Saudi officials kill journalist, what's the response going to be?

[printcraft]

10 Questions To Answer About Khashoggi Before Buying The Narrative

7. How Did a Man with Extensive Ties to Intelligence Services as Well as Extremist Groups Get a Green Card?

Khashoggi writes a column for the Washington Post and worked at a number of Saudi media organizations, print and broadcast. Broadly speaking, he is a journalist, as the U.S. press is describing him—with the caveat that most Arab journalists primarily serve the political masters who pay and protect them, and often represent the interests of intelligence services.
Khashoggi was an adviser to former Saudi intelligence chief Turki al-Faisal when he was ambassador to London, then Washington. Khashoggi reportedly joined the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1970s and continues to advocate for political Islam. He called the late Saudi dissident Osama Bin Laden a friend and mourned his death. It appears that Khasshogi may have been something like Riyadh’s back channel to al-Qaeda, at least prior to 9/11.

No great loss. Sounds more like a blessing.



So how did a former Saudi official with ties to intelligence services, connections to the Muslim Brotherhood, and a long history with a terrorist responsible for nearly 3,000 deaths on U.S. soil obtain permanent resident status?
Khashoggi must have important American patrons, because even though he reportedly moved to the United States in 2017, he already had a green card. According to the Washington Post’s David Ignatius: “Friends helped Khashoggi obtain a visa that allowed him to stay in the United States as a permanent resident.” So who vouched for him and why?

Traitors in the U.S. Government vvvvvvvvvvv

It might be useful to put these questions to former CIA director John Brennan. He was station chief in Riyadh from 1996-1999, when Khashoggi’s patron Turki al-Faisal was head of Saudi’s general intelligence directorate.

That turd gets around don't he?

..

 

[KG1]

I think the Saudis are taking advantage of the fact that the US ties are a complicated issue and the US will have difficulty separating shared strategic interests from responding to how the Saudis conduct their own internal affairs. I thing the Royals thought they would have enough leverage in that regard to be able to get away with what they want to.

Lindsey Graham is pissed at the Saudis. So much so that he wants to "sanction the hell out of them" He says they not only putt him but also President Trump in a difficult position.They have both been advocating for a continued strong partnership in regional strategic conflict goals and economic ties concerning military equipment contracts and OPEC related issues.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I do understand and I do sympathize with the reasons you list. We only know what we're told and I guess we should take it as the truth.
I do believe the Crusades ended a long time ago but not much has changed in that vast amount of time. 1099 I read?

You can read his articles yourself. You don't need to take anyone's word on at least that part. As far as nothing changing since the Crusades, in what aspect? I see very few similarities, personally.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

..

You should dig a bit deeper. Yes, he was friends with Osama Bin Laden. Did you read my post about it already? Friends with, but condemned his actions and tried to steer him toward political solutions vs violent solutions. Yes, he was an advocate of "political Islam". Have you read why? Because he believed it was the best chance for democracy in the Middle East that would then mature. This is akin to "he supported slavery" as a condemnation of our earlier leaders for democracy.

I know, we need some narrative to save face when we shrug and let the House of Saud continue with actions we condemned Saddam Hussein for.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[KLB]

You should dig a bit deeper. Yes, he was friends with Osama Bin Laden. Did you read my post about it already? Friends with, but condemned his actions and tried to steer him toward political solutions vs violent solutions. Yes, he was an advocate of "political Islam". Have you read why? Because he believed it was the best chance for democracy in the Middle East that would then mature. This is akin to "he supported slavery" as a condemnation of our earlier leaders for democracy.

I know, we need some narrative to save face when we shrug and let the House of Saud continue with actions we condemned Saddam Hussein for.

It is sad that this happened, but I wouldn't say we let anything happen. It isn't like there were US troops standing there watching as they kidnapped the poor guy.

The US government may not have condemned it, but there was nothing they could have done to prevent it.

Maybe his death will help the cause he championed. It has brought the whole thing much more coverage than anything he was able to do in life.

