The Religious Exemption: Sodomy for Suicide Bombers
A researcher says suicide bomber Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri was allowed by clerics to ask for anal sex if he thought it would later make inserting explosives inside himself easier.
Suicide bombers were allowed to ask fellow militants for anal sex so it would be easier to hide explosives in their rectums — at least according to a researcher at a conservative think tank.
in which a Muslim cleric is caught explaining why sodomy is permissible if part of "martyrdom operations."
"Is it permissible for me to let one of the jihadi brothers sodomize me to widen my anus if the intention is good?" someone asks cleric Abu al-Dema al-Qasab, according to Ibrahim's account.
Although the cleric reminds everyone that sodomy is forbidden, he offers an exception.
"Jihad comes first," he said, according to Ibrahim's translation, "for it is the pinnacle of Islam, and if the pinnacle of Islam can only be achieved through sodomy, then there is no wrong in it."
The cleric actually makes the case that not only is sodomy allowed, it could be required.
"If obligatory matters can only be achieved by performing the prohibited, then it becomes obligatory to perform the prohibited, and there is no greater duty than jihad," the cleric reportedly says. "After he sodomizes you, you must ask Allah for forgiveness and praise him all the more."
Ibrahim ties the philosophy to Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri, who attempted to assassinate a Saudi Arabian security chief in 2009. The bomber's parents said their son had been taken by extremists, and he went on to become the first suicide bomber to use the new body-bomb tactic.
The 23-year-old al-Asiri is said to have hidden an explosive device inside himself to avoid metal detectors, then detonated it.
There is actually no factual report claiming this if you read the article.
The tile of article says The mistake they did was believe that David Horowitz is running a legitimate "think tank" when in fact it is nothing but a farce and has very low credibility on serious issues.
And in any case, suicide itself is forbidden across all school of thoughts. Even the ultra-conservative Wahabbis opposed suicide bombing because the Quran explicitly forbids suicide in any form. And this includes using suicide bombing as a tactic against Israeli military nontheless, forget killing civilians.
Islam may prohibit suicide, but it does not prohibit what is known these days as "suicide bombings". One needs to understand that the purpose of suicide bombings is not to kill oneself, but to kill so called kafirs. Now if the person who carries out the killing dies, then so be it. That is the Islamic thinking. And surprisingly, the Koran even encourages such violent activities in the name of religion.
"Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward". Quran 4:95.
As we can see Koran clearly condones violence in the name of their religion.
I was discussing only the aspect of suicide bombings here.
Like I mentioned, suicide including suicide bombings are considered haram by the vast majority of Islamic scholars. Leave aside the major moderate of schools of thought that are expected to condemn this. Even the minority conservative Wahabbi scholars from Saudi Arabia - more specifically Sheikh Bin Baaz who is quite (in)famous for giving various regressive fatwas on women e.t.c have state clearly that even if this includes for example a person attacking the Israeli military which are non-believers as well as occupiers of their land it is still forbidden. And this was the fatwa given in the 1980s, well before any Al Qaeda was formed and just when HEzbullah had started using suicide bombing as a tool to get the Israeli military to withdraw from southern Lebanon.
Here is an audio recording and the English transcription of the fatwa. Please view from 0:30 to get to the actual matter
Just to summarize, he explicitly mentions that suicide attacks are forbidden in any case. And if a declaration of armed Jihad is to be given ie.e. a formal declaration of war, only then fighting against Israel is permitted. That is, the terrorist attacks without formal declaration of war is not a correct way to fight a just war / armed Jihad . Keep in mind that this is again in the 1980s, in the context of Israel and by the most conservative Muslim school of thought i.e. the Salafi/Wahabbi group.
Although we are getting oftopic, I might just quickly address your other point as well.
The verse you have quoted is basically referring Jihad and does not explicitly refer to "armed" Jihad. This refers to people who go out and strive and struggle non-violently or violently if necessary. Nowhere in the verse you have quoted does it say "kill kafirs". In other places, where it is mentioned, it is explicitly stated that you are allowed to fight and kill for example when the Meccans unilaterally withdrew from the treaty and attacked the Muslim community. And the "go out strive/fight" is a defensive measure.
