October 13, 2018

"Will you work for a murderer? That’s the question a host of ex-generals, diplomats and spies may soon face."

A headline, on a WaPo column by Fred Hiatt, just one of many things I'm seeing this morning as I try to find some inroad into the story of Jamal Khashoggi.
Now, as more and more evidence implicates Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, in the reported murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi on Saudi diplomatic property in Istanbul, the equation has changed.
The "reported murder" is a strange way to say "suspected murder" or "alleged murder" and it makes me uneasy about fake news. The fact that something has been reported doesn't make it true unless journalism itself is a process that ensures truth. I remain confused.

Hiatt imagines a daughter asking "Daddy" about why he works for a murderer, which just seems like sententious blather. Hiatt goes on to paint Trump as unscrupulous and greedy, thinking only about the money we get from Saudi Arabia. The column is padded out with the moral struggle of the imagined "Daddy" and concludes "No matter what Saudi Arabia offered, could its supposed friendship be worth shrugging off the ensnaring and killing of a critic whose only offense was to tell the truth?"

I'm wary of the foreign-policy-as-friendship rhetoric. I'm wary of the test: Can Daddy explain it to his little girl? In this invented moral scenario, why are we using a parent and child and why have a male parent and a female child? I know you want to play on my heartstrings, but could you play something less babyish? Was Obama's foreign policy — say, with Iran or Syria — put through an explain-it-to-a-child test?

People criticize Trump as being a big child, but this criticism of Trump expects us all to think like children.

174 comments:

Ann Althouse said...

Comments must respond to the post. I deleted a comment that might have been responsive, but I couldn't figure out how.

Quayle said...

In the category of questions nobody ever asked:

“Daddy, why did you send pallets of cash to Iran and agree to spend trillions to barely make a dent in global warning, when our own fellow countrymen and women in Detroit have such great need?"

Darkisland said...

Just fyi

Jamal khashoggi is nephew of Adnan khashoggi arms dealer and scoundrel extraordinaire.

President Trumps yacht was formerly owned by adnan

Jamal Is ethnically Turkish. Turkish citizen?

He May or may not be dead

John Henry

Michael K said...

Erdogan is trying to ally himself with Iran in the Middle East so the whole story is suspicious.

If MBS is really responsible, that is one thing. The left, which is still supporting Obama's Iran deal, is not to be trusted.

Quayle said...

Or I should say, in the category of questions no writer in the WaPo ever put in the mouth of a fictional kid-tool.

elkh1 said...

Did we get money from Saudi? Why didn't he say "The money Trump gets..."?

"... a critic whose only offense was to tell the truth..." How much "truth" is in this sentence?

Shouldn't the Saudi's murdering squad kill the "truth telling critic" some place else other than in the Embassy? I know the Chinese would, Putin would, the CIA would.

Kate said...

Didn't Trump argue at the beginning of the Kanye visit against denying aircraft to SA? He was asked about JK and responded as if he and his team have already looked into response options, even before the details are verified.

n.n said...

WaPo is carrying out a trial by press on one hand, and attempting a diplomatic coup on the other. This approach does not, is not intended to, help the people on the ground.

Althouse, yes, you're right. The conversation can and should be expanded and focused.

daskol said...

Does it expect that we think like children, or is it more pernicious because it gets people to think like children?

Bad Lieutenant said...

Ann Althouse said...
Comments must respond to the post. I deleted a comment that might have been responsive, but I couldn't figure out how.

10/13/18, 9:01 AM


“Young man,” Harkaman reproved, “the conversation was between Lord Trask and myself. And when somebody makes a statement you don’t understand, don’t tell him he’s crazy. Ask him what he means. What do you mean, Lord Trask?”

Excerpt From Space Viking by H. Beam Piper

Fernandinande said...

A better question might be "Daddy, Oh Daddy! How do you not think of dogs and laugh when dealing with people who call themselves 'Prince' and 'King'?"

Quayle said...

(What the press doesn't seem to get is that the more they show how a "friend of Trump" did something bad, the more it highlights how they didn't show - refused to show - that a "friend of Clinton" or a "friend of Obama" did something bad. Ditto on those accusing Trump of horrible treatment of women. It only highlights how Kennedy and Clinton got a pass. They won't ever be able to escape that structural trap.)

Fernandinande said...

NEIL YOUNG & EMMYLOU HARRIS - DOG NAMED KING - AT NASHVILLE,TENN

A Puppy Named Prince but this one can cause dain bramage if you have the sound on; it's for proof of concept only.

Drago said...

Our Saudi/Egypt/Israel/Jordan realpolitick engagement and alliance policies are paying great dividends in squeezing Iran and Iranian ambitions in the Middle East.

Therefore, the lefty media, after years of praising obamas horrific massive rewards and giveaways to the murderous mullahs of Iran, has decided to try and blow this relationship up.

Transparent.

mccullough said...

I’ve never liked Saudi Arabia but it would be nuts to overreact to this. It’s about way more than an arms sale to them, lucrative though it is.

If Trump wants to get the critics to dial back here, he should float the idea of revoking all Saudi student visas.

Academia would go apeshit at the loss of that easy money from the Saudi government. And would also cry Islamophobia.

Ann Althouse said...

@Bad Lieutenant

The first comment on a post is subjected to a higher standard. The whole discussion can be thrown off by somebody inserting their issue in place of mine. That's what this seemed to be. It was one of those comments that seemed to say: So you think that's important, this is more important. I actually invited the commenter to explain the connection, but I gave him very little time and deleted his comment and mine. I believe the person was trying to switch the subject to abortion. Find an old post about abortion, wait for a cafe, or get your own blog.

Bob Boyd said...

"this criticism of Trump expects us all to think like children."

Progressives see us all as children.

Tom T. said...

Fred Hiatt used his WaPo editorial position to be an enthusiastic supporter of the Iraq War. His hands are soaked in American blood. The fact that he laments the death of one reporter more than multitudes of soldiers tells us a lot about his skewed moral perspective.

mezzrow said...

People criticize Trump as being a big child, but this criticism of Trump expects us all to think like children.

Some of us remember what a pay phone sounded like when the dime drops. I heard that when I read this sentence.

Big Mike said...

I beg your pardon, but until it is for certain that Jamal Khashoggi is even dead I have a hard time getting worked up over his murder. And in the Midfle East Trump is practicing what was once called “Realpolitik” — the need to accept the real world for how it really is. Big contrast with Trump’s predecessor.

narciso said...

Obama met with raul after Oswaldo paya, perhaps Cuba's leading dissident was killed in an 'auto accident' neda sultan death was but A speed bump, I noted last night a contradictory account on al Jazeera that an astute Egyptian observer, discovered.

robother said...

Who can forget that nice Mr Stalin, our friend in WWII? Kindly Uncle Joe, wouldn't hurt a flea.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

The left are so enraged over corrupt HIllary's loss, we get crap for journalism.

