And yet they never were. I did question and continue to question whether their significance to the allies was anything more than on the periphery. And I also point out that muslim supporters of the Reich were significantly closer to its core and to the heart of the fighting in Europe itself.
That "single cleric" you refer to met personally with Hitler and travelled across eastern europe recruiting 20,000 muslims into the SS with Himmler. He also personally intervened in an eastern europe prisoner exchange negotiation that resulted in sending 5,000 Jews to the gas chambers. And he had hundreds of Hitler-supporting clerics under him as well as a Hitler-loyalist muslim politician in Iraq who committed "tens of thousands" of Hitler-supporting muslim troops to attacking the British in the middle east.
So yes. By comparison of influence and significance to the Nazi effort, I'd say Husseini wielded more of a stroke than the entire colonial muslim membership of the FFL combined. Plus his cohorts did it all in the name of Mahomet, as their Crescent scimitar-adorned SS badge indicates:

Only if you consider North Africa and Italy to be the periphery.
By comparison of influence and significance to the Nazi effort, I'd say Husseini wielded more of a stroke than the entire colonial muslim membership of the FFL combined. Plus his cohorts did it all in the name of Mahomet, as their Crescent scimitar-adorned SS badge indicates:
Interesting thing about that Waffen SS unit, apparently they were the first Nazi troops to mutiny.
So while no one disagrees with you that the Mufti was an evil, evil, man, it seems that his vaunted recruiting efforts produced soldiers that were far less effective than the conservatively-estimated 67,000 Muslim troops in the FFL from West Africa alone.
After all, who won the war?