Yes. Surely they're upset because the general Muslim population happens to have a different skin color. No way it has anything to do with the fact that people around the world are slaughtering civilians in the name of the exact same piece of 9th century literature which moderates subscribe to.

Even if just .0000001% of the 1.6 billion Muslims held dangerous fundamentalist beliefs, that'd be an honest justification for fearing Islam generally. But instead, in almost every Muslim majority country and several non-majority countries (Russia and, I believe Thailand come to mind), pew polls show that the enforcement of Sharia law, even over legal law, is believed to be righteous by over half of the Muslim population.

In the 9th century, a warlord and named Mohammed publicly commands the ambush and slaughter of Meccans after their four-month truce ended. 1.6 billion people worldwide believe him to be a virtuous man and the sole messenger of God's will. And any attempt to criticize this faith, with absolutely zero intention to harm any of its followers, is then painted as by confused people as "racist." Most critics of Islam have not made any point about race whatsoever. It is their opponents who, in a dazed fury of political correctness and misplaced desire to impress Islamists, are most often guilty of fallaciously bringing race into the conversation.

I agree that Breitbart is cancer and, in many ways, bigoted. However, you seem to be conflating genuine criticism of Islam and its doctrines with the beliefs of alt-right maniacs who follow Breitbart/Milo Yiannopolous.

ps: sorry for the long winded shitpost