Saudi Arabia’s biggest mass execution in 35 years

[Jonathan Fairfield]

Saudi Arabia’s biggest mass execution in 35 years

• Nimr al-Nimr arrested in 2012


• Majority convicted of al-Qaeda attacks 2003-06


• News “vigorously condemned” by regional rivals


• Protests held in Riyadh, Bahrain

News that a prominent Shi’ite Muslim cleric was among those killed in Saudi Arabia’s biggest mass execution for 35 years has met with a furious international reaction.

Most of the 47 executed were convicted of carrying out attacks on behalf of al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia more than a decade ago.

However four, including Nimr al-Nimr, were Shi’ite Muslims accused of shooting police officers during more recent anti-government protests.

43 are described as Sunni jihadists. They include prominent al-Qaeda figures convicted of attacks on Western compounds, government buildings and diplomatic missions between 2003 and 2006.

The most severe form of punishment

The executions took place in 12 cities across Saudi Arabia. Firing squads were employed in four prisons, while the others were carried out via beheadings.

The bodies were then displayed in public places, the most severe form of punishment available under Sharia Islamic law.

Why were the executions carried out?

The 43 Sunni jihadists executed included several prominent al-Qaeda figures, some of whom were convicted of responsibility for attacks on Western compounds, government buildings and diplomatic missions between 2003-2006.

The four Shi’ites, including al-Nimr, were convicted of shooting and petrol bomb attacks which killed several police officers during anti-government protests in the Qatif district of Riyadh between 2011-2013.

Thousands of militant Islamists were detained after the 2003-06 al-Qaeda attacks. Hundreds have been convicted.

Hundreds of members of the Shi’ite minority were detained after the 2011-13 protests.

This is the biggest mass execution for security reasons in Saudi Arabia since 1980, when 83 jihadist rebels were executed for taking over Mecca’s Grand Mosque in 1979.

Commentators say a secondary aim is about discouraging Saudi nationals from engaging in jihadism.

Bombings and shootings by Sunni militants over the past year have killed dozens in the country.

In addition, ISIL has called on followers in Saudi Arabia to stage attacks.

Reaction

Riyadh’s main regional rival Iran and its Shi’ite allies immediately reacted with vigorous condemnation.

A top Iranian cleric warned the kingdom’s Al Saud ruling family would be “wiped from the pages of history.”

Yemen’s Houthi group described Nimr as a “holy warrior”. Hezbollah in Lebanon said Riyadh had made “a grave mistake.”

There have already been protests in Riyadh’s Shi’ite district of Qatif.

However, al-Nimr’s brother says he hopes any response will be peaceful.

-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-01-03

[Briggsy]

The rearrangement of power in the Arab world is coming closer.

The House of Saud must be feeling threatened. It keeps provoking Iran and its allies. (ISIS, Syria, sending troops to Bahrain, Yemen invasion and now these executions)

[JohnDodd]

Another nail in the coffin of World Peace, The "Royal house of Saud" who were nothing more than a bunch common Bedouins until the Brits installed this bunch of Fascists as "Royals". But ISIL are on the way, and those "Mad Max" of the desert with their nihilistic world view will soon put an end to these bunch of Viagra fuelled geriatrics.

[Briggsy]

It is amusing to watch the West contort itself as it demonises the Sunni ISIS (It does this as its own populus expects nothing less) and backs the House of Saud to the hilt (It does this as the alliances were cemented years ago in oil deals, weapon deals, investment deals and control of the world's oil trade). Yet they are two sides of the same coin.

Not saying the Iranians/Shias/Syrians/Hezbollah/Hamas side is any better.

[KevinCorr]

We (the US) don't care what side, we just love being at war. The major US business.

[OMGImInPattaya]

ISIS...House of Saud...same-same no difference!

[spidermike007]

Typical, for one of the most despotic regimes in the world. The ONLY reason they are not absolute and complete outcasts, is due to their money, and oil. Otherwise, they would be on every blacklist on the planet, and they would be enemy number one of the US, which is their rightful status, as the worlds greatest supporters of terrorism, for the past 30 years. The ruling family, is one of the great parasites of the planet, and the amount they give back to humanity, relative to their wealth is astonishing low. Sorry, but their support of terror (financing of the Madrasas that teach extremist behavior and attitudes and direct and indirect support of many terrorist organizations) does not exactly count as charity, though they would insist it does.

In addition their treatment of women is deplorable, and should be condemned on every level possible.

[Steely Dan]

Here's to the house of Saud. They may have entered into a Faustian pact with the religious nut cases from the very birth of the Country, but better a corrupt autocracy than the religious nut cases, who are nigh on indivisible from Isis.

