Sodomy “For the Sake of Islam”
Â “If the pinnacle of Islam can only be achieved through sodomy, then there is no wrong in it.”
Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri is certainly not alone ‘practising’ for jihad by being sodomised by fellow jihadists. Malaysian terrorist Noordin Top who was shot dead in 2009 also had an ‘extremely widened’ anal cavity, in fact Noordin’s funnel-shaped anus was an obvious sign that he had been sodomized over a long period of time.Â
Not only did the original “underwear bomber” Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri hide explosives in his rectum to assassinate Saudi Prince Muhammad bin Nayefâ€”they met in 2009 after the 22-year-old holy warrior “feigned repentance for his jihadi views“â€”but al-Asiri apparently had fellowÂ jihadisÂ repeatedly sodomize him to “widen” his anus in order to accommodate the explosivesâ€” all in accordance with theÂ fatwasÂ [religious edicts] of Islamic clerics.
A 2010Â Arabic news videoÂ that is making the rounds on the Internet gives the details. Apparently a cleric, one Abu al-Dema al-Qasab, informedÂ jihadisÂ of an “innovative and unprecedented way to execute martyrdom operations: place explosive capsules in your anus. However, to undertake thisÂ jihadiÂ approach you must agree to be sodomized for a while to widen your anus so it can hold the explosives.”
Others inquired further by asking for formalÂ fatwas. Citing his desire for “martyrdom and the virgins of paradise,” oneÂ jihadi, (possibly al-Asiri himself) asked another sheikh, “Is it permissible for me to let one of the jihadi brothers sodomize me to widen my anus if the intention is good?”
After praising Allah, the sheikh’sÂ fatwaÂ began by declaring that sodomy is forbidden in Islam,
Two important and complementary points emerge from this view: 1) thatÂ jihadÂ is the “pinnacle” of Islamâ€”for it makes Islam supreme (based on aÂ hadith, the formerly oral history of the life of Muhammad); and 2) that “necessity makes permissible the prohibited.” These axioms are not limited to modern dayÂ fatwas, but in fact, were crystallized centuries and ago agreed to by theÂ ulemaÂ [Islam’s leading religious scholars]. The result is thatâ€”because making Islam supreme throughÂ jihadÂ is the greatest priorityâ€”anything and everything that is otherwise banned becomes permissible. All that comes to matter is one’s intention, orÂ niyya.
From here one may understand the many ostensible incongruities of Islamic history: lying is forbiddenâ€”butpermissibleÂ to empower Islam; intentionally killing women and children is forbiddenâ€”but permissible when performed during holy war, orÂ jihad; suicide is forbiddenâ€”but also permissible duringÂ jihad, only then called “martyrdom.”
Indeed, the Five Pillars of Islamâ€”including prayer and fastingâ€”may be ignored during the jihad. So important is the duty of jihad that the Ottoman sultansâ€”who often spent half their lives on the battlefieldâ€”wereÂ not permitted to perform the obligatory pilgrimageÂ to Mecca.
More recently, these ideas appeared in a different form during Egypt’s elections, when Islamic leaders portrayed voting as aÂ form of jihadÂ and justified anythingâ€”including cheating, which was deemed “obligatory”â€”to empower Islam.
According to these two doctrinesâ€”which culminate in empowering Islam, no matter howâ€”one may expect anything from would-beÂ jihadis, regardless of how dubious the effort might seem to us.
Ironically, this mentality, prevalent throughout the Islamic world, is the same mentality that many Western leaders and politicians think can be appeased with just a bit more respect, well-wishing, and concessions from the West.