Didn't matter if you were Muslim or not---they were going to shoot you.

[trumad]

At the Islamic Center of Riverside, where Farook had worshipped until about two years ago, mosque director Mustapha Kuko described him as quiet, private and devoted to Koran study.

“He knows that we believe that to take one life is to take all life. So for him to do the opposite of what we as Muslims believe … I don’t know,” Kuko said.

One victim, who worked in the same department as Farook, was also a member of the congregation, he said.

“He shot her,” Kuko said. “Point blank.”

The victim’s husband reported she is in stable condition, he said.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-syed-farook-tashfeen-malik-shooters-san-bernardino-20151203-story.html

[ck4829]

1. Glad she's stable, hope she recovers quickly

This needs to spread, some cognitive dissonance is needed.

[BeyondGeography]

2. This related link is also well worth reading

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-san-bernardino-shooting-victims-htmlstory.html

[oberliner]

3. Most victims of radical Islamic terrorism are Muslim

For what that is worth.

[Yorktown]

4. "we believe that to take one life is to take all life." is not very truthful

That's verse 5:32. It's an account of god telling Jews he told them that.

Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely.

Which was a safe bet on muhamad's part, because the sentence is in the Misnah Sanhedrin

Whoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world. — Mishnah Sanhedrin 4 : 9

The problem is that the verse which immediatly follows 5:32 in the Quran negates it:

Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment (Quran 5 : 33)

[ck4829]

5. It is what he believes

[Yorktown]

6. Or what he claims to believe

[etherealtruth]

8. Do you assign the same beliefs to Christians?

Is the assumption that most Christians ascribe to the teachings in the old testament?

While the Koran Calls for Violence, The Bible Is Even Worse … Calling for Genocide
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/08/no_author/is-the-bible-more-bloodthirsty-than-the-koran/

Christians and Jews rightly point out that the Koran is a violent text which calls on Muslims to attack “unbelievers”.

But they fail to see that the Bible is at least as violent

[Yorktown]

9. This should be a sticky; discussed so often

Yes, all abrahamic 'holy books' are insanely violent. But, in its directives, the Quran is currently the 'holy book' which mechanically leads to the most violence.

For Jews, whatever insane violence is in the Torah is mitigated by the fact Judaism is a closed club. Invitation by mother only. Which restrains the scope of possible violence to a few millions. And limits territorail demands as the holy book is only a land claim on Israel. Besides, Jews obviously chose to disregard the letter of the text, or people working on Saturdays in Israel would be stoned to death.

Christianity's text are so contradictory they end up not meaning anything. Fundamentalist Christians follow the OT which is in obvious contradiction with the spirit of the NT. Christians might choose to do violence in the name of the OT, but it just doesn't make sense. Anyway the total sum of contradictions in Christianity is so great it's a miracle -pun intended- that anybody takes it seriously.

For Islam, things are far more problematic because of the doctrine: the holy book says it is holy, perfect, the word of God, unchangeable forever. The problem that when he wrote it, muhamad was recounting his adventures which involved quite a bit of fighting and calls for war. And he didn't put time stamps and sell-by dates.
So, if one is serious about the Quran, one must commit violence in the name of religion. The problem is compounded by the ludicrous hadiths where people decades later made up stories pushing the whole doctrine toward the more violent interpretation of the Quran.

So, in the end, the product (violence of the text) x (injunction to apply the text no matter what) makes Islam the abrahamic religion which incites the most to violence.

Which makes it somewhat more toxic than Judaism or Christianity which themselves are problematic ideologies.

[bklyncowgirl]

7. She worked outside the house. She probably did not cover herself "properly"

She was a sinner in their eyes.

[Photographer]

10. Thanks for sharing this report. n/t