BADuBois said...

Lord Palmerston said it best: "England has no eternal friends, England has no perpetual enemies, England has only eternal and perpetual interests."

narciso said...

Prince talal figures in this, as well from last year at the Ritz Carlton. Saudis are not ethnically So, because of their involvement in Lebanon and turkey, the ottoman resurgence is always on the mind.

narciso said...

Many of the figures Prince Salman has gone to ground were part of the golden chain, bin Laden's original crew of backers, they are all very lawyered up, they funded the Atlantic council and Hillary foundation

Unknown said...

I am getting cynical about this type of rhetoric anymore. When a dem is in the white house, and the foreign relationships remain as is, this "reporting" will go down the rabbit hole.

tim in vermont said...

I liked the story of how he was tortured and murdered while being videoed, and the video sent to whoever ordered the murder, then dismembered and spirited out by a team of assassins.

I am betting here that whoever actually knows what happened ain't talking, and whoever is talking, doesn't know. Throw in Erdigan, and nobody knows what happened. But if he was murdered by the Saudis, Shame on Trump for not listening to the people at pre-crime!

Ann Althouse said...

@Fernandistein

Did you mean to put that on the older post? I don't think it fits here. Please move it (or explain why it fits).

Hagar said...

This is a very strange story, and coming from Erdogan's government, it would be well to wait for some reasonably convincing explanation of how it came by this alleged information, or further developments.

narciso said...

Furthermore who else had ties even peripheral ones to both talal and Prince Turkic, the swamp rat avenatti.

So the story tapper bought was a full general intelligence crew couldn't spot that khashiggi had an apple watch within minutes of entering the building, why would he have reason to suspect.

Jason beale who was an interrogator whose worked with these officials before, finds it improbable.

narciso said...

Take gehlen the founder of the German security service, he hired so many mass killers who escaped capture, after the war.

tim in vermont said...

A similar theme came up during my podcast with scholar Raymond Kuo, who hopefully described Trump’s transactional approach as possibly like that of “master statesman” Otto Von BismarckM during his rule over Germany in the late 19th century. Maybe Trump is just a return to the norm of what Ian Bremmer calls our “G-Zero World.”

https://warontherocks.com/2018/10/trump-and-the-end-of-smugness/

tim in vermont said...

Obviously the Saudis did it and were emboldened by Trump's rhetoric. QED.

Amadeus 48 said...

Hoo, boy. This whole Khashoggi thing is a real mess. Thuggish, murderous behavior by Mohammed ben Sultan? Maybe. Does Saudi cooperate with Israel and hate Iran? Yes. Was Khashoggi a tool of the Muslim Brotherhood as well as a columnist for WaPoo? Yes. Was he a friend of the US? No. Is MBS a friend of the US? No. Is Turkey a friend of the US? No. Are Turkey and Saudi allies of the US? Sometimes.

narciso said...

That's what khaled saffuri told klaidman and isikoff, kind of like getting the scoop from Frank nitti.

DKWalser said...

So, it's immoral for Trump to work with the government of another nation (with whom we still share common interests) that may have murdered one of its own citizens, but it wasn't immoral for Obama to order the killing of a US citizen (by drone targeted missile strike)? How is Daddy supposed to explain that contradiction to his darling little daughter? I'm tired of those claiming everything about Trump smells and at the same time claiming Barrack Obama had no B.O.

Psota said...

What's really childish is the idea that TRUMP is a murderer because of something another head of state "reportedly" ordered. Is there now a foreign policy equivalent of the felony-murder rule?

There is a purge happening in Saudi Arabia right now and what we know is rough enough. Was this guy murdered? Who knows? Fred Hiatt certainly does not.

I claim no great expertise, but the purge seems to be affecting (in a negative way) the sorts of corrupt people who have been playing the "moderate face/Wahabi mind" for much too long and to our great detriment. Khashoggi is the sort of person who is being purged. I don't see any sign that he is a great dissident a la Natan Sharansky.

Fred Hiatt should consider writing about reality. It's much more interesting.

PhilD said...

Good old FDR had no trouble at all in recognizing the USSR in 1933 just after that regime committed one of the greatest mass murders in the 20th century.
More recent, good old Obama had no trouble kissing up the Iran regime or, for that matter, being more 'flexible' towards Putin.

Now I do despise Saudi Arabia but then I despised it when Obama took a bow, I despised it when Bush was president, when Clinton was, etc ... And I despise it for reasons the idiots of the Washington Compost no doubt would call 'islamophobic' (and proud of it).
But this 'Saudi Arabia fails the high standards the West imposes on itself' when it is a Republican president and the 'No standards at all for the so-called muslim world' when it is a democrat president (or even simply when it suits the Left, like the feminazis ignoring the islamic 'patriarchy') is toxic nonsense and the progressive posers should not be allowed to get away with it.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Will you work for a murderer?

Muammar Gaddafi could not be reached for comment

mccullough said...

The Brotherhood thing bothers me as well. I don’t like the Salafists or the Brotherhood. Glad the Brotherhood got tossed from Egypt so quickly. I know Obama was upset by that. So it was a good move.

Michael K said...

Blogger narciso said...
Take gehlen the founder of the German security service, he hired so many mass killers who escaped capture, after the war.


Really ? Gehlen was the head of Abteilung Fremde Heere Ost and offered to give the US his files on the Soviets if his men and their families could be saved from the Russians at the end of the war. Truman made the deal and many of them went to Argentina on Vatican passports. I'm not sure there were many "mass murderers among them. They were mostly technocrats.

There certainly were Nazis also that escaped to Argentina but I'm not sure they were related to Gehlen, more to Peron.

narciso said...

This guy,


https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individuals/khaled-saffuri/

Now he is high up in Republican circles (ie rove and norquist) when Bob corker started yelping with certainty.

Fernandinande said...

Did you mean to put that on the older post?

Nope. I think Saudis calling themselves "princes" and "kings" just might be worse than their murderousness; it's certainly more ridiculous. And I really do think of dogs when I hear titles of imagined nobility. Here, Duke!

rcocean said...

Sorry, we're best buddies with the Saudi's because they have a lot of oil and $$$.
They support us in pretty much everything.

If we can be friends with Mao and Stalin, we can overlook one dead Journalist. How many people has the Castro Dictatorship killed? Yet, no one seems worked up about it.

PhilD said...

"Take gehlen the founder of the German security service, he hired so many mass killers who escaped capture, after the war."


On the other hand ALL communist mass killers 'escaped' after WW2, apart from the ones Stalin wanted dead of course.

rcocean said...

We know no spectacle so ridiculous as the American public in one of its periodical fits of morality.

rcocean said...

"On the other hand ALL communist mass killers 'escaped' after WW2, apart from the ones Stalin wanted dead of course."

Yeah, that's one good thing about Uncle Joe. He killed more Old Bolshevik leaders than the White Army.