 

[Ziggidy]

Maybe the Saudi's like Obama and Hillary better. Maybe they see this as an opportunity to put Trump in "another" situation where the left can punish him.

It's all BS to me. It's a story line being played on a world theater stage. The acting does not always match the words. The butler doesn't always do it.

Trump will be judged on this even though it's been going on for years. Waiting for the next scene...

 

[Thor]

lese majeste is considered criminal or treasonous behavior in many cultures. Having a green card or even being a US citizen will not protect you when you are in those countries.

Government abuse including private and public executions is far more common than the lame stream media would have us believe when talking about this case.

The Turkish film release raises many questions, if their electronic penetration of the Saudi Consulate General is as deep as they claim I would expect diplomatic relations between the two countries to be immediately severed. As it is it brings into question the reality of the video.

The furor over this particular case as opposed to others may only be because this particular one wrote for the WaPo. Also, so many of the past maladministration, and their enablers in the press, loved them some Iran.

 

[printcraft]

.......
I know, we need some narrative to save face when we shrug and let the House of Saud continue with actions we condemned Saddam Hussein for.

house of saud can FATWO. They are enabling the hate and violence.

 

[Fargo]

I know, we need some narrative to save face when we shrug and let the House of Saud continue with actions we condemned Saddam Hussein for.

Dude sounds like he was a basically good guy, but that will easily get you the title of Traitor with the Saudis.

When one considers that we only went after Saddam after the Kuwaitis “convinced” us that he was a threat to the Saudi’s, the whole thing is pretty nonsensical from the perspective of principle.

Plus, since we have been openly assassinating our own citizens living in foreign countries, without even the pretense of a trial, I’m really skeptical that the US is going to get too involved in this one. (Never mind our rendition program.)

The Saudi‘s provide a measure of stability to that region, I don’t think there is anything the US prioritizes more than that in regard to the Middle East. Our interactions in the Middle East have seldom to never been principle driven.

 

[Ziggidy]

I think we should get to the bottom on Benghazi before we get into this one.......I can also think of a few others we need to solve before we go further.

 

[HoughMade]

Yeah....I have nothing against this man and my thoughts are not influenced by who he may have counted among friends or acquaintances over the years...

...but I'm having a hard time getting worked up about this. Foreign national, even if a U.S. resident, killed overseas. Obviously, it's important to his family, but why should it be important to U.S. foreign policy? I don't really get it.

 

[T.Lex]

Yeah....I have nothing against this man and my thoughts are not influenced by who he may have counted among friends or acquaintances over the years...

...but I'm having a hard time getting worked up about this. Foreign national, even if a U.S. resident, killed overseas. Obviously, it's important to his family, but why should it be important to U.S. foreign policy? I don't really get it.

There are a couple different answers to this.

At the 50,000 ft. level, this is a disruption to the international status quo. Or at least the public one.

The Saudis lured an opposing journalist to their consulate in Turkey. This guy was not a terrorist. This was not a military target. This was an advocate of uncomfortable positions. Basically a personal vendetta.

Is it now open season for this sort of thing? That would be bad. If Saudi Arabia's allies don't discourage it, in some way, there is a good argument that we are willing to allow it. That, then, opens up our own personnel for this kind of skullduggery.

Importantly, it is a test of our often-lacking principles. Those pesky things that are supposed to apply regardless of awkward circumstances.

To Fargo's point, some of our actions have been but a half-step removed from this kind of thing.

 

[Trigger Time]

Internal matter of another country, **** happens everywhere in the world, why should we be involved?

pretty much how I feel about it. These people are animals. Let them kill each other.
Was the dude an American citizen? No? Then stay out of it.
Publicly denounce the behavior and move on. In my opinion we have the Democrats doing much worse here in our own country for the last presidency and now and nothing is being done about it because our justice department is a joke
Also the Democrats wanna give terrorists access to this country because they dont care. Freedom of terrorism er I mean religion, doesnt mean open season on the security on the US.

