Previously discussed and resolved.

@OwlInASack Our fathers and grandfathers did NOT fight to enable this:
[thereligionofpeace.com]

@OwlInASack You have my heartfelt sympathy. I hope things start going better for you,.

@OwlInASack Again, my sympathies.
I do not encourage or condone violence against Muhammadans.
The best way to show true compassion and empathy for the followers of "the prophet" would be to help and encourage them to apostatize, freeing themselves and humanity from the slavery and oppression imposed by political Islam.

@OwlInASack It seems to me that those who rail against free speech are Fascistic. The term does not apply either to myself or Stephen Yaxley-Lennon.

[en.wikipedia.org]

Those who follow the teachings of Buddha are Buddhists.
Those who follow the teachings of Christ are Christian.
For followers of "the prophet" to be offended by being classified as a Muhammadans would be offensive only to hypocrites, and against the spirit of the Shahada.

Your implication that Yaxley-Lennon 'lives for violence against them" is an extreme extrapolation. His efforts have been towards protecting innocent youth from rape and advocating prosecution of the perpetrators. Had law enforcement not abrogated its function in those areas, there would be no "Tommy Robinson".

@OwlInASack Again, my heartfelt sympathies.
Continue to propagate regressive leftist dogma. Continue to wallow in your misery. Continue in your efforts to infect those who can critically evaluate evidence without bias. I'm sure this will solve all your problems.

@OwlInASack Perhaps you are correct. I regularly read, but do not invariably trust, the MSM. I also do not automatically distrust non-traditional media, which, IMHO, often exposes truth evaded by the MSM. I would be interested in links to any MSM (or other) articles which credibly refute that law enforcement in Britain treats followers of Islam as a special privileged group.

Deflecting the issue:
"Grooming gangs have been part of our society for centuries and centuries."