3 ms·

I think it is about swallowing the less poisonous pill. Of course, he is related to Dodi Fayed (the dude killed with Diana), and his uncle is Adnan Khashoggi,

I think it is about swallowing the less poisonous pill. Of course, he is related to Dodi Fayed (the dude killed with Diana), and his uncle is Adnan Khashoggi, the billionaire arms dealer. The entire family was very well connected in the West, especially the elite (British monarchy, Washington DC, etc). But beyond that, he was also a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, a diametrically opposing philosophy to Al Saud's Salafism (but still islamist and regressive, in my opinion. Bin Laden was a member, someone who Jamal was friendly with for a long time). Perhaps the American media are more closely aligned with MB than with Al Sauds. This would explain the outrage to me. The GCC nations are extremely anti MB. However, MB has a relatively positive presence in the US. Here is an article from WaPo about when CAIR was designated as a terrorist org in UAE due to MB ties (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/11/17/why-the-u-a-e-is-calling-2-american-groups-terrorists/?utm_term=.34be58e54e0b https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/11/17...). I think the US generally turns a blind eye to both MB and Saudi atrocities. However, MB is a little better connected socially in the US (elites, civil rights orgs, etc) compared to Saudi, which is better connected on a federal level (aid, trade, investments).

forapurpose 8y ago
> Of course, he is related to Dodi Fayed (the dude killed with Diana), and his uncle is Adnan Khashoggi, the billionaire arms dealer. The entire family was very well connected in the West, especially the elite (British monarchy, Washington DC, etc). I don't see how it's relevant to his murder, other than to try to smear the victim. That Princess Diana was murdered is an unsubstantiated rumor. > But beyond that, he was also a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, a diametrically opposing philosophy to Al Saud's Salafism (but still islamist and regressive, in my opinion. Bin Laden was a member). Now I'm not sure if these are more smears or not. Is there a basis for them?
- skeptic_69 8y ago
  there is a basis to at least some of these claims. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Khashoggi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Khashoggi
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - vowelless 8y ago
    “There is a basis” Of course there is. I have no idea why there is such a viceral reaction to a nuanced viewpoint of why a guy got dismembered. It’s not a simple “he was a cool WaPo journalist who criticized the Saudi family “ It reminds me of how so many smart people supported the Iraq war in 2003, including American media like NYT. I implore people to not do that again.
    - skeptic_69 8y ago
      There is a serious and well documented basis in neutral american and european media-going back decades. It reminds me of how so many smart people make decisions based on an anecdotal basis, including American media like NYT. I implore people to not do that again. side note: your background is wild. you have been around the block a time or two..I think you have some good stories to tell.
- vowelless 8y ago
  > Now I'm not sure if these are more smears or not. Is there a basis for them? Do you know much about the Ikhwan Muslimeen? If not, then you are missing a huge part of MENA politics over the last 90 years, and the more recent Saudi vs. rest of MENA spats (ex: Qatar). Might be worth reading up on them. Start from end of Ottoman Empire and don't skip over Sayyid Qutb.
aaronbrethorst 8y ago
There's an article up on the Brookings Institute's website, which directly addresses all of the Republican/Saudi talking points that you're sharing here. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/10/19/on-jamal-khashoggi-the-muslim-brotherhood-and-saudi-arabia/ https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/10/19/o... I think the US generally turns a blind eye to both MB and Saudi atrocities. I do agree with you on this point. I think the United States's complicity in atrocities committed by the Saudi regime is abhorrent.
- vowelless 8y ago
  I am appalled you think these are “republican/Saudi” talking points. Please don’t get swayed by this sort of propaganda. I never said Jamal was anti secularism. This article you link seems to presenting a very biased take on history. I am speaking as someone who lived under salafi rule and have a strong dislike of Saudi Arabia. To suggest I am using Saudi talking points is absolutely bizarre, ignorant and uneducated.
  - vowelless 8y ago
    Note to self: never call out the extreme close mindedness of certain HN commentators. Even if it directly applies to why you became a refugee.

forapurpose 8y ago

> Of course, he is related to Dodi Fayed (the dude killed with Diana), and his uncle is Adnan Khashoggi, the billionaire arms dealer. The entire family was very well connected in the West, especially the elite (British monarchy, Washington DC, etc). I don't see how it's relevant to his murder, other than to try to smear the victim. That Princess Diana was murdered is an unsubstantiated rumor. > But beyond that, he was also a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, a diametrically opposing philosophy to Al Saud's Salafism (but still islamist and regressive, in my opinion. Bin Laden was a member). Now I'm not sure if these are more smears or not. Is there a basis for them?

skeptic_69 8y ago
there is a basis to at least some of these claims. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Khashoggi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Khashoggi
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- vowelless 8y ago
  “There is a basis” Of course there is. I have no idea why there is such a viceral reaction to a nuanced viewpoint of why a guy got dismembered. It’s not a simple “he was a cool WaPo journalist who criticized the Saudi family “ It reminds me of how so many smart people supported the Iraq war in 2003, including American media like NYT. I implore people to not do that again.
  - skeptic_69 8y ago
    There is a serious and well documented basis in neutral american and european media-going back decades. It reminds me of how so many smart people make decisions based on an anecdotal basis, including American media like NYT. I implore people to not do that again. side note: your background is wild. you have been around the block a time or two..I think you have some good stories to tell.
vowelless 8y ago
> Now I'm not sure if these are more smears or not. Is there a basis for them? Do you know much about the Ikhwan Muslimeen? If not, then you are missing a huge part of MENA politics over the last 90 years, and the more recent Saudi vs. rest of MENA spats (ex: Qatar). Might be worth reading up on them. Start from end of Ottoman Empire and don't skip over Sayyid Qutb.

aaronbrethorst 8y ago

There's an article up on the Brookings Institute's website, which directly addresses all of the Republican/Saudi talking points that you're sharing here. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/10/19/on-jamal-khashoggi-the-muslim-brotherhood-and-saudi-arabia/ https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/10/19/o... I think the US generally turns a blind eye to both MB and Saudi atrocities. I do agree with you on this point. I think the United States's complicity in atrocities committed by the Saudi regime is abhorrent.

vowelless 8y ago
I am appalled you think these are “republican/Saudi” talking points. Please don’t get swayed by this sort of propaganda. I never said Jamal was anti secularism. This article you link seems to presenting a very biased take on history. I am speaking as someone who lived under salafi rule and have a strong dislike of Saudi Arabia. To suggest I am using Saudi talking points is absolutely bizarre, ignorant and uneducated.
- vowelless 8y ago
  Note to self: never call out the extreme close mindedness of certain HN commentators. Even if it directly applies to why you became a refugee.