Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 10, 2018

U.S. Intelligence Had A 'Duty To Warn' Khashoggi - Why Didn't That Happen?

It is beyond doubt that the Saudi government abducted, or killed, the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. But what did the Trump administration knew about the threat to Khashoggi? Did U.S. intelligence services warn him as their regulations require? Was such a warning blocked by the White House? And what will Trump do about the case?

The Turkish government published pictures of 15 men who had come from Saudi Arabia and were in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul shortly before Khashoggi visited it to get his divorce papers. They moved Khashoggi to the residence of the consul and later that day flew back on the same two private Saudi jets that had brought them to Istanbul.

At least 8 of the 15 men have been identified as Saudi royal military. At least three are bodyguards of the Saudi clown prince Mohammad bin Salman. It is thereby obvious that the clown prince himself gave the order for the operation. One of the 15 is Dr. Salah Muhammed Al-Tubaigy, the head of forensic evidence at the Saudi General Security Department.

Anonymous Turkish sources assert that Khashoggi was killed, his body cut to pieces and taken away. They even claim that there is video of the murder:

The official described a quick and complex operation in which Mr. Khashoggi was killed within two hours of his arrival at the consulate by a team of Saudi agents, who dismembered his body with a bone saw they brought for the purpose.

“It is like ‘Pulp Fiction,’” the official said.
...
Mr. Erdogan was informed of the conclusions on Saturday, according to several people with knowledge of the briefings, and he has since dispatched officials to anonymously tell myriad news outlets, including The New York Times, that Mr. Khashoggi was killed inside the Saudi Consulate.
...
Another person briefed on the matter, speaking on condition of anonymity to disclose confidential details, told The Times on Saturday that Turkish intelligence had obtained a video of the killing, made by the Saudis to prove that it had occurred.

A commentator close to Mr. Erdogan’s government said so publicly on Tuesday.

“There is a video of the moment of him being killed,” Kemal Ozturk, a columnist in a pro-government newspaper and the former head of a semiofficial news agency, said in an interview on a pro-government television network, citing unnamed security officials.

That Erdogan pushes this 'Pulp Fiction' story is not astonishing. His troops protect Qatar from a Saudi attack and Qatar props up the Turkish economy with multi-billion investments. There is also the old Ottoman versus Arab fight over leadership in the Middle East.

But why would the Saudis kill Khashoggi? Why not drug him, haul him to the airport and fly him back to Riyadh as a "medial emergency"? Why not put him into a big box and transported him as privileged diplomatic baggage? If the Saudis intended to kill Khashoggi they could have hire some guy to shoot him in the streets. It would have been a much simpler operation and way less suspicious.

Killing Khashoggi in the official Consulate makes no sense - unless MbS wanted this current public outrage. Is it a warning to all his enemies? Is it to demonstrate that he can get away with anything?

The Washington Post reports that the U.S. government knew that Khashoggi was in danger:

Before Khashoggi’s disappearance, U.S. intelligence intercepted communications of Saudi officials discussing a plan to capture him, according to a person familiar with the information. The Saudis wanted to lure Khashoggi back to Saudi Arabia and lay hands on him there, this person said. It was not clear whether the Saudis intended to arrest and interrogate Khashoggi or to kill him, or if the United States warned Khashoggi that he was a target, this person said.

If U.S. intelligence knew of the danger to Khashoggi Intelligence Community Directive 191 - Duty to Warn (pdf) would have applied:

An IC element that collects or acquires credible and specific information indicating an impending threat of intentional killing, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping directed at a person or group of people (hereafter referred to as intended victim) shall have a duty to warn the intended victim or those responsible for protecting the intended victim, as appropriate. This includes threats where the target is an institution, place of business, structure, or location. The term intended victim includes both U.S. persons, as defined in EO 12333, Section 3.5(k), and non-U.S. persons.

Read plainly ICD 191 provides that the U.S. intelligence services had to warn Khashoggi of the Saudi threat. Did they do so or not?

