Saudis Confirm Khashoggi's Death

originally posted by: TexasTruth

originally posted by: MteWamp
I just can't, for the life of me, find it in my heart to trust the Saudis, y'know?

Maybe they are considered allies, but something is just "off" about them.

This whole Khashoggi mess stinks to high Heaven, as well.

Maybe it’s the turban and dresses from medivial times they still wear. Or the fact they are on the UN board of human rights, while they still cut off hands and behead people? Or the treatment of women? Yea, not a friendly bunch to associate with. The only things not from the Stone Age there are military weapons and fancy buildings.

Ding! Ding!
I think you nailed it!

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Of course their bribing people, including probably Trump and Kushner and half of Washington on both sides.

They broke the rules you don’t do that like that you do it in the dark with plausible deniability, these barbarians have no sense of how to do delicate dirty stuff.

They should have gone with something more credible like "slipped on a banana peel", "piano fell on head" or "fell backward onto some salad forks" or something like that.

At the very least, I bet nobody on the Saudi Rapid-Response Divorce Counseling Team is teasing Salah al-Tubaigy anymore about always carrying a bone saw around with him. Surprisingly handy, those bone saws.

Because hey, if somebody should happen to accidentally die during divorce counseling, what else are you going to do?

You might as well chop him up.

a reply to: theantediluvian

As Khashoggi crisis grows, Saudi king asserts authority, checks son's power: sources

DUBAI (Reuters) - So grave is the fallout from the disappearance of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi that King Salman has felt compelled to intervene, five sources with links to the Saudi royal family said.

Last Thursday, Oct. 11, the king dispatched his most trusted aide, Prince Khaled al-Faisal, governor of Mecca, to Istanbul to try to defuse the crisis.

World leaders were demanding an explanation and concern was growing in parts of the royal court that the king’s son Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, to whom he has delegated vast powers, was struggling to contain the fallout, the sources said.

During Prince Khaled’s visit, Turkey and Saudi Arabia agreed to form a joint working group to investigate Khashoggi’s disappearance. The king subsequently ordered the Saudi public prosecutor to open an inquiry based on its findings.

“The selection of Khaled, a senior royal with high status, is telling as he is the king’s personal adviser, his right hand man and has had very strong ties and a friendship with (Turkish President) Erdogan,” said a Saudi source with links to government circles.

click link for full article...

A man walks in to a room full of Killers I persume he may of tried to put up a bit of a fight back. Saudi story tries to make out the guy was Jason Bourne.

What you don't think a newspaper reporter could be lethal? Have you ever gotten a paper cut they really hurt.

Why is it any of the US's business? If Saudi Arabia decide that an enemy of their state needs to be executed, it might be wrong, but why is it any different than the US murdering people they deem to be terrorists?

Didn't the Obama administration go to court to defend their ability to execute a US Citizen without due process?

Lawyers for the Obama administration, arguing for their ability to kill an American citizen without trial in Yemen, contended that the protection of US citizenship was effectively removed by a key congressional act that blessed a global war against al-Qaida.
Known as the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF), the broad and controversial 2001 law played a major role in the legal decision to kill Anwar al-Awlaki, the former al-Qaida propagandist and US citizen, in 2011, according to a redacted memorandum made public on Monday.
"We believe that the AUMF's authority to use lethal force abroad also may apply in appropriate circumstances to a United States citizen who is part of the forces of an enemy authorization within the scope of the force authorization," reads the Justice Department memorandum, written for attorney general Eric Holder on 16 July 2010 and ostensibly intended strictly for Awlaki's case.

How is this different?

This is none of the US's business and they have a real nerve crying foul on things the US govt. does themselves.

...and Trumps think this is a credible version of events...
Tell me how many Trump supporters agree that this is a credible version ?

Me personally think the Saudi version is a utter lie! To go along with this
for hte sake of money and business.. is a step over the edge for America.

