October 18, 2018
Why the Angst over Jamal Khashoggi?
Timothy Birdnow
Does the public at large care about Jamal Khashoggi? I mean, nobody is happy about a person being murdered, but is this really a national issue? Those guys in the Middle East 86 each-other on a regular basis. Why is this so much more important? Yes, Khashoggi had resident status in the U.S., but he wasn't an American citizen. But he was also a member of the radical Jihadist Muslim Brotherhood. When you lay down with dogs you get up with fleas, the old saying goes.
I have to wonder why the Washington Post employed a terrorist supporter anyway. What does that say about them?
The great Daniel Greenfield at Front Page Mag made the following point: "Every utterance made by the Turkish Islamist regime is treated as fact by the media. Trump is being barraged with "how could you" lectures by the same media that is happy to ignore the tens of thousands of political prisoners in Turkish jails.
Why is the media so in love with Jamal Khashoggi?
Guessing isn't hard. It's the easiest thing in the world. And there's only one kind of fellow that the Turkish government would be up in arms over. There's only one kind of Muslim the media loves. Only one kind.
'The fate of Khashoggi has at least provoked global outrage, but it’s for all the wrong reasons. We are told he was a liberal, Saudi progressive voice fighting for freedom and democracy, and a martyr who paid the ultimate price for telling the truth to power.'
Sorry, no.
'In truth, Khashoggi never had much time for western-style pluralistic democracy. In the 1970s he joined the Muslim Brotherhood, which exists to rid the Islamic world of western influence. He was a political Islamist until the end, recently praising the Muslim Brotherhood in the Washington Post. He championed the ‘moderate’ Islamist opposition in Syria, whose crimes against humanity are a matter of record. Khashoggi frequently sugarcoated his Islamist beliefs with constant references to freedom and democracy. But he never hid that he was in favour of a Muslim Brotherhood arc throughout the Middle East. His recurring plea to bin Salman in his columns was to embrace not western-style democracy, but the rise of political Islam which the Arab Spring had inadvertently given rise to. For Khashoggi, secularism was the enemy.'
The Washington Post was happy to provide a forum for a member of a terror network that is responsible for murdering countless Christians and Jews.
End excerpt.
And this guy was working for the WAPO. It gets better:
"It was Yasin Aktay — a former MP for Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development party (AKP) — whom Khashoggi told his fiancée to call if he did not emerge from the consulate. The AKP is, in effect, the Turkish branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. His most trusted friend, then, was an adviser to President Erdogan, who is fast becoming known as the most vicious persecutor of journalists on earth. Khashoggi never meaningfully criticised Erdogan. So we ought not to see this as the assassination of a liberal reformer.
And it gets worse.
Most of the Islamic clerics in Saudi Arabia who have been imprisoned over the past two years — Khashoggi’s friends — have historic ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Khashoggi had therefore emerged as a de facto leader of the Saudi branch. Due to his profile and influence, he was the biggest political threat to bin Salman’s rule outside of the royal family.
And worse.
And that may have been the fatal snub, not least because Khashoggi had earlier this year established a new political party in the US called Democracy for the Arab World Now, which would support Islamist gains in democratic elections throughout the region. Bin Salman’s nightmare of a Khashoggi-led Islamist political opposition was about to become a reality."
End excerpt.
So, why is the media going all out for someone like this?
Well for one thing, this is a club to beat President Trump.
For example.
From the Boston Globe:
"Journalists around the world are increasingly fair game these days at the hands of their autocratic governments — or at the hands of just plain thugs. And President Trump’s assaults on journalists as "the enemy of the people†are surely exacerbating the problem."
The American media has been furious with Donald Trump for calling them out - successfully - as liars and enemies of the average American. So this story is tailor made for them.
The editorial continues;
"On Tuesday, David Kaye, the UN special rapporteur for freedom of expression, in an interview with the Associated Press decried the "global epidemic†of the stigmatization of journalists. "Whether it’s the United States and Donald Trump calling them ‘the enemy of the people’ or it’s [President] Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines doing much the same thing . . . journalists are under threat.â€
American journalists are still, relatively speaking, the lucky ones — beneficiaries of the First Amendment and of an independent judiciary committed to uphold and enforce it.
But words do matter. They matter to autocrats around the globe who now feel newly empowered to disparage, imprison, block, or even perhaps slaughter those journalists committed to telling the hard truths about the regimes they cover.
Jamal Khashoggi may be the latest victim of that "autocrats unleashed†syndrome. And the Trump administration owes him — and those who love him — more than empty words in determining his fate.
