The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has 1.6 million followers on Twitter. On Monday, they used that massive platform to blatantly lie about the motive in the horrific murder of Deah Barakat, Yusor Abu-Salha and Razan Abu-Salha, three young adults who happened to be Muslim. The well-established motive behind the media-dubbed “Chapel Hill Shooting” was anger over a parking spot in the condominium complex, where killer Craig Stephen Hicks resided with his wife.
The ACLU, a hard left activist organization who has long masqueraded as a “guardian of liberty,” and defender of America’s Constitution, blatantly lied about the motive in the killing, saying that the victims were “killed in a hate crime motivated by anti-Muslim bigotry.”
In the wake of the shooting, a local report gave more insight on the twisted mind of the killer:
Imad Ahmad, who lived in the condo where his friends were killed until Barakat and Yusor Abu-Salha were married in December, said Hicks complained about once a month that the two men were parking in a visitor’s space as well as their assigned spot.
“He would come over to the door. Knock on the door and then have a gun on his hip saying ‘you guys need to not park here,'” said Ahmad, a graduate student in chemistry at UNC-Chapel Hill. “He did it again after they got married.”
Both Hicks and his neighbors complained to the property managers, who apparently didn’t intervene. ‘They told us to call the police if the guy came and harassed us again,’ Ahmad said.
“This man was frustrated day in and day out about not being able to park where he wanted to,” said Karen Hicks’ attorney, Robert Maitland.
The killings were “related to long-standing parking disputes my husband had with various neighbors regardless of their race, religion or creed,” [Hicks’ ex-wife] Karen Hicks said.
Last year, Hicks’ confession was released, bolstering the warped motive of the perpetrator as being angry over a parking space:
A worthy discussion of the case can be found at Reason.
As reported at RAIR Foundation USA, the “Hate Crime” designation is used inconsistently, illogically and politically. The aftermath of this shooting quickly devolved into endless accusations of “hate” in America and reprimands against “Islamophobia.” The truth in this case, and the vast majority of “hate crimes”, is that a lone individual engaged in unthinkable and devastating violence for which only he is responsible. And the killer was properly given three consecutive life terms in prison, which readers would surely agree is the correct outcome.