one iota.lowing wrote:
We will be attacked again, I agree, and under Obama I will almost guarantee it
Take Saudi Arabia to task for their idiocy and stop sucking their knobs for oil.ATG wrote:
Okay, one cause of radical Islam is the schools and wabbi nutcases funneling money and bombs through Saudi Arabia.CameronPoe wrote:
Treat the cause, manage the effect prudently mindful of the cause.
How to we treat that cause if not with bombs?
Perhaps your soldiers could have died patrolling the US skies and North American coastal waters instead of in a desert halfway around the world that had no connection whatsoever to the WTC attacks?lowing wrote:
Our soldiers died fighting, not on their knees hoping and praying that Islam does not blow up their kids schools. Sorry if you do not see the difference. How sad.Braddock wrote:
How many Americans have died in Iraq and Afhganistan during the Bush regime? Did they not die in "attacks" or was it all friendly fire incidents?lowing wrote:
Ummmmmmm, you do know we haven't had an attack since 911 when Bush went on the offensive, compared to the numerous attacks under Clinton when he didn't do shit. Also several attacks were prevented under Bush's inititives. I dunno, sound logical to me. Stop being a hater
Also, have you not considered that your newfound sense of domestic security might be down to increased vigilance on the home-front and might have nothing to do with soldiers fighting in the Middle East? You haven't even attacked the country where the 9/11 hijackers came from (and where they were radicalised) so how does your cause and effect logic address that little fact?
The lack of terrorist attacks is a direct result of Bush administration initiatives. You have to admit this, or admit that if we were attacked under Bush again, you would not be blaming him or his genitives.
Please tell me how your Middle Eastern based soldiers might prevent a radicalised Muslim in New Jersey from blowing up a kid's school? The wars you are fighting overseas are pointless in terms of any sort of war on 'terror', utterly pointless. I may stretch to admitting that the changes made in airport security under the Bush regime have contributed to there being no terrorist attacks on US soil... but beyond that no sirree Bob!
Last edited by Braddock (2009-02-10 09:24:58)
yes if you HAVE experience in a certain area. i am talking about being able to move to something different. a degree would help big time.m3thod wrote:
Not reallyusmarine wrote:
no but it helps you diversify in case things go bad. plus, when you have tons and tons of people going for a handful of jobs, most will take the people with degrees first. that's a fact.
experince > education
And this is someone who is going to embark on his 4th university degree in July.
Agreed, experience isn't everything. You'll end up as one of those 90 year old Japanese guys that are 'world's best barrel roller' or can cut fresh noodles with a mechanical digger; payed accordingly of course.usmarine wrote:
yes if you HAVE experience in a certain area. i am talking about being able to move to something different. a degree would help big time.m3thod wrote:
Not reallyusmarine wrote:
no but it helps you diversify in case things go bad. plus, when you have tons and tons of people going for a handful of jobs, most will take the people with degrees first. that's a fact.
experince > education
And this is someone who is going to embark on his 4th university degree in July.
That's like taking a shitload of asprine when you suffer from cancer. You'll feel better, but aren't cured. If you stay at home and prevent the 'symptoms' treating the cause is exactly what you are not doing and the spilling of American blood will be ultimately imminent. Rather see the multiplication of 'people that deside such actions' as a fever; it might be dangerous if it rises too high but it also a necessity if you want to get better.CameronPoe wrote:
Typical short-sightedness and brash stupidity. You should get a job in the banking sector. You can't police the world and America will get attacked again, whether or not their army has encroached on every corner of the globe it will happen again, and again. To think otherwise is ridiculous. To take actions that multiply the number of people that desire to take such action is also ridiculous. Prevention is key. Treat the cause, manage the effect prudently mindful of the cause. Launch as many cruise missiles as you want at their training camps but don't think steam rolling over nations and rebuilding them in your likeness is going to solve any longterm problems or save any American blood that wouldn't ultimately get spilled anyway.
Except the cancer you're carrying is in an organ that lies outside your body across a vast ocean and treating said cancer in the manner mentioned makes the cancer multiply and spread faster.... .... while at the same time you have little microbes of cancer in the body proper that will reside there dormant or will infiltrate through other orifices with or without treatment of the foreign body cancer.Lai wrote:
That's like taking a shitload of asprine when you suffer from cancer. You'll feel better, but aren't cured. If you stay at home and prevent the 'symptoms' treating the cause is exactly what you are not doing and the spilling of American blood will be ultimately imminent. Rather see the multiplication of 'people that deside such actions' as a fever; it might be dangerous if it rises too high but it also a necessity if you want to get better.
