Why didn't media hold IS apologist to account?
SO, Dr Al-Wazzan of the Belfast Islamic Centre comments that Mosul, under Islamic State (IS) control, is "the most peaceful city in the world", as IS "are less evil than the Iraqi government" (News, January 10).
Is this the same Mosul where, at the weekend, we learned that two men had been thrown to their deaths from the top of a tall building in front of a baying crowd for the "crime" of being gay?
Is this the same IS that killed people for refusing to convert to their particular sect of Islam? Is this the same IS that has kidnapped women and young girls, forcing them into sexual slavery?
Is this the same IS that has committed atrocity after atrocity?
Or am I watching different news reports?
Shocking as the above may be, perhaps most shocking is that this story only merited a few column centimetres.
Where was the page upon page of righteous indignation from your columnists, reporters asking members of the public to comment and calls for a public show of humility in front of the media?
It is easy for newspapers to write "Je Suis Charlie", but when put to the test, they fail to be robust in challenging the above comments of Dr Al-Wazzan.
Or maybe you only reserve that approach for Christians, such as Peter Robinson and Pastor James McConnell.
EQUALITY FOR ALL