Wow! I’m not sure quite how to say this so it’s clear I’m sincere and not being saracastic- Johanna you are very learned.
But it’s nothing new. The Wahabi simply take it to the extreme.
You can visit the Hidden Church in Amsterdam in all its ornate Catholic glory for a tiny place - then go down the street and the Nieuwe Kerk is barebones whitewashed plaster. Same all over. The churches of England tend to be fairly barren except for the woodwork and what stained glass windows could be save from the Puritans - who lived up to their name when it came to decorations. There’s a word “iconoclast” which was coined to describe the exact same action in the east.
I believe the point is they are attacking the periphery of holiness - not the Ka’bah but things like the house or grave of the mother of Mohammed. True believers, in their mind, should not care one iota about such relics of the past. Mohammed himself forbade images of people or animals lest they become the objects of worship like the pre-Islamic society obviously was prone to do.
And as I said earlier, you need only look to some of the historical pieces of Catholic lore to see where it seems that idolatry has crept into the church, papered over with the veneer of “it just represents…”.
What the ever-loving fuck are you talking about?
Moderator Note
This is FQ. Let’s all stick to the factual aspects of the topic, please.
The large numbers visiting Mecca have led to some pretty bad crowd crush incidents in recent years and the Saudi authorities have devoted a good deal of attention to improving the access routes and trying to eliminate potential pinch points for a crush to develop.
Sure, it’s more easily possible to imagine some artifact being able to be credibly traced back to Muhammad in a way that it isn’t for Moses. But when the same museum is straight-facedly claiming to have both of them, it raises suspicions about even the relatively plausible claims.
BTW, Jews aren’t big on place-based idolatry, either (well, with one major exception). May it please your monks to think that what they live at the base of is Mt. Sinai, but according to our tradition the exact location of Sinai was forgotten centuries before their Church existed.
I think analogy would be if a particularly puritan branch of Protestantism wound up permanently ruling Rome. While I’m sure they would also take great pride in being the Custodians of Rome, there would be plenty of heritage sites that fall foul of the iconoclastic authorities.
Sort of like fanatics who blow up a giant statue from another religion?
I think Little Nemo has said it better - Mohammed was a person of great renown while he was alive, so the provenance of his “relics” is probably fairly reliable, less likely to pop up out of nowhere for sale. IIRC what the museum said, it had been there all the time in possession of the local ruler, unlike some travelling biblical relics of shady provenance. (Or carbon date to 1300 like the Shroud of Turin) As our guide in Israel said, A lot of tourists who arrived armed during the crusades were looking for biblical sites and artifacts, and the locals were happy to oblige for money. Or Constantine’s mother, who was determined to find the “true cross” so of course, some locals took her to the right spot and helped her dig it up. As some skeptics long ago remarked, in a land where wood was hard to come by, what are the odds a cross was a one-time-use thing, vs. they recycled until it fell apart,?
Sort of but not exactly as it’s not artifacts from another religion it’s things from their own their own religion.they find objectionable. So a better analogy would be the countless statues and other irreplaceable artifacts that were damaged or destroyed in my own home country when Parliamentarian victory in the English Civil War led to puritan extremists having control of them.
They might well cite things that happen in Muslim countries today, like Turkish Muslims who visit the tomb of Rumi, or Egyptians who visit Christian saints.
Aw, go on with you, man. Embarrass me, why don’t you. 
All I did was read one book, History of the Arabs by Philip K. Hitti. It’s all in there.