Might as well be Russia. At least Putin is what he is.

originally posted by: rigel4
...and Trumps think this is a credible version of events...
Tell me how many Trump supporters agree that this is a credible version ?

Me personally think the Saudi version is a utter lie! To go along with this
for hte sake of money and business.. is a step over the edge for America.

Might as well be Russia. At least Putin is what he is.

When the US stops assassinating people, including it's own citizens, they can take the moral high ground. Until then, I'd say it's time for the US to stfu.

Trump thinks the Saudi explanation is credible.


I guess it's credible if you ignore all the evidence , he says it will get solved which I guess is code for swept under the carpet.

a reply to: gortex

What is not credible about a Saudi general ordering an assassination?
Let me guess, the only 'credible' explanation that the Prince ordered it on behalf Trump.

a reply to: UKTruth

Let me guess, the only 'credible' explanation that the Prince ordered it on behalf Trump.

I think it more likely the Prince ordered it on behalf of himself because he thought he could get away with it in this Trumpian new world disorder... he's probably right.

a reply to: gortex

Oh, is this as opposed to thinking (correctly) that they could let their citizens fly a plane into the world trade centre and kill thousands of American citizens? I guess they thought Trump would be ok with that too, so took no steps to stop known extremists and allowed govt run charities to fund them.

Regardless, please explain why it is not credible that the general ordered the assassination. That is what you claimed.

a reply to: gortex

Trumps a Moron.... (expletive monkey noises much)

a reply to: UKTruth

Regardless, please explain why it is not credible that the general ordered the assassination. That is what you claimed.

Because Saudi is an absolute Monarchy , nobody jumps unless they're told to jump and how high they are to jump because to do so risks losing their heads.

Mr Khashoggi was a former friend of the family who became a thorn in its side , M.B.S chose to remove that thorn.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: UKTruth

Regardless, please explain why it is not credible that the general ordered the assassination. That is what you claimed.

Because Saudi is an absolute Monarchy , nobody jumps unless they're told to jump and how high they are to jump because to do so risks losing their heads.

Mr Khashoggi was a former friend of the family who became a thorn in its side , M.B.S chose to remove that thorn.

Nonsense. The Saudi Royal Family is constantly jailing (or worse) people in their own govt. or in industry who fail to follow orders. There is no absolute power anywhere that controls everything that happens. Aside from which it is impossible for one person to make decisions on every military or govt. decision. It's YOUR assertion that is not credible, whilst it is entirely credible that a Saudi general made a decision.

a reply to: UKTruth

It's YOUR assertion that is not credible, whilst it is entirely credible that a Saudi general made a decision.

Not just mine , Lindsey Graham doesn't believe it either.

To say that I am skeptical of the new Saudi narrative about Mr. Khashoggi is an understatement.

First we were told Mr. Khashoggi supposedly left the consulate and there was blanket denial of any Saudi involvement. Now, a fight breaks out and he’s killed in the consulate, all without knowledge of Crown Prince.

It’s hard to find this latest “explanation” as credible.
twitter.com...

But yeah , you keep believing what you want to believe , it makes no difference to me.

a reply to: gortex

I am uninterested in what you believe.
You have no basis for determining the credibility of the latest news.
On the other hand, I DO have a basis for determining your view that the Prince HAS to have been responsible is not credible. This is because we've seen - you know in reality - that the Saudi ruling family do not make all the decisions.

So, you can continue with your hunches and feelings. I will await more details and not assume the current statements from the Saudi's are not credible. That seems prudent and is what the President is doing. I'm grateful the leader of the free world is not wading in based on liberal reporting of an issue that is not really any business of the US - or the UK for that matter.

a reply to: UKTruth

As I said above , what you believe makes no difference to me.
TBH I'd be concerned if we agreed , that would probably mean I was wrong.

It'll probably turn out that Jamal Khashoggi was actually killed by GRU-supplied polonium administered during a CIA-sponsored rendition on behalf of the Chinese MSS.