http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4785065.stm Now while I'll agree that Bush doesn't always come across as having a total grasp on the English language, I cannot see how his comments are anything less than a shameless beat up by so called American Muslim leaders. There is such a thing as an Islamic facist and looking at the dictionary definition it would seem to apply to the current Iranian Leadership. There are also fascists in every religion I'm sure and if it was relevent to refer to these people as well then there's also nothing wrong with that. Take this crazy excerpt from the article. It is Younis who is trying to portray these comments as a 'clash of civillisations'. How can he say it was wrong to link the action of violent Muslims to their religion when they do so themselves? Sure it is a perversion of the Islamic religion but if they themselves say their actions are religious based then who is to argue otherwise even if they misinterpret their own religion. No different to Christians who bomb abortion clinics. Their fanaticism is linked to their religion even though it is against their religious teachings. A lot but by no means all terrorism around the world has some form of Islam as it's supposed motivating factor. If this is what is in the news then why pretend it is not so. Why is pointing out the obvious fact that a lot of Islamic terrorism is linked to religion, is somehow a slur on all Muslims? I do not think that the inflammatory comments by Younis, help the cause of Moderate Islam. It is in Ahmed who is feeding the perception that the war on terror is a war on Islam. The war on terror is a war on Islamic terrorists, not Islam.