I would also wonder if the recipient of a cruise missile approaching at high velocity (or clandestine spec ops) regards said missile as being much like aspirin... The US tried regime change before - in Iran - when they overthrew Mossadeq. Now look at Iran.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2009-02-10 11:57:55)
United States, May, 2002: Luke Helder injures 6 by placing pipebombs in mailboxes in the Midwest. Motivation to protest government control over daily lives and the illegality of marijuana and promotion of astral projectionlowing wrote:
Ummmmmmm, you do know we haven't had an attack since 911 when Bush went on the offensive
United States, July 4, 2002: An Egyptian gunman opens fire at an El Al ticket counter in Los Angeles International Airport, killing two Israelis before being killed himself.
United States, October 2002: John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo conduct the Beltway Sniper Attacks, killing ten people in various locations throughout the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area from October 2 until they are arrested on October 24.
United States, October 1, 2005: Joel Henry Hinrichs III detonated a bomb near the packed football stadium at the University of Oklahoma in Norman, Oklahoma killing himself in the process.
United States, March 3, 2006: Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, an Iranian-born graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, drives an SUV onto a crowded part of campus, injuring nine.
United States, August 30, 2006: An Afghani Muslim hit 19 pedestrians, killing one, with his SUV in the San Francisco Bay area.
United States, October 26, 2007 A pair of improvised explosive devices are thrown at the Mexican Consulate in New York City. The fake grenades were filled with black powder and detonated by fuses, causing very minor damage. Police investigate the connection between this and a similar attack against the British Consulate in New York in 2005.
United States October 17, 2008 Dalton, Georgia An explosion at a personal injury law firm in downtown Dalton, Ga., this morning injured four people, including at least one lawyer, and resulted in the death of the apparent bomber in what a federal law enforcement spokesman describes as a suicide attack.
and what, meddle in ME affairs?! I thought you were against that.CameronPoe wrote:
Take Saudi Arabia to task for their idiocy and stop sucking their knobs for oil.ATG wrote:
Okay, one cause of radical Islam is the schools and wabbi nutcases funneling money and bombs through Saudi Arabia.CameronPoe wrote:
Treat the cause, manage the effect prudently mindful of the cause.
How to we treat that cause if not with bombs?
he forgets euros suck russian knob.......lowing wrote:
and what, meddle in ME affairs?! I thought you were against that.CameronPoe wrote:
Take Saudi Arabia to task for their idiocy and stop sucking their knobs for oil.ATG wrote:
Okay, one cause of radical Islam is the schools and wabbi nutcases funneling money and bombs through Saudi Arabia.
How to we treat that cause if not with bombs?
The war in Iraq HAD nothing to do with terrorism undil Saddam fell and the terrorists flooded in.Braddock wrote:
Perhaps your soldiers could have died patrolling the US skies and North American coastal waters instead of in a desert halfway around the world that had no connection whatsoever to the WTC attacks?lowing wrote:
Our soldiers died fighting, not on their knees hoping and praying that Islam does not blow up their kids schools. Sorry if you do not see the difference. How sad.Braddock wrote:
How many Americans have died in Iraq and Afhganistan during the Bush regime? Did they not die in "attacks" or was it all friendly fire incidents?
Also, have you not considered that your newfound sense of domestic security might be down to increased vigilance on the home-front and might have nothing to do with soldiers fighting in the Middle East? You haven't even attacked the country where the 9/11 hijackers came from (and where they were radicalised) so how does your cause and effect logic address that little fact?
The lack of terrorist attacks is a direct result of Bush administration initiatives. You have to admit this, or admit that if we were attacked under Bush again, you would not be blaming him or his genitives.
Please tell me how your Middle Eastern based soldiers might prevent a radicalised Muslim in New Jersey from blowing up a kid's school? The wars you are fighting overseas are pointless in terms of any sort of war on 'terror', utterly pointless. I may stretch to admitting that the changes made in airport security under the Bush regime have contributed to there being no terrorist attacks on US soil... but beyond that no sirree Bob!
Saddam and Osama were bffs.
Last edited by Reciprocity (2009-02-10 19:34:53)
How could this be? After all there are only a "few" Islamic terrorists in the world. Also, if think this adds up to say a dirty bomb or a plane into a sky scraper.......let me tell you......It doesn't.BN wrote:
United States, May, 2002: Luke Helder injures 6 by placing pipebombs in mailboxes in the Midwest. Motivation to protest government control over daily lives and the illegality of marijuana and promotion of astral projectionlowing wrote:
Ummmmmmm, you do know we haven't had an attack since 911 when Bush went on the offensive
United States, July 4, 2002: An Egyptian gunman opens fire at an El Al ticket counter in Los Angeles International Airport, killing two Israelis before being killed himself.
United States, October 2002: John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo conduct the Beltway Sniper Attacks, killing ten people in various locations throughout the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area from October 2 until they are arrested on October 24.