There are a few exceptions in the directive that allow to withhold a warning. If the information came through a friendly intelligence service the protection of sources and methods has priority over a warning (point E.3.e. in the regulation.)

If U.S. intelligence acquired the information through the British GHCQ, a warning to Khashoggi might have revealed that the GHCQ has bugged all those Cisco telephones the Saudi royals so proudly display. But there was little danger that a warning to Khashoggi would have revealed anything. The Saudis will surely expect that the U.S., British and other intelligence services listen to even their private communications.

There may have been other reasons to withhold a warning. Trump's son in law and senior aid Jared Kushner has good personal relations with MbS. In March The Intercept reported that, according to MbS, Kushner revealed U.S. intelligence about MbS' enemies to him.

[A]fter the meeting, Crown Prince Mohammed told confidants that Kushner had discussed the names of Saudis disloyal to the crown prince, according to three sources who have been in contact with members of the Saudi and Emirati royal families since the crackdown.

The meeting took place in late October 2017. About a week later the Saudi clown prince incarcerated hundreds of his rich relatives and other Saudi billionaires in the Ritz hotel in Riyadh and pressured them to hand over their assets.

Kushner had obviously no qualms to rat out the people who privately criticized MbS.

(In February 2018 Kushner lost access to top level security briefings because his interim security clearance was revoked. This may have been the deep state's revenge for his indiscretion. Kushner finally passed full clearance and regained access in May.)

Not to warn Khashoggi might well have been a White House decision. It is the Trump's administration policy to not challenge its allies over human rights issues. The State Department even produced a memo explaining that human rights criticism only applies to U.S. 'enemies'.

If the Saudis want to nab Khashoggi, the White House might have thought, why no let them have him?

Trump's foreign policy depends on good relations with the Saudis:

The Trump administration, from the president on down, is heavily invested in the Saudi relationship. Robin Wright, a scholar at the Wilson Center think tank and close friend of the missing writer, said that’s unlikely to change. The administration’s Middle East agenda heavily depends on the Saudis, including efforts to counter Iranian influence in the region, fight extremism and build support for its yet-to-be-released plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

The Turkish and Qatari rulers and their media do their best to propagandize the case and to rage against the Saudi regime. The Washington Post, for which Khashoggi wrote, will surely not let go of the issue. Other 'western' media and journalists are also enraged about the case. Khashoggi was one of them, aristocratic elite as they see themselves, who do not deserve such fate.

Can MbS and the Trump regime really sit back and not reply to demands of serious consequences over the case?

That may well be. After all, no one is challenging the U.S.-Saudis alliance over the daily murder it commits in Yemen and elsewhere. If the Saudis kidnapped Khashoggi, and provide evidence that he is alive, the media outrage will soon die down. If the Turkish government publishes the video of the murder that it claims to have, it will only take a bit longer until other news moves the case from the front pages.

There is no real reason for MbS, or Trump, to care.

Posted by b on October 10, 2018 at 17:02 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

87

Cheney made the Saudis Royals $Trillionaires. They said in 2000 that $25 a barrel was sufficient profit, when Food for Oil drove crude to below $15. Cheney's oil war drove crude to $147. The Saudi Royals made more than $B a DAY in pure profit. Our BFFs. And it's heading north of $100 within a fortnight. The media is demonizing KSA already. 'It's the Saudis!' the headlines will scream, when a tank of gas hits $100.

Buddha was a 'Saudi prince'. He had retainers who took care of everything. He didn't have an 8mpg pickup truck and a 60-mile daily commute either. Cheney is your 'Buddha' today. Cheney preaches 'no hate', too. "Don't hate me because I'm rich!

3Q18 $1,000,000,000,000 tithe-tribute to Deep Purple is due in 4 days, and your savings earn less than 1/5th of inflation. Don't hate, give! Dig deep, until it hurts!

