Hajj Stampede Controversy: People only see what they want to see

Today I have yet another thing to share that I observed on Facebook in previous two weeks. The after effects of Hajj stampede controversy can still be felt in our daily conversations but I had an interesting learning from all this. All the facebook community got divided into multiple groups and according to my observation following are the major types of people:

1. People who are strongly anti-Arabs (in general)

2. People who are strongly anti-Saudi Govt i.e. Saud Family
3. People who are strongly anti-wahhabism (school of thought in power in Saudi Arabia)
4. People who are strongly pro-Saudi Govt, pro-Saud family and/or pro-Wahabism
5. People who are strongly anti-Iran (this one is interesting :) )

I want to now summarize views of all mentioned type of people and also provide a suitable justification of how it should be.

  

Type	View	Justification
Type 1 the anti-arabs	Their opinion be like "all Arabs are morally corrupt and their corrupt nature has resulted in this tragedy"	Arabs has nothing to do with anything happening in Hajj, the Sheikhs in Dubai etc does not have any impact on Hajj preparations (I think) as it's not their responsibility in the first place.
Type 2 the anti-Saud Family	They think like "Saud Family has not done their duty which resulted in this tragedy."	First of all Saud family members are rulers they just rule, they are not field workers, they don't manage everything. Yes two things can be blamed on them: If the report of the affected road being blocked for a Saudi prince during Hajj is true then of-course they are culprits but (as of now) it still is unauthentic. May be their intentions (نیت) were corrupted so two incidents happened which resulted in severe criticism on rulers, but if that is the case its between them and Allah. We don't need to be judgmental.
Type 3 the anti-wahhabism	Typical posts are like "these wahabis are ignorant, they are making money of this holy event, they are disrespectful, they are responsible" etc etc	Well ok the rulers of Saudi Arabia belong to a certain school of thought but that doesn't make other people of same school responsible for everything that happens there. Its as simple as 2+2
Type 4 the pro-Saud family	They have posted a lot but overall there are only two things they have. 1.    Some pictures of Saudi police rescuing children and elderly Haaji's 2.    The point of view that these things happen every now and then and its not a deal so we don't need to make an issue out of it	1.  It all happened under their administration and it was their duty and responsibility to rescue people, they were being paid to do that. It's like I'm an IT guy and whenever there is a bug in my code its my responsibility to fix it, I can't claim to be a hero just because I fixed it as I am responsible for the bug in the first place. 2.    YES these things happen in Hajj, hundreds of people die every year but NO this was not normal that 1200 people died in a single incident. Their has to be a blunder somewhere and it needs to be investigated.
Type 5 the anti-Iran	They would blame Iran for every single news that is floating in social media against Saudi Arabia. They would think every news against the Saudi govt is Iran sponsored.	Well ok Iran and Saudi Arabia are rivals and politically they lash each other but if Iran asked for investigations of the incident and criticized Saudi govt officially it doesn't mean every negative news comes from Iran. Iran does not have that much influence on social media, they are still a long way to go in IT advancements because of sanctions by US.

I think even if some of the people I described above may be correct in their opinions there is no need to be one sided as there always are multiple factors involved in incidents of such a big impact. In such situations people want information, they listen to everything but they believe only on things that they like. If something is not according to their opinion they think this is false information and they start floating conspiracy theories then.

To conclude first I would say only if we become a little bit reasonable and try seeing things without our biased lenses things would be better.

Second and most important thing is sense of responsibility. I strongly believe that this could have been handled very easily if Saudi govt could play are leader's role in whatever happened. No matter who is responsible, instead of finger pointing they could have issued a statement saying that "Hazarat Umer (R.A) said if a dog dies at the bank of River Farat it's my responsibility, similarly we as rulers of Hijaz own this tragedy, we apologize and promise to make better arrangements next time". Don't you think this could have solved the problem?