New York Times.  Killers Were Long Radicalized, F.B.I. Investigators Say, By ADAM NAGOURNEY, SALMAN MASOOD and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT, DEC. 7, 2015

“As the investigation has progressed, we have learned and believe that both subjects were radicalized and have been for quite some time,” David Bowdich, the F.B.I. assistant director in charge of the Los Angeles field office, said at a news conference here. The authorities said they now had evidence that there was extensive planning for the attack. Mr. Bowdich said the couple honed their shooting skills at ranges across the Los Angeles region, including one near where the attack took place here in San Bernardino County.

With the investigation sprawling from California to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the exact motives of Mr. Farook, 28, and Ms. Malik, 29, have not been identified. … Investigators say they have learned through interviews with people who knew Mr. Farook for several years that he had militant views before he met Ms. Malik online and married her in Saudi Arabia. (Emphasis supplied)

“At first it seemed very black and white to us that he changed radically when he met her,” said one of the officials who declined to be identified because of the continuing investigation. “But it’s become clear that he was that way before he met her.” Read more.

But the motive for the shootings appears to still be “elusive,” “not yet identified.”  The Washington Post states:

Motive elusive in deadly San Bernardino rampage as FBI takes over probe. By Missy Ryan, Mark Berman and Joel Achenbach December 3

Without a firmly established motive, authorities said Thursday that they could not determine whether they were dealing with terrorists, a disgruntled worker who had enlisted his wife in his cause, or some kind of hybrid of those two scenarios.

“We do not yet know the motive,” David Bow­dich, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles office, said at a news conference. “It would be irresponsible and premature for me to call this terrorism.” … Police found more than 1,600 rounds of ammunition on or near the couple, suggesting that they were prepared for a long siege. Police recovered two assault rifles and two 9mm pistols, all legally purchased, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Two of the weapons were traced to one of the assailants, said Dannette Seward, an ATF spokeswoman, while the other two were traced to another person who has not been publicly identified. Read more.

How is it possible that we are still reading that the motive is “elusive,” and “still not identified”? Are we ignorant, deceived, or willingly blind to why an Islamist might kill the innocent? Why did Islamists kill 2,996 innocent people on 9/11? Was it because of workplace violence? Or because of our Western values (or absence of values)? Or was it because they submitted to Allah and his Muhammad, the supreme Islamist and the role model for all Muslims? (Whether or not all Muslims follow Muhammad’s violent behaviors does not change the fact that the Qur’an and traditions are filled with example after example of Muhammad’s violent actions as well as those of his followers.)  Were not the last words out of the mouths of the 9/11 attackers “Allahu Ahkbar” (“Allah is Great”)– because Allah is glorified in death rather than in life? Was Allah not similarly glorified when Islamists murdered over 100 in Paris on 11/13/2015? Or in Beirut when 43 were killed on 11/12/2015? Or in Egypt when 224 were killed on 10/31/2015? Or in Turkey when 95 were killed on 10/10/15? Did you know that since 9/11 there have been 13 “terror” attacks linked to “radical Islam” on U.S. soil? I could go on but I think you get my point. Of the many “terror” linked killings since 9/11, how many had a motive other than to give glory to Allah and his Muhammad? If so, why is the motive for the San Bernardino killings any different, and certainly, why is the motive still “elusive”?

I remember watching a TV newscast of the San Bernardino killings and hearing a young man say something like, “How can anyone have so much hatred?” Is it really hatred that would cause someone in their right mind to be motivated to kill the innocent? The San Bernardino killers had a six-month old baby girl. They knew that the likelihood of their continued living after the attack was highly questionable. Their desire to die in the cause of Allah was therefore greater than their desire to live for their daughter. A famous saying of a long-ago Muslim “terrorist” goes this way: “We love death more than you love life.” The San Bernardino Islamists loved death more than they loved life, even when it came to loving the baby girl they left behind. Of course, that conclusion assumes that Farook and Malik were married for the right reasons (that is, two Islamists marry for love) rather than because Malik, the woman, was sent to America under cover of marriage so an American visa could be obtained. The act of a leaving the 6 month old behind knowing their death was imminent actually leads one to conclude that this was their plan all along, that it, it was not about marriage but about jihad! I also suspect that when all the facts are in, we will find that the parents of Mr. Farook knew quite a bit more about Islamism and jihad than they are currently letting on.

