Saudi Arabia tears down historical buildings

[Sea Skimmer]

Actually Bin Laden said at some point I recall, we captured some information on this very early on, that he and his fellow plotters had only expected at most, for the tops of the towers above the impacts to fall. That might have happened too had the planes made wider damage paths in the curtain walls or struck corners. This failure to expect such completely massive destruction was part of the reason why Al-Qaeda wasn't well prepared for the US to full on invade Afghanistan to come after him. This isn't really surprising though, few skyscrapers were ever built with the WTC tower idea of a core and curtain wall.

Remember this also the same group that had a major attack fail because they couldn't figure out how much weight it took to sink a small boat.

[Simon_Jester]

You would think that they'd at least want to mark some of the significant locations if they have to tear them down?

I don't think you understand Wahhabism.

For an answer larger than 'snark...'

The Wahhabi version of Sunni Islam, which is pretty much the official version in Saudi Arabia proper, is aggressively fundamentalist. One of the ways it is fundamentalist is that it hates anything which might look like 'idolatry' or worship of anything that is not God. Therefore, Wahhabism calls for the destruction of anything that might become a focus of worship, including historical sites and artistic images of revered figures within Islam.

This is why you hear about (for instance) the Taliban blowing up giant statues of the Buddha, or rebels in Mali burning the ancient library of that city. The willful destruction of the past is a part of this stripe of Islamic fundamentalism.

All versions of Islam are officially iconoclastic, to one degree or another; that is why pictorial representation of human beings is discouraged and Islamic art focuses on geometric figures so much. But the Wahhabis take it beyond that into active vandalism. Thus, they would prefer that an ancient site where the Prophet did XYZ be destroyed, on balance, because it removes the temptation anyone might have to worship at that site in an idolistic way.

[weemadando]

You would think that they'd at least want to mark some of the significant locations if they have to tear them down?

I don't think you understand Wahhabism.

For an answer larger than 'snark...'

The Wahhabi version of Sunni Islam, which is pretty much the official version in Saudi Arabia proper, is aggressively fundamentalist. One of the ways it is fundamentalist is that it hates anything which might look like 'idolatry' or worship of anything that is not God. Therefore, Wahhabism calls for the destruction of anything that might become a focus of worship, including historical sites and artistic images of revered figures within Islam.

This is why you hear about (for instance) the Taliban blowing up giant statues of the Buddha, or rebels in Mali burning the ancient library of that city. The willful destruction of the past is a part of this stripe of Islamic fundamentalism.

All versions of Islam are officially iconoclastic, to one degree or another; that is why pictorial representation of human beings is discouraged and Islamic art focuses on geometric figures so much. But the Wahhabis take it beyond that into active vandalism. Thus, they would prefer that an ancient site where the Prophet did XYZ be destroyed, on balance, because it removes the temptation anyone might have to worship at that site in an idolistic way.

It was covered in the article in the OP. I don't think any further explanation was really needed.

[Simon_Jester]

Maybe not. You could be right, I could be wrong.

I prefer to tell people why they're mistaken about something, in enough detail that they learn something from the experience. But then, I'm a windy lunatic who doesn't mind wasting his time sometimes.

[aieeegrunt]

...I'd say it's preferable to simply saying "herp derp you stooopid". There is no point to telling somebody they're wrong without trying to explain why unless you're only purpose in posting was LOOK AT ME SO SMART.

[Guardsman Bass]

If they believe that preserving historical Islamic sites creates idolatory, then why hasn't the Wahhabist establishment tried to destroy the Kaaba? International muslim outrage? Religious tourism?

[weemadando]

Because worship there is one of the Five Pillars that's a core part of the religion, defined in the Koran perhaps?

Not something that came later or is not protected as such?

[Irbis]

I prefer to tell people why they're mistaken about something, in enough detail that they learn something from the experience. But then, I'm a windy lunatic who doesn't mind wasting his time sometimes.

Personally, it's main appeal of this forum to me, to read people with very obscure knowledge explain things that might look simple from outside but are much more complicated from inside. I find people going 'YOUR WRONG' in one sentence without explaining (especially less mainstream topics) to be ones being pompous waste of time, if that makes you feel any better.