Sorry to back track, but thatbags I definitely don't hear the same tone of voice as you do when I listen to BG or SA in the video. I hear BG being aggressive and SA being measured. Here I am not talking about what was said, just the tones of their voices.
As for SA playing the victim, what is wrong with her asking why there did not appear to be any Muslims in the audience discussing the murder of Americans by extremists in a Muslim country?
As for BG, don't you think it would be wise to check if what she said is actually correct? I know what she said about Nazi Germany is wrong, so perhaps other examples are not as straight forward as she implied (9/11 being the obvious exception as I said before)?
I do think the whole thing was an attempt by both parties to make their points in front of a camera. Unfortunately for SA, it was BG's speech which went viral (I saw the video a while ago), no doubt because it taps into the American fear of Islam and it went on from there.
I don't think IS is promoting Islam, I think it is using Islam for its own purpose and that purpose is nothing to with religion.
Someone mentioned earlier the possibility of the Paris attackers being high on drugs. Some of the friends and relatives of the attackers have been talking about the attackers and describing their distinctly non-Islamic. Drinking, drug taking and never going to the mosque were mentioned. Apparently during suicide missions jihadists are known to use heroine and cocaine. One example is the Tunisian beach attacker. Reports are saying the hotel room booked Salah Abdeslam's name was filled with drug taking paraphernalia.