One example. The mentioned Imam Hatip schools were a headway for religious education after a very heavy secularization of the country. It was just an alternativ

One example. The mentioned Imam Hatip schools were a headway for religious education after a very heavy secularization of the country. It was just an alternative to ultra secular education system so people could send their children to have them get some religious education. They were never meant to train preachers only. Their graduates have become anything but preachers mostly. In my family there are physicians, lawyers, engineers who attended that school (Alas, I did not). In the article it is presented as if these schools are training ultra religious people even "Jihadist" in the sense Western conception has these day. That is the biggest lie and misdirection. These schools are actually anti-thesis of such movements like people who join ISIS. The fundamental reason is that they teach religion, and if one knows Islam as it should be one can not join such groups. For example, The coup attempt executed by Gulenist (a pseudo-religious modern looking power hungry group) have been against these schools. Because these schools were teaching Islam as opposed to a version filled with superstitions, like believing the Gulen himself (the leader of the group) is Mahdi to put the world in order. During the coup attempt they have killed over 250 ordinary citizens. They shot to crowds from helicopter gunships. Due to their so called religious understanding those killed were killed for a greater good anyway or deserved such death. Do you see any resemblance to ISIS? They are more dangerous than ISIS though, at least those thugs show their true color unlike Gulenists. Where there's lack of proper education and understanding of religion there will always be someone to abuse it. Painting these schools as if training jihadists is nothing but disservice to the public.