[Sydebolle]

As long as they kill and murder themselves and leave all those infidels out of the game - good riddance!

[GeorgesAbitbol]

Saudis are just successful Daesh

Damn each time I forgot the Saudis hunt those who say that and threaten them of legal action... damn me, damn me!

But let s face it :same interpretation of Islam, same executions,.. the only real difference seems to be that the US and Europ lick their b.tt

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed. I am not sure where members got the idea that this thread is about the US, but it's not.

[Briggsy]

Here's to the house of Saud. They may have entered into a Faustian pact with the religious nut cases from the very birth of the Country, but better a corrupt autocracy than the religious nut cases, who are nigh on indivisible from Isis.

I see what you are doing. You are painting the rulers as not responsible for the long-standing policies of the country.

You are trying to pretend the poor House of Saud is held captive by powerful clerics, holds markedly different views from them and are two totally separate entities. And if that were not the case it would be secular Saudi Arabia ruled by the still autocratic yet benign and moderate House of Saud.

I believe you are doing this because of your U.S. political allegiances and to accept the House of Saud and ISIS have many overlapping objectives, beliefs, members, behavioural traits, funding connections, weapons suppliers and friends in the U.S. would cause you to experience cognitive dissonance. So you create a partition in your beliefs and pretend the contradiction does not exist.

[Tchooptip]

Typical, for one of the most despotic regimes in the world. The ONLY reason they are not absolute and complete outcasts, is due to their money, and oil. Otherwise, they would be on every blacklist on the planet, and they would be enemy number one of the US, which is their rightful status, as the worlds greatest supporters of terrorism, for the past 30 years. The ruling family, is one of the great parasites of the planet, and the amount they give back to humanity, relative to their wealth is astonishing low. Sorry, but their support of terror (financing of the Madrasas that teach extremist behavior and attitudes and direct and indirect support of many terrorist organizations) does not exactly count as charity, though they would insist it does.

In addition their treatment of women is deplorable, and should be condemned on every level possible.

Your are right but In the meantime : Saudi Arabia was Elected Chair of UN Human Rights Council Panel

[oxo1947]

ISIS...House of Saud...same-same no difference!

Of course there's a difference................One is our very close friend and ally.....................

Edited January 3, 2016 by oxo1947

[chuckd]

Do many of you people even read the OP?

This is what it says:

-------------------------------------------------------------------

"However four, including Nimr al-Nimr, were Shi’ite Muslims accused of shooting police officers during more recent anti-government protests.

43 are described as Sunni jihadists. They include prominent al-Qaeda figures convicted of attacks on Western compounds, government buildings and diplomatic missions between 2003 and 2006."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Seems to me the Saudis were simply cleaning house by getting rid of some of the trash.

[MiKT]

Here's to the house of Saud. They may have entered into a Faustian pact with the religious nut cases from the very birth of the Country, but better a corrupt autocracy than the religious nut cases, who are nigh on indivisible from Isis.

I see what you are doing. You are painting the rulers as not responsible for the long-standing policies of the country.

You are trying to pretend the poor House of Saud is held captive by powerful clerics, holds markedly different views from them and are two totally separate entities. And if that were not the case it would be secular Saudi Arabia ruled by the still autocratic yet benign and moderate House of Saud.

I believe you are doing this because of your U.S. political allegiances and to accept the House of Saud and ISIS have many overlapping objectives, beliefs, members, behavioural traits, funding connections, weapons suppliers and friends in the U.S. would cause you to experience cognitive dissonance. So you create a partition in your beliefs and pretend the contradiction does not exist.

He'd probably experience some cognitive dissonance if they cut his head off. But to be honest a Faustian pact really is the better of the two evils and it will be the same with any pact with Iran/Syria/etc.

Tempting as it is to say "lets stand back and let them all kill themselves" the reality is that some people need to be talking and it appears that the Saudi's, bad as they are, and they are bad, are still less evil than ISIS.

[canuckamuck]

ISIS...House of Saud...same-same no difference!

Of course there's a difference................One is our very close friend and ally.....................

Yeah, but which one?

[spidermike007]

Typical, for one of the most despotic regimes in the world. The ONLY reason they are not absolute and complete outcasts, is due to their money, and oil. Otherwise, they would be on every blacklist on the planet, and they would be enemy number one of the US, which is their rightful status, as the worlds greatest supporters of terrorism, for the past 30 years. The ruling family, is one of the great parasites of the planet, and the amount they give back to humanity, relative to their wealth is astonishing low. Sorry, but their support of terror (financing of the Madrasas that teach extremist behavior and attitudes and direct and indirect support of many terrorist organizations) does not exactly count as charity, though they would insist it does.