Wince said...

In this invented moral scenario, why are we using a parent and child and why have a male parent and a female child? I know you want to play on my heartstrings, but could you play something less babyish?

Isn't that why the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee brought in a female prosecutor to question Christine Blasey Ford?

And explains why CBF spoke like a little baby girl?

And why Star Wars voice actress Rachel Butera was "erased" for daring to point that out with an impression?

narciso said...

The Saud run a state that is a fusion of mosque and state, somewhat akin to the czars but they are warlords just the same at heart, read charles doughty

Sloanasaurus said...

Isn't this a form of ethnocentrism. In the west, reporters a free to say whatever the want about political leaders. That is our culture. But, in Saudi, perhaps criticizing leaders carries the death sentence. It seems that Turkey also has similar laws - putting members of the press in Turkish Prisons. So shouldn't we be sanctioning Turkey along with Saudi? Should we be applying our ethnocentrism equally? What we do to Saudi, we should also do against China, Turkey, and lots of other places.

Sloanasaurus said...

Also, the Left has no problem criticizing our ethnocentrism when it comes to the left's hatred of Israel and love of Palestinians and Hamas.

narciso said...

It's called corruption of the blood, I heard that expression in Terry hayes I pilgrim,

Weve seem this dance before against Chiang Batista somoza the Shah it never ends well.

Michael K said...

Remember that Werner von Braun used slave labor at Peenemunde.

Also Morgenthau wanted to "pastoralize" Germany after the war. His deputy, Harry Dexter White, a Soviet agent, was enthusiastic about it. He knew just where the Ruhr heavy industry should go.

Anonymous said...

"Was Obama's foreign policy — say, with Iran or Syria — ..." or, ahem, Saudi Arabia...

People criticize Trump as being a big child, but this criticism of Trump expects us all to think like children.

You're criticizing them, but you're still reacting to these sorts of articles as if they should be taken seriously - seriously enough to warrant thoughtful criticism.

They're idiotic, and there's an end on't.

J. Farmer said...

The case is highly suspect, and if I were a betting man (which I am), I would put money on the proposition that Saudi Arabia played some role in Khashoggi’s disappearance. The Saudis seem to be acting mighty squirrely. For one, the Saudi claim is that Khashoggi left the consulate and then disappeared while in Turkey. They have been asked to provide evidence that he left and none has been forthcoming as of now. They have also nominally agreed to allow Turkish authorities to search the Consulate but so far have not permitted a search to be carried out.

Also, such heavy handed overreactions to regime critics and dissidents have been a routine feature of MBS' reign. Prior to his disappearance, Khashoggi was covering the case of Essam Al-Zamil, a Saudi economist who had been in good standing with the regime until he criticized aspects of the Aramco IPO, a plan since shut down by MBS.

Sultan bin Turki bin Abdulaziz, Prince Turki bin Bandar, and Saud bin Saif al-Nasr were all dissident Saudi princes living in Europe who have since disappeared and are widely considered to being imprisoned in the Kingdom. Loujain al-Hathloul, the womens rights activist, was studying in the UAE when she was apprehended by Saudi authorities. Her husband, Fahad Albutairi, was forcibly returned from Jordan to Saudi Arabia by Saudi security services.

As for the so called "realpolitik" argument that we need to support Saudi Arabia to contain Iran, there is no expanding Iran to contain. Doug Bandow ably deconstructs the myth of Iran's expansionism in The National Intereast here.

Annie said...

Hopefully daddy will explain a little better about who Khashoggi was and who he associated with. IF he was taken out.

He was friend of Osama and member of the muslim brotherhood. The same people who want to bring down the House of Saud. Khashoggi wanted the Saudis to go after Israel and was critical of any reform the crown prince is pushing.

www.frontpagemag.com/point/271617/jamal-khashoggi-bin-laden-we-were-hoping-establish-daniel-greenfield

“We were hoping to establish an Islamic state anywhere,” said Jamal Khashoggi, a friend of bin Laden’s who joined the Brotherhood at about the same time. “We believed that the first one would lead to another, and that would have a domino effect which could reverse the history of mankind.”

Bad Lieutenant said...

Observations and predictions:


1. We don't know what if anything happened to Jamal Khashoggi. No CSI, no blood trail. Luminol and DNA or it didn't happen. He could be on a Caribbean island laughing over mai tais, or he could be in a Saudi black site, or for that matter a Turkish one.
2. JK was no saint "even though" he worked with the WaPo.
3. The media source for the story, which was obscured at first, is literally an al-Qaeda operative.
4. Like WaPo, Erdogan hates the USA/PDJT.
5. Erdogan hates KSA/MBS
6. Erdogan would love to shake their alliance. I doubt WaPo thinks that much.
7. Erdogan generated this potentially fake news in astounding synchronicity with the release of Pastor Brunson. Co-inky-dink? Or "Ottoman slap?" Bitch-slap is more like it.
8. I don't know that I value protecting the lives of reporters. I don't like reporters and they don't like me. Let them protect themselves.
8a. I'm sure that nothing whatsoever, literally, is as important to reporters, as protecting reporters.
8b. And none of the virtuous whores in the West can be seen to think or say otherwise.
8c. In reality, though, the reporter's life would not be worth political schism in the West, even if the worst were true.
8d. Its invocation just makes me think that the Magnitsky Act is overreach. Let's cancel that in return for getting Crimea back.
9. The surest indicator that the story is fake news is the synchronized reporting and the rush to judgment.
10. Prediction: in time, either the story will be disproved, the hoax will be revealed, or, at least, the accusations will never be proven.
10a. The Turks always overplay. They have wild imaginations. Google the Turkish financed Gary Busey vehicle, Valley of the Wolves, for a taste of how their minds run.
10b. Turkey/Erdogan will pay for this.

Francisco D said...

From AP: Turkish officials say they believe a 15-member Saudi “assassination squad” killed Khashoggi at the consulate. They’ve also alleged that they have video of the slaying, but not explained how they have it.

This sounds fishy.

I don't trust Erdogan at all.

mockturtle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mockturtle said...

I'm more interested in what is known about this case than in any discussion of moral culpability on our part. Interesting how Al Arabiya has backpedaled since yesterday, now implying it is fake news. Al Jazeera is running with the story. There is certainly evidence that something did happen to Khashoggi. But perhaps we should be more concerned that SA/UAE is cutting deals with Al Qaeda. Saudis' deals with Al Qaeda in Yemen

JaimeRoberto said...

Wasn't there a recent case in Ukraine where some high profile person was "murdered" only to turn up later?

Bad Lieutenant said...

I actually invited the commenter to explain the connection, but I gave him very little time and deleted his comment and mine.


Fair enough, especially if it was dear n.n.

mockturtle said...

I don't trust Erdogan at all.

I don't trust the Saudis, either.

