by Joe Kirkpatrick

Almost weekly, there is a story on the news about a savage pit bull attack somewhere in our country. Authorities regard pit bulls as the most vicious breed of dogs, and a lot of insurance companies will not issue homeowners policy if there is a pit bull on the premises.

However, despite all of the mauling and killing pit bulls have done, many people still have them as pets and insist they are harmless and loveable. Statistics don't lie - pit bulls are responsible for more vicious attacks resulting in serious injuries or death than any other breed of dog in the United States. Now, before all of you pit bull owners get all up in arms, I know many of you will still insist your pit bull is the exception. In fact, I will agree that many are just as you say and are indeed kind, loving pets.

However, due to the irrefutable statistics, I would not own one or have it round my home because there is that ever-present risk. Now, believe it or not, my column this month is not about Pit Bulls at all. If we go back in the last couple of decades, a particular breed of people did every terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Despite that glaring fact, many still say "but my Muslim is sweet and caring." That's right, many are sweet and caring, but once again, statistics clearly show, if a terrorist attack takes place, a male Muslim was involved.

Or, as a comedian might say, "show me a plane blowing up and I'll show you a Muslim every time!"

Starting back in 1972 with the Munich Olympic massacre, and going forward to the Lockerbie, Scotland airliner bombing, terrorism began to rise. In fact, recently in Libya, one of the participants of the airliner bombing was given a hero's homecoming!

Going onward through the slaughter in the World Trade Center, all of these terrorist attacks have been perpetrated by one group:

Muslim males.

Since 9-11, numerous people have been needlessly randomly checked at airports. White, Black, and Asian women with breast feeding babies have been pulled out of airport lines at random and harassed while a obviously middle eastern man right behind them is allowed to pass right through. Why? Because to check only them would be racial profiling. And after all, this is America where we don't want anyone to get offended.

Now comes United States Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan who allegedly (it would be socially impolite if I did not put in that) is responsible for a massacre at Fort Hood Texas, killing thirteen people and wounding numerous others.

It has been revealed the Army had stationed him there because they had concerns and wanted to "watch" him. "Watch" him do what? The Army knew the statistics. The Army knew all about prior terrorist attacks and who was responsible.

The Army knew Major Hasan was a faithful and practicing Muslim. The Army knew that Muslims fight against anyone who they feel is a threat to their cause.

The Army knew Major Hasan did not want to go over to the Middle East and be a part of the fight against his faith.

The Army thought he was their kind, loving pit bull - oops, I mean Muslim.

The two are very easily confused, aren't they?
.