featured, latest, media watch
Comments 156

Jamal Khashoggi: or why you don’t trust the MSM even if they say what you want to hear

Catte

(Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

The alleged murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi is a mass media rollout, every bit as sparsely verified and every bit as questionable as the official Skripal narrative, but this fact is being overlooked due to the cognitive dissonance involved in who is being blamed.

What we are seeing in the mainstream media at the moment is a narrative-shift worthy of Minitrue. We are currently being told the equivalent of “Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia”.  The Saudis in general, and  Muhammad bin Salman in particular, all previous “good guys” in the MSM pantheon, are being apparently re-branded as baddies with all the cartoonish excess normally reserved for Russia/Putin and Syria/Assad.

Sen. Lindsey Graham rewriting his “Assad must go” mantra with a new name.
American public officials, corporations and press pulling out of Saudi-related events in an attempt to “isolate” them.

We are being bombarded with what one commentator rightly described as Grand Guignol narratives of slaughter, dismemberment, torture, all based on the kind of flimsy claims and dodgy alleged technologies we are already more than familiar  with in a different context. Despite an almost total lack of hard evidence,  we are being told the missing Khashoggi is not just definitely deceased, but horribly murdered and definitely by the Saudis.

Some of the alt media are accepting these conclusions simply because the accused is recognised as a NATO ally, when they would be far more sceptical if it was one of the more usual patsies – Russia or Syria.

Two major points seem to be largely missed. They are:

The Saudis may be local tyrants but for the Empire they are merely puppets.  Like all such assets,  they are expendable.  They are tolerated.  They are flattered, feted, given the hero treatment by the compliant media –  while they are useful and obedient. The moment they cease to be either of these things they are slapped down, and if they don’t learn the lesson they go on to be dropped like a lizard tail, scapegoated, color-revolutioned and ultimately destroyed.

Remember when Saddam was the good guy in the ME because he was going up against the “evil” of Iran?

It’s not that long ago, a matter of weeks, that MPs were writing articles praising MBS in the the Huffington Post, or The Guardian was accepting ad revenue to praise Saudi Arabia’s great reformer.The empire knows no loyalty and has no interest in consistency.

The recent media blitz on MBS stemming from the alleged murder of Khashoggi, tells us he is currently out of favour. And this is all it tells us.  It may be meant to remind him and certainly should remind us of where the power really lies. It’s a signifier of his real place in the scheme of things, and how quickly he can be demonised and disposed of if the real powers that be should choose.

It is not an indicator on any level of his guilt or innocence of this alleged crime. Because the  second overlooked point is this:

The question of whether or not the Saudis and MBS really murdered Khashoggi is irrelevant to the message.

Not secondary, not incidental – entirely irrelevant.

We need to get this if we are to be able to understand anything about how the current western intelligentsia operates.

What matters to them is the narrative. The headline. The psychic impact. The saying is all. Khashoggi needs to be dead right now and so he is. Will he still be dead tomorrow? Who knows, but if not he won’t be the first such resurrection. Even death isn’t necessarily permanent in the new post-truth age.

Do we currently know the man is dead? Let alone who may have killed him? I don’t think we can make that claim. We have an allegedly vanished journalist. We have a number of unproven claims, of varying plausibility. None of this is evidence of anything.

Yes, the Saudis are blood-soaked and vile. Yes they are, or have been up to this time, allies of the empire, but that’s no reason to buy a bare and unconvincing mainstream narrative that just happens to implicate them We need to keep repeating the mantra. Khashoggi’s murder, whether ultimately real or not,  appeared in the media, not because it happened but because it was useful for someone to say that it had. If he had been murdered at some other time when such news served no purpose it would have been buried with his body, airbrushed away. It’s possible no one would ever have heard about it. Or it may have appeared in alt media, reported by some dedicated truth-seeking unpaid journalists who went out there to dig up some buried truths, and who would have been called “conspiracy theorists” for their pains.

We need to resist any temptation to give the mainstream the benefit of the doubt as soon as they appear to endorse some part of what we know is true. When they seem to have an epiphany and realise  the Saudis are bloodthirsty tyrants or that global warming is a thing, they aren’t seeing the light, they’re simply following the dictates of an agenda which currently finds these truths useful. The moment they stop being useful these truths will be dropped again, right down the Memory Hole. And it will be as if they never were.

When we preempt the arrival of any data and discuss the “murder of Khashoggi” as if it were a fact, and when we blame the Saudis unequivocally without anymore evidence for their guilt than we have for that of Boshirov and Petrov, we are actually unwittingly endorsing the media’s ability to invent realities.

What all this should teach us is the need to stop assuming even the most basic connection between “the news” and veridical reality. Because no such connection exists in the minds of those who control the media and those who work for it. We need to grasp that they no longer even consider fact-checking in any sense we would understand it. You can’t meaningfully fact-check a worldview that has escaped so far from all verifiable fact. All you can do is find endorsement in repetition.

We’ll know when/if the Saudis  step back behind whatever line they transgressed when the headlines stop telling us about Khashoggi’s brutal murder, when that meme simply vanishes, or when it’s transformed by weasel-words into something else. If the meme doesn’t vanish or transform we’ll know the Saudis are still on the naughty stool and may well be headed the way of Saddam.

But none of it will have anything much to do with what really happened to Jamal Khashoggi – whether he’s alive or dead, brutally murdered by the Saudis, brutally murdered by someone else, disappeared or hiding in someone’s basement.

Co-founding editor at OffGuardian. Writer. Occasional polemicist. Lives in UK.

Email at blackcatte@off-guardian.org

156 Comments

  1. witters says

    Well now. The Saudi’s now claim (which claim mean an admission – and i’d say that’s pretty persuasive evidence for the fact of the killing and its agents…) that the mild-mannered “journalist” attacked the 15 friendly guys who – unbeknown to MBS, of course! – were just there for a friendly chat about where one might want to live… So the pudgy guy attacked the 15 of them. Well, that clearly placed their lives at risk, and so in the best US policing fashion they had to do what they (now) had to do…

    Catte’s scepticism int these circumstances, seems to me overstated, no?

    2
    3
    • Stonky says

      Isn’t there a stupidity blog where you could go and post stupid stuff without pestering the rest of us? If not, you and Matt can go and create one. The point of Catte’s article is not “whether the Saudis killed Khashoggi”. It’s “Why this sudden wall-to-wall campaign of outrage against a despot who was previously untouchable?”

      But then you knew that didn’t you? You didn’t? Then you’re genuinely as stupid as you pretend to be.

      By the way, thanks to Matt for a great belly-laugh yesterday. To those who couldn’t be bothered clicking on his link, the NYT ‘explanation’ for the wall-to-wall media campaign of outrage was basically:

      “Yeah but no but many deaths a statistic, one death a tragedy blah blah cod psychology 27 children in a school bus don’t much matter in the greater scheme of things BUT KHASHOGGI WAS SPECIAL BECAUSE HE WAS A JOURNALIST!”

      I think the NYT has got it wrong. The outpouring outrage and grief wasn’t because Khashoggi was a journalist. It’s because he was in real estate. They’re even more popular than journalists. We should all be grateful that the guy wasn’t an ambulance-chasing lawyer. That would probably have been instant casus belli (apologies to homeslicez).

    • Col says

      Yes well – how is “Mrs Khashoggi” doing? After her future husband cut up with a bone saw.

  2. Matt says

    I burst out laughing while reading this article. The fallacy is so obvious that even a blind person can see it. Apparently, if the MSM criticizes a foreign government for literally chopping up a journalist working for an American newspaper, then that must mean that there is some sooper-secret plot afoot. Can’t be because, you know, this stuff is deplorable. Nope. As for the lack of outrage over Yemen, The New York Times wrote an article explaining why many have reacted to this murder so strongly. I suggest you read it before jumping to premature conclusions:

    How One Journalist’s Death Provoked a Backlash That Thousands Dead in Yemen Did Not

    Oh, and despite this dishonest article, Saudi Arabia just admit to killing the journalist:

    Saudi Arabia claims Khashoggi was killed in a fight, contrary to other accounts

    How embarrassing for the author.

    What I love about this article is that it exposes how reverse-psychology works on conspiratorial minds. The author thinks that if the MSM criticizes someone, then that must magically mean they are following the wishes of the elite. This blanket assertion is obviously false.

    I’m going to share this article with as many people as I can. It’s hilarious.

    3
    14
    • LizA says

      And I burst out laughing when I read your response. What rock have you been living under? You’ve totally missed the point of the article. The MSM is beholden to its owners and their political agendas. Both the MSM and its owners are beholden to advertisers and those willing to pay for content. If the public’s imagination has been caught by a suitably digestible little horror story then so be it – run with that. Oh and bring in some suitably – way too late – faux outrage about Yemen and Saudi’s human rights record to keep things righteous. The hypocrisy is unbelievable. But desperate attempts to remain ‘relevant’, the pressure to make money, and the need to keep the narrative politically ‘mainstream’ to construct/appeal to the biggest base means that we are encountering not only hypocrisy in the MSM but unbelievable cowardice.

      So yes – I think your response is funny.

