Saudi Journalist Disappears in Saudi Consulate in Turkey

I don't think it is in the interests of the West to see the Saudi government as a whole overthrown or isolated. Libya, Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan are disasters enough without adding Saudi Arabia to the list.
[irony]Previously I though that the only objectives that the West has are democracy, human rights, peace, rule of law[/irony]
Of course, you are absolutely right.
However, we would like to see Saudi Arabia's behaviour changed, and get them to wind their necks in on a lot of issues.
By 'we' you apparently mean the West. As for some other countries (like Iraq) then 'would like' meant ... [irony]liberation from brutal disctator using peace-keeping operations[/irony]. What means do you think the West has to change political regime in the KSA?
 
ETA today's news is that Kashoggi was dismembered, while still alive, on the consul-general's desk.
Goodness.

Having seen a few post-mortems, cutting up a dead body makes enough mess.

I would imagine if that it true, the area would light up like the drum solo at a blue man concert under forensic examination.

 
And the Saudis nominally have access to nuclear weapons..... there may be SPF 50 million trouble ahead in the Middle East
Could do millions of dollars worth of improvements.
 
I'd suggest the only change of any significance is that there's no change of any significance, and that those who do know anything of significance, namely the Consul and possibly others from the Consulate, have been allowed to leave Turkey and return to the KSA with no questions being asked, no requests for them to remain, no attempt to detain them until such a request could be approved, no request to talk to them in them in the KSA (for example when Pompeo was there) and minimal publicity apart from as footnotes to other articles.

All that's left in Turkey are minor Manuel's who can honestly and pointlessly say 'I know nothing' and a lot of circumstantial but inconclusive physical evidence.
Very dangerous precedent for the Receiving State to detain a person who has diplomatic privilege: remember, reciprocity...
 
[irony]Previously I though that the only objectives that the West has are democracy, human rights, peace, rule of law[/irony]
Of course, you are absolutely right.
As opposed to Russia just stealing parts of neighbours :rolleyes:. Syria shows exactly what happens when the West doesn't get involved. CW, carpet bombing, the lot.

You'll always get people quoting things about the West's interventions and saying nothing on Russian annexation for example.
By 'we' you apparently mean the West. As for some other countries (like Iraq) then 'would like' meant ... [irony]liberation from brutal disctator using peace-keeping operations[/irony]. What means do you think the West has to change political regime in the KSA?
That would be 'regime change' surely and apparently 'the West' are against that. Something about the UN Charter?

I suppose as its KSA some would agree with it though ..........
 
Very dangerous precedent for the Receiving State to detain a person who has diplomatic privilege: remember, reciprocity...
The receiving state can request the withdrawl of protected diplomatic status though.

There were two Columbians successfully prosecuted for manslaughter in the early 2000s in London, Columbia waved diplomatic protected status and they were later charged and convicted.
 
(...) By 'we' you apparently mean the West. As for some other countries (like Iraq) then 'would like' meant ... [irony]liberation from brutal disctator using peace-keeping operations[/irony]. What means do you think the West has to change political regime in the KSA?
The West has the usual means of enforcing "regime change" - invasion, bombing, financing of insurgents, etc. There just aren't a lot of examples of where that produced results that were better than the previous state of affairs.

This is why I would not want to see the Saudi government overthrown, just the persons in high positions who were responsible to be forced into retirement and replaced by people who were not so reckless. And by "reckless" I am referring to the entire pattern of behaviour, not just the most recent incident.

However, the above is predicated upon the assumption that persons in high office are responsible for this current state of affairs. We should wait upon further developments before coming to any final conclusions.
 
I think the big question is whether Mohamed bin Salman (or Mohamed Bone Saw) manages to avoid any blame, or whether he is disgraced and forced from power by his peers. He is already unpopular in some quarters, and I suspect that some would see this as an opportunity to displace him.

I don't think it is in the interests of the West to see the Saudi government as a whole overthrown or isolated. Libya, Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan are disasters enough without adding Saudi Arabia to the list.

