Why isn’t this front page news?

Tippexy · 05/10/2025 12:05

perhaps because the police know more than we do?

OrangeSunsetSkies · 05/10/2025 12:08

I'm actually curious about the definition as well.

ComtesseDeSpair · 05/10/2025 12:09

Nobody was present or injured, so ultimately, it’s “just” an arson, whatever the motivation. It’s not quite such front page news as a terrorist attack in which people are killed and killed and injured.

UltraCynica · 05/10/2025 12:11

ComtesseDeSpair · 05/10/2025 12:09

Nobody was present or injured, so ultimately, it’s “just” an arson, whatever the motivation. It’s not quite such front page news as a terrorist attack in which people are killed and killed and injured.

Edited

There was a person inside the mosque though - so this is attempted murder and therefore a terrorist attack surely?

ShesTheAlbatross · 05/10/2025 12:12

ComtesseDeSpair · 05/10/2025 12:09

Nobody was present or injured, so ultimately, it’s “just” an arson, whatever the motivation. It’s not quite such front page news as a terrorist attack in which people are killed and killed and injured.

Edited

That’s not correct that no one was present. There was at least one man in the mosque. And that’s not relevant at all to the definition - the line between hate crime and terrorism isn’t whether or not anyone was hurt or killed.

JSMill · 05/10/2025 12:13

There have been incidents of vandalism against mosques for years. No one gives a shit.

Lou802 · 05/10/2025 12:16

I think the difference is if there is a political or ideological reason behind it. Or if it's just someone being a racist arsehole. I can imagine it can be hard to separate out the two at times though.

MrsSkylerWhite · 05/10/2025 12:16

JSMill · 05/10/2025 12:13

There have been incidents of vandalism against mosques for years. No one gives a shit.

Sadly, I think that’s probably a fair point.

JHound · 05/10/2025 12:17

There is never consistency in what is deemed a terror attack and what is not. And also what makes headlines and what does not.

I noticed that ages ago.

But part of it could be downgrading the news so as to not inflame tensions after the recent attack in Manchester.

PraisebetoGod · 05/10/2025 12:22

Doesn't seem anything like a terriost attack. It's arson. Not sure why this warrants any attention...I mean, the insurer Ecclesiastical reported over 150 churches experienced arson attacks in the UK over the five years leading up to 2022. We never hear about these do we?

EmeraldRoulette · 05/10/2025 12:23

@Deerfolk there have been loads of arson attacks on places of worship in recent years! I know they don't make the old style news but there have been so many of them.

They are never described as terror attacks.

MrsSkylerWhite · 05/10/2025 12:26

PraisebetoGod · 05/10/2025 12:22

Doesn't seem anything like a terriost attack. It's arson. Not sure why this warrants any attention...I mean, the insurer Ecclesiastical reported over 150 churches experienced arson attacks in the UK over the five years leading up to 2022. We never hear about these do we?

For someone with your username, that’s not a very Christian view.
Any attack on any place of worship is alarming and worthy of reporting on. It’s not a competition.

SriouslyWhutNow · 05/10/2025 12:28

Deerfolk · 05/10/2025 11:59

If it was a church or a temple it would be seen as a terrorist attack. But because it’s a mosque it gets down graded to a hate crime.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15163567/Footage-arsonist-Mmosque-fire-police-probe-hate-crime.html

Well given that they weren’t even initially able to pinpoint Axel Rudakubana as a terrorist due to lack of him having “I’m a terrorist” written on his forehead, I’d expect there’s a well-defined threshold that hasn’t been met just like during the initial Southport investigation. It’s not about who the target was. 🙄 But keep with the whataboutery, it’s such a good look after this week’s actual terrorist attack.

SriouslyWhutNow · 05/10/2025 12:29

MrsSkylerWhite · 05/10/2025 12:26

For someone with your username, that’s not a very Christian view.
Any attack on any place of worship is alarming and worthy of reporting on. It’s not a competition.

Show quote history

God could refer to several faiths so lots of ignorance here, but keep making things up to throw “unChristian” around for the bingo cards.

Dollymylove · 05/10/2025 12:32

SriouslyWhutNow · 05/10/2025 12:28

Well given that they weren’t even initially able to pinpoint Axel Rudakubana as a terrorist due to lack of him having “I’m a terrorist” written on his forehead, I’d expect there’s a well-defined threshold that hasn’t been met just like during the initial Southport investigation. It’s not about who the target was. 🙄 But keep with the whataboutery, it’s such a good look after this week’s actual terrorist attack.

Edited

Show quote history

But we had Starmer and Merseyside polis tying themselves in knots to make us believe the Welsh choir boy shit 😡

MrsSkylerWhite · 05/10/2025 12:32

SriouslyWhutNow · 05/10/2025 12:29

God could refer to several faiths so lots of ignorance here, but keep making things up to throw “unChristian” around for the bingo cards.