There are other verses that use the word "Qital" (mentioned in about 6-8 verses out of the 6600+ verses) which explicit refers to fighting and killing in battle. For example verses 2:190-196. There are strict conditions and safeguards (like formal declaration of war should be given and not killing non-combatants, religious monks, women, animals, plantation and fields e.t.c.) around it similar to the Just war concept in other religions. The Mahbharat where Pandavas fought the Kauravas for example is an example of Just war or armed struggle against evil. Similarly, the 10th Sikh guru gave permission to fight for just war against oppression. There is similarly permission to use violence under specific circumstances in the Quran. This is a good link that covers almost all the links that explicitly discuss "Qital" verses in the Quran and gives the context. I suggest going through all five parts if you have time. About Jihad - Misquoting Quran - Part 1
But even when this permission is given to fight in a just war, the suicide bombing aspect is quite explicitly forbidden As you can see from the video posted earlier, the Salafi school of thought that follows a very literal interpretation confirms that suicide bombing is prohibited
Of course this also doesn't mean that there AQ ( a salafi oriented group) who do justify suicide bombings, for example you have Hezbullah although a shia group that used it against the Israelis in the 80s. But as I mentioned, they don't have mainstream or even conservative Islamic "scholar" support. Zawahiri and Abu Yahya Al-Libi for example both of whom justified these attacks are medical doctor and an engineer by profession. OBL who pioneered for the first time justifying attacking American civilians in 1998 for example is a businessmen. None of these had an traditional Islamic training or scholarly support. So we are really talking about a fanatical fringe here, and one of the reasons why there is a high level of violence against other Muslims themselves. For example according to a US study till 2009, 85% of AQ victims were Muslims. (Muslims account for 85 percent of casualties in al Qaeda attacks - Threat Matrix)
It was a spoof story on an Arab TV show that was taken as an actual news story by some western news media outlets. This happens quite often, like the story about Egyptian MPs passing a law about having sex with their dead wife which was again a parody spoof done on Egyptian TV rather than a true story
I was explaining some facts, on the issue so its upto you what you think. Suffice to say that people who have done extensive research on the suicide bombings issue actually found that religion was not the actual factor in justifying them. If you take the effort to actually see the testimonoies of the suicide attackers they do actually mention political factors to justify their response. They used a political reason to do so, because there was no way they could justify (1) suicide bombings (2) killing non-combatants civilians just based on the Quranic texts. Of course, this doesn't mean that Muslims should be combating religious justifications whatever they may be as well and if you follow Arabic newspapers and TV channels, you will realise how widespread this campaign is.
For example Hezbullah the first Muslim group to start suicide bombings did so with the aim of getting Israel to withdraw from southern lebanon. Once Israel withdrew, the suicide bombings stopped. If religion was the only motivation, Hezbullah would have continued the bombings into the 90s but it didn't. Similarly until 2005, the largest number of Suicide bombings done by single group was the LTTE which was Tamil group and again was fighting an occupation (in their perception) by the Sinhalese military forces. LTTE even attacked a fellow Hindu Rajiv Gandhi because he was perceived to be aiding the Sri Lankan occupation.
If you are interested, you can check out an ex-US Air Force office Robert Pape's analysis on this, he has basically collected a database of ALL suicide bombings since the first bombing in 1980s. I would highly suggest to sit through the video in this thread here (
Robert Pape is also important because his policy research and recommendation was implemented successfully in Iraq to bring down suicide bombings there and is also being implemented in Afghanistan eventual. Insight on developing US policy to tackle Suicide Terrorism
There might be also other threads on DFI and you can google his Chicago university database if you are interested in more analysis. PM me if you need this info.
Also, I am not trying to justify intra-religious violence. I was only explaining that a concept of just war exists in other faiths as well. On intra - religious violence, I would just ask you to look up on history of middle ages in Europe. Its also called the 100 year war where there was constant war fare on religious grounds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_wars_of_religion.