      10
      2
    • Thanks Matt – your disendorsement only adds to the innate worth of Catte’s insightful analysis. I for one find it particularly useful as I share the scepticism triggered on the first day by the msm flood of interest in this “just another day in the life and times of the kingdom”.
      PS, anyone hear what Adel al Jubair has to say on it? Where is he? the man who thought that Zahran Alloush would be a good leader of Syria, once Bashar’s body was cut up and relocated… And where is Turkey’s famous chief of intel Hakal Fidan? What’s the chance this a joint Saudi-CIA-Turkish conspiracy? We’ll have to wait and see what happens…

      7
      1
    • MLS says

      @Matt – Wow. Your psychotherapist should really take a look at this.

      Talk about over-compensation/projection.

      And problems with women.

      And reading/comprehension issues.

      This poor dude doesn’t even understand what the article is saying.

      5
      1
      • Paul says

        He certainly comes across as a sad guy but at the same time he’s very effective at wasting time and diverting discussion. Somebody is proud of him.

        5
        2
    • mark says

      The MSM response is like the famous police captain, “I am shocked, shocked, to find that gambling is taking place in Rick’s bar.” Waiter: “Here are your winnings, sir.”

      This is the same MSM that has been trousering Saudi money for years to run puff pieces on goons like Bin Salman and his ilk. Even when they do (very occasionally) report truthfully, nothing they say can be taken seriously. That is the point of the article.

      • Matt says

        I agree that some mainstream media outlets are being hypocritical and expression faux indignation. But not all of them. Numerous mainstream websites have been reporting on the reckless actions by MBS and criticizing them. Some have taken money from SA to paint MBS in a good light, but most have not.

        I just think that Off-G casting the mainstream media’s criticism of Khashogi’s murder as having an ulterior motive is wrong. They have good reason to be shocked at the murder of one of their own.

        • mark says

          Why? They are not in the least shocked when the Nazis they back in the Ukraine strut around in swastikas and SS regalia announcing their intention to “cleanse” the country of “Russian scum” and “Jewish scum.” They are not in the least shocked when the moderate cannibal jihadis they slobber over in Syria film themselves eating and mutilating dead bodies, beheading young children and putting women and children in cages to use as human shields. All the outrage seems to be highly selective and turned on and off like a tap. No doubt all this will be thrown down the Memory Hole as soon as it becomes convenient.

  3. Occam says

    Occam’s razor: the theory that makes the least amount of assumptions is statistically speaking the most likely to be correct.

    Here is one such theory:

    Mohammed bin Salman was put on top in Saudi Arabia with the help of the US.
    Mohammed bin Salman is a murderous psychopath that has left a trail of bloody murder in his wake on the way to power in Saudi Arabia. All of this is documented fact.

    Now the theory: murderous psychopaths with unlimited power do things like what happened to Khashoggi.

    (I’ve also read somewhere that his death might have been the result of an interrogation gone wrong, again fairly plausible I would say, considering Mohammed bin Salman’ track record.)

    The US is now terribly embarrassed but no fear, Trump has already said he hopes the arms deals can continue as usual.

    Saudi Arabia has now more or less admitted btw:
    https://www.rt.com/news/441783-saudi-arabia-khashoggi-died-fight/

    • Paul X says

      If it’s true they took a bone saw with them then it’s hard to credit this was a fist fight gone wrong – but that’s likely to be the Ddfendant’s story, not necessarily the State’s. Predictably 18 are arrested and 5 sacked. Somebody might have to go down for a bit the real loser is the Crown Prince ironically possibly squeezed out of Absolute Power For Life by Western Liberal anger – totally faux as noted. The root of the difficulty goes back to the War within the Trump Administration and appears designed to rob him of an ally and begin to side line the son-in-law who is as cocky as Robert Kennedy was so far as Langley is concerned. And we know how that ended. Cockiness they detest.

      • mark says

        I always take a bone saw with me when I go out just in case I need to dismember a body somewhere.
        You never know, you could be set upon unexpectedly by some ruffian like an elderly journalist.

    • Matt says

      I fully agree with you. This article is a fallacious one because it assumes that the MSM criticizing Saudi Arabia for chopping up their own journalist’s body in a consulate means the MSM is following the wishes of some elite. Going by that logic, literally any event criticized by any mainstream media outlet can be “connected” back to the U.S.

      It reminds me of the loonies who blame Russia for everything. It’s highly ironic that this website, which frequently peddles anti-American disinformation like this article and repeats every one of Russia’s lies uncritically, would do the same thing with the U.S. that they defend Russia against on a daily basis.

      I also love the reference in the article to “Boshirov”. Now, even more photos of his partner in crime have been released, and multiple Russian media outlets have visited his hometown, with residents easily identifying the man in the interview as exactly what Bellingcat claimed, even openly admitting that he received the Hero of the Russian Federation award. But Off-G refuses to publish any of that, because it would prove them wrong. Being as dishonest as they are, they will now avoid addressing the new evidence and keep repeating the same ad hominem and fallacies about Bellingcat and the photos they released.

      Frankly, this website has completely discredited itself. It’s been proven to have been wrong on nearly every major event, even one as plainly obvious as this one. Combine this with the reluctance of the authors to honestly address evidence that contradicts their viewpoints, and you have a perfect fake news outlet.

      13
      4
      • LizA says

        More uncontrolled laughter. You say:

        “It’s been proven to have been wrong on nearly every major event, even one as plainly obvious as this one. Combine this with the reluctance of the authors to honestly address evidence that contradicts their viewpoints, and you have a perfect fake news outlet.”

        I thought you were referring to the NYT or the BBC. It would actually make sense! And anyone who naively quotes Bellingcat is possibly the most gullible ‘useful idiot’ on the planet.

        6
        2
        • Matt says

          I guess the entire Russian media are “useful idiots” then, considering they have verified Bellingcat’s claims. Whoops.

          • LizA says

            ‘Whoops’??? You mean you slipped over on a very greasy generalisation?? Perhaps what you’re implying is that there is actually a free press in Russia, some of which is willing to play along while being as confused as everyone else by a UK/Bellingcat narrative that just doesn’t stack up.

        • mark says

          No, you have to believe all this because Bell End Higgins spoke to someone down the pub who knew somebody who said he knew Boshirov’s granny. Sounds pretty convincing to me. Anyone who thinks differently is obviously a Putin troll in the pay of the Kremlin.

      • LadyDi says

        @Matt My God what a shameless liar you are. I have gone back and read every one of OffG’s articles on the Skripals and on MH17.

        You know what none of them do? Make claims without evidence. They source to facts, correct errors in the mainstream stories. They have never, not once that I can see ever claimed that Boshirov and the other guy are not Russian agents, they do the proper journalistic thing and wait for evidence. Real evidence you cow pat, not “oooh Bellingcrap just got handed another manilla envelope of anonymous bullshit”.

        You have some nerve you really do. You either are so special you don’t get what evidence is and you think it’s whatever that pervert Higgins (he’s obsessed with people sucking his testicles) posts on his Atlantic Council-funded disinfo site, or you’re a disinfo agent in an anonymous cubicle being paid minimum wage to diss sites far better and smarter and braver than you can ever hope to be. Either way please get the fuck out of here. If I was OffG I’d ban you, but they likely won’t I guess. It is truly sickening how you exploit their tolerance to insult them. Your only possible excuse is you’re as spectrum dominated as you seem to be.

        3
        1
  4. Paul X says

    The argument gets credence with Sawyers jumping in today as if he was talking about Russians! Who needs evidence, he’s got to go. Maybe those Princes he imprisoned have got together a Big Bung revenge and are paying for the campaign? Most things in KSA need very big bribes.

  5. MICHAEL LEIGH says

    I have just watched the whole of the EU leaders assembled, to publicly admonish Saudi Arabia for an unproven crime, a crime for which there is not a shred of evidence against the Saudi leaders and or their peoples ?

    And this reminds me of how easy it was in medeval times for the witch-hunters to smear and destroy the innocent peoples ??

    3
    3
    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      Do the Sordid Barbarian Mafia family appeal to your ‘moral values’?

  6. djrichard says

    If a murder happens and it can’t be used as a fodder for an elite narrative (regime change or regime-protecting-us-from-chaos) then did the murder really happen?

  7. Much of what I have heard on the media points to Khashoggi being a spook. The two interviews with ‘friends’ that I have happened to hear have struck me as suspicious.

    • Paul X says

      He was very senior in Saudi Intelligence for years and appears to have done a Skripal last year by going to live in the US and writing for CIA papers like the Washington Post. Instead of using a nerve agent that didn’t work (say the Brits) the Saudis took a bone saw with them. To be so open about it – surely they reckoned on myriad devices implanted by Agencies from across the World – suggests the idea was to make it obvious what had happened to discourage others from Turning?

  8. As an ex MSM journalist who’s seen the light, I got to the place Catte urges us to go a while ago (I’ve called it in my own mind a place of ‘radical doubt’ about everything in the MSM). The problem is, where to go from here and how to engage with the world (if one wants to) because the very next place you wind up is asking yourself, um, soooo, why the hell am I even bothering to read this stuff or think about it when it’s almost certainly 100% bullshit. Then I moved into reading only books with a few long-form magazines occasionally. As a result, you become pretty alienated from everyone you since you can’t really talk about world affairs at all because there is ZERO common ground; it would take several days of intense seminars to get other people to understand where you’re coming from. You almost start to feel like you’re some kind of mad-person and that you’re definitely seen as a ‘conspiracy theorist’. Anyway, just saying, and interested in how other people who have gone through the X Stages of Enlightenment are dealing with those various stages. (Which I realise is a bit of a derail, but never mind.)