Did you notice the many statements about when the “radicalization” occurred for Syed Rizwan Farook, the American-born perpetrator, educated in the United States, and employed by a California government agency? An FBI spokesman told us this in the latest development, something that most informed readers suspected all along:

“As the investigation has progressed, we have learned and believe that both subjects were radicalized and have been for quite some time,” David Bowdich, the F.B.I. assistant director in charge of the Los Angeles field office, said at a news conference here.

I wonder what event “radicalized” Farook? Perhaps it was that he read the Qur’an and took it to mean what it says– while he was growing up, no doubt? Here are a few of the culprit verses:

Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and you know not. Qur’an 2:216

Let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah, whether he is slain or gets victory soon shall we give him a reward of great (value). Qur’an 4:74

Seize them and slay them wherever you find them: and in any case take no friends or helpers from their ranks. Qur’an 4:89

Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly. Qur’an 8:60

Fight and establish regular Prayers and practice regular Charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Qur’an 9:5

Fight those of the People of the Book who do not [truly] believe in God and the Last Day, who do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden, who do not obey the rule of justice, until they pay the tax and agree to submit. Qur’an 9:29

When you meet the disbelievers in battle, strike them in the neck, and once they are defeated, bind any captives firmly —later you can release them by grace or by ransom —until the toils of war have ended. That [is the way]. God could have defeated them Himself if He had willed, but His purpose is to test some of you by means of others. He will not let the deeds of those who are killed for His cause come to nothing; He will guide them and put them into a good state; He will admit them into the Garden He has already made known to them. Qur’an 47:4-6

The event that fuels a Muslim to “radicalize” is not the fault of America or the West, but the Qur’an. America may be the modern-day manifestation of the crusaders to an Islamist but crusaders are simply the object upon which Muhammadanism is forced to wage jihad.  Radicalization to a Muslim is not something that happens to him, it is something he is continuously instructed in from a child to an adult, and Muhammad is the model that shapes his (or her) life and life decisions. The Muslim seeks to become Muhammad, in all his actions, deeds, and beliefs. Mr. Farook is simply a modern-day Muhammadan. He is an anomaly in America, a deviant from what we believe to be good and right. Farook was raised in a free, democratic society, and Americans believe that anyone given the choice of Sharia law or the U.S. constitutional law would clearly choose the latter.  I wonder how long it will be before our leaders come to realize it is not about when radicalization occurs, but how the Qur’an is interpreted, which, in time and opportunity, results in actions we define as only committed by “radicals”?  Radical Islam is not about poverty, nor about the unemployed, or underprivileged who choose Islam because they are disenchanted with their world. Rather, it is because Islam is  believed to be the better choice, it is believed to be good– why?  Because the Qur’an defines it to be so.

A twentieth century Muslim revivalist, Seyyid Qutb, explains Sharia in his renowned work, Milestones. One of his many quotes that  are relevant to the actions of Islamists today is important for the moment:

It is in the very nature of Islam to take initiative for freeing the human beings throughout the earth from servitude to anyone other than God [Allah]; and so it cannot be restricted within any geographic or racial limits, leaving all mankind on the whole earth in evil, in chaos and in servitude to lords other than God [Allah]. It may happen that the enemies of Islam may consider it expedient not to take any action against Islam, if Islam leaves them alone in their geographical boundaries to continue the message and its declaration of universal freedom within their domain. But Islam cannot agree to this unless they submit to its authority by paying the Jizyah [humiliation tax], which will be a guarantee that they have opened their doors for the preaching of Islam and will not put any obstacle in its way through the power of the state.1

To an Islamist, the world must be liberated from servitude of any but Allah. All societal obstacles to the preaching of Islam must be eliminated, including any obstacle placed by the state, democratic or otherwise, because it is in the best interests of the non-Muslim. Peace, according to an Islamist, is obtained only through submission to Allah. Death is but a small price to pay for obedience to Allah. After all, 72 virgins await the obedient. That, my friends, is the motivation behind jihad, and why we find it so hard to even imagine. Islam is all about obedience and submission to Allah. Our thinking is so backwards to that of Islam that it has blinded our minds to see the danger of Islam. We look for some “elusive motive” when the truth is right in front of us — it is Allah and his Muhammad, they are the reason why Islamists do what they do. They are the elusive motive behind the actions of Islamists.  Revelation 13:4-5, 7-8.

Jesus come quickly.

Blessings.

Jack

 

 

Footnotes to post:
  1. See Islam the Cloak of Antichrist for Qutb quotes, p. 152. []

Comments

comments