Atheism is the belief that there is no creator, Heaven forbid. This is as opposed to Agnosticism. People in the USSR were taught this as fact, and forced to state this. You are making a distinction without a difference.

As for the rest, I can't do anything about the nonsense you've swallowed. One day you will learn the facts.

Those deaths in China had nothing to do with Communism or Mao Zedong. Millions of people die in China on a regular basis due to famines.

Finally, Hitler and the Nazis were not even remotely atheist. That is a popular misconception.

The Soviet Union did not intentionally and deliberately destroy Judaism in Eastern Europe. It is still there and always was there. The only thing the USSR did was teach the Jews Russian and give them an education and end the shtetls. The USSR attempted and largely succeeded in making everyone who lived there equal and made their lives better.

Your vicious hatred of Communism (which, by the way, is a complete misunderstaning of Communism) is no better than the Arab Muslim hatred of Jews.

I also appreciated your reference to the forced preaching in Rome. My reading until now had given me the impression that anti-Jewish activity was almost exclusively confined to regional and local clerics, not the Vatican. If you have anything else regarding this, I would appreciate it.

Undoubtedly Islam was spread by the sword. That doesn't mean they need to believe that this should be done right now, any more than we (you and I) believe that Judaism should be fully enforced here (Israel) in the absence of the consent of a significant percentage of the population (as it would be counter-productive). Most Moslem countries are, in fact, not trying to convert the world by the sword (just us).

I think the book of John is a good example. There is no reason that some day Islamic thought could come to resemble to that of the Italian cleric, or at least accept that the Jihad should be put off for a few centuries.

The Soviet Union intentionally and deliberately, destroyed the Jewish religion is Eastern Europe. Those Jews (and there were many) whose bodies they did not destroy, they went for their souls. (In a much smaller and milder way, the latter also happened in Israel, although the extent is not clear.) We live with the results of this here in Israel. I will never view a Marxist (today) as any different from a Nazi.

The history of all Jews under all Islamic countries at all times?

What is your problem with that?

Regarding the Koran, you can't prove anything from quotes in source material. Take a look at Brendon O'Connell's video, posted here. The stuff he quotes is there; just that no-one interprets it that way.

A half truth at best and apples and oranges for certain. There's plenty to learn from the source material. It helps you to know that the Quran's Suras are not canonized in historical order.

Back in Mohamed's time and thereafter, they didn't have videos. They had disciples and schools of jurisprudence. All of them agreed that Jihad and the Sha'aria are the means and the goal to hoist the flag of Islam over the entire world, using the most cruel and diabolical methods to achieve their subjugation over everyone else.

I will not try to defend the precise figure, but it is WAY over 5 million. (Jung Chang's figure for China is 70 million.) The six million figure for the Holocaust also includes a lot of indirect deaths; of course I am including them. Speak to someone who remembers the early days; how the government intentionally destroyed simple commerce and family life. When you make an omelet, you are responsible for the eggs you break.

I presume, by the way, that the people who researched the holocaust were fanatical anti-Nazis. I still trust their figures. Hating evil does not make you a bad researcher.

Regarding the Koran, you can't prove anything from quotes in source material. Take a look at Brendon O'Connell's video, posted here. The stuff he quotes is there; just that no-one interprets it that way. (The parts that are not out-of-context.) Or look at how many Christians re-interpret the anti-semitism of John. Regarding scholarship, I will not try to argue, only that this can change.