You're not having déjà vu. There was another terrorist attack in London last night. Not to be confused with all of Britain's other isms of terror (see Multiple Dead in London Terrorist Attack and Another Terror Attack Hits the UK, This Time London Bridge...). This time, it was a "van attack" which went down outside a Mosque. Here's what we know so far...

A man died and 10 people were injured after a van was rammed into a crowd of worshipers near a mosque in north London, in the latest terror attack to hit the UK this year.

A 48-year-old white man was wrestled to the ground by members of the public and then arrested at the scene on suspicion of attempted murder, authorities said.

British Prime Minister Theresa May said the attack was directed at Muslims and condemned it was "every bit as sickening" as deadly Islamist attacks that hit the country in recent months.

Firstly, this is a heinous crime and should be roundly condemned. Clearly this was meant to be a terrorist attack and need be referred to as such. Period. The end.

Something amiss here, though? Notice how the media has NO problem deeming this a terrorist attack immediately upon occurrence. With previous incidents (see Horrific Terrorist Attack in Nice, France. Cowardly Media Calls it "Truck Attack..." and London Bridge Attacker was Featured in ‘The Jihadis Next Door’), the media took a much less direct approach and took their time before calling it terrorism. And, of course, there were immediate calls to halt "Islamophobia." Whereas right now, it is immediately being condemned as... you guessed it, Islamophobia.

Consistency. The media (and left) has none. Their selective condemnation comes to light in these instances. Speaking of which...

There is a double standard going on here. Just not the one this guy's implying. What's failing to be noticed here? All the headlines calling it terrorism. Seriously, Twitterheads, Google is your friend. But also - the reason why attacks like this are considered "lone wolf" may have something to do with the rate of their (non)occurrence. They make up an obviously insignificant percentage of the total global terrorism statistic.

Also, it's worth pointing out that this shooter was "radicalized"... by terrorist attacks themselves.

When it comes to the Islamic terrorists in the UK, the vast majority were radicalized by Imams, "extremist" mosques and teachings of the evils and decadence of the West. It takes no stretch of the imagination to see that this lowdown cretin was influenced and inspired by the murders committed by said people. But in terms of consequences on a global scale, to act as though there's an equivalency would be nonsensical. This man himself will serve to radicalize no one else as he is not fighting in the name of a unified and growing ideology. The others were.

Oh, and while we're on the subject, I'll just leave this here...

NOT SUBSCRIBED TO THE PODCAST? FIX THAT! IT’S COMPLETELY FREE ON BOTH ITUNES HERE AND SOUNDCLOUD HERE.