In addition their treatment of women is deplorable, and should be condemned on every level possible.

Your are right but In the meantime : Saudi Arabia was Elected Chair of UN Human Rights Council Panel

Lots of cash buys the big chair. And what is the overall credibility of the UN, these days? They are about as credible as the US Congress, the Thai government, the World Bank, the American Cancer Society, the FDA, the NSA, the CIA, or the Thai judiciary.

[sanukjim]

Alright Saudi,you are doing great.Keep it up.

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed.

[Steely Dan]

Here's to the house of Saud. They may have entered into a Faustian pact with the religious nut cases from the very birth of the Country, but better a corrupt autocracy than the religious nut cases, who are nigh on indivisible from Isis.

I see what you are doing. You are painting the rulers as not responsible for the long-standing policies of the country.

You are trying to pretend the poor House of Saud is held captive by powerful clerics, holds markedly different views from them and are two totally separate entities. And if that were not the case it would be secular Saudi Arabia ruled by the still autocratic yet benign and moderate House of Saud.

I believe you are doing this because of your U.S. political allegiances and to accept the House of Saud and ISIS have many overlapping objectives, beliefs, members, behavioural traits, funding connections, weapons suppliers and friends in the U.S. would cause you to experience cognitive dissonance. So you create a partition in your beliefs and pretend the contradiction does not exist.

Hmmm,

Yes, there is a contradiction isn't there. 19 Saudi nationals fly planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, yet Saudi citizens benefit from most trusted traveler status by U.S immigration. Yes, of course many Saudi hi so's are no doubt sympathetic to Isis or a global Caliphate. An opinion poll of Saudis found over 90% believed ISIS were acting in a manner true to Islamic values, and why not for a Country that had to be bullied into abolishing slavery in the 60's or 70's.

My point boils down to a similar observation I would make about Pakistan. However compromised the ruling house is they are still preferable to a completely unchecked theocracy. The pact between the house of Saud and the religious conservatives is in mortal danger now because of ISIS. How the dust settles will be interesting to see.

[Briggsy]

Here's to the house of Saud. They may have entered into a Faustian pact with the religious nut cases from the very birth of the Country, but better a corrupt autocracy than the religious nut cases, who are nigh on indivisible from Isis.

I see what you are doing. You are painting the rulers as not responsible for the long-standing policies of the country.

You are trying to pretend the poor House of Saud is held captive by powerful clerics, holds markedly different views from them and are two totally separate entities. And if that were not the case it would be secular Saudi Arabia ruled by the still autocratic yet benign and moderate House of Saud.

I believe you are doing this because of your U.S. political allegiances and to accept the House of Saud and ISIS have many overlapping objectives, beliefs, members, behavioural traits, funding connections, weapons suppliers and friends in the U.S. would cause you to experience cognitive dissonance. So you create a partition in your beliefs and pretend the contradiction does not exist.

Hmmm,

Yes, there is a contradiction isn't there. 19 Saudi nationals fly planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, yet Saudi citizens benefit from most trusted traveler status by U.S immigration. Yes, of course many Saudi hi so's are no doubt sympathetic to Isis or a global Caliphate. An opinion poll of Saudis found over 90% believed ISIS were acting in a manner true to Islamic values, and why not for a Country that had to be bullied into abolishing slavery in the 60's or 70's.

My point boils down to a similar observation I would make about Pakistan. However compromised the ruling house is they are still preferable to a completely unchecked theocracy. The pact between the house of Saud and the religious conservatives is in mortal danger now because of ISIS. How the dust settles will be interesting to see.

Thank you for your objective reply.

Is Saudi Arabia far from a completely unchecked theocracy now? My view is it is not but the Western governments have to deny this obvious truth to their own people. Try holding a Christian service in Saudi or proselytising!

The current situation stems from the fact that the Western-installed government in Iran was overthrown whilst its counterpart in Saudi was not and they happen to be on opposite sides of the Muslim schism. So the West backs Saudi.

ISIS was a Saudi creation, at the very least with Western tacit approval, and probably a lot more, to overthrow Assad but ended up as a Western hate machine spreading a message of murder and encouraging European passport holding Muslims to massacre people in restaurants and concert halls. The Western governments have yet to square the circle over how to guarantee oil security without supporting Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East. The poor response is to deny its key role in the Saudi state.

[bazza40]

Off-topic posts removed. I am not sure where members got the idea that this thread is about the US, but it's not.