United States, October 1, 2005: Joel Henry Hinrichs III detonated a bomb near the packed football stadium at the University of Oklahoma in Norman, Oklahoma killing himself in the process.
United States, March 3, 2006: Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, an Iranian-born graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, drives an SUV onto a crowded part of campus, injuring nine.
United States, August 30, 2006: An Afghani Muslim hit 19 pedestrians, killing one, with his SUV in the San Francisco Bay area.
United States, October 26, 2007 A pair of improvised explosive devices are thrown at the Mexican Consulate in New York City. The fake grenades were filled with black powder and detonated by fuses, causing very minor damage. Police investigate the connection between this and a similar attack against the British Consulate in New York in 2005.
United States October 17, 2008 Dalton, Georgia An explosion at a personal injury law firm in downtown Dalton, Ga., this morning injured four people, including at least one lawyer, and resulted in the death of the apparent bomber in what a federal law enforcement spokesman describes as a suicide attack.
I do thank you however, for proving more of my point that Islam is fucked up and can not be trusted. That we should remain vigilant at all times. Hardly a paranoid stance I would think.
Last edited by lowing (2009-02-10 19:37:48)
True. It was about weapons of mass destruction.lowing wrote:
The war in Iraq HAD nothing to do with terrorism undil Saddam fell and the terrorists flooded in.
Partly, it was also about enforcing UN resolutions that were continually broken for an entire decade. Resolutions that the UN failed to enforce with anything more than idol threats and bullshit.TheAussieReaper wrote:
True. It was about weapons of mass destruction.lowing wrote:
The war in Iraq HAD nothing to do with terrorism undil Saddam fell and the terrorists flooded in.
cool, so long as there hasnt been any terrorist attacks since 9/11lowing wrote:
How could this be? After all there are only a "few" Islamic terrorists in the world. Also, if think this adds up to say a dirty bomb or a plane into a sky scraper.......let me tell you......It doesn't.BN wrote:
United States, May, 2002: Luke Helder injures 6 by placing pipebombs in mailboxes in the Midwest. Motivation to protest government control over daily lives and the illegality of marijuana and promotion of astral projectionlowing wrote:
Ummmmmmm, you do know we haven't had an attack since 911 when Bush went on the offensive
United States, July 4, 2002: An Egyptian gunman opens fire at an El Al ticket counter in Los Angeles International Airport, killing two Israelis before being killed himself.
United States, October 2002: John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo conduct the Beltway Sniper Attacks, killing ten people in various locations throughout the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area from October 2 until they are arrested on October 24.
United States, October 1, 2005: Joel Henry Hinrichs III detonated a bomb near the packed football stadium at the University of Oklahoma in Norman, Oklahoma killing himself in the process.
United States, March 3, 2006: Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, an Iranian-born graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, drives an SUV onto a crowded part of campus, injuring nine.
United States, August 30, 2006: An Afghani Muslim hit 19 pedestrians, killing one, with his SUV in the San Francisco Bay area.
United States, October 26, 2007 A pair of improvised explosive devices are thrown at the Mexican Consulate in New York City. The fake grenades were filled with black powder and detonated by fuses, causing very minor damage. Police investigate the connection between this and a similar attack against the British Consulate in New York in 2005.
United States October 17, 2008 Dalton, Georgia An explosion at a personal injury law firm in downtown Dalton, Ga., this morning injured four people, including at least one lawyer, and resulted in the death of the apparent bomber in what a federal law enforcement spokesman describes as a suicide attack.
I do thank you however, for proving more of my point that Islam is fucked up and can not be trusted. That we should remain vigilant at all times. Hardly a paranoid stance I would think.
PS Only 1 of the above was mentioned as muslim.
OK then don't sanction them or publicly reprimand them. Continue sucking their knob. Saudi Arabia has invested heavily in your nation, massively. Quietly and diplomatically threaten to seize their assets or make their investments less 'fruitful' unless they play ball. Cease military co-operation/sales - that would make them sit up and take notice. There are more carrots and sticks than direct intervention you guys. Shit PR exercises would suffice - have Obama clearly address the international media to call upon America's ally Saudi Arabia to disavow Wahabiism and embrace more a modern and tolerant branch of Islam. It would be quite difficult for the Saudis to stand up and say 'No, we like cutting peoples heads off'. They're meant to be on your side - they should demonstrate that no? Don't they want to rid themelves of such problems - it's in their own interest....usmarine wrote:
he forgets euros suck russian knob.......lowing wrote:
and what, meddle in ME affairs?! I thought you were against that.CameronPoe wrote:
Take Saudi Arabia to task for their idiocy and stop sucking their knobs for oil.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7882142.stm
Ban Wahabiism. Start there.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2009-02-11 01:59:46)
Wrong again. The UN was against unilateral action and did not sanction the US to enforce its resolutions. And anyway the US didn't enforce UN resolutions, last time i checked invasion, war and occupying a sovereign nation were not in any UN resolution I’ve read.lowing wrote:
Partly, it was also about enforcing UN resolutions that were continually broken for an entire decade. Resolutions that the UN failed to enforce with anything more than idol threats and bullshit.TheAussieReaper wrote:
True. It was about weapons of mass destruction.lowing wrote:
The war in Iraq HAD nothing to do with terrorism undil Saddam fell and the terrorists flooded in.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
Saddam repeatedly violated the terms of peace imposed upon Iraq after the 1991 war. That's what you get for violating an agreement to end a fight! (Extreme? Yes. Completely unreasonable? No.)
