found through recoiling:

When radio host Jerry Klein suggested that all Muslims in the United States should be identified with a crescent-shape tattoo or a distinctive arm band, the phone lines jammed instantly. The first caller to the station in Washington said that Klein must be "off his rocker." The second congratulated him and added: "Not only do you tattoo them in the middle of their forehead but you ship them out of this country ... they are here to kill us." Another said that tattoos, armbands and other identifying markers such as crescent marks on driver's licenses, passports and birth certificates did not go far enough. "What good is identifying them?" he asked. "You have to set up encampments like during World War Two with the Japanese and Germans." At the end of the one-hour show, rich with arguments on why visual identification of "the threat in our midst" would alleviate the public's fears, Klein revealed that he had staged a hoax. It drew out reactions that are not uncommon in post-9/11 America. "I can't believe any of you are sick enough to have agreed for one second with anything I said," he told his audience on the AM station 630 WMAL, which covers Washington, Northern Virginia and Maryland ... "Because basically what you just did was show me how the German people allowed what happened to the Jews to happen ... We need to separate them, we need to tattoo their arms, we need to make them wear the yellow Star of David, we need to put them in concentration camps, we basically just need to kill them all because they are dangerous." ... Those in agreement are not a fringe minority: A Gallup poll this summer of more than 1,000 Americans showed that 39 percent were in favor of requiring Muslims in the United States, including American citizens, to carry special identification. full article

39% percent is a scary number. The Nazi Party never got 39% of the German vote before Hitler became Chancellor. In fact, in the election just prior to his becoming Chancellor, the Nazi Party received only 31% of the vote. The 39% of the American public supporting the marking and separation of Muslims does not necessarily mean we will have a repeat of the Nazi atrocities, but it does mean that we are closer to the edge of that precipice than we'd like to believe.

To Dennis Prager:

If you can't swear on the bible, you have no business being in American politics. You have no business being part of America. Ditto for taking the pledge of allegiance. Hell, if you can't be bothered to put up a Christmas tree this season, why don't you just leave.

If you can't or won't follow the religious customs of the country you're living in, you have no business being part of it. Take for example the Roman Empire. If the Christians of Rome couldn't offer the traditional Roman sacrifices, they had no business being part of the Empire. The Christians were not unduly persecuted or "oppressed" by the Romans: Emperors like Decius were merely working to preserve traditional values.

</sarcasm>

I thought that I could not be any more disgusted by the Bush administration, but his response to the Israeli assault on Lebanon has proved me wrong. While the numbers killed vary widely depending on what source you use, but by any count the vast majority of the Israelis killed by the Hizbullah "terrorists" have been soldiers while the vast majority of those killed by Israel have been civilians. The word "terrorist" has become a term simply meaning "Muslim enemy", it no longer has any connection whatsoever to action.

As if on cue, Bush is rolling out the 9/11 bandwagon, that somehow a Southern Lebanese resistance movement is responsible for the attack on the World Trade Center. Bush cannot be a peace broker, he is only interested in lies and war.

According to BushCo anything Israel does is okay. Anything. They can murder and bomb and kidnap and hold hostages and assassinate anyone they deem appropriate. No condemnation ever. However, if a group of Palestinians kidnap a soldier, a soldier and not a civilian, it is terrorism. It is proof of every muslim is evil, and every non-US supporting country supports terrorism and probably was behind the 9/11 plot just like Saddam Hussein wasn't. Bush can't condemn Israel of course, Israel's actions in Gaza and Lebanon follow the same sort of "logic" he used to attack Iraq. He can't condemn the Israeli government's actions without condemn the actions of the United States.

I talk a lot about why United States foreign policy sucks, and why Bush is evil and just pissing everyone off around the globe. However, Bush isn't the only one pissing the world off. Al Qaeda and associated Islamic extremist groups are doing just as good a job at getting everyone to hate them as Bush is. Al Qaeda isn't just against the United States. Al Qaeda isn't just against the West. As today horrendous bombings in Mumbai reiterate, al Qaeda is against the world. Not only are all non-muslins their enemy, many muslins are as well. One of Bush's key failures has been not treating al Qaeda as a world problem that requires a world solution. Instead of concentrating on stopping terrorists, Bush and Company have turned the "war on terror" into an excuse to further U.S. imperialism. The enemy of your enemy is not always your friend; and no one, not Bush, not al Qaeda, can take on the world.

Imagine: you are a foot soldier in a paramilitary group whose purpose is to remake America as a Christian theocracy, and establish its worldly vision of the dominion of Christ over all aspects of life. You are issued high-tech military weaponry, and instructed to engage the infidel on the streets of New York City. You are on a mission - both a religious mission and a military mission -- to convert or kill Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, gays, and anyone who advocates the separation of church and state - especially moderate, mainstream Christians. Your mission is "to conduct physical and spiritual warfare"; all who resist must be taken out with extreme prejudice. You have never felt so powerful, so driven by a purpose: you are 13 years old. You are playing a real-time strategy video game whose creators are linked to the empire of mega-church pastor Rick Warren, best selling author of The Purpose Driven Life. The game, slated for release by October 2006 in advance of the Christmas shopping rush, has been previewed at video game exhibitions, and reviewed by major newspapers and magazines. But until now, no fan or critic has pointed out the controversial game's connection to Mr. Warren or his dominionist agenda. ... According to Mr. Warren, the establishment of this earthly kingdom requires "foot soldiers." As part of his plan, Mr. Warren said he would encourage laypeople to "adopt" needy villages overseas in order to plant churches, expand business opportunities, educate children, influence governments, and overthrow corrupt political leaders, whom he described as "little Saddams." Mr. Warren said his purpose is to enlist "one billion foot soldiers for the Kingdom of God" in the developing world. And the stadium crowd roared its approval. Celebrants included Paul Kagame, the president of Rwanda, a tiny east African country that lost hundreds of thousands of people when it suffered genocide in 1994. Catholic and Protestant clergy have been convicted in connection with that genocide. Yet Mr. Kagame announced that he would allow Mr. Warren to turn his country into the first purpose driven nation. The following month, 16 Rwandan religious leaders arrived in Orange County to begin religious training at Saddleback Church. Mr. Warren has said that his global initiative was developed "underground" and in "stealth". Presumably, this was done with the assistance of Mr. Carver, who directs the Purpose Driven Church in all its activities outside North America. full article

I hear time and time again the Islam is the religion of violence. Islam is the religion that endangers the world. The only reason the fundamentalist Christians have not resorted to terrorism more then they have (and, yes there have been plenty of terrorist attacks by fundamentalist Christians) is that they often have access to more "acceptable" avenues to pursue their agenda, as carpet bombing civilian populations with white phosphorus is deemed more acceptable than a suicide attack. If fundamentalist Christians lose their political prestige you can expect a series of terrorist attacks from their ranks. "Last Days Crusade" would be a likely organizational name.

I'm not saying all Christian are violent, the same as not all Muslims are violent. What I am saying is that Christianity holds no moral high ground over Islam. Both have factions that want to kill all the infidels. Fundamentalism is the problem, not any particular religion.