Some Muslims, like Obama's friends in the Society of the Muslim Brothers, are murderous Islamists theocrats and the forefathers of al-Qa'ida. Others, like Bush's friends in the House of Saud, are meta-hypocritical playboys paying off 'Islamic charities' across the globe to turn the Sunni world Wahabbist to the tune of billions.
Ismailis are a small, docile branch of Islam that the big brands dislike. The kind that, while still backwards and ignorant, are at least generally harmless. Clearly, someone did their homework in reaching out to this particular sect.
While I'd be perfectly happy in a world without Islam, I also realize that much of our strategic interest lies in playing the sects against each other, and that's probably true in politics too. Once you rise high enough, you can't duck the existence of Muslim voters. If you're going to pick a group, you'll want a small, friendly type like this.
Islamiststs are either Islamists, or not. One man wrote it, and his word is their command.
If there are moderates, as you claim, like the Ismailis, who ever they are, who are opposed to muhammed's commands, then why are they still Islamists?
Methinks you have too many loops to clear. But nice try. Since you did jump thru a few, albeit while tripping all over yourself.