Jupiter said...

Mr Hiatt doesn't seem to grasp that these are Muslims he is talking about. Of course they murder each other. They'll murder him, too, if they get the chance. Their "religion" tells them it's OK to murder anyone who isn't a Good Muslim. And when push comes to shove, there are damned few Good Muslims.

mockturtle said...

Bad Lieutenant observes:
8. I don't know that I value protecting the lives of reporters. I don't like reporters and they don't like me. Let them protect themselves.
8a. I'm sure that nothing whatsoever, literally, is as important to reporters, as protecting reporters.


That's for sure.

Annie said...

In the context of who Khashoggi was and who he associated with, along with Bad Lieutenant's points, there is a good chance this is a play against, specifically, the crown prince and his reforms. I'm sure there is bad blood within the House of Saud. Remember he arrested quite a few princes for corruption - and what they wouldn't do to pay the prince back.

And if by chance, the prince did assassinate Khashoggi in such a suspiciously sloppy manner, I wouldn't be too upset about it.

Lyle said...

Iran, Iran, Iran.

Quaestor said...

Yet another case of the accusation alone being sufficient to condemn and punish.

LYNNDH said...

Simplistic analysis in the article. Turkey has an axe to grind with SA over Iran and Israel.
SA supports Israel. The arms are a hedge against Iran. It is a mess in the Middle East. Trump knows that and knows that he can't make the quick, knee jerk response demanded by politicians on both sides. Did SA kill him/ Most likely. As pointed out above Russia and China and yes the US would have been more circumspect in that would not have done it on there soil. Wait, I take that back, China and Russia certainly would but it would have been covered up better.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Also, such heavy handed overreactions to regime critics and dissidents have been a routine feature of MBS' reign.

Oh and,

12. Literally nothing has been desired and required more of KSA by the United States then that they eliminate their Islamofascist types. This is literally the US national interest. It's been going on since 2001. Does anybody remember that Saudi princeling who managed to get himself lost in the desert and died of thirst? Yeah, that happened. It hasn't happened fast enough, & MBS has accelerated the process. We have no complaints. If we turn against the Saudis now over this it will be like Jimmy Carter dumping the Shah. Not going to happen.

Jupiter said...

If good little liberal Fred wants to ask his allies troubling questions, perhaps he should ask someone at Google how they can sleep at night after getting in bed with people who run death camps to harvest human organs. If I were Sundar Pichai, I'd be worried about waking up one morning missing a kidney.

Narayanan said...

Isn't every President a murderer who is not pardoning, commuting, releasing death row

Bad Lieutenant said...

Wait, I take that back, China and Russia certainly would but it would have been covered up better.

Sergei Skripal says hi.
Anna Politsovkaya and Andrei Litvinenko were unavailable for comment.
Nobody knows what dirt the Chinese are doing but trust me, they're doing it.

At worst, if needs must, blame a rogue op and hang some mid-level bureaucrat out to dry for it. I'd prefer them innocent, of course, but I'd also not mind if they shoved it up the world's ass and made them like it.

I wonder how Tayip Recep Erdogan is going to die.

J. Farmer said...

@Bad Lieutenant:

12. Literally nothing has been desired and required more of KSA by the United States then that they eliminate their Islamofascist types.

Loujain al-Hathloul, Eman al-Nafjan, Aisha al-Mana, Aziza al-Yousef, and Madeha al-Ajroush are Islamofascist types?

Meanwhile, Saudi and Emirati actions in Syria and Yemen have specifically empowered "Islamofascist types," including the Al-Nusra Front, Jaish al-Fatah, and AQAP.

gg6 said...

Althouse, your "wariness' strikes me as extremely sensible. Not to mention, talking and working with murderers is an age-old Diplomacy-Statesmanship tradition, no? Not to mention there appears the assumption Khashoggi was some sort of hero-journalist as opposed to - possibly - being something of a devil himself?

Narayanan said...

If Jamal K isn't in Saudi hands this is finito for him ... Must die for the narrative.

Narayanan said...

"Progressives see us all as children" as only path so they can feel mature.

rhhardin said...

Saudi doesn't seem to be riven with violence so at the moment the system of bribes and payoffs is working. If it gets a little out of balance, then people start getting killed.

It doesn't work on a western system and reform is something we haven't worked out a theory for. Driving in western rights is not how to do it, however.

Narayanan said...

* How is Daddy supposed to explain that contradiction to his darling little daughter? *
What is Daddy supposed to do when child brings loaded question from narrative mechanics?

Is already too late.

Seeing Red said...

It’s always been for the children because it takes a village.

Seeing Red said...

How stoopid could KSA be? These things take finess. He should have hired the Bulgarians or Russians.

Narayanan said...

JK was reported to be getting his divorce papers from Saudi consul.??!!
To marry fiance ... That's bizarre. As Muslim he can have many wives, yes??

Seeing Red said...

And Erdogan had thugs on our soil, beat up protesters and we did nothing.

mockturtle said...

JK was reported to be getting his divorce papers from Saudi consul.??!!
To marry fiance ... That's bizarre. As Muslim he can have many wives, yes??


His family claims to have no knowledge of any 'fiancee'.

narciso said...

Yes, they are impatient, for nearly 70 years there was no sahwa, recall that bin baz Awda is,also on the chopping block.

Ken B said...

Re deleting the first comment. Ann has claimed in the past she doesn’t censor for content. That was deleted for content, right?

Howard said...

"reportedly" is a common way to express uncertainty

narciso said...

Skripals would be assassins must be the shame of bala shita, that's the soetznaz training center. You had one job not only do you not get the target, you kill people who were not the intended. Codename vianelle was too confident in their skills.

Howard said...

These sand tics are responsible for 911 and you cucks are sucking their dicks, just like GW Bush when he played the bitch bride in their wedding dance.

Robert Cook said...

“'Daddy, why did you send pallets of cash to Iran and agree to spend trillions to barely make a dent in global warning, when our own fellow countrymen and women in Detroit have such great need?'"

The cash we sent to Iran was their money, not ours.

Have we spent "trillions" on global warming? It's more like less than $250 billion.

Darrell said...

Erdogan is saying that Saudi Arabia pushed him on a bed almost forty years ago and tried to fondle his breasts. Fortunately, he had a one-piece bathing suit on, under his uniform, so his honor wasn't violated. Don't believe him!

narciso said...

And it was frozen because Iran was a bad actor and after being responsible for at least of coalition casualties it still is.

Robert Cook said...

"Therefore, the lefty media, after years of praising obamas horrific massive rewards and giveaways to the murderous mullahs of Iran, has decided to try and blow this relationship up."

The U.S. is a far more disruptive agent of violence and murder in the world than Iran. (For the slow-minded, this is not to claim the Iranians are choirboys.)

narciso said...

Qatar and turkey and iran form a triangle, the kingdom the uae and israel form another who has Mueller been investigating?