Posted by: Anton Worter | Oct 11 2018 12:57 utc | 101

Apparently, the Saudi Consul's house has an underground garage and the hit squad spent several hours there getting rid of the body or body parts. Also the Saudis rescinded their offer to allow Turkish forensic teams to investigate their premises.

They're guilty as sin and Trump could care less. He's happy with the 110 bn deal in weapons sales that are destroying Yemen. So he's going to receive the grieving fiancee like the stinking hypocrite he is while he gives the m.urdering tyrants a pass just like mob bosses do consoling the widow after getting rid of her husband.

Posted by: Circe | Oct 11 2018 13:21 utc | 102

If Saudis could kill 3000 Americans, and tens of thousand innocent Yemanies and get away with it, why would they care killing one journalist

Posted by: kooshy | Oct 11 2018 13:48 utc | 103

Trump already reacted a day after Khashoggi disappeared when he told one of his stadiums filled with MAGA hats that Saudi Arabia wouldn't survive two weeks without US support. The clown prince has since replied with some gibberish about that they have paid properly for all the weapons, but he must have gotten the message.

Posted by: CE | Oct 11 2018 14:30 utc | 104

@10 - awesome rant! :-)

Posted by: Deschutes | Oct 11 2018 15:06 utc | 105

I have no idea what happened and no interest in speculating. But seems to me that Trump, his kids, his son-in-law & various minions, fellow travelers, and "friends" are in deep with the Saudi's. They don't want to rock the boat, so they ain't gonna do one damn thing about this. It'll eventually be swept under the carpet, and the USA "media" (such as it is) will commence radio silence.

As far as Trump "inheriting" the gruesome Yemen slaughter from Obama: that's pretty much factual. However, I duly note that Trump has done bupkiss about it. And just the other day, we passed the 17th "birthday" of the Afghanistan War Forever (which is a frickin goldmine for some), and I duly note that Trump - who brayed out a lotta crap about ending these expensive WarsInc - has done bupkiss other than to dump some big effen bomb on it about 18 months ago (to prove that his 'srhoom dick is bigger than what Stormy Daniels sez, apparently).

So it's tedious to whine about Obama whilst praising Trump. They ALL do what the MIC wants bc they ALL get rich from it, themselves. Whyever would Trump seek to end War,Inc when he's benefiting handsomely from it? He won't. You can bank on that.

And finally, I doubt that Trump gives a stuff about Kashouggi. Why would he? If anything, Trump is probably happy this happened, as it's a warning to uppity journo's here in the Yew Ess Aay, land-o-the so-called "free," and home-o-the purported "brave."

Posted by: RUKidding | Oct 11 2018 15:28 utc | 106

Debsisdead @85--

Your story sounds similar to the one related in Apocalypse Now. I fail to see how saying Good Riddance is the same as becoming as morally repugnant as the headchopping fake-Islamists and their supporters. What chafes me is the reluctance of the Umma--the Muslim World--to denounce as apostates the Saudi regime and its fake-Islam "religion;" and further announce that because of their longstanding desecration of Islam, the Saudis no longer have the right to be the protectors of Mecca and Medina--that the Saudis are illegitimate in the eyes of the Arab and Muslim worlds. IMO, that's the bomb needing to be dropped on MbS and his crew. Just as Zionism is the #1 threat to Judaism, Wahhabism is the #1 threat to Islam. Southwest Asia will never know peace until those two false ideologies are rooted out and destroyed along with their enablers.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 11 2018 15:35 utc | 107

reply to:
"..Because as soon as both are out - in a way or another -, his life might well be forfeit. Pissed off and still billionaire Saudi royals won't forget."
Posted by: Clueless Joe | Oct 10, 2018 2:53:17 PM | 19
He has caused the torture and death of quite a number of members of the Saudi Royal Family. He is Dead Man Walking as of the moment anyone knew, Trump or no Trump presidency. He is the biggest fool I have ever heard of frankly.

Posted by: frances | Oct 11 2018 16:00 utc | 108

An excellent piece which covers many aspects of this dark affair.

