San Bernardino Shooter Tashfeen Malik Supported Jihad, Officials Say

[BobRyan]

I think you need to keep up with things a bit better.

That clip was within 24 hours of the shooting. Shortly after, the White House acknowledged it was terrorism.

It is always a nice thing to have the White House finally catch up with the rest of the world now and then.

They did not decide to "look" at the social media broadcast to the world by these "extremists" when they applied to come to America as a couple. How PC correct of the White House in that regard.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

If you wish to always wait to see what Obama says before deciding what to think about it that's up to you.

See that's what you don't understand. I didn't wait for Obama to tell me what it was. Considering the past 15 to 20 years worth of mass shootings in America, it seemed like this was going to be just another day in the gun country.

 

[BobRyan]

Is that what this is about? Scoring points for the team? How disgusting.

Conservatives didn't recognize squat. They were hoping it would be a Muslim so they can fire up the war machine.

Indeed whenever Muslims strike - be it Paris, or San Bernardino, or ... it is probably the fault of a political conservative in America "wanting" to find out that some Muslims are violent.

 

[TheBear]

Is that what this is about? Scoring points for the team?

For me, it started out with me knowing nothing more than there was a mass shooting in San Bernadino, Ca. Then it came out that an employee was involved in a heated argument at work, so he left and came back and shot up the place. At that point I thought it was a disgruntled employee situation. Later, it came out that there were multiple shooters involved. At that point, the whole 'disgruntled employee' scenario wasn't making sense. Then, the name of one of the shooters was released. It was then that I realized that there was a strong possibility of terrorism. Then, the second shooter was identified. At that point, it was pretty obvious to me that it was an act of terrorism. Then, the FBI came out and said they were treating it as an act of terrorism. All I did was follow where the evidence led, and drew reasonable conclusions based on the facts.

But, even after all that information was made public, and when we were into day 3 or 4 of the investigation, there were still those who were clinging to the notion that it was not an act of terrorism, no way, no shape, no how. They were fighting that notion tooth and nail, and were attacking anyone who thought otherwise. I don't know the root cause of such attitudes and behavior. It is befuddling.

Lord knows we wouldn't do anything about it had the shooter been white like the guy that was at Planned Parenthood just a week prior.

Since we've already seen abortion clinics getting blown up, and abortion doctors getting shot, my immediate reaction on that was it was an act of terrorism.

Also, there are Muslims who are white, and Christians who are non-white.

 

[Mountain_Girl406]

The reported witness accounts of what happened.

What reported witness accounts were released right after the event, and what did those witnesses see that convinced them it was terrorism before the investigation got underway?

 

[LoveBeingAMuslimah]

Here's what Jordan's King Abdullah II (a Muslim) said about the problem of Islamic terrorism:

Jordan's king: Fight on ISIS "a third world war"

"This is a Muslim problem. We need to take ownership of this. We need to stand up and say what is right and what is wrong...This is a war inside of Islam. So we have to own up to it. We have to take the lead. And we have to start fighting back. And all of us have to make that decision and stand up to the plate and take our responsibilities." - King Abdullah II

It's a war between Muslims. And Muslims have been fighting against ISIS since late 2013 (perhaps prior to that too, but that's when relations in Syria between rebel groups and ISIS became much more strained because of some killings). 700 Sunni tribesmen were killed by ISIS a bit more than a year ago because they openly refused to pledge allegiance to ISIS. Muslims are fighting ISIS with their hands, with their tongues, and likely with their prayers.

As for the topic, doesn't she fit the description of a lone wolf? Neither she nor her husband were directed by anybody. ISIS didn't even know about it (but of course cheered it on).

Also, jihad is not what this woman did. She may have said she supported it, but she had clearly had no idea about the rulings that it entails. Apparently she did not know that the guidelines it sets include not intentionally targeting non-combatants and not betraying covenants (her entry into the US was a covenant and her husband being born here and being a citizen was a covenant). I'm just a layperson and I could've told her all this. What she and her husband did was completely against our religion.

 

[MennoSota]

Every religion has their liberals - those that use the holy book of their faith merely for social and "cultural" reasons but not really for religious ones as if the book were true. Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, and yes Muslims.

But Abdullah is right that this is a Muslim issue.

