Andrew Bostom

Uncreated, Uncreative Words

Andrew Bostom header image 2

Confronting Nidal Malik Hassan’s “Martyrdom”

November 6th, 2009 by Andrew Bostom |
5 Comments
2,916 visitors have read this article

From this AP story about the devout Muslim, execution-style murderer of US soldiers and civilian personnel at Fort Hood, Nidal Malik Hassan, surviving erstwhile “martyr”:

At least six months ago, Hasan came to the attention of law enforcement officials because of Internet postings about suicide bombings and other threats, including posts that equated suicide bombers to soldiers who throw themselves on a grenade to save the lives of their comrades. They had not determined for certain whether Hasan is the author of the posting, and a formal investigation had not been opened before the shooting, said law enforcement officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the case. One of the officials said late Thursday that federal search warrants were being drawn up to authorize the seizure of Hasan’s computer. Retired Army Col. Terry Lee, who said he worked with Hasan, told Fox News that Hasan had hoped President Barack Obama would pull troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Lee said Hasan got into frequent arguments with others in the military who supported the wars, and had tried hard to prevent his pending deployment.

 

It is likely that the full Nidal Malik Hasan comments alluded to in the AP story are these:

There was a grenade thrown among a group of American soldiers. One of the soldiers, feeling that it was to late for everyone to flee jumped on the grave with the intention of saving his comrades. Indeed he saved them. He inentionally took his life (suicide) for a noble cause i.e. saving the lives of his soldier. To say that this soldier committed suicide is inappropriate. Its more appropriate to say he is a brave hero that sacrificed his life for a more noble cause. Scholars have paralled this to suicide bombers whose intention, by sacrificing their lives, is to help save Muslims by killing enemy soldiers. If one suicide bomber can kill 100 enemy soldiers because they were caught off guard that would be considered a strategic victory. Their intention is not to die because of some despair. The same can be said for the Kamikazees in Japan. They died (via crashing their planes into ships) to kill the enemies for the homeland. You can call them crazy i you want but their act was not one of suicide that is despised by Islam. So the scholars main point is that “IT SEEMS AS THOUGH YOUR INTENTION IS THE MAIN ISSUE” and Allah (SWT) knows best.

Dan Greenfield has a fine post about Hasan’s local Silver Springs, MD imam, Faizul Khan, who is at minimum a cultural jihadist. Regardless, Hasan’s own apparent views on jihad martyrdom are entirely consistent with mainstream, orthodox Islamic dogma on this sacralized killing of the enemies of Islam, which should not be conflated with “suicide” resulting from melancholia, or depression.

Franz Rosenthal, the late (d. 2002) Yale University scholar of Islam, who, 50 years ago, translated Ibn Khaldun’s classic Introduction To History, also wrote a seminal essay entitled “On Suicide in Islam” in 1946. Rosenthal’s research confirmed how Islam extolled “suicidal” martyrdom attacks:

While the Qur’anic attitude toward suicide remains uncertain, the great authorities of the hadith leave no doubt as to the official attitude of Islam. In their opinion suicide is an unlawful act….On the other hand, death as the result of “suicidal” missions and of the desire of martyrdom occurs not infrequently, since death is considered highly commendable according to Muslim religious concepts. (Emphasis added.) However, such cases are no[t] suicides in the proper sense of the term.

These orthodox Islamic views have been reiterated by Yusuf Al Qaradawi—“spiritual”  leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, head of the European Fatwa Council, and immensely popular Al-Jazeera television personality, as well as Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, Grand Imam of Al-Azhar University, the most prestigious center of Muslim learning in Sunni Islam. Sheikh Qaradawi openly endorsed murderous Palestinian homicide bomber “martyrdom” operations against innocent Israeli citizens (all of whom are considered “combatants” who obstruct the “call to Islam”) during a fatwa council convened in the heart of Europe (in Stockholm, July, 2003). For the past decade, Sheikh Tantawi, who is the nearest equivalent to a Muslim Pope, has also confirmed the legitimacy of homicide bombing of Jews, characterizing these grisly attacks as

…the highest form of Jihad operations…the young people executing them have sold Allah the most precious thing of all…every martyrdom operation against any Israeli, including children, women, and teenagers, is a legitimate act according to [Islamic] religious law, and an Islamic commandment, until the people of Palestine regain their land

On July 25, 2005, historian David Littman attempted to deliver a prepared text in the joint names of three international NGOs, but was prevented from doing so by the intervention of Islamic members of the United Nations Sub-Commission on Human Rights. Following repeated interruptions he was unable to complete his speech. Littman was simply trying to support the argument that those who issue fatwas to kill innocent people in the name of Islam are not real Muslims and should be treated as apostates. But as he noted, just before the 7/7/05 London bombings a major conference of 170 Muslim scholars from 40 countries meeting in Amman, Jordan gave an opinion in a Final Communiqué, dated July 6, 2005:

It is not possible to declare as apostates any group of Muslims who believes in Allah the Mighty and Sublime and His Messenger (may Peace and Blessings be upon him) and the pillars of faith, and respects the pillars of Islam and does not deny any necessary article of religion.