And you are right, no one even questions the Saudi Usurper over mass killing in Yemen. Or his dark work in Syria. Or his abuse of Shia Muslims in Saudi Arabia.

It does appear that we increasingly live in a world where the right kind of people can get away with murder.

To my mind, it's all just part of the damage done by American hyper-aggressive efforts to assert Washington's authority in every corner of the world.

Saudi Arabia is important because of the new relationship it has formed with America's privileged imperial colony, Israel.

After all, Israel doesn't have to account for its savage line-ups of soldiers behind fences shooting into unarmed crowds at Gaza, people who are only demonstrating for basic human rights.

These big-game hunting parties with human beings as targets make the old days of Bull Connor in Alabama look almost gentle by comparison.

Yet our press and politicians say almost nothing.

Well, not quite.

The savages are actually publicly praised for their "restraint" in an increasingly-bizarre America.

Posted by: JOHN CHUCKMAN | Oct 11 2018 16:01 utc | 109

All countries need to put their money where their mouth is AND PULL OUT OF FU.KING DAVOS IN THE DESERT!!

STOP doing business with m.urderers who are also starving close to a million children in Yemen. Sink the stinking tyrant monarchy!

Posted by: Circe | Oct 11 2018 16:06 utc | 110

Khashoggi lived in Virginia and he wrote articles for the Washington Post.

He was a propagandist and he lived in the beltway. Neighbors with John Bolton, to name one. Whose side was he on?

Was he a double agent?

Posted by: fastfreddy | Oct 11 2018 16:10 utc | 111

Profile of our "American Girl".

Heather Nauert was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

(Does anyone ever leave the CFR? You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.)

In 2010 Heather portrayed herself in three episodes of that shitshow "24".

On April 24, 2017, the U.S. State Department announced that Nauert would be the new State Department spokesperson.

Following the dismissal of Steve Goldstein on March 13, 2018, Nauert was named acting Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs.

(She's very diplomatic!)

Nauert voiced support for Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen. She also condemned "Iran’s malign influence" in Yemen.

(She loved the School Bus Attack.)

In May 2018, Nauert said in response to the Gaza border protests: "We oppose actions against Israel… at the International Criminal Court...because it doesn’t help the cause for peace."

n August 2018, Canada called for the immediate release of Saudi human rights activist Raif Badawi and his sister Samar. In response to Canada's criticism, Nauert said: "It’s up for the government of Saudi Arabia and the Canadians to work this out. Both sides need to diplomatically resolve this together. We can’t do it for them."

Nauert is married to Scott Norby, an investment banker who works at Morgan Stanley and previously held positions at National Veterinary Associates, UBS Investment Bank, Goldman Sachs and Cargill.


Posted by: fastfreddy | Oct 11 2018 16:26 utc | 112

karlof1 says:

What chafes me is the reluctance of the Umma--the Muslim World--to denounce as apostates the Saudi regime and its fake-Islam "religion;"

after oil, religious tourism is possibly SA's biggest business, and it's growing by leaps and bounds. the Fifth Pillar of Islam prescribes that the faithful get their butts to Mecca at least once in a lifetime and take a lap or two around that big black box. and, irony of ironies, i've read that they're even leveling the mountains around Mecca to make way for more hotels; and apparently it's all pretty glitzy. revenues from the pilgrim business are already in excess of 35 billion a year.

Posted by: john | Oct 11 2018 17:08 utc | 113

I doubt if Jamal Khashoggi was a "double agent". According to his columns, he was a hanger on of Waleed bin Talal Al Saud, a prince that was both maltreated and impoverished by MbS:
"The net worth of Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Al Saud, the richest person in Saudi Arabia, has tumbled by 58 percent to total $15.2 billion, Bloomberg reported Wednesday"

I would not be surprised if WbT were a part owner of WP, Saudi prices often purchased such flashy holdings. Erdogan knew what he was doing when he sided with Qatari Al-Thanis against MbS -- he also has allies among the maltreated princes.