Seeing Red said...

Will you work for a murderer?

Did you have an abortion?

Lolololol

Francisco D said...

I don't trust the Saudis, either.

I absolutely agree.

However, this seems way too clumsy for MBS.

It smells like setup by Erdogan, sort of like his phony coup attempt.

The next few weeks will be interesting if we are able to get more information.

Howard said...

Geez Robert. Next you will be victim blaming the US for the Mad Mullah takeover of our Embassy because of the CIA support and training of the secret police and torturers used to keep the Shah in absolute tyrannical power over the riches of Persia.

Darrell said...

The opposition in Saudi Arabia-- that was put down after Trump was elected-- was funding, steering, and covering for Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. The Left and Erdogan is trying to drive a wedge between the US and the new Saudi Arabia which has become a better ally. And one that has been made more willing to pay its full share of US security costs. Friendship with the US always puts you on the shit list of the Left and its sniveling Press. Ask Gaddafi.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

Hiatt’s comment reminds me of Kavanaugh saying his poor little daughter prayed for “the woman”. What a wise child! Wise children will ask us tough questions!

tcrosse said...

"reportedly" is a common way to express uncertainty

Or, if you can't make it good, make it up.

narciso said...

Yes that Stalinist at mont Clair state, Grover furr is still touring that factoid, a relic from bani sadrs black legend against the shah.

Robert Cook said...

"Geez Robert. Next you will be victim blaming the US for the Mad Mullah takeover of our Embassy because of the CIA support and training of the secret police and torturers used to keep the Shah in absolute tyrannical power over the riches of Persia."

Howard...you're a mindreader!

Inga...Allie Oop said...

With all the bashing of Muslims that goes on in these threads, it’s odd that the Saudis seem to get a pass as they are Trumps business partners and were Bush buddies. Next time we hear about American journalists getting beheaded, it would be a good time to mention how an American resident journalist got dismemberered by the some of the strictest of Muslims, the Saudis. I won’t even mention that the majority of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis as was Bin Laden. This love affair with Saudi Arabia is beyond bizzare.

narciso said...

Yes notably the king Salman who has given junior the run of the place, the late Prince Mayef his son was also a reformer, the late Prince Aziz, who lavished certain mosques as much as certain clubs.

Yancey Ward said...

I would be very suspicious of any claims connected to either the Turkish government or the Saudi government in this particular story. I have done a deep dive on this story and have found nothing that I could trust from anyone. I don't know that Khashoggi actually went into the consulate and never came out, and I don't know that the so-called Saudi hit team arrived in Turkey as described and left as described. Indeed, the claim about the hit team seems far-fetched to me since I couldn't figure out why such a large team would be dispatched to deal with a single aging journalist. The politics involved make almost every source suspect here.

Are the Saudis capable of dispatching a critic? Sure, and the Turks are capable of doing so as part of a plot to discredit the Saudis- as are the Iranians. If Khashoggi never reappears, you will likely never know what happened to him.

narciso said...

Well we never did know what happened to musa sadr speculation was Myanmar did a favor for Khomeini, regardless it made Hezbollah much more feasible.

Bad Lieutenant said...

No proof, no problem.

Farmer, I don't know those people, why should I care about them? Are they serving American interests? You don't care about them, unless it serves your interest to do so. As you would say, they're not Americans.

Have I missed you particularising against any abuses of Iran, or just abstractly acknowledging in order to dismiss? You're just talking to serve your interest. You have sided with Iran, I have sided with the US. Don't worry, I'm sure you won't be hanged for it. Unless you visit Iran of course. Tell me though, once you set them up, any thoughts on how to get them on side, or you don't care about that?


Inga,

Saudis seem to get a pass

Google "our SOB." We shouldn't have turned against Qaddafi either, it certainly brought misery in the world to do so, and made everything harder. Hell, if Saddam had bent the knee I could have seen letting him be as well. If what we did couldn't produce democracy there, there's no doing it. Let them at least not trouble us.

Michael K said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michael K said...

the CIA support and training of the secret police and torturers used to keep the Shah in absolute tyrannical power over the riches of Persia.

Howard speaks from absolute ignorance.

A friend of mine, a medical school classmate I still see, fled the Shah as a teenager.

He ended up in the US and went to medical school with me. After graduation he did a residency in Orthopedics in LA. He married a nurse named "Dixie."

After he finished his training, he decided to visit his patents in Tehran and bring his family to meet them.

In the Tehran airport, he was met by agents of the SAVAK, the Shah's secret police. They took him aside to a small office and told him he had two choices. He could stay in Iran and serve his one year mandatory military service. If he did so, he would be allowed to bring his family to see his parents in Tehran.

His other option was to get right on a plane to New York.

He stayed and was assigned to serve as a doctor in an oil field where he learned to play golf.

The oil field was all sand but the greens were oiled to make them solid. The players carried a piece of Astroturf around the course.

He still plays golf.

Howard, read a book or two.

Michael K said...

Google "our SOB." We shouldn't have turned against Qaddafi either, it certainly brought misery in the world to do so, and made everything harder.

I'm sure Inga is a supporter of Castro, the Sandinistas and Chavez, too.

The left is all about feelings.

n.n said...

At least Saddam was the exceptional case where he stood in judgment before his people. Qaddafi was sodomized and aborted in the street, for what was a foreign-backed coup carried out to secure natural resources, and incidentally, conveniently, forced a refugee crisis that still produces native victims in Libya and European nations. Actually, Qaddafi was engaged in civil and social reforms to the benefit of his people.

Michael K said...

Besides, Howard, you are feeding Cookie's paranoid delusions.

He has not been happy about a dictator since Stalin died.

Howard said...

Nice anecdote Mike, I love your little pointless stories.

Howard said...

Paranoid delusions is the red meat republicans feed their minions.

Narayanan said...

Chapter 2
Did RBG goes to White House??
Not seen after!!!

Michael K said...


Blogger Howard said...
Nice anecdote Mike, I love your little pointless stories.


I enjoy your little ignorant ones.

Inga...Allie Oop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
narciso said...

The,problem is many authors like James bill for instance relied on bani sadrs black legend which he sold to gullible types like Randall and rouleau and salinger.

tim in vermont said...

This love affair with Saudi Arabia is beyond bizzare.

Everybody's guilty based on whether we like them or not. We know none of the facts here but facts don't matter! Obviously the Turks would never lie! Obviously the Saudis are guilty. #BelieveAllAccusers! #EvidenceAndLogicAreToolsOfOppression!

I will wait for the facts to come out. I have noticed that you, in particular Inga, are willing to wait decades in the hopes that some further fact might come out that would prove Bill Clinton not a forcible rapist....

Darrell said...

Howard and Cookie sitting in a tree.
S-U-C-K-I-N-G.

