Heres one for those that would defend this religion
YouTube - Hamas and Islamic nazism
This, from noted Professor Bernard Lewis:
1. In the year 1940, the government of France surrendered to the Axis and formed a collaborationist government in a place called Vichy. The French colonial empire was, for the most part, beyond the reach of the Nazis, which meant that the governors of the French colonies had a free choice: To stay with Vichy or to join Charles de Gaulle, who had set up a Free French Committee in London. The overwhelming majority chose Vichy, which meant that Syria-Lebanona French-mandated territory in the heart of the Arab Eastwas now wide open to the Nazis.
2. The Nazis moved in, made a tremendous propaganda effort, and were even able to move from Syria eastwards into Iraq and for a while set up a pro-Nazi, fascist regime. It was in this period that political parties were formed that were the nucleus of what later became the Baath Party. A few after the war, the Soviets moved in, established an immensely powerful presence in Egypt, Syria, Iraq and various other countries, and introduced Soviet-style political practice. The adaptation from the Nazi model to the communist model was very simple and easy, requiring only a few minor adjustments.
3. Two other factors added to the mix produce the picture we see today.
a. The first of thesefounded by a theologian called Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, who lived in a remote area of Najd in desert Arabiais known as Wahhabi. Its argument is that the root of Arab-Islamic troubles lies in following the ways of the infidel.
b. The other important thing that happenedalso in the mid-20swas the discovery of oil. With that, this extremist sect found itself not only in possession of Mecca and Medina, but also of wealth beyond the dreams of avarice. As a result, what would otherwise have been a lunatic fringe in a marginal country became a major force in the world of Islam. Now, its influence spreads far beyond the region.
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2006&month=09
But Professor Lewis concludes in eye-opening fashion, stating that historically, Muslim leadership has followed a path closer to democracy than monarchical or tyrannical rule:
"To view traditional Islamic leadership, consider this letter by Mssr. Count de Choiseul-Gouffier, the French ambassador in Istanbul, written in 1786, in which he is trying to explain why he is making rather slow progress with the tasks entrusted to him by his government in dealing with the Ottoman government. Here, he says, things are not as in France where the king is sole master and does as he pleases. Here, he says, the sultan has to consult. He has to consult with the former holders of high offices, with the leaders of various groups and so on. And this is a slow process."
Precis: the long view of history inveighs against phrases such as 'this religion.'
You might be more accurate to state 'the leaning of this religion at this time...'