The story is murky and I would not draw conclusions with the boldness of b. A bit of perspective: right after MbS become King's son and got a few ministerial portfolios including Defense, three important princes were kidnapped abroad, raising only a very tepid reaction. Nevertheless, official Turkish tales offer some puzzles. For example, Saudi private plane departed from Istanbul to Dubai shortly after JK disappearance -- doesn't Turkey have custom control?

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Oct 11 2018 18:46 utc | 114

"I doubt if Jamal Khashoggi was a "double agent". According to his columns, he was a hanger on of Waleed bin Talal Al Saud, a prince that was both maltreated and impoverished by MbS:
"The net worth of Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Al Saud, the richest person in Saudi Arabia, has tumbled by 58 percent to total $15.2 billion, Bloomberg reported Wednesday""
Posted by: Piotr Berman | Oct 11, 2018 2:46:49 PM | 114
Finally!! A real reason to kidnap him, money. He may have been a conduit via which Prince Alwaleed hid money from Prince Crazy, and Prince Crazy will break every bone in his body to find out. This world will never see Jamal again. The other Princes better step up their game or they will soon join him.

Posted by: frances | Oct 11 2018 20:06 utc | 115

Karlof1 @ 107

Actually, Wahabbism is not fake-Islam, it is the original, solid-gold, 100 percent Islam and none genuine without this signature!

Almost everyone in the US today who is talking about Islam – whether in support or in opposition – does not know what they are talking about. They have not read the three Islamic texts. (Yes, there are three, not just one.) So they know absolutely nothing about that over which they are squabbling so fiercely.

Muslim authorities insist that the three texts are perfect, complete, universal and eternal. No changes or varying interpretations (ijtihad) are allowed. No thoughts are allowed to be expressed if they contradict anything that is written in the Koran, the Sira or the Hadith. All of Islam is contained in those texts, and nowhere else. If it's not in the Koran, the Sira or the Hadith, then, according to Islamic authorities, it is not Islam. If it is in one of those texts, then it is compulsory.

I have read several different translations of the Koran – which has been deliberately and thoroughly scrambled, and made utterly unintelligible without the key. I have read the Sira, which among other things contains the key (in fact, it is the key). And I have done a significant amount of reading among the Hadiths.

Less than half of the content in the three Islamic texts is about religion. Nearly 70 percent of the Koran, for example, is used to spell out the violent, utterly intolerant Islamic political ideology, the most important part of which comes down to this: (my wording) “fight and kill the unbelievers, and keep on fighting and killing them until there is no one left in the world who is not a Muslim.”

Don't believe it? Try this; “Fight them (unbelievers) until there is no more discord and the religion of Allah reigns absolute, but if they submit, then only fight those who do wrong.” ( Koran 2:193) (emphasis added)

Or this; “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement.” (Koran 5:33);

Or this; “I (Allah) shall strike terror into the hearts of the kafirs (unbelievers). Strike off their heads; strike off even the tips of their fingers.” (Koran 8:12)

And this; “When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they submit and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful.” (Koran 9:5)

Just a minuscule sample of the 150 or so commands for war upon - and slaughter of -- unbelievers, contained in the Koran alone.

Or these, from the two primary collections of Hadiths;

Abu Muslim 001.0031; Muhammed: “I have been ordered to wage war against mankind until they accept that there is no god but Allah and that they believe that I am His prophet and accept all revelations spoken through me. When they do these things I will protect their lives and property unless justified by Islamic law, in which case their fate lies in Allah's hands.” (emphasis added)

Bukhari 4,52,196; Muhammed: “I have been directed to fight the Kafirs until every one of them admits, 'There is only one god, and that is Allah.' Whoever says “there is only one god and that is Allah,” his body and possessions will be protected by me except for violations of Sharia, in which case his fate is with Allah, to be punished or forgiven as He sees fit.” (emphasis added)

And if you read them all, you cannot but come away with the understanding that those jihadists who are furiously slaughtering thousands of innocent men, women and children today are, in fact, not “extremists.” They are following both the letter and the spirit of Islam – permanent, worldwide slaughter and conquest – as they have been doing for 1400 years. They are, in fact, true Muslims.