He sucks from the cock of Socialism . . .
Socialism
Shirley Chisholm
Barack Obama, Dali Lama
Chit-Chit Baruti
Howdy Doody

D 2 said...

This article was in the Washington Post. Somewhere in Beijing, some guys are sitting in a room laughing so hard, they're crying.

Meanwhile across town, in another room, other guys in the ChiCom admin are driving themselves insane trying to think what is the hidden strategy behind the tactics of the sly, perfidious Yankee.
The boss wants an analysis of all this noise. What can you write? The US is a country where senior members of the media elite write emoting crap, ... nah, surely this means ... something more is going on. I mean, they aren't all so clearly idiotic, are they? There must be a signal in there ....

Forget it, Jake. It's Washing -town.

narciso said...

Charles Freeman who carried water for both, found it amusing a hume hume is unheard of.

J. Farmer said...

@Bad Lieutenant:

Farmer, I don't know those people, why should I care about them? Are they serving American interests? You don't care about them, unless it serves your interest to do so. As you would say, they're not Americans.

Who asked you to care about them? The point is that there treatment belies the fact that Saudi Arabia's behavior is motivated little, if at all, by their desire to "eliminate their Islamofascist types." The Saudi purges have by and large been about consolidating power and punishing dissidents or critics of the Crown Prince's agenda. The notion of authoritarian regimes using trumped up charges to punish critics is not new. It is certainly not new for Saudi Arabia.

Have I missed you particularising against any abuses of Iran, or just abstractly acknowledging in order to dismiss? You're just talking to serve your interest. You have sided with Iran, I have sided with the US.

If anyone argued that the Iranian regime was "reformist" or if Iran was the recipient of nearly unquestionable American military and political support, I would certainly be pointing it out. I have not "sided with Iran," as you absurdly claim.

What I do claim, and what I am prepared to defend, is the notion that the US does not have to get involved on one side or the other in the Iran-Saudi Arabia rivalry. If anything, a smart strategy would leverage both against each other. The whole "our SOB" argument made sense in the context of the larger Cold War but is a meaningless ananchronism in today's international relations. China and Russia each maintain decent relations with Saudi Arabia and with Iran. Such an arrangement is possible, but the US needs to give up on its policy of wanting to overturn the Islamic Republic and simply deal with the regime as is.

The Saudi regime is not any kind of regime that comports with Western values. It is an absolute monarchy that enforces religious law. Pretty much the opposite of secular representative democracies. But it is the legitimate government of Saudi Arabia and we approach it that way. There is no reason not to consider the Iranians in the same manner. They are a religiously-motivated authoritarian regime. We do not have to like them to accept them as the legitimate government of Iran.

narciso said...

The half Persian Brahmin who called out the silkworms Bandar had bought from china.

narciso said...


https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/10/13/watch-released-u-s-pastor-andrew-brunson-president-trump-in-oval-office/

Mary Beth said...

Jamal khashoggi is nephew of Adnan khashoggi arms dealer and scoundrel extraordinaire.

And cousin of Dodi Fayed.

Michael K said...

I'm still enjoying the de Gaulle bio.

He hated the Quai d'Orsay as much as Trump hates State.

He was much smarter than the Brits on decolonization. His African fixer, Foccart, made sure the African rulers stayed on the reservation. When M'ba, the Gabon roller was sick, Foccart chose the successor who has ruled for 40 years since.

Michael K said...

There is no reason not to consider the Iranians in the same manner. They are a religiously-motivated authoritarian regime. We do not have to like them to accept them as the legitimate government of Iran.

With the slight difference that they declared they are at war with us.

J. Farmer said...

@Michael K:

With the slight difference that they declared they are at war with us.

The "war" language is fatuous. We have an adversarial relationship with Iran in which our stated goal is to bring down the government. The government has a stated goal of remaining in power. Their relation with the US (and every other state) is predicated on that notion. My argument is that we need to abandon regime change as an unrealistic and counterproductive.

RMc said...

The "reported murder" is a strange way to say "suspected murder" or "alleged murder"

Not post-Kavanaugh, it isn't.

RMc said...

Have we spent "trillions" on global warming? It's more like less than $250 billion.

Ah. Well. That's OK, then. (On the other hand, $250B here, $250B there...pretty soon you're talking real money!)

The U.S. is a far more disruptive agent of violence and murder in the world than Iran.

*snort* Yeah, that's why so many Americans want to move to Iran, and not the other way around.

Seeing Red said...

the CIA support and training of the secret police and torturers used to keep the Shah in absolute tyrannical power over the riches of Persia.


Take a vote. Would now prefer to live under the tyranny of the Shah or the tyranny they live under?

Michael K said...

We have an adversarial relationship with Iran in which our stated goal is to bring down the government.

Which they started as Jimmy Carter threw the Shah out "like a dead mouse."

Our stated goal is regime change and it should be. The regime is a murderous theocracy that is held up by a cadre like the communists in The USSR before it collapsed. The IRG have their own stores and there own privileges.

The Iranian birth rate is lower than Europe. Remember when Sharansky said how much Reagan's calling the Soviets out heartened the dissidents ? I see no reason to try to invade but they are an enemy and should be considered as such.

Did you ever read the CSIS estimate of the results of an Iran nuclear attack on Israel ? It is not on their site anymore but Tony Cordesman estimated that it would be the end of "The Oil Age" and most of the middle east would be uninhabitable. Persian would not survive.

narciso said...

There's also another thing, mossadegh who was a secular nationalist was the one who was toppled in 53.

J. Farmer said...

@Rob McLean:

*snort* Yeah, that's why so many Americans want to move to Iran, and not the other way around.

You are confusing two different things...the internal nature of the society and its power on the global stage. There actually is not much of a correlation between the two. In the 19th century, the most interventionist power in the world was Great Britain, which also had the most liberal internal society.

Iran has an authoritarian, illiberal regime. But it has very limited power projection capabilities. And there is nothing in the last 30 years that Iran has done that has been anywhere near as consequential as the toppling of Hussein or Gaddafi. This judgment has nothing to do with a moral judgment on the nature of the respective regimes.

J. Farmer said...

@Michael K:

Our stated goal is regime change and it should be. The regime is a murderous theocracy that is held up by a cadre like the communists in The USSR before it collapsed. The IRG have their own stores and there own privileges.

The "murderous theocracy" bit is tired. The Gulf Countries all have histories of engaging in extrajudicial killings and the funding of armed groups in foreign countries. The use of murder by state actors is not what is driving our relationships in the region.

Did you ever read the CSIS estimate of the results of an Iran nuclear attack on Israel ? It is not on their site anymore but Tony Cordesman estimated that it would be the end of "The Oil Age" and most of the middle east would be uninhabitable. Persian would not survive.

