In
an article in the Washington Post, a senior U.S. law enforcement official was perplexed about why Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik killed 14 people. They weren't regular readers of jihadist websites. Investigators don't know if the couple were "
radicalized" or not. "It's very odd," said the official. "It appears they were a happy couple of the Muslim faith."
The article asserts: "Relatives, friends, co-workers, police and neighbors agree on one thing: It doesn’t make sense." Which is true — if you know nothing at all about Islam, the shooting in San Bernardino doesn't make any sense.
If you know about
Islamic doctrine, however, it makes sense. The fact that they were Muslims means they have identified themselves as believers in
the Islamic ideology, and given Allah's
final message about non-Muslims, slaughtering them makes sense. In the Koran, Allah even anticipates that anyone with a shred of humanity would hesitate to carry out the horrific actions recommended in Islamic doctrine. It says, basically, "Even if you don't want to do these things, you must." It is a test of a Muslim's faith.
In other words, to really prove to Allah that you trust and believe him, you must set aside your own feelings of empathy and do what he commands.
Farook and Malik did just that. Investigators are scrambling to find connections to a "terror network" or some other official membership in something so they can explain how such a nice couple could suddenly go on a murderous rampage. But no Muslim needs to be affiliated with anything other than Islam to decide to murder non-Muslims. They just have to read Islamic doctrine, available at any nearby bookstore, and do
what it says.
And
one of the things it says is to go ahead and be nice to non-Muslims if it serves
Islam's main goal, but never let them in your heart. In
a different Washington Post article, we find a description of that. It says: "Farook’s supervisor, Amanda Adair, who also went to college with him at California State University at San Bernardino, said he 'got along with everybody, but he kept his distance.'"
In many articles you find the same sort of comments. Here's another quote from the same article: "Speaking to the
Los Angeles Times, co-workers who knew Farook described him as a quiet, polite man who held no obvious grudges against people in the office."
In still
another Washington Post article, you can read comments like these:
"Farook had always been one of the most agreeable, the quietest, and also among the best at his job...
"He got along with everybody..."
"We all thought he was doing great, having a family, but still the same guy — peaceful and quiet..."
"And so many in the San Bernardino County Department of Health were left doubting how much they knew about their co-worker..."
When I talk to people about Islam, one of the most common things people respond with is, "I know a lot of Muslims, and they're nice people," or "I work with a Muslim and she's a very sweet woman," or "I've traveled to Jordan and Egypt and met a lot of Muslims and they are good people."
These things are said as if they refute your statement that the
ideology of Islam is dangerous to non-Muslims. How can someone be a nice person and at the same time believe in an ideology that recommends slaughtering people?
It's not as far fetched as it may seem at first glance. The "argument" (if you can call it that) is irrelevant to the issue. The fact that you know a Muslim who is a very nice person doesn't in the slightest imply that Islam's ideology must be peaceful and loving. It would be like stating: "Islam's ideology can't be intolerant or violent because I know this Muslim and he's really nice. The existence of this nice Muslim man is proof that Islam is a peaceful religion." Not much of an argument.
It's a weak argument because first of all, almost every psychopathic serial murderer is described by people who knew him as a quiet, peaceful, nice man. Someone can be "nice" and still enjoy killing people, as strange as that may seem to someone who doesn't know much about
sociopathy.
It is, of course, unlikely that a large proportion of Muslims are sociopaths, but there's another way to explain a nice Muslim being willing to kill non-Muslims: The way killing is framed in Islamic doctrine helps to soothe a Muslim's conscience. It goes something like this: "Non-Muslims are going to suffer in hell forever unless we can somehow bring them into the light of Islam. Sometimes people are stubborn and you have to use force to get them to accept the truth. So we have this system, and if you use the system, we will bring a lot more people into the light."
The system, as laid out in Islamic doctrine, is this: Scare people into submitting to Islamic rule. If you have to terrorize people, so be it. The more horrific the atrocities, the more quickly people will submit (from this point of view, horrific atrocities can be seen as compassionate). Once you establish Islamic rule and begin applying
Islamic law, everybody but the Christians and Jews have already been killed or converted. So right there, you have potentially saved a lot of souls from eternal damnation (the ones you scared into converting). And when you apply
jizya and all the
other official forms of discrimination against Jews and Christians, they will feel the heavy burden of their underling status, and over several generations, most of them will convert to Islam, saving even more souls.
Given this way of thinking, murdering innocent non-Muslims can be seen as an act of kindness. So even a "nice" person might be willing to do it.
People who know about Islam know this, and it's one of the main reasons we want to
stop Muslim immigration. People who don't know this can't see why we shouldn't accept millions of poor refugees who have been forced from their homes by war.
It's not the
people we're worried about. It's the ideology they carry with them.