Reuters wrote:... The underlying propaganda message, officials say, is that the United States is waging a crusade against Islam in order to control Middle Eastern oil, and that Muslims should fight to protect Islam from humiliation.
...
Well, if they are so concerned with «crusades», Bush shouldn't be using it in it's speeches which are carefully writen to the letter by specialists.
If you don't remember, in one of his speeches, he used it a few times. It got to be known because that is very offensive to the middle-east area and leads to that very same thinking, of US waging a crusade against Islam. At the time, Bush was accused of, either intentionally or unintentionally, using that as extra inflaming of Islamic's hate towards US.
To us, the hapenings of the crusades seems very far away, but for the regions of the old crusades, the stuff that hapened there were so cruel that, even today, people use remarks to it in they're comon language and speaking. At least as far as i've heard some specialists explain.
Read (or see and hear) about that part of history and learn how, due to many circunstances like thirst, hunger, hate, etc, piles of bodies of mans, kinds, women of an entire city ended up piled in the streets, how they ended up comiting canibalism, et cetera, et cetera.
The dark ages. When the musslins saw every people as son of god (Ala) which deserved to have it's soul saved, believing in Ala or not, while the cristians saw the musslins as condemned creatures to hell deserving of nothing. They had sciences, poetry, etc, we had nothing, all lost in the fall of the roman empire.
How things have changed...
History, sometimes, is a very interesting thing.