© Neil Hall / ReutersPolice officers attend to the scene after a vehicle collided with pedestrians, Finsbury Park, Britain June 19, 2017.
Following the terrorist attackin north London's Seven Sisters, which left one dead and 10 in hospital, celebrities and the public alike have criticized outlets of Islamophobic rhetoric.
Among the culprits are tabloid newspapers like the Sun, the UK Independence Party (UKIP), the Leave campaign during the Brexit referendum, and the leader of far-right group Britain First, Paul Golding.
"Islamophobia is not taken seriously enough in this country," Tom Mills, co-editor of the book What is Islamophobia, told RT.When the story was originally reported by the Daily Mail as "white van driver injures at least 10 people," Harry Potter author JK Rowling launched a series of tweets asking how the perpetrator had been radicalized - the sort of questions asked following attacks by Islamist extremists.
"You can say things about Muslims and Islam in British public life that you would never get away with saying about other minority groups.
"I don't think there's any doubt about that. But there's also the fact that if you look at the data, Islamophobic terrorist attacks in the UK are roughly as prevalent as attacks by those identifying with Islam, yet they are not treated as such by the media or the authorities."
"The Mail has misspelled 'terrorist' as 'white van driver.' Now let's discuss how he was radicalized," she tweeted.
She followed it up with the caption of a tweet by UKIP's former leader Nigel Farage and his unveiling of a Leave campaign poster showing a long line of presumed migrants with the words "Breaking Point" superimposed.
"Let's talk about how the #FinsburyPark terrorist was radicalized," she added.
Her messages triggered a series of angry replies from Farage and rightwing pundit Katie Hopkins, who Rowling also accused of provoking Islamophobia.
Academics like Mills believe the problem lies within British society and its failure to understand how the vilification of Muslims works.
"It's not just that Islamophobia isn't taken seriously enough, though. It's also that it is not properly understood," Mills said.A report by anti-Islamophobia group Tell MAMA reported at the end of last year that British mosques had been attacked no less than 100 times since 2013.
"Hate crimes against Muslims are recorded by the police, which is a good thing, and there are a number of initiatives seeking to combat bigoted views about against Muslims, as well as the far right groups and movements associated with them.
"But what tends to always get overlooked is that the far right are just part of a broader continuum of actors that produce Islamophobia.
"At the heart of Islamophobia in this country is the state, and in particular the state counter-terrorism apparatus, and then there are much more mainstream conservative, as well as liberal, groupings, that have actively contributed towards an Islamophobic culture and policy agenda."
2. If someone beats X into a coma, do we really need to worry about why? It's a Malum In Se (evil in itself) crime; assault and battery, and always has been, etc.
3. "Hate crime' laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the US constitution. Why? The only persons whom it does NOT supposedly protect: White folks. (Males a little moreso than females..)
Governments love to take advantage of youthful programming of 'original sin,' i.e., that we're all guilty. Therefore, white folks hesitate to object for fear of looking 'racist' because that guilt streak is there and so programmed.
4. If we want our governments back, we've got to get rid of over 90% of Malum Prohibitum/fake crimes off the books.
There are many problems out there and there is no logical reason that most of them should be dealt with through government; and of those that are, many skip over the step of trying a civil penalty and 'crimes' pop up all over the place; so that everyone is guilty of things they are not even aware of .
There is no reason that such problems (if they really are problems, rather than a divide and conquer/conflict reaction, synthesis tactic by government to acquire power via reducing the rights of individuals to simply be let alone.
Nowadays, our 'Criminal System' is overrun and overloaded with malum prohibitum 'crimes' that are harmful to no one, and that have better remedies outside of the government.
Drugs: medical problem.
Unemployment. ; We treat it as a civil matter, but in the USSR, being unemployed was made a CRIME - not by its nature but by a law,i.e., it became a status crime and a type of Malum Prohibitum crime..
If the government should be involved, (e.g., traffic laws) same were at first treated as a civil matter, but all to often have morphed into a criminal matter. (I know that it used to be that Fl. was the only state in the US where driving without a license is a crime! I imagine other states have since joined florida's position on that.)
Whatever. Hate crimes are absurd and require looking into a mind of an offender and lead to laws that outlaw the use even of words, etc. Welcome to 1984. See Canada's recent war on speaking naturally and saying he him them. insane. (And to think that step could never have been made without 'hate crimes' in the first place.....Where does it end? Answer: it doesn't.
R.C.