    20
    • remorris says

      No ‘derail.’ Mine was 911. coming to grips with that mass-deception broke the mirror. And as we all know, you go through the mirror
      you get cut by the glass.
      Al Martin calls it the vortex of the way things are.

    • matty says

      Know how you feel Pohutuawa…. after a while you will feel as though you are living on another planet. As for dealing with it…I tell you…its a struggle…a real struggle.. Conventional wisdom cannot help you… Good luck Hope you cope better than I am.. Some say…The truth will set you free. Not in my case tho… a glimpse of the truth has done my head in… cannot get over “what could have been” had we not been subjugated and abused by the descendants of Evil.

      2
      1
  9. Sav says

    It’s become normalised that the West can go around the world murdering who they like and no one says a thing in western MSM about this. Which journalists also matter – not the ones NATO killed in Serbia. Or when they bombed Libyan TV. That’s all glossed over. They didn’t matter as they weren’t the right kind.

    14
    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      Or the Murder Incorporated regime known as Israel, with its unmatched record of assassinations.

      5
      3
      • PSJ says

        Any chance you could go an entire day without mentioning Israel in situations that don’t really call for it? No? OK, just a friendly inquiry.

        2
        7
        • Matt says

          They can’t. They like following me around and claiming I’m “hasbara”, “Ukronazi”, etc.

          Websites like this one and RT appeal to those who’ve lost touch with reality.

          1
          8
    • mark says

      Uncle Sam killed a lot of Al Jazeera journalists as well before it morphed into part of the MSM. Funny how all the journalists who have been murdered by the Kiev Junta don’t matter.

  10. Thomas Peterson says

    The point of the site is to speak to the same educated audience as The Guardian but not suck like the Guardian does.

    12
  11. Manda says

    “The recent media blitz on MBS stemming from the alleged murder of Khashoggi, tells us he is currently out of favour. And this is all it tells us.”

    Couldn’t agree more. Good piece Catte.

    11
    2
    • CalDre says

      The guy disappeared, no video of him leaving the consulate despite lots of cameras, Saudis can’t account for him, that’s a strong circumstantial case, probably enough even for a conviction in a criminal court. As to details, it’s all about what Turkish officials have said so far. You can believe them or not, but I haven’t seen anyone in the MSM accept it as truth.

      Now, the author posits that it’s merely a frame=job due to a falling out. WHere’s the evidence of that? Ironically, there’s absolutely no evidence of a frame job, nor any reason given why the “Western intelligentsia” would turn on Saudi Arabia. I’ve heard it be claimed that this is about Saudis cozying up to Russia – agreeing on oil output limits (the high oil price Trump was complaining about, the S-400 purchases). But that is even greater speculation than the assumption that Kashoggi is dead.

      By bigger point is: who cares if he’s dead. Saudis bombed a schoolbus of children and killed 50 of them a few months back, that was quickly forgotten, but the killing of this evil war criminal Khashoggi should concern anyone? World is much better off without him.

      10
      7
      • Admin says

        What author posits it’s a “frame-job”? Catte absolutely DOES NOT posit that. Catte states emphatically that we don’t know what happened to Khashoggi. Please don’t put words in our authors’ mouths BTL.

        14
        6
        • CalDre says

          LOL, seriously? Author goes on and on about how MBS has fallen out of favor (with no proof, except that he’s suddenly being accused of something – a cart-horse thing) and how is innocence vel non matters not. Yet they are accusing him – well, not exactly, they are sort of accusing 15 guess and sort of implying MBS would have been the one ultimately in charge – of this crime, or alleged crime, or what-not.

          So in general if someone is accusing another person of a crime, without caring whether or not the crime actually occurred, that’s generally accepted to be a frame job.

          Frankly I don’t see how you can not come away with that implication.

          My bigger question is, who cares about Kashoggi. Why his death or not matters. Saudis kill dissidents all the time, the consulate is their soil, nothing out of the ordinary here.

          So if I am reading tea leaves, it may very well be that someone other than MBS ordered a hit, but they want to blame MBS, because for whatever reason, he has fallen out of favor. That’s the frame job – whether by the intelligence services, the Saud family, or the media.

          To rule out that Kashoggi was killed, you’d have to assume he was alive, and that either he is hiding (to frame the Saudis), or the Turks are holding him (to frame the Saudis).

          I.e., either he was killed, or it’s a frame job.

          Hence, by positing he was not killed, one posits it was a frame job.

          If there is a rational third explanation, please, do explain it.

          6
          2
        • CalDre says

          By the way, if I were to speculate, my take on it is Kashoggi was a CIA agent (WaPo has close relations with CIA) and the CIA was working to overthrow MBS for whatever reason. Kashoggit was supposed to head the opposition to get a different successor to King Salman. MBS found out and that’s why they interrogated/killed him. And the CIA is pissed about that as they do not like anyone undermining their plans. Nobody cares about Kashoggi per se, he was a darkly evil SOB and the world is better off without him.

          4
          2
        • Matt says

          We know exactly what happened to him, sheesh. Stop lying so blatantly.

  12. One peculiar thing is the no one is asking the question of the motive. Why would MbS have ordered the assassination of Khashoggi? If I remember correctly, in all the detective books I read when I was a kid, the first thing that had to be determined by the detective was the motive. Maybe today, nobody reads detective novels any more, and everyone can get to conclusions thanks to some novel telepathic ability they developed while I was sleeping.

    • Lea,

      This was Pepe Escobar’s analysis a few days ago

      “EXCLUSIVE: BUTCHER/KILLER/REFORMER MBS AND HIS PAL JARED

      One of my top House of Saud-related sources confirmed it – once again: Khashoggi was CIA – and no wonder the CIA WaPo is up in arms.

      Quite a few CIA senior ops are also after MBS prime WhatsApp pal Jared.

      The narrative is that Jared alerted MBS that Khashoggi was a danger.

      Other CIA ops were already in uproar when MBS pulled his Ritz-Carlton jail stunt – accusing Jared of TREASON: giving away CIA files on dissidents in the royal family which were CIA agents. That led to their deaths or arrests or at least forking out billions.

      This is the real game: civil war at the top. The Trump clan vs. the CIA. Everything else is smoke and mirrors.”

      However, I think Catte’s analysis here is absolutely brilliant. We know Khashoggi is CIA, and I am personally convinced that the CIA fake – some stuff – . It sometimes is not necessary to carry out a real killing, in order to obtain the main objective, which is indeed to change the narrative. People can be made to disappear without killing them, especially if they are already “on the team”, and would prefer a quiet life with less risks under a new identity.

      I believe very little of what I read in Newspapers, and I do not watch TV.

      Tony

      7
      1
      • CalDre says

        “People can be made to disappear without killing them” – yes but a Saudi consulate isn’t just any place. If Kashoggi had disappeared just anywhere we wouldn’t be having this conversation. He disappeared and there was a lot of suspicious activity and the Saudis have not provided any evidence that he left the consulate.

        CIA is not a magician. Brutal killers, sure, magical, not a bit.

        2
        1
        • If JK is in on the act, no signs of him leaving mean absolutely zilch, do they? Surely, there is simply no way to know the truth because we don’t know who’s in on it and who isn’t, who’s lying and who’s telling the truth (if indeed there is anyone at all in the last category).

          The CIA, along with their collaborators, are absolute masters at propaganda. And to my mind, propaganda works like magic. It truly has magical properties. It can make people believe the most ridiculous, impossible things with the most ridiculous ease.

  13. Thanks for this article. Self-skepticism is tough. Objectivity and consistency is tough. But that’s the measure of uh, “stalwartness”.

    I’m personally not sure what the measure of “optimism” is. Both Sanders and AOC are now anti-BDS and such. And not that that’s my big issue. My issue is more warmongering. Which Sanders is also a new fan of apparently. AOC who knows. I’m left to hope amoral libertarians such as Rand Paul remain as just one voice against. Guess libertarian fans might take issue with that. Welcome to the club. Very, very, very, very narrow difference.

    And again good article, but “Minitrue” and “Grand Guignol”. ? Just from someone not in your apparent sphere of easy knowledge, I have no clue what the fuck either of those things are. And again good article, but it’s personally annoying to have to almost immediately ignore some kind of word that is utterly meaningless in order to go on. Maybe if I include some Louisiana Cajun words, or Boston Lingo, you’d understand that it’s ridiculous to write a serious article meant for the global masses yet include native or local phrases which mean utterly nothing to anyone else?

    Serious US people shouldn’t reference obscure US characters from US books. Nor other obscure shit. In order to not seem insular and/or pretentious.UK people also shouldn’t do similar, if they want to reach out to even a US audience; and/or even more so to a global audience.

    Next time and next articles, please limit your pompous studious arcane Anglophile references. Or don’t, and like me almost, lose readers after the first bizarre “Minicure” or whatever that was. Not even an asterisk as of a poem to go down below and get the reference.

    You’re not a professor, are you? So, since not, maybe just stick to plain language instead of abstruse clever smarty-pants references.

    1
    4
    • Ultraviolet says

      Minitrue is not an obscure reference from an obscure book. It is the Ministry of Truth from 1984. I am surprised that anyone with a keen interest in global politics could be unaware of it.

