4 ms·

I find it deeply disturbing that this was known by the US intelligence community the entire time yet they were suppressed from sharing publicly because of certa

I find it deeply disturbing that this was known by the US intelligence community the entire time yet they were suppressed from sharing publicly because of certain people being compromised. Ugh.

hddu 6y ago
Just wait until you go down the blackmail inflation epstein rabbithole.
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
I don't know. It's not like the US government kept this as a closely-held secret or tried to convince anyone it wasn't true; they just didn't want to officially acknowledge it for diplomatic reasons. International politics works that way sometimes, and I'm not sure it's fair to characterize that as being "compromised".
kolbe 6y ago
Why is this in particular deeply disturbing? Your tax dollars are responsible for thousands of murders and hundreds of thousands of negligent homicides every year. Why is it that one guy getting killed for doing something that was illegal for him to do in his country is the thing that is getting to you?
- TwoBit 6y ago
  What murders and homicides are you referring to?
  - sofixa 6y ago
    Not OP, but * US military action anywhere * CIA kidnapping and torture of US and non-US nationals * US sponsored regimes and regime changes around the world That's a decent start.
    - kolbe 6y ago
      I would add US sponsorship of opioid addiction, police violence, lax firearm laws.
    - gremlinsinc 6y ago
      Also, I read recently the CIA and other covert ops led to assassinations on members of the Black Panthers and even Malcom X and maybe Martin Luther King.
  - jessaustin 6y ago
    Have the stupid wars we're fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Niger, Syria, Yemen, etc. somehow escaped your notice? How can a human with access to internet be so ill-informed?
  - cwkoss 6y ago
    Cops shoot about 1000 civilians a year
doggodaddo78 6y ago
Remember the 9/11 redacted pages about the Saudis leaving? Oil and $$$. The US and the world must decarbonize to remove the power from these feudal, vicious "drug dealers." The US wouldn't need to protect SA if most of NATO countries' energy could be had elsewhere. It would be essential to remove nukes and military arms from SA and Iran to ensure peace in the region.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  The US is already a net oil exporter, and the EU mostly gets their fossil fuels from Russia. That's why anti-interventionist voices are so frustrated these days; it's increasingly rare to see any concrete justification for why regional conflicts in the Middle East are actually relevant to the US.
  - doggodaddo78 6y ago
    These are all true points. I think there are other interests beyond oil also: - MIC: weapon sales and US military budget justification - Focal-point for US proxy conflict with global adversaries - Monetize Iran - Saudi Arabia tensions; simultaneously stoking it and tempering it Getting away from oil, normalizing relations with Iran, and bringing SA and Iran closer together would work against the above interests but would deescalate tensions and obviate a major pretext for regional imperial occupation.
andrewacove 6y ago
Much of this story was published in Proof of Conspiracy in 2019, curated from major media reporting. The media just didn't cover the release at the time.
Chris2048 6y ago
This makes sense to me. The idea that "the truth sets you free" is not just false, but in some cases even "privileged". If the political situation in the ME gets worse, it isn't necessarily Americans, or at least the current generation, who will be most harmed. I'd argue it is up to US intelligence and the current Administration to make these decisions, or at least that's how the system is designed - and I would agree that any systems needs to be selective in what information is public - radical political honesty works about as well as radical social honesty, just with even more terrible consequences. That's not to say 'there aren't problems with this, the most pressing being how to trust the authorities involved, especially when they are essentially given the means to bury their crimes, and control the very information by which their actions may be (democratically) measured - but I guess these are the paradox of the modern, democratic mega-nation.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
rsj_hn 6y ago
This was known to the world. When a foreign critic is invited to an embassy, dismembered, and his body disposed of, you can be sure that all the key people in leadership knew about it, and those in a position to stop it must have approved it. The only possible reason why someone in the Saudi government would not know about it would be if they were an outsider that was generally excluded from the flow of sensitive information. Say the minister of agriculture or something.
- bjoli 6y ago
  This has been more than hinted at by just about any reputable media publishing anything about the event. I seriously don't know why it makes the news now.

