🧩 BND Motif Index · M651
Explaining is excusing
Any explanation offered for an atrocity is heard as an excuse for it: a condemnation followed by "but" or by context about the attacker counts as no condemnation at all.
- 1claim filed under it
- 1fact-checker
⚠️ A story people tell, not a claim that it's true.
A motif is the shape of a story as its tellers tell it, named the way a folklorist names a tale type, so the same story told about other people, by the other side or in another year lands in the same place. Some of the claims below are true, many are false. Arguing against a story is often a story of its own, its answer (Voter fraud is answered by Voter suppression, Lawfare by No one is above the law), and we file it there; where no answer has a motif yet, the arguments against a story sit with its tellings.
🪜 Its family
what it rests on, what rests on it, and the motifs that answer it
🔗 goes with: 🧩 Excusing Hitler
🧶 Its claims
what's been told in this shape, newest first, in our words, with where each was heard
- 2026-10-01 “Republican Mike Rogers criticized Abdul El-Sayed for not condemning the attacker in the Michigan synagogue attack, saying El-Sayed could not condemn the terrorist who tried to attack and kill 140 Jewish children.” 🔎 PolitiFact
M651 · first seen 2026-10-08 · what this is · how the index works