      “Grand Guignol” is perhaps a slightly less common phrase, but again not something I had to look up. This concept of bloodthirsty melodrama is pretty well-known, at least on the European side of the Atlantic. Maybe it never made it across to your side of the pond, but that fact does not justify insulting the author with accusations of “smarty-pants references”. Why not just be glad to have learned something new?

      4
      1
      • 1984 is an obscure book to most, sorry.

        And yes, sorry, and again (and again) it’s a good article. I just think it could be much better reaching without such insular references, to things 90% or more of humans have never read.

        “anyone with a keen interest in global politics could be unaware of it”

        Who in the hell is this article meant to reach? Intelligentsia? Anglophiles? Fuck that shit.

        1
        8
        • LadyDi says

          OMG. 1984 is an “obscure” book now? Read for God’s sake!

          11
          1
          • Obscure to the 7,000,000,000 non-British or American people. I typed “to most” for a reason.

            And “90% or more of humans have never read”, typed for a reason. This shouldn’t have been difficult to understand for most English-language speakers. Sorry for overestimating you.

            Please go back to your parsing studies, maybe in a few years you could read words and their meanings correctly. Even when it’s right there in your face.

            1
            5
            • Admin says

              Point taken. But – to all involved – the discussion is a bit OT so shall we leave it there?

              1
              1
            • Thomas Peterson says

              well no, not really, 1984 is pretty widely known worldwide.

              5
              1
            • Stonky says

              Actually, 1984 is widely known and read in China. So you just lost 1.5 of your 7 billion people. 😉

        • Thomas Peterson says

          no it isn’t, it’s used as a school text here in the UK and probably in the USA as well

          • Not in any USA (school text) I’m aware of, or went through. And in any event…even if every single American and Brit read 1984, there’d still be about 95% of the other humans who might not have or get what the fuck references to it are.

            I know perceived importance of Imperialist nations is outsized, but come on, even to the point of denying simple math? 1984 isn’t obscure to a billion Indians? To 2 billion Chinese? To a billion Africans?

            And how many Chinese, Indian, and African novels do you know, in their original language?

            Jesus fucking christ.

    • Victor G. says

      Comment less, bro … read more, and more. Illiteracy is not a badge one ought to wear with such, uhm, “attitude” …

      7
      1
      • Uhm you’re illiterate in thousands of tongues. So am I. Reading more and more in the same language we already know isn’t going to solve that. Barely-English speakers might happen upon this article and then abandon it with “Truepine” right off the bat.

        Read more utilitarianism, bro. Reaching out to struggling Sudanese and Mongolians isn’t all about your Charles Dickens’ references and Alexander Pope quotes, bro. Tone it down, is my recommendation, if the point is global humanitarian reach. If instead just a bubble of self-importance, sure. Go hog wild. Be only an Islander.

        1
        5
        • Thomas Peterson says

          sounds like you’d prefer to be on another site where the writing style is more to your liking. if you don’t understand references, look them up, as Lysias suggests. that’s half the fun.

            • Thomas Peterson says

              if you don’t enjoy learning new things, then why come here?

              6
              2
            • You have got to be kidding. I see expressions and words I don’t know all the time. It takes all of two seconds to put them into Google. Regardless of whether you find it fun or not, it takes a moment. And sometimes I have to look them up again because I’ve forgotten their meaning. Another moment of my time … to learn something new.

        • Makropulos says

          A language you don’t understand can be translated through the net. I’ve used this for passages in French, Russian, and even Latin. Non-English speakers can do the same in the opposite direction.

      • matty says

        Good Point…I get the impression that a lot of people are no longer concerned when exposing their own ignorance. Back in my day… one avoided letting all and sundry know that one was not quite up to following the adults conversation.

    • lysias says

      Instead of complaining, why not look up the phrses you don’t understand on line?

      I’m an American, and had no trouble understanding “Minitrue” and “Grand Guignol”.

      • My point was that if the author intends to affect things and reach globally, she or he should not include obscure cultural references. Do you agree. Do you disagree. What is the point of this site. To self-validate? Okay, if so goodbye.

        1
        6
    • lysias says

      Instead of complaining, why not look up the phrses you don’t understand on line?

      I’m an American, and had no trouble understanding “Minitrue” and “Grand Guignol”.

  14. John Marks says

    Yeh, one Saudi journalist killed in Turkey – headline news all round the world for days on end.
    Hundreds of women and children murder in cold blood – many while asleep – by ISIS and not a peep from anywhere on earth.
    What’s going on?
    Sure as anything mainstream media isn’t a source of news. More like mass psycho”therapy”.
    Why are these powerhouses masquerading as news sources allowed such free rein?

    19
    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      Because Western presstitutes and their owners are Evil, lying, hypocritical psychopaths. Haven’t you noticed?

  15. DunGroanin says

    Of course it could be that Kashoggi had a late life damascene conversion. Found true love. Wanted to repent and live in truth. That the CIA tipped off the incompetent (they really are that mince) Saudis, who then got caught red handed, literally, by Erdogan, who in turn has used it to escape pressure to keep fighting the Syrians, Russians and whoever else the Nato thugs want him to.

    Whatever – the best is that we may have seen peak Saudi ! And their FUKUS banker overlords.

    6
    1
  16. Makropulos says

    “Why you don’t trust the MSM even if they say what you want to hear”?

    I’d say you shouldn’t trust the MSM ESPECIALLY if they say what you want to hear.

    17
  17. Seamus Padraig says

    These days, whenever the Langley Post tells me zig, I feel the uncontrollable urge to zag.

    11
  18. Frankly Speaking says

    This article is spinning a bit of a yarn that no truth ever appears in the MSM. That’s patently nonsense, however, the article is spot on when it comes to MSM motivations and their control.

    To understand what’s happening with this MSM story we need to remind ourselves as to what’s been going in Syria. The Saudis have funded, equipped and otherwise supported ISIS, Al-Nusra and the other headchopping “rebels”. The Israelis and US and UK have also played their part in Syria.

    Turkey did too, but increasingly Erdogan is siding with the Russians and Iranians after the Russians gave him intel as to who was behind the attempted coup against him. That’s the key.

    Turkey is no longer playing along to the US script. The Americans have royally fucked up with their plan. Erdogan is now working against them as much as he can get away with. He’s also making sure that the Saudis know that they finally want peace on their border with Syria, and they don’t want the Devil Incarnate of Riyadh’s head choppers risking their own security and people. They’ve decided that MBS is too dangerous and he needs to go, hence releasing the recordings of what happened to Khashoggi.

    The MSM could not ignore this one, there’s too much revenue to made from the gory clickbait. But who ultimately controls most of our western media owners?

    Enter the Israeli’s. They now see this is a great opportunity to show who is boss and bring down MBS because he was competing for attention and investment in “their” part of the world. They sanctioned their media controllers in the US and UK to dish out the dirt on MBS and they responded faithfully, as ever. This is the second key.

    Turkey initially, follwed by Israel, are the keys to what’s going on. They have different motivations to bring down MBS, but this opportunity suits them both. The Israeli part is the explantion as to why even the likes of Lindsay Graham are now condeming MBS and announcing a regime change.

    Sorry Catte, you’re way off the mark.

    8
    6
    • Frankly Speaking says

      Forgot to mention that the Saudis are also being punished by the US for buying Russian S-400s

    • Admin says

      If you think this article claims no truth ever appears in the MSM you have fundamentally failed to grasp its point. Maybe read it again?

      12
      1
      • Frankly Speaking says

        No Catte, I fully and carefully read your article and I understand what you are saying. You are spinning your own narrative on this one. I like your work generally, but this one poor in my humble opinion.

  19. asdfasdf says

    I find this a bizarre notion that the MSM beholden to Saudi Arabia would come up with a narrative damaging to Saudi Arabia.

    I get the criticisms and hypocrisy innate in the corporate MSM. However this notion that there is never, ever, any reporting done THAT UNCOVERS TRUTH is idiotic.

    Reminds me of the Trump leftists who championed Trump’s criticisms of the MSM as if Trump gives a _____ about objective truth to begin with.

    And so it goes.

    4
    6
    • grandstand says

      Yes asdfasdf the MSM usually (but not always) get the sports results right. But as you said, in slightly different words, why does the MSM, beholden to KSA, make a big thing – really a big thing (Op-Ed in WaPo) – about a narrative that puts the leader of KSA in a bad light? Note that the MSM took on board a narrative that Turkey gave them – they didn’t construct it – just as they took on board the Skripals narrative from the UK government.

      Imagine that Russia had given them a narrative that was fairly conclusive – assuming the evidence was not fake – that MH17 had been shot down by the Ukrainians. Oh wait a minute, they have! Did the Western MSM make it their big story? Of course not. And why is the Khashoggi narrative echoed back and forth between Western governments and the MSM? That’s what they normally do, of course, but they do it to the “baddies” – not to “our guys”. No – it seems clear this is about either removing MbS or extracting some payment (in cash or in kind) from him. But why? What has changed? How has he stepped out of line? And the answer to that is not that he killed a journalist.

      19
  20. grandstand says

    I am trying to make sense of the situation and share my thoughts – mainly questions – here in the hope that others might shed some light. Apologies if I repeat what others have already said.