Frankly Christians would have a very hard time in our own religion IF it were true that we were all still under the theocracy conditions of Israel and Moses - because there were civil laws under that system that only apply to a theocracy. We do not have that theocracy today - and we also do not have that leadership. That is the same situation the New Testament writers were in - they too did not have that theocracy. So in the NT you have the "persecuted church" model and not the "Wipe out enemy nations model" of the OT.

But ISLAM has a huge problem in that they ARE still under the same conditions as when the book was authored.

The problem with your analogy is that Israel was only commissioned by God to remove those nations who were in His land, which God chose. And this happened only after God's patience had come to an end for these groups. God had given them 400 years to repent. I'd say that was quite an act of mercy and patience.
Islam has a worldwide goal of subjugation, which they have been working at for 1400 years. It is this act of subjugation, which forces the non-Muslim world to react against. So far, India has escalated its level of response to nuclear capabilities. Why do you suppose they felt so compelled? Do you think it was because Muslims were being kind to Hindu's?

 

[BobRyan]

The problem with your analogy is that Israel was only commissioned by God to remove those nations who were in His land, which God chose. And this happened only after God's patience had come to an end for these groups. God had given them 400 years to repent. I'd say that was quite an act of mercy and patience.

True - but I think Islam claims the entire planet as 'theirs' and they could as well claim that the other nations of earth had 1000's of years to change.

Islam has a worldwide goal of subjugation, which they have been working at for 1400 years. It is this act of subjugation, which forces the non-Muslim world to react against. So far, India has escalated its level of response to nuclear capabilities. Why do you suppose they felt so compelled? Do you think it was because Muslims were being kind to Hindu's?

I think Muslim policy of "conversion at the point of a sword" was very brutal in India - and that the Sikhs and others had to try and minimize the damage as much as they could.

The RCC has a something called the 'doctrine of discovery' where they basically claim the same right to kill people if they don't convert when exploring new territory.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

What reported witness accounts were released right after the event, and what did those witnesses see that convinced them it was terrorism before the investigation got underway?

Mainly, it was the reports of the police who responded to it. There were many things about it that made it obvious that it was more than just the typical "work place violence."

Day One San Bernardino law enforcement authorities report a mass shooting involving at least 20 victims just before 11 a.m. Pacific time. Local news reports suggest that there are between one and three suspects, wearing masks and possibly body armor as well.

6:00 p.m.: Adelle Nazarian of Breitbart News notes that CNN analysts say the attack looks like terrorism:

Speaking on CNN’s Out Front with Erin Burnett Wednesday, former CIA case officer Robert Baer said the most “disturbing” aspect of the deadly San Bernardino shooting is that it was carried out using tactics that are employed in the Middle East. “What I don’t like about this shooting is multiple shooters… IEDs… I say this very reluctantly, but this has the hallmarks of the sort of attacks you see in the Middle East,” Baer said. Former FBI special agent Robert Chacon agreed with Baer’s assertions later on in the show.​

7:32 p.m.: An unconfirmed account from a man claiming to be Farook’s father describes him as a “very religious” Muslim.

“I haven’t heard anything. He worked in a county office,” Farook’s dad told The News. “He’s married and has a kid. We’re estranged because my wife got the divorce, and they are together. She doesn’t want to see me.” Farook said he hasn’t seen his son in some time. “He was very religious. He would go to work, come back, go to pray, come back. He’s Muslim.”​

4:45 a.m.: Fox News reports that the suspects’ apartment was a “bomb-making factory,” with improvised explosive devices (IED) and remote-controlled cars for delivering explosives to their targets. The suspects are said to have attacked the holiday party wearing body armor and GoPro cameras to record their exploits. The couple had apparently left their young daughter with a grandparent, saying they had a doctor’s appointment to attend. The Inland Regional Center is now a crime scene, with victims’ bodies still apparently inside. Police have not yet released identifying details about the dead or wounded.

5:30 a.m.: Political correctness may have played a role, as suspicious neighbors declined to report the suspects for fear of “racial profiling.” CBS Los Angeles reports:

Neighbors in Redlands were shocked that the suspects had ties to their area. “I was in awe that it was happening four houses down form my property,” one neighbor said. A man who has been working in the area said he noticed a half-dozen Middle Eastern men in the area in recent weeks, but decided not to report anything since he did not wish to racially profile those people. “We sat around lunch thinking, ‘What war they doing around the neighborhood?’” he said. “We’d see them leave where they’re raiding the apartment.”​

Source

 

[BobRyan]

It's a war between Muslims. And Muslims have been fighting against ISIS since late 2013 (perhaps prior to that too, but that's when relations in Syria between rebel groups and ISIS became much more strained because of some killings). 700 Sunni tribesmen were killed by ISIS a bit more than a year ago because they openly refused to pledge allegiance to ISIS. Muslims are fighting ISIS with their hands, with their tongues, and likely with their prayers.