However, we would like to see Saudi Arabia's behaviour changed, and get them to wind their necks in on a lot of issues. Many press stories have blamed bin Salman for the current erratic and reckless behaviour of Saudi Arabia (in many areas, not just this one) and it may not be a bad thing if power there were to pass into a more cautious set of hands.
Not least (in terms of things the KSA needs to stop doing) is funding and supporting Mosques in the UK (and Canada?) which spread Wahhabism and have been direct causal factors of events such as 7/7. What could the 'Prevent' programme achieve if Wahhabist seats of learning were instructed by the KSA to stop creating and channeling discontent towards violence? Intead we get our government saying things such as that the KSA provides us with good intelligence (about those radicalised in Saudi-funded institutions it is assumed).
I think that's why this story has not gone away. A lot of people are fed up with the KSA, for a variety of reasons (Yemen, Qatar, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Canada, Wahhabism, etc).
 
1) As opposed to Russia just stealing parts of neighbours :rolleyes:. 2) Syria shows exactly what happens when the West doesn't get involved. CW, carpet bombing, the lot.

3) You'll always get people quoting things about the West's interventions and saying nothing on Russian annexation for example.

4) That would be 'regime change' 5) surely and apparently 'the West' are against that. 6) Something about the UN Charter?

7) I suppose as its KSA some would agree with it though ..........
1) Russia just returned territory populated mainly by Russians under its rule.
2) There were no CW, no carpet bombing, except Raqqa where the West (US) was involved.
3) Whataboutarism, that you previously didn't accept as a method of discussion.
4) I meant not radical 'regime change' but rather evolution, gradual changes in political regime
5) Really?
6) Who in the West do respect it?
7) So my remark #5 is reasonable.
 
Trump is clutching at straws, hoping he can get away with believing the implausible pack of lies offered by the KSA. Why? because of the effect on jobs of a stoppage of US arms sales.
I think it goes far deeper than that - the arms sales are on nothing like the scale he claims ($12.5 billion, nowhere near 110+ except over several decades), but his whole plan for the Middle East centres around KSA, whereas previous administrations had far more balanced plans.

You, like many others including the media, have also missed the crucial point: MbS hasn't given "an implausible pack of lies" - all he's said so far is "I know nothing". While that may well be a lie, and even arguably an implausable one, all the "implausible pack of lies" can with at least a veneer of plausibility be put down to the Consul and the "rogue killers".
ETA today's news is that Kashoggi was dismembered, while still alive, on the consul-general's desk.
Headline grabbing, but contrary to all other reports and leaks and extremely unlikely as the bonesaw supposedly used was still in KSA. It does, however, play straight into Trump / MbS's hands (and they're pretty well interdependent and a mutual appreciation society.)

MbS now holds all the cards, openly backed by Trump. He's got all the players, literally, and it's for him to lose.

He can either brazen it out about the "rogue killers", now including the Consular staff, and 'purge' the lot plus any others for good measure, making the most of the opportunity, and all the groundwork for that's been laid, or he can blow it completely by being arrogant enough to say that all they did wrong was kill Khashoggi by accident.

There's always the possibility of a coup, but other than that it really is MbS's to lose.
 
Not least (in terms of things the KSA needs to stop doing) is funding and supporting Mosques in the UK (and Canada?) which spread Wahhabism and have been direct causal factors of events such as 7/7. What could the 'Prevent' programme achieve if Wahhabist seats of learning were instructed by the KSA to stop creating and channeling discontent towards violence? Intead we get our government saying things such as that the KSA provides us with good intelligence (about those radicalised in Saudi-funded institutions it is assumed).
I think that's why this story has not gone away. A lot of people are fed up with the KSA, for a variety of reasons (Yemen, Qatar, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Canada, Wahhabism, etc).
Although there are some extremists in Canada, there seems to be fewer than in the UK. I'm not a scholar of the field, but the reasons for this I understand have to do with different primary sources and different social classes of immigrants. This wasn't through forethought, it's just the way things worked out.
 
(...) Headline grabbing, but contrary to all other reports and leaks and extremely unlikely as the bonesaw supposedly used was still in KSA. (...)
Have you got a source for where the bone saw was at what times? Because I haven't seen any news report which said they knew that sort of detail.
 
