Terrorism to Strike Saudi Arabia Again...Stop It It Is Responsible!

Fouad Ibrahim - al-Akhbar newspaper

In a Riyadh-based report about the identity of the suicide bomber who blew himself up in DuRoy Hotel in Raouche region in west Beirut, Saudi al-Arabiya channel literally said: "the young man was Saudi. His name was Abdul Rahman Nasser al-Shaneifi, aged 20. He was wanted by the Saudi security and he had left the Saudi territories on last March 10. [al-Arabiya, June 26].

Question is, how could a wanted person possible leave the country via airport heading to Istanbul without that the Saudi security authorities stopped him?
There could be many possibilities:

- that the wanted person might have left the country with a fake passport, which is still not proven; and if proven, this would be considered a dangerous infiltration into the Saudi security and authorities might tend to this possibility in case they found themselves in a place of accusation. It is worth-mentioning here that using a fake passport in a state that adopts a meticulous electronic network is not a piece of cake!

- that there could be connivance between the wanted person and the Saudi security authorities, which allowed the former to skip critical security measures at the airport before traveling. In other words, there might be a side that could have facilitated his travel. This possibility is simply envisaged because it happened before.

On April 16, 2012, a document issued by the Interior Ministry uncovered that an agreement had been reached with people from different Arab, Afghani and Pakistani nationalities, accused of murder, rape, and drugs smuggling, as per which their families would enjoy monthly salaries if they accept to join Jihad in Syria.

- that the Saudi security authorities might have lost the ability to chase wanted people, who took advantage of this flaw to escape home; or that they might have facilitated their travel to get rid of them or to use them to implement their agendas abroad, especially with the presence of many common rivals whether in Syria, Iraq, or Lebanon.

Clearly enough, all possibilities embed a condemnation of Saudi authorities since each possibility tampers per se with sovereignty and functions of the state. This is the scene as we see from the inside.

On the Lebanese side, where the crime scene is, the normal citizen wonder about the secret of the supremacy of the Saudi element in terrorist acts, especially those requiring "a suicidal role." This is where what is political and touching with security intertwines with what is religious, educational, and social, because any terrorism-has-no-religion or the-Kingdom-is-the-first-victim-of-terrorism-like answers mean an indirect resignation in front of an exploding reality as well as closing the dossier without distributing responsibilities. In other terms, this means keeping the scene open to other consecutive gory chapters.

In politics, Saudi Arabia has chosen silence and neglecting until further notice, ever since its citizens were proven involved in terrorist activities outside frontiers from the Indian continent passing by Yemen, up till Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, until Russia; that is, until it is pressured enough to adopt a certain position, just like what happened on February 3, when the royal order was issued to criminalize every civilian or military Saudi militant abroad. Therefore, in politics too, all forms of condemnation are understandable as long as they are not issued by great powers like the US or the European Union.

Until now, Saudi Arabia doesn't seem to be dealing seriously with the dossier of its terrorist citizens abroad. The statements of some Saudi officials even unearth the level of slackness in that respect. The statement of Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon, Ali Awadh Asseri, just one day after the suicide bombing at DuRoy Hotel, was proof of reluctance, as he claimed that the targeted was the Saudi embassy, just because it is situated next to the hotel, in an attempt to victimize the Kingdom.
Here goes al-Akhbar's question again:

How did "Okaz" newspaper succeed in launching a preventive alarm regarding the security juncture in Lebanon in its editorial on June 17, titled "Tomorrow, the last of chances," while a state with tremendous intelligence, technical, and human capacities like KSA failed to warn the Lebanese authorities from the advent of terrorists coming from the Kingdom, instead of having the German intelligence services alerting Lebanon of looming terrorist activities!

As to the religious incitement, the Kingdom's mosques are still under the influence of the Sheikhs of incitement on jihad abroad under different guises, while book markets abound with tons of booklets encouraging on killing the Other.
However, the Saudi government still didn't take any measure to cease the incitement on terrorism or even set laws criminalizing such attempts. On the contrary, incitement and provocation went even further when local newspapers started depicting ISIS militants as rebels, and the terrorist acts in Mosul and other provinces as "popular uprising."

Today, one may say that religious, cultural, and media institutions directly nurturing the public opinion have effectively contributed to spreading the rhetoric of hatred and violence. Surprisingly, these very institutions remained quiescent regarding the uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, and Bahrain. They might have found in Iraq, Syria, and maybe Lebanon "some liberation squares" for revolutions that are tailored upon Saudi Wahhabi measurements.

In all these revolutions, "ahl-al-Sunnah" [sunnites] are present so that the sectarian aspect of the incitement campaign level by the Saudi media reveals.

In addition, the Saudi authorities' abstaining from cooperating with their Lebanese counterparts in the dossier of Saudi suspects proven involved in bombings inside Lebanon--most dangerous of whom Majid al-Majid--hints on what is certainly negative. In the best case scenario, Saudi Arabia is resorting to turning a cold shoulder to dealing with the sizzling security dossier in Lebanon, which can be placed within the frame of its position from Hizbullah and its participation in the fights in Syria. But, what if the Saudi slackness embeds something else, that may start with ignoring the movements of Saudi citizens, then facilitating their terrorist missions, and finally directly getting involved in terrorism striking Lebanon, exactly like proven after investigations in the bombing of the Iranian embassy in Bir Hassan.

Regardless of the Saudi justifications, when an incident occurs time after time with same people, in the same way, little is left to think of spontaneity. Criminology knows no futilities!
Saudis are intensively present in terrorist acts in general and suicidal ones in particular. This is not sheer coincidence or a once-in-a-lifetime crime.

This makes Saudi Arabia, in the best and worst case scenarios, directly responsible for the crimes perpetrated by its citizens who have settled on their death, because somebody had incited them in the mosque and at school, and provided money, and supported them in society; those who bring death to the world have been trained to do so in the Wahhabi Kingdom before dashing to die.