This article found on google news says militants blew themselves up in the holy city of Mecca. Apparently they were about to get arrested when the incident occured.
My question is this. Why would muslim militants blow themselves up in the very place their prophet is purported to have been born? The article says an explosion in that city was geared towards the Saudi Regime, but still, aren’t they supposed to be loyal to their muslim God? Why go into his home land and bring your death and destruction?
Does anyone think any fundamentalist muslim movement has their sh*t together enough to know what they want in the future? It just seems all too haphazard, then again I get my news from a decidedly American Point of View…
I think it speaks more of what they think of the Saudi Royal family… but then they shouldn’t be doing this in Mecca. Something stinks in this story. It certainly doesn’t add up.
I would have to agree with this. If they wanted to hit the royal family, they would have hit Jeddah where most of the royal family lives. But then it could have been to make a statement “look, the Custodian of the 2 Holy Mosques could not prevent a terrorist action in the most holy of cities. They need to be deposed.”
But who realy knows what their reasons for doing anything is.
I don’t see the advantage of spending energy exploring the philosophical beliefs of criminals. They are just thugs, I don’t want to hear their opinions.
Although out of the ordinary, this sort of event is not unique. The Grand Mosque in Mecca was seized for a couple of weeks in 1979 by several hundred armed anti-Saudi, Islamist dissidents uner the leadership of an important tribal leader from the Najd, with views very similar to the ones later to be espoused by Osama bin Laden ( indeed ObL was deeply impressed with the rebels ). They were mostly killed in the final assault by Saudi forces or executed shortly thereafter. Back in the Middle Ages, in 930, the Isma’ili group known as the Qaramita sacked Mecca and carried off the black stone of the Ka’ba in pieces ( they held it at their capital for about 20 years before finally being persuaded to return it ).
In both cases these assaults were intended in part to strike a blow against the caretakers of Mecca, by attempying to show them as unfit to manage the holy places. In the case of the Qaramita there are also suggestions that in addition to showing up the Abbasids, they were also out to tar the reputation of the religiously related, but rival Fatimids. But in both the modern and medieval case, arguably, it backfired.
I have no idea what, if anything, these nuts intended to bomb. But the attempt was likely intended to show the Saudis as incompetent caretakers of Islam’s holiest shrine. I would suspect even if successful, it would have ended up being more damaging to their cause. But that’s fanatics for you - they don’t always look at things clearly.
Tamarlane, you’d know this better than I can look it up. Doesn’t Wahabist Saudi Arabia severely restrict pilgrimage to and from Mecca? And isn’t every muslim required to make the pilgrimage to Mecca at least once?
That could certainly be a bone of contention for some, if I’m not completely wrong.
Restrict, yes. How severely depends on who you talk to and who you’re talking about. The worst political abuses were in regards to Iran, especially in the 1980’s, when Khomeini and Saudi Arabia were engaged in a bit of a lukewarm “pilgrimage war”.
Required to at least try, anyway. That’s apparently one of the problems - One of the restrictions in place, supposedly to prevent overcrowding, is a system designed to give preference to first-time pilgrims at the expense of those who have made the trips multiple times. This has indeed raised some howls of protest, though the Saudis claim it is a necessary measure.
I’m sure it is in some quarters, however I’d be inclined to suspect it is a somewhat secondary issue with the al Qaeda types, more another footnote in the litany of Saudi failures, rather than the primary grievance.
The Shia are generally peeved at the regulations in Mecca. The ones I know claim that there are prayers/rituals they’d like to carry out in Mecca but are prevented from doing so by the Saudis. You might know more about that than I.
As far as the OP goes, it does seem extraordinarily dumb to blow yourself up in Mecca but after all, it is a functioning city, not just some monuments in the desert.
There is another element not explicitly mentioned yet: The Saudi’s use Mecca & Medina, like an American politican wraps himself in the flag and Lady liberty – so the terrorists strike against them says, as others already have more elequently, look the Saudis can’t protect these Holy Places.
But it also says this tribe has ruled us since 1932, one way they are trying to show they are legtimate is by wrapping themselves in this religious mantle & look what we just did. Miltants hitting there is an overt polictical act even if it is wrapped in religious overtones, & if you look at the OP in that light it makes more sense.