You may not want to believe any of this, so I urge you – read the texts!

But – slogging through those texts is an almost unendurably dreary task. If you wish to understand political Islam, but don't want to suffer through the reading, try this decidedly undreary, fascinating, illustrated talk by an actual expert on political Islam –

Why people are afraid:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Im0IisZ77QI
– about the political content of the Islamic texts, and about the ultra-violent nature of Islam's history and current practice, by a quantum physicist (PhD) and university professor who spent 40 years researching political Islam.

And this lecture, by the same person, which covers much of the same ground but in a supplementary, rather than an identical way:
Why we are afraid:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y

Note the constant use of the descriptor “political” here. The lecturer referenced above has nothing to say about the religious content of the Islamic texts, and I myself am unalterably opposed to superstition in all its forms, so cannot prefer any religion whatever. Only the Islamic political ideology is being addressed. Likewise, Muslims themselves are not criticised nor even discussed. Only the doctrine – the content of the three Islamic texts imposed on Muslims, and which is attempting to be imposed upon the entire world, is examined and explained in detail.

Posted by: AntiSpin | Oct 11 2018 20:22 utc | 116

b, can you please avoid phrases like "It is beyond doubt"? Especially when it does not precede several links to a detailed examination of the case in question.

Posted by: Marian Devers | Oct 12 2018 13:25 utc | 117

AntiSpin
What you say shows you are ill informed. Just one example, Shias don't accept Abu Muslim or Bukhari as credible sources.

Posted by: Manar | Oct 12 2018 15:57 utc | 118

Shia constitute only about ten percent of Muslims worldwide, and the Sunni are hell-bent on killing every last one of them.

Posted by: AntiSpin | Oct 12 2018 16:49 utc | 119

khashoggi was often on tv. why?
what sorts of scoundrels get this privilege?
he supported the invaders of syria.
who cares if he is chopped or will suddenly appear?

how many reporters and students are disappeared by israel?
and they never reappear. israel likes to keep bodies.

Posted by: bondo | Oct 12 2018 17:40 utc | 120

AntiSpin @116--

Thanks for your reply! The history related to Islam's rise represents a gaping hole in my historical knowledge which I'm currently working to rectify, but I've just started and have a ways to go. I've yet to read any version of the Qu'ran, but I've already assumed there to be major distortions in translation just as with the Bible--I'm actually more acquainted with Sufi Mysticism and Shia thought than Suniism. My perception of Wahhabism is due to The Battle for Saudi Arabia by the Angry Arab, As'ad AbuKhalil. I recently adopted calling it Fake-Islam instead of Perverted Islam; but as you suggest, it's likely neither is correct.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 12 2018 17:45 utc | 121

@ Karlofi 121

I'm no expert, but I've read that Wahabism arose in the mid-18th century as a reform movement against both corrupt "state" Islam and against Sufi mysticism. It also sparked rebellions against Turkish rule. I've seen it compared to the Protestant reformers. Sounds a lot like Christianity in general (and a lot of other things) - something which might be excellent as a reform/rebellion movement, not good in power.

They also opposed the cult of the Prophet's tomb at Medina. Oh well, with so many pilgrim dollars at stake, I guess the Saudi regime overlooks that part.

Posted by: Russ | Oct 12 2018 19:54 utc | 122

Russ @122--

Thanks for your reply! Just clicked the link under your moniker to reveal the fascinating blog tied to it. Yours? Lots of good work from the little I skimmed. Have your read Reg Morrison's Spirit in the Gene? Margulis wrote its introduction and felt Reg was on the right track.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 12 2018 21:18 utc | 123

Karlofi 123

Yes, that's my site. Thanks for the good words. I'm not familiar with Morrison's book but just wrote it down to go check out. Thanks for the recommendation. Margulis' and Dorion Sagan's Microcosmos has been a profound book to me.

