A mosque was set afire in Peterborough, Canada. A local Moslem spokesman says it is clearly a ‘hate crime.’
The way the media treat incidents like this stands in sharp contrast to the way they treat incidents targeting the native populations of Western countries. If Moslems do something violent, it is downplayed as being unrepresentative of ‘true Islam’, only the act of a few ‘radical extremists’ or ‘fringe groups’. Then we are told that we must not judge Islam or Moslems by the violent acts (which are ever more frequent it seems) but by the supposed ‘peaceful majority’ of Moslems — who seem rather elusive, to be honest.
Judging by the way the media treat incidents like this mosque fire — in which no people were harmed, by the way — one would be led to think that damaging a building is more shocking and heinous than what happened in Paris on Friday, an attack in which hundreds of human beings were killed or injured. I guess it all depends on who is doing what to whom, not on the actual nature of the ‘crime’ itself. And of course the term ‘hate crime’ is only ever applicable to acts carried out by White people. When the actors are not White and especially if they are members of other protected groups (Moslems, non-heterosexuals, etc.) then the media warn against judging the group by the actions of certain individuals; the group as a whole is never indicted as with White people.
And when, as so often happens, the ”hate crime” proves to have been carried out by the ‘victims’ the media bury that story on the back pages of the papers, or do not report it on the evening newscast. Hoax ‘hate crimes’ are far more common than most people realize, and if you stop and think who benefits the most from the hoaxes, obviously the ‘victim’ wins sympathy and the propaganda value for the leftist narrative is valuable. So there’s every motive to stage these ‘hate crimes.‘ So I’ll take this one with a grain of salt, and to the media, I say, let’s show some perspective here.