Michigan ACLU Muslim Deputy Director Refuses to Condemn Terrorist Acts
Many times, as we deal with those who are on the other side of an issue, we can begin to see things from their point of view. This is not to say that their arguments are convincing, but we can put ourselves in their shoes and understand where they are coming from. People of different races and religions would do well to hear what the other is saying about their beliefs and positions. However, there are those that seem to have left all realm of reality.
Keep in mind we are being heavily censored, please follow us on our social media pages: Telegram USA.Life, Gab, Parler, Minds, Spreely, MeWe, Twitter, Facebook
Rana Elmir, an American Muslim and deputy director of the ACLU of Michigan, says that she “emphatically” refuses to condemn jihadist terrorists “just because I’m Muslim.”
In her provocative article in Monday’s Washington Post, Elmir claims that she is often asked to condemn Islamic terrorism, to which she replies: “I emphatically refuse.”
Now, I do not want to sound crass or complicated, but I do not think that anyone is asking only the Muslim community to condemn terrorism. What I mean is that there is no one out there telling Muslims to condemn what these Islamists are doing. Would we all not want to come out and say what these people are doing is evil and wrong? But this is something that she says she cannot do!
She then goes on to compare the systematic slaughters wrought under the name of Islamic terrorism with “the terror advanced by mostly white men at the alarming rate of one mass killing every two weeks in this country.”
Elmir draws a parallel between the Islamic State and “Dylann Storm Roof’s attack on parishioners of a historic black church in South Carolina, Robert Dear’s attack on a Planned Parenthood facility, the murder of 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School,” and “the slaughter of moviegoers in Colorado or Louisiana.”
This is a false parallel that she and the Left have created to lessen the impact of Muslim terror on the Islamic community. For this parallel to work, you would have to make some sort of connection between the acts; some point of reference besides the color of their skin; say they all were of the same sect of Christianity; they all sat under the same philosophy teacher; they were from the same family. But none of this things connect the acts of violence that she has listed.
If race is the connecting factor, then there is a reason for racism. But it is not the color of our skin which makes us commit acts of violence. It is our ideas and motives.
No matter how the Left tries, we have to see that there is nothing like what we see happening in the Islamic community. There are no parallels in religious or even political communities anywhere or at any other time in history. It is more likely that this Muslim fears reprisal more than being lumped together with the terrorist.
“I will not be bullied into condemning terror perpetrated by psychopaths who misrepresent and distort Islam for their deranged purposes,” she wrote.
“Muslims across the globe are not threats. They are threatened,” she wrote.
“Condemnation,” she says, “becomes our admission of guilt.”
This has more to do with the lefts lumping of peoples together than anything else. Could you imagine a white person coming out and saying that he would not condemn the Charleston shooting? It would be screamed by the thought police that he was a racist and that he supported the shooting.
The more proof mounts that there is a theological and textual problem with Islam and violence the more the Left embraces and seeks to whitewash the Islamic community. And this is the very opposite thing that they do with other situations. Guns, white on black crime, police, and business leaders. All are lumped in as proof that the whole is evil.
But it is not wrong thinking, it is a means to their ends.
*Article by Michael Ware