Your ridicule hate and contempt for religion will be used as a recruiting tool for these bastaards. You would be doing little more than pouring petrol on to the fire.
In terms of what to do, for me this should be seen as a declaration of war. I think it is time (has been for a while) to put ground troops in. Isis are the closest thing to pure evil since the nazis. I think this should be done in conjunction with players on the ground and promises of new nation states for those that fight with us, iraq and syria are little more than poorly concieved western colonial constructs anyway (ignoring strong sectarian fault lines).
Prohibitions (social and legal) on criticism of religion creates a shield for religious opinion to hide behind. Criticism starts and ends with humour in my opinion, you need satire, you need ridicule. If you don't have that right you have no right to criticise. It might be that ridicule is used as a tool of recruitment, it certainly motivated people to attack Charlie Hebdo it seems (although it could have been a symbolic attack that would otherwise have been aimed at another symbol). But there are also benefits to ridule, and the ridiculous deserves to be treated with ridicule regardless of threats of violence and any real or imagined recruitment to violence that results.
We've had way too much protection of religion. And it's gotten us nowhere.
Hate is a very strong word, but one I think is warranted in this situation. It's a word I'm sure the extremists are familiar with. It's an emotion, and although I don't believe in the notion that one cannot control one's emotions at all, or the notion that emotions don't influence action (both notions are rather ridiculous themselves) I believe my emotions on this are justified. Religious groups kill people in large numbers, they incite violence and bigotry. Two quick, non-terrorism examples: I believe religious doctrines are one of the leading causes of increased suffering, suicides and depression amongst gay and lesbian youths. The vatican is spending extraordinary amounts of money protecting and relocating priests accused of raping children, most likely allowing them to go on raping children elsewhere. They've been doing this at least for decades. And catholics from around the world continue to give them money! I don't think it's unjustified to have an emotional response that can be desrcibed as hateful. It says a lot about how much protection religion has enjoyed in our society that reacting to that with hate can be seen as a bad thing. Believe me, I could go on with the examples...
I do find it quite interesting that when discussing the blame of religion for terrorism there's always someone pointing towards socioeconomic reasons to excuse religion. But when it's a question of sensitivity from those critical of religion apparently our words can be really influential and socioeconomic reasons for terrorism are not really brought up. "My" words, my contempt, my humour can apparently drive people to extrimism and terrorism. But the words written by their claimed prophet, GHod's messenger, nope. Socioeconomic reasons.
There are too many other candidates for pure evil for me to agree with the part of your second paragraph comparing them to nazis, other than I think I agree with the rest of your second paragraph. I think the Syrian situation should be a bit of a wake up call to all of those who seem to disagree with all military interventions. Leaving states like this to fester doesn't help the situation, or their suffering population.
