> Two bad sources doesn't a good source make

I agree with the principle. However, the Honest Reporting article isn’t actually making any particular claim and isn’t a “source” in the same way, right? Their article is just pointing out the flaws in the widely-circulated claims from pro-Palestine news media and reasons to be skeptical of those claims.

As for your comparison of Islamism to others - I feel it goes too far in framing these various movements as the same, as these all are different in their goals and the level of intolerance against other beliefs. One key difference - Islamism (the political movement) is much more prevalent among Muslims than Christian nationalism is among Christians. And it preaches the erasure of all other religions entirely. Sam Harris has spoken about this in length if you want to hear it from others. Hindutva isn’t the same as either Islamism or Christian nationalism, since it literally means “Hinduness”. The recent reframing of “Hinduness” into a pejorative is just a vague racist-tinged political attack against a long-colonized people (Indians) trying to keep their culture from being erased by other powers. The intersection of many eastern religions with politics, to whatever extent they exist, are far less of a threat to free societies than the supremacist versions of Christianity and Islam.