I find it deeply disturbing that this was known by the US intelligence community the entire time yet they were suppressed from sharing publicly because of certain people being compromised. Ugh.

hddu 6y ago

Just wait until you go down the blackmail inflation epstein rabbithole.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

I don't know. It's not like the US government kept this as a closely-held secret or tried to convince anyone it wasn't true; they just didn't want to officially acknowledge it for diplomatic reasons. International politics works that way sometimes, and I'm not sure it's fair to characterize that as being "compromised".

kolbe 6y ago

Why is this in particular deeply disturbing? Your tax dollars are responsible for thousands of murders and hundreds of thousands of negligent homicides every year. Why is it that one guy getting killed for doing something that was illegal for him to do in his country is the thing that is getting to you?

TwoBit 6y ago
What murders and homicides are you referring to?
- sofixa 6y ago
  Not OP, but * US military action anywhere * CIA kidnapping and torture of US and non-US nationals * US sponsored regimes and regime changes around the world That's a decent start.
  - kolbe 6y ago
    I would add US sponsorship of opioid addiction, police violence, lax firearm laws.
  - gremlinsinc 6y ago
    Also, I read recently the CIA and other covert ops led to assassinations on members of the Black Panthers and even Malcom X and maybe Martin Luther King.
- jessaustin 6y ago
  Have the stupid wars we're fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Niger, Syria, Yemen, etc. somehow escaped your notice? How can a human with access to internet be so ill-informed?
- cwkoss 6y ago
  Cops shoot about 1000 civilians a year

doggodaddo78 6y ago

Remember the 9/11 redacted pages about the Saudis leaving? Oil and $$$. The US and the world must decarbonize to remove the power from these feudal, vicious "drug dealers." The US wouldn't need to protect SA if most of NATO countries' energy could be had elsewhere. It would be essential to remove nukes and military arms from SA and Iran to ensure peace in the region.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
The US is already a net oil exporter, and the EU mostly gets their fossil fuels from Russia. That's why anti-interventionist voices are so frustrated these days; it's increasingly rare to see any concrete justification for why regional conflicts in the Middle East are actually relevant to the US.
- doggodaddo78 6y ago
  These are all true points. I think there are other interests beyond oil also: - MIC: weapon sales and US military budget justification - Focal-point for US proxy conflict with global adversaries - Monetize Iran - Saudi Arabia tensions; simultaneously stoking it and tempering it Getting away from oil, normalizing relations with Iran, and bringing SA and Iran closer together would work against the above interests but would deescalate tensions and obviate a major pretext for regional imperial occupation.

andrewacove 6y ago

Much of this story was published in Proof of Conspiracy in 2019, curated from major media reporting. The media just didn't cover the release at the time.

Chris2048 6y ago

This makes sense to me. The idea that "the truth sets you free" is not just false, but in some cases even "privileged". If the political situation in the ME gets worse, it isn't necessarily Americans, or at least the current generation, who will be most harmed. I'd argue it is up to US intelligence and the current Administration to make these decisions, or at least that's how the system is designed - and I would agree that any systems needs to be selective in what information is public - radical political honesty works about as well as radical social honesty, just with even more terrible consequences. That's not to say 'there aren't problems with this, the most pressing being how to trust the authorities involved, especially when they are essentially given the means to bury their crimes, and control the very information by which their actions may be (democratically) measured - but I guess these are the paradox of the modern, democratic mega-nation.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

rsj_hn 6y ago

This was known to the world. When a foreign critic is invited to an embassy, dismembered, and his body disposed of, you can be sure that all the key people in leadership knew about it, and those in a position to stop it must have approved it. The only possible reason why someone in the Saudi government would not know about it would be if they were an outsider that was generally excluded from the flow of sensitive information. Say the minister of agriculture or something.

bjoli 6y ago
This has been more than hinted at by just about any reputable media publishing anything about the event. I seriously don't know why it makes the news now.