Since you're interested in US constitutional stuff, here's the page which assembles many of the pieces I used to write on that, if you're interested.

https://attempter.wordpress.com/series-on-federalism-and-the-constitution/

Posted by: Russ | Oct 12 2018 21:46 utc | 124

Russ @124--

Thanks! You've done lots of work over the years. I see you did some work on movement building and such. I'm interested in all sorts of stuff, although the entire spectrum of history and its attributes are my field of study, which includes the History of Life. I've read most of Lynn and son Dorian's works. Her microbiological work was revolutionary and a bit was snuck into The Phantom Menace Star Wars episode--the miticlorians--that flew over everybody's heads--I had just finished Microcosmos before it was released. I hope you find a copy of Spirit, read it and let me know what you thought as I haven't met very many people capable of digesting its content.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 12 2018 22:04 utc | 125

Trump was interviewed for 60 Minutes this Sunday and he's now saying that if it's proven to be the Saudis there will be severe punishment but arms deal stays. He's full of shet, and the Turks better release the video and audio proof. The Turks from day one were claiming Khashoggi was dismembered. Why would they specifically claim that unless they had some kind of proof? If the Turks don't show proof now, they'll lose all credibility with allies, with NATO members and the Saudis will gain power to continue acting with impunity. The Turks are holding the cards and blowing it.

Posted by: Circe | Oct 13 2018 14:52 utc | 126

Has anybody actually seen this video?

Posted by: Shahna | Oct 14 2018 14:57 utc | 127

Murdered and mutilated by his own demons,The Media martyrs/canonise WMD champion Khashoggi in preference to the souls of Falujah.... Thank God/Allah he Khashoggi wasn't successful in Lebanon.

Posted by: Ghifari AL Mukhtar | Oct 15 2018 4:54 utc | 128

Kashoggi is no dissident! If anything is in the pay of the CIA. Just look at his history. See for example:


Khashoggi was a loyal member of the Saudi propaganda apparatus. There is no journalism allowed in the kingdom: there have been courageous Saudi women and men who attempted to crack the wall of rigid political conformity and were persecuted and punished for their views. Khashoggi was not among them.

Some writers suffered while Khashoggi was their boss at Al-Watan newspaper. Khashoggi—contrary to what is being written—was never punished by the regime, except lightly two years ago, when Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) banned him from tweeting and writing for Al-Hayat, the London-based, pan-Arab newspaper owned by Saudi Prince Khalid bin Sultan. Strange Disappearance - Consortium News

And:

Jamal Khashoggi is a controversial figure, a representative of the shadowy world of collaboration that sometimes exists between journalism and the intelligence agencies, in this case involving the intelligence agencies of Saudi Arabia and the United States. It has been virtually confirmed by official circles within the Al Saud family that Khashoggi was an agent in the employ of Riyadh and the CIA during the Soviet presence in Afghanistan.

From 1991 to 1999, he continued to serve in several countries like Afghanistan, Algeria, Sudan, Kuwait and other parts of the Middle East, often maintaining an ambiguous role in the service of his friend Turki Faisal Al-Saud, the future Saudi ambassador to Washington and London and later supreme head of Saudi intelligence for 24 years.

Khashoggi was named editor of the leading English-language magazine in Saudi Arabia, Arab News, from 1999 to 2003. In late 2003, he transferred to Al Watan, one of the most liberal, Western and pro-reform newspapers in the country. His job lasted only 52 days, with him being removed strongly criticizing the Wahhabi clerical extremist Ibn Taymiyyah. Khashoggi had turned into a critical voice of the Saudi regime following the internal struggles between King Abdullah and Turki Faisal Al-Saud.

