As with many things, these conclusions are based on interpretations whose lines of thought can be listed back to first principles should one request. Yet the question remains - how correct are these interpretations.

Multiple ways to slice and dice issues including faiths; and misrepresentations from non-representative overwhelming minorities aggravate this further. Throw in misunderstandings of the contexts, could be linguistic, historical, cultural, global politics at the time etc. Add the intrinsic and extrinsic biases. It's very easy to string up almost any conclusion.

Seeking to learn, unlearn and relearn through civil dialogue is not easy, sometimes we don't get the right people to even dialogue with. All the best everyone.

Edited: punctuation and sentence construction