    To my mind, following Catte, the key issue is not Karshoggi’s killing (assuming that he has been killed) but how this information (real or fake) is being used and why it is being used in that way. Karshoggi, if he is dead, is just one of the millions who have died violently in the Middle East recent years and, while he will no doubt be mourned by his nearest and dearest, is not, in the bigger scheme of things, a great loss to the world. Many more deserving humans have been killed. So how and why the fuss?

    What does Turkey get out of this drip feed approach to information dissemination that it is undertaking? Is this about leverage with MbS? “Give us what we want or we will release more?” And why do the Western media take the Turkish “evidence” at face value? Why would KSA not understand that the Turks had bugged their embassy? Isn’t that what everyone does? And if they didn’t know this, why is this killing so important that Turkey is willing to blow its cover – thereby no doubt losing this capability?

    We have all seen how the Western media is very selective about its willingness to accept evidence. If it fits with a narrative that they want the population to believe (however fanciful), then it is promoted, if not it is pushed to the bottom of the column or the back page, or simply ignored. Why do those who own or control the newspapers want us to accept – now and not earlier – that MbS is a “brutal dictator”, like, we are told, Assad and Putin? It was fine when he locked up, and by some accounts tortured, his relations, and forced them to cough up money.

    Saudi Arabia has some very powerful levers to exert if it so chooses. Oil prices, already high, can be pushed to astronomical levels. Indeed, even the threat of action by, or instability in KSA, would trigger a huge rise in the prices. On the other hand, KSA has been playing well with Israel and the US – apparently Pompeo’s recent trip to KSA involved the payment by KSA of $100M to the US to “support the stabilization of” the situation in Syria. Why is MbS a liability now? KSA is a bulwark, isn’t it, against those nasty “state supporters of terrorism” the Iranians? It has, at least its leaders have, accepted that the Israelis can do whatever they like to the Palestinians with impunity.
    Israel surely cannot expect a more friendly government in KSA than the current one.

    Can we be so naive as to believe that the increased concern by the media for Karshoggi is because he is/was one of theirs? It hasn’t been the case when Israel and the US have both targeted, and continue to target, journalists in war zones in recent years. Why now?

    Is the issue about the fact that despite offering to buy $110B of arms from the US, MbS is also negotiating to buy S-400s from Russia. Those nasty S-400 weapons that would defend them from Iranian missiles, presumably. Or are the Israelis worried that they would defend a future, less Zionistically disposed, leader of KSA against IAF attacks?

    There is an interesting discussion on SST – one of the best I have seen there. Ignore the rantings of the cantankerous Colonel. He clearly knows a lot about the Middle East and about how the US Government works but he is a little intolerant of alternative views.

    16
    1
  21. Antonym says

    The Saudis may be local tyrants but for the Empire they are merely puppets.
    That, or the other way around. It was US president Obama who kneeled for the Saudi ruler, not visa versa. The Saudis got royal treatment in the US days after 9/11, not the Americans.
    Also the Gulf sheikhs pay Anglo secret services: https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/isis-recruiter-who-radicalised-london-bridge-attackers-was-protected-by-mi5-232998ab6421

    Why? Long history of cooperation, oil as the new gold to underpin Wall street & the City plus the U$ dollar and the UK Pound.

    5
    1
  22. Stonky says

    Great article Catte.

    What I find most sobering about this whole story is the sheer level of orchestration.

    The story has been on the front page of every major media outlet for days now. Two weeks ago none of these politicians or journalists had ever heard of Khashoggi, Now they’re all running around carrying on as if the Saudis had just crucified Jesus.

    It’s clear that there are people out there who can get quite literally anything they want plastered all over the whole of our media, quite literally overnight. I guess most of the people who gather in places like this know intuitively that our mainstream media are worthless puppets. But we’re now having it rubbed relentlessly in our faces on a daily basis.

    With the Skripals and Syria you at least have some inkling about who is conducting the orchestra, and why. I was utterly baffled as to what bin Salman could possibly have done to suddenly become a target like this. Thank you to the people above who are already starting to put some of the pieces together. And thank god for places like offguardian, where you can come in the hopes of finding some worthwhile information about what’s going on.

    23
    • grandstand says

      I guess you and I are thinking along the same lines Stonky. Sorry if I’m repeating some of your views. “Orchestration” is a good word!

  23. Wonderful article, Catte! You’ve reminded us once again to never ever ever to take mass media narratives at face value.

    Kashoggi is a well known surname to those of us who are old enough to remember the late Adnan Khashoggi, the international arms dealer, playboy and owner of a big yacht he sold to Donald Trump.

    Adnan was the son of Muhammad Kashoggi the personal physician of the King Abdulaziz Al Saud, the founder of Saudi Arabia who was played by Alec Guinness in the movie starring Peter O’Toole as T.E. Lawrence.

    Muhammad’s roots were in Kayseri in Anatolia. The family surname means “spoon maker” in Turkish.

    Adnan was the uncle of Dodi Fayed, the son of Egyptian billionaire Mohamed Al-Fayed who was Princess Diana’s last boyfriend and who, according to the mass media, died with her in a car crash in Paris on 31 August 1997.

    Adnan was also the uncle of Jamal, was a first cousin of Dodi.

    Jamal was acquainted with Osama bin Ladenand had worked for Saudi intelligence to try and influence bin Laden into making a compromise with the Saudi royal family in their rivalry.

    The Kashoggis are swimming in money, in connections, and in the stink of petrodollar politics.

    I discovered all of the above in ten minutes of reading Wikipedia, and already I feel qualified to bore strangers at cocktail parties on the subject. There is bound to be a lot more to the story of Jamal walking into the consulate to obtain a document proving he was divorced and then getting cut up, but we are probably never going to hear the truth, and even if we did, I doubt that we would recognize it.

    20
    • Even though Wikipedia publishes loads of rubbish there are so many revealing golden tidbits to be found.

    • Cherrycoke says

      Adnan Kashoggi was a major figure in the geopolitcal intrigues of the 70s and 80s (e.g. Iran-Contra). Have you heard of the Safari Club?

      “The Safari Club takes its name (reportedly de Marenches’ idea) after the resort in Kenya where the group first met in 1976. The club was operated by Saudi arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi—also a friend of Adham’s.”

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safari_Club

    • davemass says

      Er, Alec Guiness played Prince Faisal, who was betrayed by the Sykes-Picot and ended up with the consolation prize of King of Syria then Iraq.
      Apart from that, I thought I knew that Khashoggi name from old Adnan, way back…!

  24. Gordon Drennan says

    Anyone who doesn’t believe the author’s basic premise need only look at the Corbyn anti-Semitism scandal in Britain. It appeared out of nowhere, started by the Guardian. It spread into the rest of the MSM. It was hugely exaggerated by the Jewish media. He was called everything up to a “f**king anti-Semite” himself for his own support of Palestine, and for supposedly tolerating it in his party. And as soon as the people who started the whole thing had sufficiently coerced him and the British Labour Party into what they wanted – support for another Brexit vote to overthrow the previous one that produced a result they didn’t like, and going soft on Israel – every mention of anti-Semitism in the British Labour Party instantly vanished, never to be heard of again.

    17
    • What I don’t understand is how people can possibly get seriously interested in anything that the media make a big deal of. For me, the greater the fanfare, the lower my level of interest. My instincts immediately told me, “Bullshit”, even though I did not acquaint myself with the barest details of the story the media published about Khashoggi. Just the sense of fanfare immediately made the affair seem as though it lacked credibility and my instincts also said, “There will be no evidence of any kind to support the story.”

      The media cannot be trusted to tell the truth in any shape or form. I’d only ever believe them if they provide very clear evidence to support their story and that evidence does not necessarily mean witness testimony because witnesses can be paid disinformation agents, of course – there’s probably thousands of ’em. The depths of propaganda and all the phony twists and turns the power elite conjure up for their stories are simply mind-blowing.

      14
      1
    • davemass says

      Chuck-up Ummuna keeps on about it. Now he’s getting 460quid an hour (65000pa) for work with the new ‘centre party’- His reward for keeping it running against Corbyn…

  25. Trumps conscience had a hard time with the school bus incident. His war mongering cabinet has demand he continue grandstanding for the Saudis anyway because of the profitable arms sales. Trump covertly took it upon himself to buy the operatives necessary to stage an event which would then give him the excuse to cut off Saudi arms sales.
    Jamal Khashoggi is currently undergoing a face transplant onboard Airforce one, on his way to Ireland to recover in a safe house near Trumps golf course.

    • Jen says

      The source is a very pro-government / pro-AKP newspaper Yeni Şafak so the news about that member of the hit squad and the consul still needs to be taken with a pinch of salt … or sand.

      • ttshasta says

        Agreed, despite nihilist goldbuggery, ZeroHedge is updated hourly, addictive, but, doom porn.
        Circa 2014, Turkey’s Zaman Today had articles about parliament questioning their gov about supplying sarin to Syrian rebels. A site search linked a handful of said articles; how I wish I had done screen grabs. Post failed coup, and Erdowan’s crackdown those articles are gone.
        Turkey is now quite the M.E. wild card.

    • vexarb says

      Tom, I buy Scott’s argument because I was going to suggest something along the same lines myself (but only as a paradox and without evidence). Scott’s documentation solidly buttresses his paradoxical argument: the AZC is in full flow of moral outrage because they have sneaking suspicion that the new ruler of Saudi Arabia might secretly have the interests of his own country at heart, just like Ghaddaffy, Assad, Nasr’Allah and the Guardians of the Iranian Revolution. The MSM presstitutes are shrieking a warning: “Dont go down that dangerous path!”

