Stephen, you present a list of alleged aggressive acts committed by Muslims against Christians leading up to the Frankish invasions (or what are politely called in the West "Crusades") beginning in 1096.
638--Jerusalem surrenders to a Muslim army. Muslims soon begin construction of a mosque on the Temple Mount.
640s--Egypt and Armenia fall to Islam.
655--Muslims win a naval battle with the Byzantines; Muslims almost capture the Byzantine emperor.
711-712--Muslims invade Spain and kill the king. After the collapse of the Spanish army, Muslims begin sending raiding parties into France.
717--In the East, Muslims besiege Constantinople, the Byzantine capital.
732--The Muslim invasion of France is stopped at the Battle of Tours (though Muslims would continue raiding France for a long period).
800s--Muslims launch invasions of Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica (south-central Europe). Muslims establish pirate havens along the coast of Italy and France.
846--Muslims attack the outer areas of Rome.
You seem to be forgetting that much of this "aggression" was committed against the Byzantine EMPIRE - ie. a Christian theocracy which formerly ruled Arabia and much of the Near East with an iron fist.
No, the year 717 is listed. Nevertheless, give us some examples of the iron fist and we'll grant that Muslims had a right to rebel. (It may deserve more thorough treatment than that.)
Al-Hakim for example was hardly a "Muslim" but a self-declared God who demanded worship in his own right under the title "Allah" - blasphemous words for any Muslim to utter.
Abu ‘Ali Mansur Tāriqu al-Ḥākim (985 – 13 February 1021), also known as Al-Hakim bi Amr Allāh (Arabic: الحاكم بأمر الله; literally "Ruler by God's Command"), was the sixth Fatimid caliph and 16th Ismaili imam (996–1021). Al-Hakim is an important figure in a number of Shia Ismaili religions, such as the world's 15 million Nizaris and in particular the 2 million Druze of the Levant whose eponymous founder Ad-Darazi proclaimed him as the incarnation of God in 1018. In Western literature he has been referred to as the "Mad Caliph", primarily as a result of the Fatimid desecration of Jerusalem in 1009, though this title is disputed as stemming from partisan writings by some historians (such as Willi Frischauer and Heinz Halm).
Histories of Al Hakim can prove controversial, as diverse views of his life and legacy exist. Historian Paul Walker writes: “Ultimately, both views of him, the mad and despotic tyrant irrationally given to killing those around him on a whim, and the ideal supreme ruler, divinely ordained and chosen, whose every action was just and righteous, were to persist, the one among his enemies and those who rebelled against him, and the other in the hearts of true believers, who, while perhaps perplexed by events, nonetheless remained avidly loyal to him to the end."
I don't think one really can have Islam disown Al Hakim.