You wont find this being covered in the mainstream news. Terrorist Act in Long Beach California covered up written by Laura Loomer @LauraLoomer " Law enforcement sources in California have told me that Police in Long Beach, California have been given a gag order to not talk about the fact that the man who was arrested yesterday after committing vehicular jihad in downtown Long beach, CA is a Muslim who carried out his attack in the name of Islam. When FBI responded to the scene yesterday, source tells me FBI said they can’t mention the killer was a Muslim terrorist and ordered all police to not speak about it to the media. The media is only referring to the terrorist killer as "a man booked for murder" after the Muslim man named Khalid Yagobbi intentionally rammed his car into a woman pushing a stroller and ran over at least 5 other pedestrians. The woman died " link here The local news did report it, but claimed "At this time, there is no indication that this incident was an act of terror nor associated with the current violence in Israel. However, the investigation is ongoing." Man booked for murder after apparent intentional crash in Long Beach, Will Conybeare, KTLA 5 Local News, Oct 15, 2023
Why are you assuming this isn't (or at least wasn't at the time) the case? Why are you taking the word of a single person on social media (with a background that would suggest a significant negative bias and limited reliability). Since the FBI didn't necessarily know for certain what the exact circumstances or any motives might have been, it would make perfect sense that they told the local officers not to spread unsupported speculation based on limited information, since we all know how such speculation can so easily spread and expand (as your post shows). Even if it turns out this was some kind of planned terrorist attack inspired by recent events in Israel, publicly speculating about any possible motive immediately after the incident isn't a good thing.
You're correct. We do not know for certain what the motives were. All we know for absolute certain is that a man with a Muslim name seems to have intentionally killed random people that were in a crowd. And the media isn't providing many details about that man. So the question really is, is it fair to assume what the likely motive probably was with that limited information.
Is it ever fair to assume motive (or even guilt) with limited information? Why would we go to all the effort of criminal court cases if it was?
Not for individuals individually, but when it comes to groups of people and immigration policies, yes. As for this individual individually, there's a 99% chance he's going to go to prison for a long time for multiple first degree murders. (So the issue is not about his guilt)
Gag orders issued by judges are pretty common, so this wouldn't be the least bit surprising. Here's another thread, with a completely separate unrelated story, about a judge who seems to have used a gag order to try to cover up a controversial case, Father Jailed for...
But we are talking about an individual (and I don't see what this necessarily has to do with immigration - he could have been US born for all you knew). You're just assuming his motives on the sole basis of his apparent membership of a general grouping, apparently based on his name alone. If exactly the same thing has happened but the driver had been named as "John Smith", you wouldn't be treating that individual the same way. It seems he's been charged with vehicular manslaughter rather than murder so it's very much about what exactly he is guilty of, which is why jumping to conclusions on any motives is even less legitimate. https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/... 46-year-old man,at the Long Beach Courthouse.
I give you permission to post any stories you can find about white people (or black people) who seemed to have intentionally run random people over, including a baby, and we have no obvious motive for it. (Stories that do not involve the driver being intoxicated with drugs or alcohol)
And the gal might have been an ex-wife or girlfriend. And they could be looking into other ties. My issue with the media more often than not is that they will rush into almost the opposite. The person is white, therefore it must be a hate crime. The victim was gay, therefore it is a hate crime. The person stealing must be poor and need the things to feed hungry children, things like that. And please, a report on Twitter?
Oh, that is amazingly easy. As a big case of that happened not all that long ago. https://apnews.com/article/bicyclist-killed-teens-video-vegas-1609f5c1a98bc023481bccf656ddf0ac Not unlike the "Knock-Out Game", there are damaged people who simply get kicks out of hurting others. Many will even post videos of them doing it for "kicks".