  26. Gary Weglarz says

    I quite agree with Catte’s general premiss, but would simply qualify that her statement – (“when we blame the Saudis unequivocally without anymore evidence for their guilt than we have for that of Boshirov and Petrov”) – that such an assertion rests totally on the word “unequivocally.” I say this because there is essentially (zero evidence) that Russia had (anything) to do with the alleged Skripnal poisoning, while there is at least significant circumstantial evidence the Saudi’s are in some way connected to K’s disappearance. I do agree that gullibly rusting the MSM’s narrative’s on this matter would be a serious mistake indeed and that there is undoubtably a great deal we do not know about.

    (“We’ll know when/if the Saudis step back behind whatever line they transgressed when the headlines stop telling us about Khashoggi’s brutal murder, when that meme simply vanishes, or when it’s transformed by weasel-words into something else.”) – This is a very astute observation. One remembers how U.S. envoy April Gillespie told Saddam that the U.S. had “no opinion” or concern regarding his possible invasion of Kuwait only to use that very move by Saddam to justify our invasion. Could the Saudi’s have been given a similar “green light” designed to create this very situation? History does have a way of repeating itself.

    Though this is an aside, I’ve always thought that the fact-free assertion that the majority of the so called 9/11 hijackers were Saudi’s was a very interesting part of that psyop, and was done for the specific purpose of having “evidence” in the court of public opinion to use for future control / extortion of Saudi compliance with neocon wishes in the Middle East.

    Thanks for a though-provoking article on this matter.

    9
    1
    • dimples says

      The hijackers were Saudis because the Saudis were running the ‘hijacker’ part of the 911 operation for their pals in the US MIC. The hijackers were merely meant to look like they were the hijackers for narrative purposes and went to ground before the attacks took place. They were not, say, Iraqis because the Iraqi govt. and intelligence services did not have the same friendly relationship with the US MIC as the Saudis.

      3
      1
    • mark says

      At least 6 of the 19 “martyred” so called hijackers turned up alive and well after 9/11. Some of them were obviously bemused by it all and said indignantly it was nothing to do with them. Their passports were mysteriously “found” in a pristine condition in the rubble. CIA asset Osama Bin Laden also denied all knowledge.

      • They weren’t bemused. They were paid to pop up – no terrorist involved would have been allowed to pop up to protest their aliveness unless that scenario had been desired by the perps. That was just one of the “signs” the power elite push in our faces to tell us it’s they who are the perps and it’s all a pack of lies – as, of course, was the pristine passport that despite its immaculate appearance managed to change ownership from Mohammad Atta to Satam al-Suqami. The power elite have some weird “moral” belief that if they signal their crimes to us with things that obviously don’t add up then the guilt lies with us for not calling them out, not them, and they are saved from karmic repercussions. I mean, one must admit that the 9/11 story does not add up from start to finish in any way at all.

        4
        1
        • Admin says

          You’re assuming a 100% control by the PTB which simply doesn’t exist. If it did, we wouldn’t be here and neither would you. The claim these people push “signs” in our faces seems to be simply a way of squaring the claim of 100% control with the obvious slips and mistakes.

          Have you considered this is itself a psyop, designed to create confusion and a sense of helplessness? “No point in pursuing these anomalies because the PTB put them there and WANT us to pursue them.” What better way of covering up your mistakes and making sure no one bothers to investigate them?

          Just sayin

          • I wouldn’t be in the least surprised if how the whole “moral belief” thing started was that they made a few great stuffups purely accidentally and were amazed at how they got away with them. Realising that they could get away with them they decided to make up their “moral” charade of pushing their crimes in our faces and making it our responsibility to call them out. But, of course, it also provides them with great amusement. I mean, I find what they do amusing myself even if I hate to admit it.

            I’m not sure what you mean by saying I assume 100% control by the PTB. Ole Dammegard was told by an insider that they push their crimes in our faces with obvious signs and I think what they do bears that out very clearly. Having terrorists pop up alive to my mind can only fit “deliberate”, it does not fit “stuffup”. A terrorist who was supposed to have died on 9/11, genuinely popping up alive, bemused, and protesting his aliveness is not a real world scenario to my mind. Surely, you don’t believe that is a real world possibility, do you? And, of course, has it made the slightest difference? Has anyone been hauled over the coals for it? No, not a thing has happened about it. Hello? Hello? A terrorist who was supposed to have died on 9/11 popped up alive. Hellloooo out there. Hello out there all you people who call us conspiracy theorists. How did a terrorist who was supposed to have died on 9/11 pop up alive and well?

            • PSJ says

              I think you mean ”Ole Dammegard CLAIMS he was told by an insider….”

              Even supposing Ole Dammegard isn’t simply lying, we still have no way of knowing the “insider” was a real insider, no way of knowing he told Dammegard the truth.

              And even if we simply believe him we are left with the problem of which “mistakes” we assume are genuine mistakes and which we assume to be “signs.” How can we tell? Do you think all the “mistakes” are also ”signs”? or just some of them? If only some – which? How do you know? How does Dammegard know?

              I see no benefit it pursuing this, other than, as some other commenter said, an impetus to desist from investigating the mistakes.

              Was Building 7 a mistake, or a “sign”? Is Silverstein merely an evil idiot who doesn’t understand the mechanics of demolition or is he a Riddler planting clues for us to follow? To where? Why?

              How is their bid to cover up their crimes aided and abetted by helping people uncover their crimes? What data is there to suggest this entire narrative of “signs” has any basis in reality?

              • I think the evidence of deliberate signs is much too obvious for Dammegard’s claim not to be true. We cannot always know necessarily whether something is a stuffup or deliberate but in some cases we can know that it is definitely deliberate as in the popping-up-alive terrorists. While we might infer that the pristine passport’s appearance is a detail added to lend credibility to the story (some may say it does the opposite, of course), the changing changing ownership tests credulity too much, is completely unnecessary for the story and does not fit stuffup.

                I’ve noticed that people commenting on other staged events will say (without knowing about the moral charade thing) that the sloppiness of execution is too obvious for it not to be deliberate, eg, the footage of David Hogg ostentatiously “rehearsing” his lines at the Florida high school staged shooting.

                It’s simply in the evidence, PSJ. The obviousness of a sign that simply cannot fit stuffup. It’s really very straightforward.

                The perfect implosion of WTC-7 is an interesting case. It wasn’t required for the “terror” operation so why did it happen? Perhaps it was multi-functional. Perhaps they wanted the building down ASAP, it was one of their “signs” (and we have the helpful trill of Silverstein’s “pull it”), and they also pushed it out to be used in their truther-targeted propaganda. Disinfo agents align with truthers by pointing to the obvious implosion while also pushing out the loved ones/rescuees/colleagues in the twin towers and Pentagon spiel. And there’s the extra propaganda about Barry Jennings’ mysterious death. They really do love their convoluted propaganda, the power elite, don’t they, PSJ?

                I hesitate to say it as, for all I know it could be true, but I do find the “bone saw” story amusing. It does seem to me rather OTT and a deliberate sign of staging. But perhaps we’ll be treated by the media to gruesome photographs of JK’s dismembered body at some point down the track.

                • Just to add. Without the piece of information that the power elite provide signs, the evidence simply does not make sense. When I first heard it from Ole, I accepted it without a moment’s hesitation because it helped make sense of things that previously had not. Silverstein’s “pull it”, of course, then there’s all the smiling parents of the just-deceased 6 and 7 year-olds and Robbie Parker’s infamous performance at the microphone. None of it made sense. Other analysts called the smiling “duping delight”, however, that didn’t quite fit. Crisis actors are directed to act – to a degree. You’d think that if they’re smiling too much the director would do it over again or give them the sack. The smiling was too prevalent and too over the top for “duping delight” so I was very happy to get this golden nugget from Ole because it made sense of all the things that had puzzled me.

                  Obviously, there are things that kind of do both: the power elite want them to happen but they’re also very, very obvious. We could say that about the whole of the 9/11 story, couldn’t we? It’s simply preposterous – 19 barely-trained terrorists hijacking four planes with boxcutters, navigating them through the most restricted airspace in the world, to crash them into three iconic buildings including Defence HQ with no evidence to support this story. It’s so utterly ridiculous and yet most people consider you to be a “conspiracy theorist” if you reject this ludicrous story. Similarly, we do have to wonder about the perfect implosion of WTC-7. So yes, it’s not always so clear cut but some things really are because they are completely gratuitous and obviously avoidable so they don’t fit “part of the propagandistic story” nor “stuff up”.

      • matty says

        It has been well documented that a number of the “saudi” hijackers are still alive. However, it seems that not many people wish to follow that insight to the next level. If ,in fact , many of the “hi-jackers” are still alive…then please explain how the planes managed to find their way to their respective targets.

  27. mark says

    Shady Wahabia is quite capable of butchering this journalist/ CIA asset/ Saudi intelligence asset/ whatever, for reasons best known to itself. Salman kidnapped the Lebanese PM and threatened to kill him and his family unless he resigned. Then he incarcerated all the Saudi billionaires and princes in the Ritz where they were tortured by Blackwater style mercenaries until they handed over all their money. And Salman has a history of stupid, reckless and self destructive ill starred adventures in Yemen, Syria and Bahrain. So this is all quite plausible in a country where 50 people were beheaded in a single day.