The UN did not enforce its resolutions. The US felt this was unacceptable, and overthrew the Iraqi regime without UN approval. Several other nations agreed with this and participated. The WMD accusations were a portion of the UN resolution problem. UN inspectors were routinely being handled by Iraqi military and government officials, which aroused even more suspicion by the US government. It was NOT a one issue action.
_________
Back on topic:
In my opinion, a representative republic is the best solution to governing larger populations in a semi-reasonable way, that we have found. (Somewhat like that old quote about Democracy being the worst form of government, except for all the others...)
I think we are seeing the problems brought by a non-homogeneous society. When government becomes too large and has to balance too many interests, governing becomes increasingly difficult, and solutions become acceptable to a smaller and smaller percentage of the population.
Is our governmental reach surpassing our grasp?
If so, what can be done to make the situation better? More government power? Less? A division of power?
The UN did not enforce its resolutions. The US felt this was unacceptable, and overthrew the Iraqi regime without UN approval. Several other nations agreed with this and participated. The WMD accusations were a portion of the UN resolution problem. UN inspectors were routinely being handled by Iraqi military and government officials, which aroused even more suspicion by the US government. It was NOT a one issue action.
_________
Back on topic:
In my opinion, a representative republic is the best solution to governing larger populations in a semi-reasonable way, that we have found. (Somewhat like that old quote about Democracy being the worst form of government, except for all the others...)
I think we are seeing the problems brought by a non-homogeneous society. When government becomes too large and has to balance too many interests, governing becomes increasingly difficult, and solutions become acceptable to a smaller and smaller percentage of the population.
Is our governmental reach surpassing our grasp?
If so, what can be done to make the situation better? More government power? Less? A division of power?
Last edited by RAIMIUS (2009-02-11 02:02:10)
an Egyptian at the El Al ticket counter, Joh nAllen Muhammad and friends, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, Afghani Muslim..Actually the majority of your examples were Arab or Islamic, but who is counting? Also you know the context that "terrorist attacks" are being used, so please stop trying to pass off that every crime is a form of terrorism.BN wrote:
cool, so long as there hasnt been any terrorist attacks since 9/11lowing wrote:
How could this be? After all there are only a "few" Islamic terrorists in the world. Also, if think this adds up to say a dirty bomb or a plane into a sky scraper.......let me tell you......It doesn't.BN wrote:
United States, May, 2002: Luke Helder injures 6 by placing pipebombs in mailboxes in the Midwest. Motivation to protest government control over daily lives and the illegality of marijuana and promotion of astral projection
United States, July 4, 2002: An Egyptian gunman opens fire at an El Al ticket counter in Los Angeles International Airport, killing two Israelis before being killed himself.
United States, October 2002: John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo conduct the Beltway Sniper Attacks, killing ten people in various locations throughout the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area from October 2 until they are arrested on October 24.
United States, October 1, 2005: Joel Henry Hinrichs III detonated a bomb near the packed football stadium at the University of Oklahoma in Norman, Oklahoma killing himself in the process.
United States, March 3, 2006: Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, an Iranian-born graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, drives an SUV onto a crowded part of campus, injuring nine.
United States, August 30, 2006: An Afghani Muslim hit 19 pedestrians, killing one, with his SUV in the San Francisco Bay area.
United States, October 26, 2007 A pair of improvised explosive devices are thrown at the Mexican Consulate in New York City. The fake grenades were filled with black powder and detonated by fuses, causing very minor damage. Police investigate the connection between this and a similar attack against the British Consulate in New York in 2005.
United States October 17, 2008 Dalton, Georgia An explosion at a personal injury law firm in downtown Dalton, Ga., this morning injured four people, including at least one lawyer, and resulted in the death of the apparent bomber in what a federal law enforcement spokesman describes as a suicide attack.
I do thank you however, for proving more of my point that Islam is fucked up and can not be trusted. That we should remain vigilant at all times. Hardly a paranoid stance I would think.
PS Only 1 of the above was mentioned as muslim.