As for the topic, doesn't she fit the description of a lone wolf? Neither she nor her husband were directed by anybody. ISIS didn't even know about it (but of course cheered it on).

Also, jihad is not what this woman did. She may have said she supported it, but she had clearly had no idea about the rulings that it entails. Apparently she did not know that the guidelines it sets include not intentionally targeting non-combatants and not betraying covenants (her entry into the US was a covenant and her husband being born here and being a citizen was a covenant). I'm just a layperson and I could've told her all this. What she and her husband did was completely against our religion.

Historically War between Muslims is a common as rain so no doubt you are correct. But ISIS (or ISIL - whatever they call themselves) make it very clear that their war is against Christians as well. They do not settle for "just killing rival Muslims" -- and they go out of their way to make death threats against the United States not merely content to call the U.S. "the great satan".

Osama Bin Ladan made it clear that he wanted to attack America - not just "his fellow Muslim".

When the twin towers were hit - who was that cheering in the streets!!??? It was not Hindus. It was not Atheists, it was not Christians, it was not Buddhists.

in Christ,
Bob

 

[bhsmte]

It is always a nice thing to have the White House finally catch up with the rest of the world now and then.

They did not decide to "look" at the social media broadcast to the world by these "extremists" when they applied to come to America as a couple. How PC correct of the White House in that regard.

Waiting for a bit more evidence to roll in, is prudent.

I get the feeling though, you would find anything to complain about though, in this situation.

 

[smaneck]

King Abdullah is what I would call a secular Muslim. His heritage is as a Muslim and his country is Muslim, but his life choices seem to be secular. He spent his high school and college years in the US. He is very much a secularist who values pluralism.

There are plenty of Muslims who are secularists and religious at the same time.

I am sure that more devout sects within Islam would consider King Abdullah to be a MINO (Muslim In Name Only).

Doesn't make them more devout.

King Abdullah is fighting for his throne and trying to be a voice of reason. I respect that. I also would not be surprised to one day see him seek asylum in the west or be assassinated. That would be a sad day for Jordan and the Middle East.

That wouldn't necessarily be because he is a secularist. The Hashemite dynasty was imposed on Jordan by the British after the Hashemites lost control of the Arabian Peninsula. No one ever asked the Jordanians what they wanted.

 

[smaneck]

Historically War between Muslims is a common as rain

As it has been between Christians.

But ISIS (or ISIL - whatever they call themselves) make it very clear that their war is against Christians as well. They do not settle for "just killing rival Muslims" -- and they go out of their way to make death threats against the United States not merely content to call the U.S. "the great satan".

Osama Bin Ladan made it clear that he wanted to attack America - not just "his fellow Muslim".

But Bin Laden was not interested in targeting religious minorities within Islamic countries or Shi'ites. In fact, before al-Baghdadi claimed the Caliphate that was their major dispute with them. Bin Laden felt this was a distraction from their real goal which was to get the US out of Islamic lands.

When the twin towers were hit - who was that cheering in the streets!!???

Palestinians.

You know who was cheering when Sadam was lobbing missiles into Israel? Arab Christian Bishops meeting in Jerusalem.

 

[smaneck]

0/2, sorry. No, the evil inhuman bogeyman in this thread is Muslims, yes Muslims is the dog whistle we were looking for. But you can still make up points in our Blame Obama sudden death round...

Don't you know? The wingnuts have all declared Obama a Muslim.

 

[Armoured]

Don't you know? The wingnuts have all declared Obama a Muslim.

Mmm, fair point.

 

[smaneck]

Every religion has their liberals - those that use the holy book of their faith merely for social and "cultural" reasons but not really for religious ones as if the book were true. Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, and yes Muslims.

I know this comes as a shock to you but liberals are quite often truly religious. They take things like Matthew 25 seriously.

That is the same situation the New Testament writers were in - they too did not have that theocracy. So in the NT you have the "persecuted church" model and not the "Wipe out enemy nations model" of the OT.
But ISLAM has a huge problem in that they ARE still under the same conditions as when the book was authored.