One of the main criticisms of Khashoggi coming from factions loyal to Abdullah was that he had recruited and paid several journalists on behalf of the CIA during his time as an editor. Such an accusation would conform with the widespread practice of the CIA seeking to influence the media, and therefore public opinion, and to put pressure on leaders failing to do what Washington wants. Global Research

And anyway, is he really dead? I might add, who cares and why the fuss? Saudi Arabia has murdering journalists for decades!

Posted by: William Bowles | Oct 15 2018 16:03 utc | 129

Alternatively, could enemies of the clown prince, within and without the kingdom have set him up for a fall? He has, after all, put a dent in the apparent invincibility of the Saudi Arabian propaganda machine with his invasion of Yemen (which is being increasingly difficult to justify what with slaughtering a busload of children in full view.

Just another theory

Posted by: William Bowles | Oct 15 2018 16:15 utc | 130

And, there's also the 9/11 connection:

Jamal Khashoggi was the nephew Adnan Khashoggi (1935-2017). The latter was an arms-trafficker that played a fundamental role in the Iran-Contras case and was considered the richest man in the world at the beginning of the eighties. Jamal himself was the protégé of the former leader of the Saudi Secret Services, Prince Turki ben Faical, who went on to be the King’s Ambassador in London. -- VoltaireNet

And:

For nearly 23 years, from 1977 to 2001, Prince Turki was the director of the Mukhabarat, the Saudi state intelligence apparatus. He was instrumental in Saudi, American and British organization of the mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan to combat Soviet forces. Those militants in Afghanistan later evolved into the al Qaeda terror network, which has served as a cat’s paw in various US proxy wars across the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia, including Russia’s backyard in the Caucasus.

Ten days before the 9/11 terror attacks on New York City, in which some 3,000 Americans died, Prince Turki retired from his post as head of Saudi intelligence. It was an abrupt departure, well before his tenure was due to expire.

There has previously been speculation in US media that this senior Saudi figure knew in advance that something major was going down on 9/11. At least 15 of the 19 Arabs who allegedly hijacked three commercial airplanes that day were Saudi nationals.

Prince Turki has subsequently been named in a 2002 lawsuit mounted by families of 9/11 victims. There is little suggestion he was wittingly involved in organizing the terror plot. Later public comments indicated that Prince Turki was horrified by the atrocity. But the question is: did he know of the impending incident, and did he alert US intelligence, which then did not take appropriate action to prevent it?

Jamal Khashoggi had long served as a trusted media advisor to Prince Turki, before the latter resigned from public office in 2007. Following 9/11, Turki was the Saudi ambassador to both the US and Britain.

A tentative idea here is that Khashoggi, in his close dealings with Prince Turki over the years, may have gleaned highly sensitive inside information on what actually happened on 9/11. Were the Arab hijackers mere patsies used by the American CIA to facilitate an event which has since been used by American military planners to launch a global “war on terror” as a cover for illegal wars overseas? There is a huge body of evidence that the 9/11 attacks were indeed a “false flag” event orchestrated by the US deep state as a pretext for its imperialist rampages. -- SCF

Posted by: William Bowles | Oct 15 2018 18:15 utc | 131

And so now it's an "interrogation gone wrong"

This from RT:

CNN claims Saudi government to admit journalist killed in ‘interrogation gone wrong'

/../

According to CNN, however, a still-unpublished government report will blame Khashoggi’s death on an attempted abduction and botched questioning, “carried out without clearance and transparency” and say that those involved will be held responsible. This is based on two anonymous sources that reportedly spoke to CNN’s correspondents, and has not been independently confirmed.

/../

The New York Times cited an anonymous source “familiar with Saudi plans,” who said that Riyadh was preparing a “narrative” that an intelligence official was “tragically incompetent” in carrying out the order for Khashoggi’s interrogation and rendition to Saudi Arabia. The story is intended to deflect the blame from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the Times said. -- RT

Posted by: William Bowles | Oct 15 2018 20:24 utc | 132

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.