    But Catte is right to be cautious and sceptical. Salman is an uppity US satrap who needs to be put in his place. This came after he threatened Canada and announced his intention to buy Russian S400s. And just after Trump did his two bit Mafia hood party piece, “They gotta pay. They gotta pay for their protection. Saudi Arabia wouldn’t last two weeks without our protection.” Perhaps if Salman falls into line and reverts to his role as a sufficiently servile US puppet he can be forgiven, whatever did or did not happen to the alleged victim. Maybe if he cancels the S400s and promises to keep oil prices low, Khashoggi can be consigned to the Memory Hole. But it tends not to end well for US puppets who have outlived their usefulness and become expendable, like Diem/ Trujillo/ Noriega/ Saddam Hussein/ Gaddafi.

    Erdogan certainly can’t be trusted and has his own agenda. Khashoggi may well have been butchered in the consulate and dismembered. Or it could be a Skripal type hoax. I’m intrigued by how and why the consulate was supposedly wired for audio/ visual, and why these tapes have not been leaked or published. The sudden US/ western/ Turkish concern for human rights and civilised standards is all very commendable, but it is a very recent departure for a country which has repeatedly called for Julian Assange and Edward Snowden to be “whacked in the street.” When hundreds of unarmed demonstrators were gunned down in Gaza by IDF kiddie killers with dum dum bullets and British sniper rifles, and millions of Yemenis cowering under a carpet of British and US cluster bombs facing starvation and cholera generate so little concern. It’s quite possible we are being played. We need to keep a very open mind.

    12
  28. Jen says

    I should think a third point Black Catte could have made is how the MSM can use Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance / murder, whichever it is, not only to blacken the Saudi Crown Prince’s reputation but also to use it to diminish Donald Trump’s presidency even more, given that so far the White House reaction to JK’s fate appears lukewarm to say the least and that Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner seems to be good pals with Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman.

    Another point is that JK wrote regular opinion pieces for The Washington Post. For this reason, we can expect WaPo to mine his disappearance for all it is worth and paint him as a dissident. Never mind that for most of his career working in the media, JK was a loyal supporter of the Saudi government, had sponsors among the Saudi royal family (Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal having been his most recent sponsor) and supported regime change in Syria. He came from a wealthy family that depended upon Saudi royal support and an uncle of his had been an arms dealer.

    Slightly off-topic, there is the possibility that the Turkish government is using JK’s disappearance to get leverage over the US and the Saudis in the current situation in Syria before the Syrian Arab Army and its allies begin their offensive in Idlib province later this year. In case no-one has noticed, Turkey has already returned the pastor Andrew Brunson to the US.

    11
    1
  29. grandstand says

    I tend to agree, Catte, that we should be very sceptical of MSM given their track record. And the fact universally they are pitching the “Saudis killed Kharshoggi” narrative in unison makes me more suspicious. Evidence, as we know, can be manufactured to suit the purpose. On the other hand, even the likes of MoA and SST and their commenters appear to be accepting the narrative. And it certainly is more credible than the Skripal affair.

    But the question I ask is why the Establishment in the West suddenly become interested in human rights? It was ok for Saudi Arabia to bomb a Yemeni school bus but not, apparently, to kill a journalist with some thing of a murky past. What has changed in the West’s love affair with MbS? The best comment I have seen on this entire sordid affair (I only have this second hand from SST) was a tweet by Jon Schwarz from The Intercept: “I am withdrawing from all ventures with the Saudi government until they go back to killing people I’ll never meet at a party.”

    Meanwhile back at the BBC: A profile of Eliot Higgins https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0000qf4. I refuse to listen!

    • grandstand, the cabal behind this Faux Moral Outrage reveals their true face not only in Yemen. From the Syrian Arab News Agency:

      SANA – The US-led international coalition committed a new massacre against Syrian civilians in al-Swseh town in the eastern countryside of Deir Ezzor.

      Local sources stated that the warplanes of international coalition targeted with several airstrikes al-Swseh town,140 km east of Deir Ezzor, causing the martyrdom and injury of a number of civilians, in addition to material damage to houses and properties.

      The coalition also carried out a massacre against Syrians on October 13th, shelling Hajin town East of Deir Ezzor with CW white Phosphorus.

  30. Jack Thomson says

    The empire needs to control both the rulers and the opposition in all countries. In Egypt they supported both Mubarak and Muslim Brothers. When it became apparent that Mubarak could not hold on to power, they supported his downfall. When Muslim Brothers also could not hold on to power they supported Sisi. Thats why they were both supporting MBS and at the same time were allowing Khashoggi to write in WSJ. The saudi do not understand this game. They simply butcher the journalist rightly seeing him as a threat to their existence. The empire cannot allow such things. That’s the essence of what is happening.

    2
    2
    • Admin says

      Was the journalist butchered? We currently have no more evidence for that than for the presence of Novichok in Salisbury.

      12
      1
      • MICHAEL LEIGH says

        My first thought on reading all of the unsubstantiated reports about the Turkish authorities comments about the self-exilled Saudi Arabian US journalist’s dissappearance, is could this be a revenge plot by the Turkish Government against the Saudi Government for their failed p;romise to finance Turki financial crisis by over Billion US dollars, six months ago ?

        And this is still my guess as to why every nation, from the ‘ Land of Donald ‘ to say the ‘ Land of the Windmills ‘ where each has had a vested interest in gladly accepting the business riches of Saudi trading and now failing to note their own hypocrisy in calling for the current banishment of Saudi wars and its internal system of slavery, all of which they supported until today?

      • Matt says

        Yes, he sure was butchered. Just because no evidence has been publicly released, does not mean it doesn’t exist.

        Just like with MH17, Chepiga, DNC hacks, etc. you’ve got this story wrong too.

        1
        3
        • We have made no claim about what happened to Khashoggi other than to remind people of the absence of evidence – just as we do in the Skripal case. Just because we refuse to endorse your evidence-free certitude doesn’t mean we believe the opposite. We simply prefer to remain agnostic pending some form of proof.

          • Matt says

            “Absence of evidence” means “the authorities haven’t released the evidence quick enough, so we’ll just make up our own and base our claims off of that.”

            The Saudi’s admit they killed him The mainstream media was right. This is without any doubt.

            There will never, ever be any “evidence” that is able to satisfy those who don’t want to believe something. Not even a thousand years from now.

            • Admin says

              We aren’t claiming anything, just declining to be convinced by absent evidence and politically motivated narratives. We don’t claim Khashoggi is alive or dead. If he’s dead we have as yet no idea how he died or who may have killed him. We simply withhold an opinion until there’s something solid enough to go on. Why does this make you so angry you have to lie about what we say and do?

              Is the absence of our endorsement of your worldview so troubling?

              • Matt says

                Withholding an opinion is perfectly fine, and I have nothing against that. But withholding an opinion indefintely is one thing, while giving credence to false scenarios is another.

                In the case of this article, a fallacy is commited in claiming that because the mainstream media is focused on Khashogi’s death, that it must mean there is some ulterior motive. I believe this is a total misrepresentation of the mainstream media’s motivations, and that the author doesn’t address the counter-arguments that many here have made.

  31. This is the first sense that I have read about the issue.

    Turkish government agencies handled some of the Khan Sheikhoun evidence and corridored several thousand NATO jihadis into Syria,
    -now they are supposed to be some sort of bastion of authenticity about Kashoggi…?

    Evidence, first, evaluation second.

    Spot on Catte.

    8
    1
  32. harry stotle says

    “If the meme doesn’t vanish or transform we’ll know the Saudis are still on the naughty stool and may well be headed the way of Saddam.” – what’s missing here is an understandable motive (please correct me if I’m wrong).

    Such motives are easier to fathom in the wake of MSM generated anti-Assad, or anti-Putin memes (because they are easily situated within a relatively transparent geopolitical narrative) but what does the Empire stand to gain from turning the west against the Saudis at this particular juncture, especially since the nemesis of both Israel and KSA (ie Iran) remain very much in the Empires cross haires?

    The unholy alliance between the neocons and Saudi fanatics remains pivotal to operations in Syria, Turkey, Russia, and Iran although I do not discount the possibility that a new power dynamic is emerging which will be easier to analyse as it begins to unfolds.

  33. Jack Thomson says

    In general you are right about the mainstream media manipulating the truth at all levels. But, regarding this event I believe the media and the establishment was left with no other choice but to go after MBS given the sheer brutality and mafia-style execution of an establishment journalist by one of their allies. They do not like what they are doing but they have to do it. Whether this is a response to what saudis were doing or not, that is something to be seen but I am not aware of such a thing.

    8
    5
    • kevin morris says

      Of course, and a view of sanity if I may say. Does the media often lie? Of course it does. Does it always lie? Highly unlikely. This story is massive and neither the press, the alt media nor the people can get enough of it. Now that the British media is unable to present what is really going on in the world because of the 1988 Official Secrets Act which removes the defence of public interest from the press, stories such as this which only come along infrequently, will be seen as a godsend.. After all, whether the media is biased and is often used by our security services to plant stories that are untrue, journalists still dream of stories such as this, I’m sure.

      Today, the former head of MI6 gave his candid opinion that the deciision for Kashoggi’s murder came from the very top in Saudi. I’m sure that this news will have convinced many Off Grauniad followers that this story is a pretence, but I think that assumption is a shaky one.