1) Russia just returned territory populated mainly by Russians under its rule.
Discussed at length hence sanctions.
2) There were no CW, no carpet bombing, except Raqqa where the West (US) was involved.
According to OPCW, numerous uses of CW by Assad's regime
3) Whataboutarism, that you previously didn't accept as a method of discussion.
Get it right, 'whataboutery'
4) I meant not radical 'regime change' but rather evolution, gradual changes in political regime
You said "What means do you think the West has to change political regime in the KSA?"
UN Charter.
6) Who in the West do respect it?
Most
7) So my remark #5 is reasonable.
Some will twist it to suit their agenda. Not in favour of a 'more reasonable govt in Iran' but want a 'more reasonable govt' in KSA. FWiW, I'd like both, but it won't happen.
 
Very dangerous precedent for the Receiving State to detain a person who has diplomatic privilege: remember, reciprocity...
I couldn't agree more, which is unusual, which is why I was very careful about what I said and how I said it.

My point was that they
  • "...have been allowed to leave Turkey and return to the KSA with no questions being asked, no requests for them to remain" - were they asked to remain and at least 'help the police with their enquiries', when requests were made to search the Consulate, consular vehicles and Consul's house"?,
  • ...no attempt to detain them until such a request could be approved" - since they left on a scheduled international flight, the flight could easily have 'developed a fault' with a delay of three hours, giving a delay of, say, six hours if necessary between when they booked the flight and when they left for KSA so that such a request could me made, including by Pompeo.
  • "no request to talk to them in them in the KSA (for example when Pompeo was there)" - instead of exchanging platitudes and listening to 'I know nothing', Pompeo could easily have slipped in a request for them to stay in Turkey and co-operate with the police, even without asking for diplomatic immunity to be lifted.
God almighty, if I could see it coming and the significance of their going back to KSA without answering any of the police's questions after the search and I can post about it here, before the event, surely others far brighter than me who are paid to think about it can do the same? ..... unless they don't want to, and prefer them to be out of the picture / held culpable in the KSA , of course.
 
Last edited:
The receiving state can request the withdrawl of protected diplomatic status though.

There were two Columbians successfully prosecuted for manslaughter in the early 2000s in London, Columbia waved diplomatic protected status and they were later charged and convicted.
I think I mentioned this in an earlier post; for this to work it relies on the complicity of the Sending State unless the allegations are erge omnes, as in the case of Augusto Pinochet.
 
The TNP reported the presence of a bone saw in the luggage of the 15 Saudi day trippers; it was searched prior to their departure (which means the Turks had clear suspicions at that point).
 
Have you got a source for where the bone saw was at what times? Because I haven't seen any news report which said they knew that sort of detail.
I can't recall the exact source and I'm afraid I'm not going to search through all the reports as you can do that just as easily as me, but there's a vast amount of detail in the Twitter feeds and facebook links I gave earlier, much of which has then been quoted verbatim in the media, reported as 'intelligence sources said ...", but I don't think you can find the feeds with a Google search so you need to read the links and feeds first then do a reverse search which will take time.

The only point I haven't seen which I made was that the second group, which included Salah al-Tubaigi, the forensic expert (the 'sawbones') were six in number but as the first is widely reported as nine and there were fifteen altogether, I think that's a reasonable assumption!

If I do find a report, though, I'll post a link.

Edit:
The TNP reported the presence of a bone saw in the luggage of the 15 Saudi day trippers; it was searched prior to their departure (which means the Turks had clear suspicions at that point).
Correct, the question was whose bag it was in, who it came in with, etc. It seems to be widely overlooked that the 15 didn't arrive together, but in two separate, matching, consecutively numbered Gulfstreams at different times so the significance of who was on which plane and when they left / arrived / left again has also been overlooked.
 
Last edited:
Surely a lot of caution is needed when using Twitter as a primary source? It can be reliable but one of the most interesting aspects of this case is the amount of rumour vs confirmed facts.
Edit: it can be a reliable tool, such as for direct reporting such as 'I am in Damascus, here is film of a column of tanks heading towards Aleppo' (and allows geo-location too) but some of the stuff on Twitter about this case is sensationalist and single source).
 
Last edited:
Surely a lot of caution is needed when using Twitter as a primary source? It can be reliable but one of the most interesting aspects of this case is the amount of rumour vs confirmed facts.
This case is remarkable by a lot of rumours and 'almost pregnant'-style claims.
 
Breaking news.

It was the Consul wot dun it!

According to Sky News, the Consul is being investigated over the disappearance of Mr Kashoggi.

I wouldn’t like to be in his shoes if he carries the can for it. Would they go as far as to execute him and any others they find “complicit” in this matter?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top