Back in March of this year, following the New Zealand mosque attack in which a large number of people died, Britain’s Islamophobia industry shoved itself into a higher gear. This, in large part publicly funded or government supported, ‘Islamophobia’ industry went all out and tried to tie every single incident where someone expressed dislike of Islam, to the New Zealand atrocity.

This industry, whose normal output is whining, often dishonestly, about Muslim victimhood, claimed that the New Zealand attacks had encouraged ‘Islamophobes’ and emboldened them. This hysteria cooked up by these Islamic Wormtongues infested both the police and elements of the mainstream media. Both the press and the police, with the encouragement of various Islamic grievance mongers, claimed that every perceived incident of ‘Islamophobia’ or an alleged attack was a direct result of the ‘Islamophobia’ of society of which the New Zealand attack was the end result.

One incident that the left leaning mainstream media and Islamic grievance mongers pointed to as ‘evidence’ that Muslims in Britain were under attack from mobs of rabid Islam-haters, was a string of property damage attacks on mosques in Birmingham. In a statement to Facebook by Iman Atta, the chair of Britain’s most well known and well rewarded (£1.9M at least) by the taxpayer, Islamic grievance mongers, Tell Mama said: “Attacks on five mosques in Birmingham show once again that Muslims are having to bear the brunt of absolute hatred and bigotry of others. “

Ms Atta also claimed in her statement that these attacks show that there are individuals who see Muslims as ‘other’ and that those who think this way need to have their ‘narratives challenged and countered’. This shows that at the time Ms Atta clearly believed that the Birmingham attacks were the result of a ‘far right’ group or individual.

However, as time has gone on, more has come out about this case and it turns out that this was nothing to do with people disliking Islam or with ‘Islamophobia’ or any other thing that Ms Atta’s group uses to both advance Islam and clamp down on our rights to speak freely about this ideology. News of the person charged with these criminal damage attacks emerged recently when charging information about the accused was released by West Midlands Police. It was revealed that the alleged attacker was not a member of a ‘far right’ organisation or an individual who had been pushed over the edge by the behaviour of some of Britain’s more ‘challenging’ Muslim residents, but is himself more than likely a Muslim judging by the name of the defendant.

The Independent said on August 21st:

A man has been charged with attacking five mosques in Birmingham in the wake of the Christchurch terror attack.

Arman Rezazadeh, is accused of religiously-aggravated criminal damage over a string of vandalism in March.

Police said the 34-year-old, from Handsworth, was originally detained under the Mental Health Act but has been deemed fit to face legal proceedings.

He will appear before Birmingham Magistrates’ Court on 12 September.

It will be interesting to see how this case develops. There has I noticed been a long delay in charging the suspect but I believe that this may be due to the fact that the police detained him under the Mental Health Act initially and it was some time before he was declared to be sane by medical experts and therefore chargeable.

Not only is this going to be an interesting case, especially as regards to the revelation of any motive behind the incidents, but it is also, hopefully, embarrass the various Islamic grievance mongers who whined about ‘muh poor Muslims’ and who tried to pin these attacks on those who had bugger all to do with them. The police, who flooded ‘Muslim areas’ with officers to ‘protect Muslims’ and by doing so probably robbed members of other groups of Britons in the city of decent policing, have been shown to being a force that put virtue signalling to Muslims above almost everything else.

This man who is up in court in September is without a doubt not the ‘far right monsters’ that the police were looking for. This defendant is also not likely to be associated with any of the ‘far right’ groups or alleged ‘far right’ individuals that groups like Tell Mama try to promote as ‘the bogeyman’ that needs to be stopped, even at the cost of the right of freedom of speech. To Tell Mama’s credit they have at least published an update to this case, but that doesn’t excuse them from criticism from the breathless hyperbole that they engaged in when this case first emerged.

Although I cannot for reasons of sub judice comment too much or speculate too much on this particular case, I think that it safe to say that this looks very much like a case similar to the one when the boy cried ‘wolf’ when there was not a wolf. The ‘Islamophobia’ industry and a police force that has been morally and politically corrupted by the ideology of Islam, seem to have both cried ‘racist, far right, Islamophobe but this case may well prove those who use these mantras that they are wrong.