 

[2A-Hoosier23]

If this goes largely ignored by the international community, which it will, it only goes to show that the international community considers Saudi oil and resources more valuable than any humanitarian crises. Shocking, right?
The Saudi's war crimes that are ONGOING against Yemen which are causing the world's worst humanitarian crisis (Yes, objectively worse than Syria and anywhere else you can name currently) will continue to be ignored. Not that this is surprising. It's expected. I mean, really... is anyone shocked?
To be completely honest, as an Arab AND as an aspiring journalist, I care much less about the fact that Khashoggi was murdered than how much I care about the entire Yemeni population being subjugated to abhorrent war crimes as the international community funds it by continuing to buy Saudi oil. If Khashoggi's murder brings about any change in the way people treat Saudi war crimes then it will have made a greater difference than a single word he ever wrote.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[HoughMade]

There are a couple different answers to this.

At the 50,000 ft. level, this is a disruption to the international status quo. Or at least the public one.

The Saudis lured an opposing journalist to their consulate in Turkey. This guy was not a terrorist. This was not a military target. This was an advocate of uncomfortable positions. Basically a personal vendetta.

Is it now open season for this sort of thing? That would be bad. If Saudi Arabia's allies don't discourage it, in some way, there is a good argument that we are willing to allow it. That, then, opens up our own personnel for this kind of skullduggery.

Importantly, it is a test of our often-lacking principles. Those pesky things that are supposed to apply regardless of awkward circumstances.

To Fargo's point, some of our actions have been but a half-step removed from this kind of thing.

So, as to this case, we are literally supposed to be the world's policemen?

So what's a proper response?

 

[T.Lex]

So, as to this case, we are literally supposed to be the world's policemen?

So what's a proper response?

Well, I don't think anyone is suggesting we should arrest the Saudis involved and put them on trial. So, no, not "literally." (Although, in common parlance nowadays, "literally" doesn't always mean what I think it means, at least according to my kids.)

IMHO, the proper response is closer to what Trump started with. This is unacceptable. Call the Saudi ambassador to the US to the White House and say that we expect a full reckoning from the Saudis as to who those people were, what they did, and who assisted with the logistics to get them there.

If the truth is anything close to what it appears to be, then their official government is 180 degrees opposed to our principles. Remind them that, when that happens, the US has been known to seek "regime change."

Now, we've been friends for a long time. And we recognize there have been significant efforts to improve freedom and accountability in Saudi Arabia. We full expect those reforms to continue and will be watching closely to make sure that they do. In fact, we're preparing an aid package directly for those organizations that we believe best reflect our ideals of social liberty and democracy.

Yeah, I think something like that would be a nice response, maybe even "proper."

 

[Dead Duck]

So, as to this case, we are literally supposed to be the world's policemen?

So what's a proper response?

Team America World Police

**** YEAH!

 

[HoughMade]

By "literally" the world's policemen I meant taking on the responsibility to investigate this incident and seek redress for it.

...that's actual "literally", not 2018 "literally".

So what we're looking for is: "Yeah, we don't like that. Don't do that"?

I am hardly an isolationist, but I guess my "meddling" overseas is usually limited to things like national security and interests, genocide, humanitarian disaster....not isolated incidents of bad behavior. I guess is we're talking about a response in words rather than anything of real substance, sure, let's try to grab some moral high ground. Why not?

 

[Sylvain]

By "literally" the world's policemen I meant taking on the responsibility to investigate this incident and seek redress for it.

...that's actual "literally", not 2018 "literally".

So what we're looking for is: "Yeah, we don't like that. Don't do that"?

I am hardly an isolationist, but I guess my "meddling" overseas is usually limited to things like national security and interests, genocide, humanitarian disaster....

The FBI might have been sent to Turkey to investigate ... or not.

[video=youtube;J2EJNvjkz4s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2EJNvjkz4s[/video]