Oh really. The US has supported an autocracy through thick and thin for the sake of the oil under Saudi Arabia, has supplied SA with some of its most modern weapons, and the US has nothing to do with the thread? Pull the other leg, it whistles.

[thailandstupidlife]

As long as they kill each other, why should we be concerned ?

[ChoakMyDee]

Am I supposed to be outraged? Well I'm not. Any terrorist anywhere, any cop killer, anyone who bombs civilians, any terrorist act should be met with a swift trial and then the culprit should be taken around the back and shot in the head. I wish the western world would start killing terrorists and making examples of them.

[arjunadawn]

As long as they kill each other, why should we be concerned ?

Because they export this barbarism and act under the cover of the West who support them "in our name." SA is among the greatest threats to the modern world. However, were the House of Saud removed things would be much worse in the region. The West's support for equality, human rights, and multiculturalism are de facto meaningless in light of their strident support for these animals. Every single milestone the West embraces as self evidence of their cultural progressivism is made moot by continuing to sleep with savages.

[FangFerang]

What a mess.

[Trouble]

Do many of you people even read the OP?

This is what it says:

-------------------------------------------------------------------

"However four, including Nimr al-Nimr, were Shi’ite Muslims accused of shooting police officers during more recent anti-government protests.

43 are described as Sunni jihadists. They include prominent al-Qaeda figures convicted of attacks on Western compounds, government buildings and diplomatic missions between 2003 and 2006."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Seems to me the Saudis were simply cleaning house by getting rid of some of the trash.

Was the execution of these individuals some kind of loss to humanity? No! They were just thugs wanting power for themselves in order to have their particular kind of despotic regime. No loss to anyone. Hope Saudis get rid of some more. Not like Obama letting the the thugs out of Guantanamo. Of course Bush should have never brought them there. Should have let the Afghans do away with them in an Afghani prison quietly.

[GeorgesAbitbol]

Do many of you people even read the OP?

This is what it says:

-------------------------------------------------------------------

"However four, including Nimr al-Nimr, were Shi’ite Muslims accused of shooting police officers during more recent anti-government protests.

43 are described as Sunni jihadists. They include prominent al-Qaeda figures convicted of attacks on Western compounds, government buildings and diplomatic missions between 2003 and 2006."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Seems to me the Saudis were simply cleaning house by getting rid of some of the trash.

Was the execution of these individuals some kind of loss to humanity? No! They were just thugs wanting power for themselves in order to have their particular kind of despotic regime. No loss to anyone. Hope Saudis get rid of some more. Not like Obama letting the the thugs out of Guantanamo. Of course Bush should have never brought them there. Should have let the Afghans do away with them in an Afghani prison quietly.

First you seem to be completly ignorant of who was Nimr, so before giving a round of applause to the Saudis, you should learn a bit more.

And of course we can trust this country, right? it is not like they support(ed) terrorism and extrem islam.

Just grab some information about wahhabism.

And for Bush : the current situation is greatly due to his stupid foreign politics and the warmongers around him

Edited January 4, 2016 by GeorgesAbitbol

[chuckd]

Do many of you people even read the OP?

This is what it says:

-------------------------------------------------------------------

"However four, including Nimr al-Nimr, were Shi’ite Muslims accused of shooting police officers during more recent anti-government protests.

43 are described as Sunni jihadists. They include prominent al-Qaeda figures convicted of attacks on Western compounds, government buildings and diplomatic missions between 2003 and 2006."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Seems to me the Saudis were simply cleaning house by getting rid of some of the trash.

Was the execution of these individuals some kind of loss to humanity? No! They were just thugs wanting power for themselves in order to have their particular kind of despotic regime. No loss to anyone. Hope Saudis get rid of some more. Not like Obama letting the the thugs out of Guantanamo. Of course Bush should have never brought them there. Should have let the Afghans do away with them in an Afghani prison quietly.

First you seem to be completly ignorant of who was Nimr, so before giving a round of applause to the Saudis, you should learn a bit more.

And of course we can trust this country, right? it is not like they support(ed) terrorism and extrem islam.

Just grab some information about wahhabism.

And for Bush : the current situation is greatly due to his stupid foreign politics and the warmongers around him

If your little tutorial is addressed to me and just for your information, i lived and worked in Saudi for over 30 years.

I had one employee shot and killed by an Al-Qaeda operative and lost some friends and acquaintances in the compound bombings in Riyadh.

I lived within 20 miles of Qatif for much of the 30 years so became somewhat familiar with the Shiite minority. Even had quite a few on my payroll.

Bush was nowhere to be seen in 1979 when the Embassy in Tehran was overrun. Islamic radicals hate everybody, including Barack Hussein Obama.

Where were you when all this was happening?