Not really. Muhammad authorized jihad precisely because Muslims were being persecuted and as governor of Medina he now had a community to protect. But the Caliphate was never a theocracy. Indeed the 'ulama or Islamic clergy largely developed the Shariah in opposition to what the Caliphs were doing.

 

[smaneck]

They did not decide to "look" at the social media broadcast to the world by these "extremists" when they applied to come to America as a couple. How PC correct of the White House in that regard.

Uh, they didn't pledge their allegiance to ISIS on Facebook until the day of the attack itself. A few private messages were sent by Tafsheen in 2012 to friends in Pakistan expressing her desire to join a jihad. But she wrote those messages in Urdu to a handful of friends in Pakistan. They were not broadcast over social media.

 

[bhsmte]

Uh, they didn't pledge their allegiance to ISIS on Facebook until the day of the attack itself. A few private messages were sent by Tafsheen in 2012 to friends in Pakistan expressing her desire to join a jihad. But she wrote those messages in Urdu to a handful of friends in Pakistan. They were not broadcast over social media.

If I am not mistaken, the FBI director is now saying there were no facebook messages in regards to pledging to ISIS.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

If I am not mistaken, the FBI director is now saying there were no facebook messages in regards to pledging to ISIS.

I wonder what convinced the source at Facebook to change their story.

The New York Times (Dec 4, 2015)

WASHINGTON — On the day she and her husband killed 14 people and wounded 21 others in San Bernardino, Calif., a woman pledged allegiance to the Islamic State in a Facebook post, officials said Friday, as the F.B.I. announced that it was treating the massacre as an act of terrorism.

[…]

The woman, Tashfeen Malik, declared allegiance to the Islamic State on Facebook at roughly the time of the shooting on Wednesday, a Facebook spokesman said. At a news conference in San Bernardino, David Bowdich, the F.B.I. assistant director in charge of the Los Angeles office, said he was aware of the post, which was taken down by Facebook on Wednesday, but he would not elaborate.

[…]

The exact motives of Ms. Malik, 29, and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, remain unknown, and law enforcement officials say the couple had not been suspected of posing a danger. But after two days of insisting that terrorism was just one of many possibilities, the F.B.I.’s statements on that prospect grew much stronger on Friday. Officials pointed to evidence like the Facebook post and what they described as a bomb-making workshop at the couple’s home, where they found 12 completed pipe bombs and a stockpile of thousands of rounds of ammunition. Officials say that weaponry could indicate that the couple were planning more attacks.

[…]

The Facebook posting and Saturday’s statement by the Islamic State provide one of the first significant clues to the role that Ms. Malik played in the attacks.

(Source)​

Los Angeles Times (December 6, 2015)

Tashfeen Malik, the 29-year-old female shooter in the deadly San Bernardino rampage, was a onetime "modern girl" who became religious during college and then began posting extremist messages on Facebook after arriving in the U.S., a family member in Pakistan told the Los Angeles Times.

The family member, in Malik's hometown of Karor Lal Esan who asked to not be identified, said Malik's postings on Facebook were a source of concern for her family.

[…]

Malik pledged allegiance on Facebook to a leader of Islamic State just as Wednesday's attack was getting underway.

[…]

Officials said that Malik had posted a comment swearing allegiance to Islamic State on a Facebook page — but only just before the couple stormed into a holiday party at the Inland Regional Center, guns blazing.

(Source)​

Chicago Tribune (December 5, 2015)

FBI officials, family lawyers and others said they know little about the 29-year-old housewife and mother, apart from what came to light on Friday: that Malik had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group on Facebook as she and her American-born husband, Syed Farook, 28, went on their rampage.

(Source)​

CBS Baltimore local news (December 4, 2015)

A Facebook official says Tashfeen Malik praised the leader of the Islamic State group in a post at 11 a.m. Wednesday, when the couple were believed to have stormed a San Bernardino social service center and opened fire.

The Facebook official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the person was not allowed under corporate policy to be quoted by name, said the company discovered the account Thursday. It removed the profile from public view and reported its contents to law enforcement.

(Source)​

 

[smaneck]

I wonder what convinced the source at Facebook to change their story.

Never trust an unnamed source:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/fbi-...s-pledged-allegiance-to-isis-on-social-media/

Perhaps the Administration was wise to wait until the fact were in?