(Before It's News)
Very little, so far, is known about Monday's shooting of Yassar Yaqub on the M62 motorway near Huddersfield. However, that hasn't stopped Muslims, Social Justice Warriors (SJW) and the Socialist Workers Party making things up.
According to Martin Jones, of Kirkless Stand Up to Racism (which is a Socialist Workers' Party front), said that “there was a great deal of anger and many questions about the police action” in regards to the shooting of Yaqub. That anger has been stoked up by Stand Up to Racism and the white, middle-class and non-Muslim Socialist Workers Party (with the gift of Marxist theory and agitprop).
Indeed there are questions from Muslims and the Leftists. Martin Jones himself asks:
“Some people asked why the police were not using body cameras in what was a pre-planned operation. Some asked if police were deliberately targeting Yassar because he was acquitted of serious charges some years ago.”
Of course it was a “pre-planned operation”. The police planned to arrest him. If they had randomly shot Yaqub, then Muslims and Leftists would have criticised that too! Indeed what's meant by “pre-planned” here? It sounds very conspiratorial; but, basically, empty.
Faisal Mahmood asks the same question:
“They say it was a planned operation. Was it planned to shoot him while he was in the vehicle? It doesn't make any sense – how can they shoot without seeing a gun? It’s murder.”
Would he rather have it that the shooting was unplanned? And what's the point about him being shot “in the vehicle”? Is that meant to tell us something important about the shooting? Take this equally portentous wording: “He was shot outside the car.” See my point? Unless these Muslims and Leftists tell us why these things are relevant, we're still all in the dark.
In addition, how does Faisal Mahmood know that the police shot Yaqub “without seeing a gun”? Clearly he must have made this fact up. On top of that, Muslim and Leftist activists would still be calling it “murder” had it been the case that Yassar had a gun. After all, this has been the case in many similar examples.
It's clear that Muslims and their Leftist whores took to making up aspects of this story which they simply couldn't have known about. For example, Chris Coon says that the police “had [Yaqub's car] boxed where the door couldn't open”. How does he know that?
Again, how does Staciie Murphy know that “[t]here was no reason to shoot”? How does she know the police “could have easily arrested him with no problem”?
The SWP itself says that the police “had chosen to follow him for miles before stopping the car”. Why is that relevant? There might have been many reasons to follow him. In fact one of those reasons might have been in order to stop possible fatalities.
How can there be justice without lies, eh?