I fear an Iranian attack on Israel as much as a Pakistani or Indian attack on Israel. The Iranian leadership is primarily motivated by a desire to remain in power. There is zero evidence that they are either suicidal or highly ideologically driven. The regime was, for example, criticized for hypocrisy in supporting Russia during its actions in Chechnya. But the Iranian leadership considered its relationship important to its interests and were willing to look the other way. That is cynicism and pragmatism, not the actions of a regime motivated by ideological fervor.

James K said...

You can talk about the nature of these regimes at this instant, or where they are going. MBS has made significant reforms, Iran has moved backwards internally and more assertive externally. That would be an important reason to favor the former and push back on the latter.

Michael K said...

As usual, Farmer makes his points with no reference to anything but his ideas. Sorry I responded.

J. Farmer said...

@James K:

You can talk about the nature of these regimes at this instant, or where they are going. MBS has made significant reforms, Iran has moved backwards internally and more assertive externally. That would be an important reason to favor the former and push back on the latter.

What are some of the "significant reforms" he has made? In terms of the regimes attitude towards dissidents, Saudi Arabia has actually "moved back"wards as well.

In the Iranian 2017 presidential elections, Rouhani defeated the more conservative Ebrahim Raisi by a large margin.

narciso said...

and that was due to an alliance of the bazaaris and the mullahs, as taheri, made clear, now the power structure in the kingdom is much more heterodox, you can't get 7,000 princes to agree on anything, khashoggi as the nephew of the lord of the bazaar, the late adnan, thought himself a prince,

J. Farmer said...

@Michael K:

As usual, Farmer makes his points with no reference to anything but his ideas. Sorry I responded.

Let me restate the points I made:

"The Gulf Countries all have histories of engaging in extrajudicial killings and the funding of armed groups in foreign countries. The use of murder by state actors is not what is driving our relationships in the region."

If you deny this, please let me know, and I will give you sources.

"The regime was, for example, criticized for hypocrisy in supporting Russia during its actions in Chechnya. But the Iranian leadership considered its relationship important to its interests and were willing to look the other way. That is cynicism and pragmatism, not the actions of a regime motivated by ideological fervor."

Again, do you deny that the Iran supported the Russians during this time? Do you deny my argument about its implication? You can read this, for example, if you want a lengthier version of the argument.

J. Farmer said...

For what it's worth, I am generally opposed to isolation and a severing of a relations as a means of altering regime's internal nature. The strategy has a very lousy track record. In such a scenario, a regime has little incentive to change its behavior or to capitulate since doing so will often lead to its own destruction. Also, it provides the regime with a very useful scapegoat on which it can blame its own mismanagement, corruption, and authoritarianism.

James K said...

—“What are some of the "significant reforms" he has made?

Restricting powers of the religious police, allowing women to drive and women performers to sing in public, for example. Economic reforms outlined in his Vision 2030. You can look it up yourself.

narciso said...

he discerns inperceptible differences of opinion, in Iranian regime circles, and finds a monolith in the kingdom, a poser, is it one that is resolutely against Israel and one at least has made gestures of common interests, toward that state,

narciso said...

the link about ali ahmed, shows what a real dissident, lives through, versus a dilettante like khashoggi,

J. Farmer said...

@narciso:

he dicscerns inperceptible differences of opinion, in Iranian regime circles, and finds a monolith in the kingdom...

No such powers of perception are needed. One need only look at the facts on the ground. By any rational measure, Iran is a freer and more open society than Saudi Arabia.

is it one that is resolutely against Israel

Not favoring a special relationship with someone is not the same thing as being "against" them.

Robert Cook said...

"Did you ever read the CSIS estimate of the results of an Iran nuclear attack on Israel?"

Given that Israel has an existing nuclear stockpile of indeterminate number (as they won't officially reveal they even have nukes), but guessed at as somewhere between 80 and 400 nukes, and Iran has none, this estimate is nothing more than empty speculation, sort of like, "What would happen to the world if Godzilla were real?"

In short, it is an estimate unmoored from reality as it is today or is likely to be in any near future. It also ignores that Iran's government is rational and would have no reason to nuke Israel, especially as they know it would guarantee their complete destruction, with responses not only from Israel but from the U.S.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Most Americans will care about this foreign reporter only after Hiatt and his ilk show they give a damn about Kate Steinle and the many Americans killed by illegal immigrants.

Will said...

I have no doubt our Saudi prince would be capable of ordering a hit on a troublesome journalist, but I have to wonder how a man smart enough to maneuver himself into the position he holds could not be a little more subtle about it than a meat saw in his own embassy.

MacMacConnell said...

I seldom lose sleep over a member of the Muslim Brotherhood being hack up, it's usually a time for a toast.

J. Farmer said...

@Mac McConnell:

I seldom lose sleep over a member of the Muslim Brotherhood being hack up, it's usually a time for a toast.

Claims about Khashoggi's association with the Muslim Brotherhood is a smokescreen. Saudi Arabia's recent designation of the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization was mostly due to events in Egypt. Even then, the regime has since reached out to and hosted several leaders affiliated with the Brotherhood, including Abdul Majeed Zindani and Khaled Meshaal.

Michael K said...

In short, it is an estimate unmoored from reality as it is today or is likely to be in any near future.

Cookie is much more confident of Khomeini's rationality than I am, but then he was a lot more enthusiastic about Chavez and Castro than I was.

J. Farmer said...

Cookie is much more confident of Khomeini's rationality than I am, but then he was a lot more enthusiastic about Chavez and Castro than I was.

In Khamenei's near 30 year reign he has not done much to suggest that he is irrational. By most external indicators, the regime acts in a self-interested way according to risks and benefits. The Iranians have limited power projection as much of their military is defensive in nature. They are far more concerned with being able to defend themselves against an attack than they are with the ability to conquer foreign countries. The regime's behavior also suggest that it is driven more by self-interest than by ideological commitments.

Martin said...

The mainstream media has expected us all to think like children for a couple of decades at least. In large part b/c that is their level and how can they lecture us if we are the adults and they are the children?

Michael K said...

They are far more concerned with being able to defend themselves against an attack than they are with the ability to conquer foreign countries

I guess that's why they are in Syria.

I apologize in advance for reading your crap.

J. Farmer said...

@Michael K:

I guess that's why they are in Syria.

I apologize in advance for reading your crap.


Iran in Syria is not an attempt at conquering another country. It is there for the same reason Russia is there. It has a long standing alliance with Syria. And even in that case, Iran's contribution in pure military terms is rather small. It mostly consists of Iranian commanders leading groups of Shiia militiamen. This is part and parcel of Iran's typical strategy of having to rely on local forces and proxy groups. Iran has very little ability to project power outside of its own borders.

It is also worth remembering that Iran's objective of preferring Assad in power is the better outcome for the US. The US/Turkey/Saudi/GCC objective of arming radical Sunni groups to overthrow the government was foolish.

James K said...

Iran is also effectively in Lebanon through Hezbollah. And that’s to threaten Israel. But yeah, they’re just interested in self-defense.