Edited

Show quote history

The poster referred to a specialist insurer of Christian churches so a perfectly reasonable assumption I think.

DiscoBob · 05/10/2025 12:37

There was nobody inside so it was an arson. That's the legal definition of it.

And I don't think an arson in a Hindu temple or church would make front page news either.

PraisebetoGod · 05/10/2025 12:37

MrsSkylerWhite · 05/10/2025 12:26

For someone with your username, that’s not a very Christian view.
Any attack on any place of worship is alarming and worthy of reporting on. It’s not a competition.

Show quote history

What is unchristian about my view? I don't condone any arson attacks on any places of worship. Perhaps the point I was trying to make wasn't very clear. Why is this making the news at all when churches suffer the same, and at a higher rate*? Don't you think there's something suspicious about that? Is a mosque more important? Why has this one incident been highlighted - why now?

*Muslim census and MEND 2022 found 4 mosques had arson attacks in the previous 3 years vs 150 churches in the five years leading up to 2022.

Original poster

Deerfolk · 05/10/2025 12:39

SriouslyWhutNow · 05/10/2025 12:28

Well given that they weren’t even initially able to pinpoint Axel Rudakubana as a terrorist due to lack of him having “I’m a terrorist” written on his forehead, I’d expect there’s a well-defined threshold that hasn’t been met just like during the initial Southport investigation. It’s not about who the target was. 🙄 But keep with the whataboutery, it’s such a good look after this week’s actual terrorist attack.

Edited

Show quote history

If he was Muslim they would have called him a terrorist. This is where there is clear double standard. If they are not Muslim then they delve into mental health issues. Look at the guy who killed the people in America, just another gun crime issue.

OP posts:

Funnywonder · 05/10/2025 12:40

Lou802 · 05/10/2025 12:16

I think the difference is if there is a political or ideological reason behind it. Or if it's just someone being a racist arsehole. I can imagine it can be hard to separate out the two at times though.

I agree with this. Having been brought up in Belfast during the Troubles, I saw reports of churches and other buildings with religious significance being targeted in arson attacks quite frequently. The vast majority of the time these attacks were very obviously carried out by opportunistic bigots who hated the other side. Clearly, if a car bomb was left outside you could be pretty sure it was a planned/orchestrated terrorist attack. This was often confirmed when a terrorist group ‘claimed’ it.

Chiseltip · 05/10/2025 12:42

Deerfolk · 05/10/2025 11:59

If it was a church or a temple it would be seen as a terrorist attack. But because it’s a mosque it gets down graded to a hate crime.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15163567/Footage-arsonist-Mmosque-fire-police-probe-hate-crime.html

Why would an arson attack on a Mosque be "front page news?"

There are far more important thing going on in the world right now. And no, it wouldn't be any different if it were a church.

MrsSkylerWhite · 05/10/2025 12:42

PraisebetoGod · 05/10/2025 12:37

What is unchristian about my view? I don't condone any arson attacks on any places of worship. Perhaps the point I was trying to make wasn't very clear. Why is this making the news at all when churches suffer the same, and at a higher rate*? Don't you think there's something suspicious about that? Is a mosque more important? Why has this one incident been highlighted - why now?

*Muslim census and MEND 2022 found 4 mosques had arson attacks in the previous 3 years vs 150 churches in the five years leading up to 2022.

Show quote history

No I don’t believe any religion trumps another. I’m an atheist. All attacks should be reported.

MrsSkylerWhite · 05/10/2025 12:44

PraisebetoGod · 05/10/2025 12:37

What is unchristian about my view? I don't condone any arson attacks on any places of worship. Perhaps the point I was trying to make wasn't very clear. Why is this making the news at all when churches suffer the same, and at a higher rate*? Don't you think there's something suspicious about that? Is a mosque more important? Why has this one incident been highlighted - why now?

*Muslim census and MEND 2022 found 4 mosques had arson attacks in the previous 3 years vs 150 churches in the five years leading up to 2022.

Show quote history

Out of curiosity, do you know what percentage of buildings representing both religions that is?

Chiseltip · 05/10/2025 12:44

UltraCynica · 05/10/2025 12:11

There was a person inside the mosque though - so this is attempted murder and therefore a terrorist attack surely?

Show quote history

No, it isn't "attempted murder" 🙄

The law doesn't work how you think it does.

JHound · 05/10/2025 12:45

SriouslyWhutNow · 05/10/2025 12:28

Well given that they weren’t even initially able to pinpoint Axel Rudakubana as a terrorist due to lack of him having “I’m a terrorist” written on his forehead, I’d expect there’s a well-defined threshold that hasn’t been met just like during the initial Southport investigation. It’s not about who the target was. 🙄 But keep with the whataboutery, it’s such a good look after this week’s actual terrorist attack.

Edited

Show quote history

Not initially nor even now.