      I do fear for people who believe that no one ever tells the truth. Admittedly, great caution is called for today, and a frequent response to frequent misinformation can be a feeling of parannoia, but an unwillingness to accept anything at face value that comes into the public arena seems to me like a recipe for ill health at the very least.

      • Admin says

        The article doesn’t claim the media always lie. The article says that reality is irrelevant to the media message. These are clearly distinct points. The first (yours) is reductionist and literal. The second (Catte’s) is not.

        4
        1
        • kevin morris says

          I think it goes without saying that people who read Off Grauniad will by and large be extremely skeptical about what the media presents. The underlying tenor of the article was that we should take nothing at face value in the Kashoggi story. I do fear that the constant seeking ulterior motives or deception in stories such as expressed in this article and by several others presents real dangers to the welfare of some people and I believe it is valid to draw attention to that. After all, my response was one of agreement with the viewpoint of another who took the Kashoggi story at face value.

          One danger seen from time to time here is that we become too clever by half, viewing anybody not blessed with our superior insight as ‘sheeple’ or members of ‘the herd’. Of course, we all sometimes feel reassured in believing that we are part of an elite because of our superior insights but I fear that such viewpoints often lead to a great deal of unhappiness, either for ourselves or for others: as it is often said, pride invariably comes before a fall. I fear too that the sort of views frequently presented can lead to a form of paranoia and I would argue that the general change in mood found at Off Grauniad suggests that this is often the case here.

          Until fairly recently responses on Off Grauniad were generally good natured and accepting of differing viewpoints. I cannot be the only person who has noticed a change in the general tenor of response to articles with terms of abuse becoming more prevalent than ever they were. As I suggested earlier, I was gratified to find that I was not the only person who saw the article as being overbown. As an organ that often asks ‘which community standards did this breach?’, but which sometimes feels the need to resort to censorship itself, I suggest we all might benefit from being rather be less dismissive of viewpoints that differ from what might be described here as ‘mainstream’.

          • Admin says

            We don’t “resort to censorship” and I’m puzzled why you would say we do. People are free to express any opinion they choose provided it’s not race-hate, incitement to violence or empty abuse. After all here you are, being less than accurate and slightly rude about us in a way that would get you wiped off the Graun, and many other places in the blink of an eye.

            Not sure we agree with the idea too much scepticism is bad for one’s health, but thanks for the thought, and it’s an interesting variant on the more traditional invitations to self-censorship. If any of us start to feel unwell we’ll definitely dial back on doubting the MSM – just in case 🙂

            4
            1
          • Paul X says

            The admission tonight that K died in the consulate ‘in a fist fight’! moves the debate on. The enthusiasm of the MSM and people like Ex MI6 bosses is interesting; maybe this is Regime Change in KSA by people (CIA) who have fallen out with the Crown Prince, maybe over the influence Trump’s of son-in-law? They’re bouncing Trump into it; they don’t want him to have any friends!

            1
            1
          • Matt says

            It feels like a breath of fresh air reading this comment. I couldn’t agree with you more. I too find that the extreme skepticism of the so-called “alternative” media has crossed into delusional territory. They are now doubting actual events that have happened, merely to “connect” them back to the U.S.

            I first noticed this with how this website covered MH17 and repeated all the lies told by Russia. If you dared criticize them, you were smeared as some “warmongering”, “imperialist”, “neocon, “neoliberal” sheeple who believed everything the West said against poor, poor Russia.

            Afterwards, when the Mueller indictment of the 12 GRU hackers came out, this website had no real rebuttal. They had been asking for “proof” to be instantly released, and, as they always do, when it didn’t come out fast enough, they began making stuff up. But they had no response to the plethora of details in the Mueller indictment, replete with the names of the hackers, locations, timestamps, payment methods used, exploits used, etc.

            And now, with the Skripal story, which they so confidently claimed was a “British false flag”. Once Bellingcat came out with their incredible investigative journalism, the dishonest “alt media” called them liars, accused their pictures of being photoshopped, falsely accused them of leaking information from intel agencies (even though Bellingcat mostly used hacked databases for their info), etc. But then the Russian media began to confirm many of the findings, even interviewing residents of the criminals’ hometowns. Despite this, this website ignored these new articles and continued with the ad hominem attacks against Bellingcat.

            There are no real watchdogs for the alternative media, which is why websites like this can get away with so much lying. And have the audacity to pretend that they’re somehow “better” and more factual than the mainstream media. Maybe in their dreams.

            It’s time to call out fake news and low news standards everywhere, even on sites like this.

            Thank you for your excellent comment.

            • PSJ says

              I don’t think you know what the word “proof” means. If you think Mueller managed to produce any you definitely don’t.

              Do you understand it’s not a synonym for “a person I want to believe told me something”?

            • Mulga Mumblebrain says

              The purest essence of hasbara. Up is down, right is left and shit is chocolate.

              1
              1
              • Matt says

                Mulga, I am not a Jewish cyberwarrior – “hasbara”. If you want to disagree with me, then that’s fine. But don’t make stuff up.

              • Admin says

                @ Mulga and @Matt. Enough. Any further OT and/or quasi racist sniping will be deleted.

                1
                2
  34. I simply don’t agree! There is much more evidence, none of which is dodgy, in this case. The very fact the poor victim never left the consulate alive, at least, is solid proof. The fact that his screams were corroborated by a visitor to the consulate at that time is more proof, the recordings of the Turks is proof. The arrival of fifteen Saudi agents who leave shortly thereafter is more proof. How much do you want? Do you need one of the murderers to confess? If that were the case, there would be very few murder convictions.

    13
    4
    • mark says

      Archie – I think you should be more cautious. The Turks have a history of orchestrating chemical weapons false flags in Syria (they were the source of the OPCW “evidence.”) I wouldn’t trust Erdogan as far as I could throw him. Ditto Trump/ CIA/ MI6, and everybody else involved in this. Salman is quite capable of murder, but you can’t take anything at face value. We have been lied to so many times before. We are told there is evidence of him being murdered. Okay, produce it. At present we are just supposed to take this on trust because Some Turkish newspapers say it exists. It’s the same with Skripal – produce the evidence. Or just believe it because some anonymous “intelligence sources” tell some tame media hacks they think it’s “highly likely” it happened.

      8
      2
    • Yes, they always have a suspect or someone associated dying in suspicious circumstances. It’s amazing how the MO is always the same.

      I believed that poor old Danny Jowenko, the Dutch demolitions expert who clearly identified the collapse of WTC-7 as a controlled demolition, when shown it, apparently, without knowing its provenance, was killed in a suspicious car accident. But now I think it likely that that was all propaganda. A demolitions expert didn’t know about WTC-7? And they really bothered to kill him in a very, very suspicious car accident? But I could be very wrong and perhaps while he was on his way home from church in his sleepy little town, intelligence agencies bumped him off with a car accident that does not stand up to any kind of scrutiny. Who knows?

      • alskdjf says

        I see you are doing your sworn duty to 9/11 orthodoxy taking every chance to discredit the obvious fact that explosives took down WTC7.

        Frankly, you look like a tool doing so.

        2
        2
        • No more perfect implosion can be found than that of WTC-7. Of course, it was explosives. That doesn’t mean that Danny Jowenko was killed for saying so. It could be sophisticated propaganda targeted at the truthers to make them believe that the evil power elite are trying to suppress the impossible-to-suppress truth of controlled demolition. The perps want the truthers to believe that they’re killing people all over the place and that they, the stop-at-nothing evil power elite, killed 3,000 and injured 6,000 on 9/11. That’s the truth they’re really trying to cover. That injury and death were staged not real on 9/11. Of course, they are killing people all over the place, just not necessarily the ones they’re trying to make out they’re killing! It’s a funny old world, isn’t it?

          3
          2
  35. TheThirteenthFloor says

    I agree with the author’s points in general, but what bugs me is why wouldn’t the Saudis release the video tapes of Khashoggi leaving the embassy again? And why is there no explanation for two Saudi jets, owned by the king, that can publicly be tracked flying to Istanbul and leaving the same day to return to Riyadh? Or why a number of MbS’s security detail, including one of his personal bodyguards can be seen on CCTV around the embassy and later the consular’s residence on that day? In contrast to the Skripal affair, there is a lot of public evidence that would have had to be faked by the Turks.

    6
    4
      • Lochearn says

        “The alleged murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi is a mass media rollout, every bit as sparsely verified and every bit as questionable as the official Skripal narrative, but this fact is being overlooked due to the cognitive dissonance involved in who is being blamed.”

        Why is TheThirteenthFloor missing the point when she/he has responded to what the author wrote above? The author claims equivalence to the Skripals and the comment is disagreeing with that. Isn’t that the point of a comments section? And what makes you feel you have the right to butt in all the time?

    • Sav says

      Who supplied the video of him entering the building? Even that is not conclusive. Not a case of the Saudis couldn’t have done this but…..it’s one stupid way of killing someone. Inviting them into your consulate and knocking them off. They may as well have shot him in the street. I know the Saudis get away with plenty but there still needs to be decent evidence.

      The claims of audio tapes etc…I’ve heard all that before. And people are repeating it as fact all over social media as if these recordings have already been heard.

Please note the opinions expressed in the comments do not necessarily reflect those of the editors or of OffG as a whole