This unfortunate communiqué clearly provides immutable protection to authentic Islamic advocates of homicide bombing—like the “esteemed” clerics Yusuf Qaradawi and Al-Azhar Grand Imam Tantawi.

And the contemporary advocacy of such “martyrdom” operations by Islam’s most esteemed mainstream clerics is what ultimately gives legitimacy to the mass murderous actions of pious Muslims such as Nidal Malik Hassan. This is the unspoken, but irrefragable truth our craven “elites” in the military, government, and media must be forced to acknowledge, and confront.


All Articles Copyright © 2007-2013 Dr. Andrew Bostom | All Rights Reserved
Printing is allowed for personal use only | Commercial usage(For Profit) is a copyright violation and written permission must be granted first.

Filed Under: Essays

Print Print

5 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Ben Wilson United Kingdom Windows XP Mozilla Firefox 3.0.15 // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:15 pm

    Dr Bostom,

    What do you make of the fact that besides Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi’s support for suicide bombing noted by MEMRI, Tantawi has also CONDEMNED all suicide bombing, including against Israelis, on at least two separate occasions?

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3059365.stm

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1690624.stm

    Pure taqiyya? If so, how would you account for the fact that at least one of these condemnations took place and was directed towards a conference of MUSLIM scholars, not gullible infidels?

    Tantawi seems to be on record as having many contradictory positions, and I don’t think all of them can be accounted for by invoking taqiyya. For example, according to the BBC again (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/42914.stm), Tantawi opposes female genital mutilation, and yet a source quoted by Robert Spencer in several of his books quotes Tantawi as SUPPORTING the same practice. Elsewhere, while MEMRI quotes Tantawi as endorsing jihad against American troops in Iraq, he is also on record as stating that bin Laden’s calls to jihad were “invalid and not binding on Muslims”.

    Please note that I am not questioning the validity of MEMRI’s translations; I just want to know what you make of his constant self-contradiction, even when addressing his fellow Muslims.

  • 2 Andrew Bostom United States Windows XP Internet Explorer 7.0 // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:30 pm

    Please…It is all sanctioned dissimulation for the consumption of those like yourself.

    Al Azhar as an institution and Tantawi as Grand Imam are part of a 1000 year continuum of mainstream Islamic irridentism which sanctions jihad war, Jew and other infidel hatred, and female genital mutilation (a scourge which afflicts over 90% of Egyptian women)

    I have extensive English translation extracts of Tantawi’s 700 pp. “magnum opus” glorifying Islamic Jew hatred which provide unassailable proof of just how idous this “cleric” really is…

  • 3 Ben Wilson United Kingdom Windows XP Mozilla Firefox 3.0.15 // Nov 6, 2009 at 2:37 pm

    Please do not confuse me with the kinds of dhimmis who are currently attempting to exonerate Islam from the crimes of Nidal Malik Hassan and others. I have both of your books and they are excellent, and have also read and admired the works of Robert Spencer, Bat Ye’or and many others. I am 100% behind the fight against Islamic totalitarian and the defence of Western values.

    My post was merely intended to highlight Tantawi’s habit of saying one thing on one occasion and then exactly the opposite on other occasions. And I must emphasise once again that he sometimes publicly speaks out against suicide bombing even AMONG HIS FELLOW MUSLIMS. I do not believe that all his contradiction can be explained by “sanctioned dissimulation”.

    On one occasion (which was only ever reported by MEMRI and no one else), Tantawi did indeed endorse suicide bombing. However, the question I was merely asking was why he would say this one day, and another day tell other Muslims (NOT dhimmis) that it was absolutely not permissible to commit suicide bombings, explicitly acknowledging and rejecting the common jihadist claim that mandatory military service in Israel makes every single Israeli a legitimate target.

  • 4 DaveP United Kingdom Windows XP Opera 9.80 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:27 pm

    Ben Wilson

    Can you give any reasons why he does so?

  • 5 DP111 United Kingdom Windows XP Opera 9.80 // Nov 14, 2009 at 4:18 pm

    “There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it”

    AND

    Our immediate, urgent task is to understand the extent to which Nidal Hasan’s orthodox vision of Islam is a shared vision—and by which Muslims, in particular.

    If the first is true, then the second is futile or irrelevant, and viceversa.