Static Ping said...

From what I have read about Khashoggi, he is (was?) not a very nice person who was successfully faking being a nice person to "right thinking" people.

From what I know about Saudi Arabia, they seem to be taking some steps towards liberalization, but on the whole are still pretty much yearning for the 7th century. Maybe their current leadership has some goals to progress further along, but that is yet to be seen and is necessarily going to be difficult in the current environment. At least they have pro wrestling now.

One thing to keep in mind that in the days when absolute monarchies were common, it was not the least bit unusual for monarchs to eliminate problems by putting them in the ground. Often the alternative was the monarch being put in the ground or massive civil wars that put lots of people in the ground and left the country in danger from outside invasion. In that regard Saudi Arabia is not doing anything unusual other than their government seems quaint in the modern age.

Achilles said...

J. Farmer said...
@Michael K:

I guess that's why they are in Syria.

I apologize in advance for reading your crap.

Iran in Syria is not an attempt at conquering another country. It is there for the same reason Russia is there. It has a long standing alliance with Syria

Bad Faith.

And even in that case, Iran's contribution in pure military terms is rather small. It mostly consists of Iranian commanders leading groups of Shiia militiamen. This is part and parcel of Iran's typical strategy of having to rely on local forces and proxy groups. Iran has very little ability to project power outside of its own borders.

Proxy War: a war fought between groups or smaller countries that each represent the interests of other larger powers, and may have help and support from these

Let us all know when you want to participate honestly in the conversation.

The middle east will be a much more peaceful and liberal place without the Mullahs in control of Iran.

Tina Trent said...

Funny how journalists make it a federal case when this administration engages in its mandated mission to practice diplomacy after a journalist is murdered but the Times, WaPo and other leftist news organs blithely accept advertising money and promote travel to several murderous dictatorships which violently oppress women, murder rape victims, literally enslave foreign laborers and kill homosexuals.

FIDO said...

No 'side' is beyond difficult questions. Nor do I respond to liberal POSs who try to concern troll about issues.

Last I recall, the Iranian Mullahs in the Green Revolution had a sniper KILL a 18 year old girl in public. Neda Agha-Soltan was assassinated by the Mullahs...and Obama sent them $100 Billion dollars.

Like most Leftists, it is pure double standards.

FIDO said...

Going back to double standards.

A few days ago, we had a mom sent out a tweet that embarrassed her son.

The Althousian tone is 'she is a bad person for doing this and it should never have been done'.

We had a mom TAKE HER KIDS to the Senate to accost a Senator...and the tone seemed a lot less condemnatory.

Frankly, the second seemed FAR FAR more egregious a parental sin. She is shaming her kids. She is putting herself at risk for arrest. She is normalizing very extreme political activism. She is teaching her kids that incivility is PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE if you are angry enough.

I would have liked to see a bit more passion at that second mom. Now, since I skim these multi hundred response threads, I might have missed the Althousian condemnation, so if so forgive me.

But my first read she seemed more hot at the tweet than the Senate thing. Perhaps she just wanted to focus on the perfect response of the Senator.

But if you are going to be hot at one, you certainly need to be just as hot if not hotter at the second.

FIDO said...

Oops. She was 26, not 18. Still, the point remains. 'How do you interact with murderers?"

These are questions liberals never ask other liberals.

Robert Cook said...

”Let us all know when you want to participate honestly in the conversation.”

J. Farmer is being perfectly honest in his participation in the conversation. You’re not.

iqvoice said...

@DKWalser

You nailed it. According to press accounts Obama took it upon himself to be the final arbiter of who got "droned" and who didn't. So Obama is a murderer equivalent to the leader of Saudi Arabia. He ordered the "code red."

I call upon all Democrats to renounce working with a cold-blooded murderer like Obama.

J. Farmer said...

@James K:

Iran is also effectively in Lebanon through Hezbollah. And that’s to threaten Israel. But yeah, they’re just interested in self-defense

I never said that Iran was "just interested in self-defense." What I wrote was that, "The Iranians have limited power projection as much of their military is defensive in nature." And as I wrote in the post directly above yours: "This is part and parcel of Iran's typical strategy of having to rely on local forces and proxy groups. Iran has very little ability to project power outside of its own borders."

J. Farmer said...

@Achilles:

Let us all know when you want to participate honestly in the conversation.

The Iranians are in Syria to prop up an ally against an externally-supported insurgency against the State. That is the same reason Russia is there.

So whose side do you think it makes more sense to be on? Assad's or the patchwork of radical Sunni groups we and our allies and clients were arming, funding, and training?

The middle east will be a much more peaceful and liberal place without the Mullahs in control of Iran.

It would also be a "a much more peaceful and liberal place" if the al Saud family did not control Saudi Arabia. Does that mean we should take steps to bring down the royal family? It would also be more liberal and peaceful if the Emirati or Qatari royal families were not in charge of their respective countries. Should that be official US policy?

J. Farmer said...

@Static Ping:

In that regard Saudi Arabia is not doing anything unusual other than their government seems quaint in the modern age.

Here is a thought experiment. Imagine if an Iranian dissident had fled the country and was living in the US and then while traveling was allegedly murdered by the Iranian regime. Do you honestly believe the administration would be taking the same circumspect approach?

James K said...

“Do you honestly believe the administration would be taking the same circumspect approach?”

Trump just said that there would be “severe punishment” if the Saudis were responsible. But at this point we don’t even know if he’s dead, much less who killed him. Here’s a question for you: In the scenario you describe, would the WaPo be screaming the way it is now? Or would they put it on p.14 like they do any news that supports the administration’s stance?

J. Farmer said...

@James K:

In the scenario you describe, would the WaPo be screaming the way it is now? Or would they put it on p.14 like they do any news that supports the administration’s stance?

That the establishment media has it out for Trump is old news and been known to anyone with half a brain for two years now. I do not read the Washington Post and have no desire to defend them I specifically asked about "the administration's" response, not the medias.

James K said...

But I don’t accept the premise that the administration’s response has been “circumspect,” at least not more than warranted by the lack of facts.

J. Farmer said...

@James K:

But I don’t accept the premise that the administration’s response has been “circumspect,” at least not more than warranted by the lack of facts.

The administration had no official response for the first six days of the disappearance. And then offered only boilerplate concern. This is consistent with the administration's response to Saudi Arabia, whether supporting the atrocious war on Yemen, supporting MBS' purge of dissidents and potential rivals of his domestic agenda, the foolish attempt to enforce a blockade against Qatar, or the over-the-top reaction towards Canada, a close and important ally of the United States.

Gospace said...

The authyis showing basic cultural ignorance.

Any Saudi in position to be a diplomat, general, spy, or head of any agency has no moral qualms about killing to get or maintain power. And in many cases would consider it a necessity to protect themselves and their families. Murder in this context is a Western, perhaps we could even call it Christian, concept.