We all know Al Gore and Senators like Durbin long called for Hussein's removal on non-Qaeda terrorism concerns inter alia, then once accomplished turned and said gosh, that was just a gambit to let steam off al-Qaeda...believeing Democrats when they said Hussein was a supporter of terrorism or even could be as such a despot; many pols today further try to weave Islamic and Christian liberation theologies into a valid "make amends" for provoking poor Qaeda and Hussein and Iran even if they did do things; today, a new Kucinich email PSA is in my inbox saying he'll have the House clerk call for a vote on referring impeachment hearings to the Judiciary Committee on implication something awesome about our "cut it out, they're good!" liberation theology friends...whom post haste all Federal and State laws should be amended to accomodate.
 
My only other religious interest besides ULC has been Roman Catholicism, on such faith and ineterpretations as expressed through works written or maintained by the Vatican.
 
Before Bush or Obama were on the scene, my knowledge of comparative religious perspectives and of exploring religion was akin to that expressed through "Ways Of Being Religious", a 2000 textbook compiled by Gary E. Kessler of California State University, Bakersfield; many of the therein footnoted reading references are also known to me; said textbook has ISBN # 0-7674-0089-5. Such is the scale by which, outside of Catholic or ULC participation, I consider comparative religious studies.
 
As to credibility of sources upon which I consider comparisons, same include writings of:
 
1. Arvind Sharma, born in India, capacity as Professor of Comparative Religion at McGill University, Montreal Canada; wrote "The Hindu Gita" (1986), "A Hindu Perspective On The Philosophy Of Religion" (1990), "Religion And Women" (1993), and "Today's Woman In World Religions" (1993).
 
2. Masao Abe, born in Japan, capacity of Visiting Professor in the Dept. of Philosophy at Purdue University; he was a leading interpreter of Buddhism, and a leading participant in Christian-Buddhist dialgoue; writing include essay "Kenotic God and Dynamic Sunyata" and book "Zen and Western Thought" (1985); he won the 1985 American Academy of Religion award for outstanding contribution to scholarship in religion.
 
3. Tu Wei-Ming, born in China, capacity teacher of Chinese intellectual history at Princeton University and the University of California at Berkeley prior to being Harvard Professor of Chinese History and Philosophy (1981); lectured on Confucian Humanism at Peking University, Taiwan University, Chinese University in Hong Kong, and University of Paris; a member of the Committee on the Study of Religion at Harvard and a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences; wrote "Neo-Confucian Thought In Action: Wang Yang-Ming's Youth" (1976), "Centrality and Commonality" (1976), "Humanity and Self-Cultivation" (1979), "Confucian Thought: Selfhood as Creative Transformation" (1985), and "Way, Learning and Politics: Essays on the Confucian Intellectual" (1989).
 
4. Liu Xiaogan, born in China, held PhD in philosophy from Beijing University, capacity Visiting Scholar in Dept. of Religion at Princeton University; most of his works were on Taoism, including "Chung-Tzu's Philosophy and Its Development".
 
5. Jacob Neusner, capacity Distinguished Research Professor of religious Studies, University of South Florida Tampa, and Life Member of Clare Hall, Cambridge University England; wrote 500 books on Judaism and served as President of the American Academy of religion (1968-69).
 
6. Harvey G. Cox, capacity Victor S. Thomas Professor of Divinity at Harvard University and as ordained Baptist minister; wrote "The Secular City" (1965), "The Feast of Fools" (1969), "The Salvation of the Spirit" (1973), and "turning East" (1977).
 
7. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, born in Iran; 1958-79 was Professor of Philosophy at Tehran University, later Professor of Islamic Studies at George Washington University; his 1981 Gifford lectures published as "Knowledge and the Sacred", also wrote "Ideals and Realities of Islam" (1966) and "Traditional Islam in the Modern World" (1987).
 
Insofar as so-called pagan religions are concerned, I rely on whatever best scholarly treatises may exist; in the case of lifelong pursuit of articulating what religion is, I condiser the works of James Breasted (University of Chicago) re ancient Egyptian culture and that of Ur (now Iraq) as I find same last precedent to modern religions.
 
It is from such resources and analysis of modern facts that I respectfully submit...as a voter and USA national only...that I do not believe President Bush committed bad-faith efforts against Islam "causing" it to reactively build jihadists.
 
First, only about two percent of Muslims are nomadic, thusly 98% are not dirt poor or open to jihad on account of poverty; even the EUP PSE references poverty is only a small facet of Islamic terrorism.
 
Second, jihad is a DUTY of leaders in the Caliphate/Imamate branch of Islam; the purpose of jihad seems to be to cause others to become either Muslims or protected people, then "fortifying the marches" so that any Muslim or protected person isn't harmed by outsiders...among those believing in such "final triumph" of Islam are the Twelver Shiites, members of the official State religion of Iran today (although it's unclear how much government rather than people influence that), and of course al-Qaeda, of course Saddam Hussein as Caliphates given to such belief themselves. Given what even Democrats said about Hussein during Clinton, and on heels of 911, a reduction of such Caliphate/Imamate-based extremists and their ability to operate globally seemed reasonable...and still does re threats from Tehran.
 
Third, Qaedan jihad seems to concern itself with appeal to the 2% of dirt-poor Muslims and on largely "day one" Islamic perspectives; Hussein and Irani-type jihad seems to concern itself with purely nationalistic interests on a geopolitical basis. As example, Qaeda looks at the Islamic Surah 4:34 literally: "Men have authority over women because Allah has made one superior to the other", yet Iran includes women in social functionality...the more likely "civil war" factor.
 
Fourth, surely if European and USA officials thought more than a tiny percentage of the world's Muslims were open to radicalization against ANYONE not an Islamic zealot, such officials would not all at once reduce defenses, invite jihadists to diplomat status as if "new age defense", and continue with cultures otherwise so 180 degrees opposite Islamic fundamentalism...where merely letting women vote is a "PING!". Which bears up that jihadists aren't offering the West or anyone else "protected persons" status against Qaedan terror unless they are exempted from the circumstances and from obeying laws like other immigrants and nationals.
 
Fifth, Christian liberation theology may have sprung up in Latin nations, q.v. CBE's in Brazil, but now exists in every corner of the globe; such theology is based on theory Christ was actually some kind of Socialist ubermensch who wants leaders treated as kings while disciples live in tents eating bread and shake down whoever they can for cash and such yet who isn't their leader; these liberationists apparently claim even the original Apostles "got it wrong", let alone the Vatican; governments tend to treat them as "knowing best" and ala everyday Muslims lumped with jihadists as "ALL are terrorists", anyone anywhere not following the "special catechisms" of liberation folks gets tossed in with the liberation front, getting called "ALL (nationality here) are such people!".
 
Wherefore, I respectfully submit that any attempt to impeach President Bush at this late, late date is wholly partisan, and seeks as tangent to its purpose an implication that all immigrants are here on canard they're all super-tough rogues who'll spare us, and who want to see totalist governments arrange their wills and faiths for them...no matter what anyone says about Bush or who wins the next election.