One point that you make is fair and often overlooked, the power of religion to stop people from doing bad things. It's overlooked because it's not really quantifiable- it's not a news story when someone decides not to murder someone else in the name of religion. It is a news story when someone shoots an abortion doctor or commits arson on abortion clinics, or attacks a venue in Paris "where hundreds of pagans gathered for a concert of prostitution and vice." To say people will always do bad things regardless of religion is true but I say not entirely- I do think there are many cases where people would not have done these things were it not for the perceived compulsion of their religion.

You say the compulsion is really the fault of other people, not the religion, but I don't think that distinction is particularly meaningful. Religion is an institution of people, it wouldn't exist and has no value without the belief and interpretation of those people. It comes with the territory that sometimes that interpretation is used to justify evil things. I never said it was religion's "fault," but neither do I subscribe to the notion that it is either the person or the tool- if the tool, in this case religion, allows someone to claim the moral superiority by divine mandate of everything they espouse, it should go without saying that that is a very dangerous tool in the wrong hands.

As for your last point about the motivations behind the Paris attack. Personally I don't follow atheist circles nearly as much as progressive ones, so for example, I had never heard of this 'atheist plus' thing until Heretic suggested I'm probably one of them. But one thing I've heard about recently is this divide between so-called 'new atheists' and progressives (now pejoratively called regressive, har har) with regard to what motivates Islamic extremism. What you're talking about is the progressive position, that it is all based on geopolitical grievances and has nothing to do with religious ideology. New atheists argue that it is more of the opposite. Personally I sympathize more with the progressive side, but you really can't say it is either/or, in my opinion. Both factors have a role in inspiring extremism. Sometimes it's because a coalition airstrike bombed a wedding or a funeral or a hospital, sometimes it really is because those damn infidels and their abomination and perversion for enjoying a soccer game, and probably it is usually a mixture of both. When you look at the Paris attack, it appears that many of these attackers may be native European Muslims who weren't personally wronged by the West's involvement in the Middle East at all, but became radicalized nonetheless. You would also be hard pressed claim the Charlie Hebdo killings were primarily due to blowback from France's foreign policy, rather than simple intolerance to criticism of Islam.

refugee camp, which was burned down after the attack on France. On some of the dead terrorists were found a "documents" (that white A4 paper) which they all receive in Lesbos.
Now cops and fireteam on this video are searching for dead bodies. Looking for connection between refugees and terrorists attack.

Belgians too, apparently.

Reforming Islam is easier said than done. I tend to think most of the donations are coming from UAE, which isn't known for a moderate interpretation of Islam. I'm hoping for more pious Muslims gathering around progressive religious leaders. They have to be somewhere. It sounds naive, I know. The radicalization of Muslims born in Western Europe has to bet met from within, there's probably not enough clearly voiced opposition, I don't know. It's kind of the same problem like with the Neonazi plague in Eastern Germany. Frustrated people with no future prospects who think they have nothing to lose.

They just need to control the five religious sites. They could do it with just three, but that takes a lot of moral authority, which would be difficult to pull off right now.

About reforming Islam...
there is a sheikh, his name is Mus'ad Anwar. And he was asked why you have a beard? And he answered - because the Prophet had a beard, so i should have a beard as well.

Oh, the merchant republics gave you away.

Incest is worth dying for.

There must be more than one.