But beyond that, the world must know that this continuing abrogation of American values coming from the Oval Office is not who we as a people are. We as journalists and as citizens will continue to espouse the same freedoms — and protections — for our colleagues around the world as we enjoy here."
End excerpt.
Funny; the American media was not the least bit concerned when the Obama Administration spied on James Rosen, on the Associated Press, on Sherryl Atkinson? Trump has merely accused them of bias - and how can anyone blame him, when they have run endless attacks on the President based on anonymous sources and Hillary Clinton oppo research? But Trump has taken no actual steps against them, unlike Mr. Obama, whom they protected and cherished.
Where was the media when Wall Street Journalist reporter Daniel Pearl was beheaded by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and what did the media do? They had a fit because the U.S. waterboarded this vile journalist-killer.
But none of that advanced the liberal agenda, so it was a non-issue until Trump.
The media wants Trump to overreact. It will show he is out of his depth and drive the price of oil through the roof - and anger the American People. They don't care about the rift between ourselves and the Saudis; they are still angry that Trump withdrew from the Iranian nuclear deal and this benefits the Iranians, thwarting the trump plan to squeeze the Mullahs.
And the media has always had sympathy for Islam, a "brown" religion that has been "oppressed" by Christendom.
Here's another interesting tidbit; the prime suspect in this case spent several months living in Australia. That is interesting because the Aussies seem to have been working with British Intelligence to stick it to Donald Trump. Remember Alexander Downer? He was the Australian ambassador who set up George Papadopoulos This guy was closely tied to Chinese interests involved in espionage against America.
According to Lifezette:
"LifeZette detailed Downer’s connection to the Clinton Foundation in posts published January 16 and January 19. He was a key factor in the Australian government’s $25 million grant to the Clinton Foundation for anti-HIV/AIDs activities, which a subsequent audit could not document as having been completed."
And he was an Australian official. Coincidence? Maybe. But it's clear the Australians were working with MI5 to frame Trump.
But I wonder; is there more to this than meets the eye? Certainly the U.K. Express article is quite confident that is the case. Here is the opening paragraph:
"THE Australian High Commissioner to the UK is responsible for the FBI investigation into the alleged Russian collusion with Trump in the 2016 presidential election, according to unnamed sources."
Do we have anything beyond the word of the Turks? For all we know, Jamal Khashoggi is sunning himself on the beach in Perth or wherever. He DISAPPEARED which is a most convenient situation indeed. The Muslim Brotherhood, the Wahaabists, the British and Australian spy apparatus, heck, our own spy apparatus, would be perfectly capable and willing to do such a thing. Oh, and they may have killed him, too. As I said at the beginning of this essay, these guys 86 each-other on a regular basis. And why would we take the word of Turkey's Erdogan?
The incurious media will not bother to look into any of this. The sole purpose of this story is to win elections for Democrats and hurt Donald Trump.
Does the public at large care about Jamal Khashoggi? I mean, nobody is happy about a person being murdered, but is this really a national issue? Those guys in the Middle East 86 each-other on a regular basis. Why is this so much more important? Yes, Khashoggi had resident status in the U.S., but he wasn't an American citizen. But he was also a member of the radical Jihadist Muslim Brotherhood. When you lay down with dogs you get up with fleas, the old saying goes.
I have to wonder why the Washington Post employed a terrorist supporter anyway. What does that say about them?
The great Daniel Greenfield at Front Page Mag made the following point: "Every utterance made by the Turkish Islamist regime is treated as fact by the media. Trump is being barraged with "how could you" lectures by the same media that is happy to ignore the tens of thousands of political prisoners in Turkish jails.
Why is the media so in love with Jamal Khashoggi?
Guessing isn't hard. It's the easiest thing in the world. And there's only one kind of fellow that the Turkish government would be up in arms over. There's only one kind of Muslim the media loves. Only one kind.
'The fate of Khashoggi has at least provoked global outrage, but it’s for all the wrong reasons. We are told he was a liberal, Saudi progressive voice fighting for freedom and democracy, and a martyr who paid the ultimate price for telling the truth to power.'
Sorry, no.
'In truth, Khashoggi never had much time for western-style pluralistic democracy. In the 1970s he joined the Muslim Brotherhood, which exists to rid the Islamic world of western influence. He was a political Islamist until the end, recently praising the Muslim Brotherhood in the Washington Post. He championed the ‘moderate’ Islamist opposition in Syria, whose crimes against humanity are a matter of record. Khashoggi frequently sugarcoated his Islamist beliefs with constant references to freedom and democracy. But he never hid that he was in favour of a Muslim Brotherhood arc throughout the Middle East. His recurring plea to bin Salman in his columns was to embrace not western-style democracy, but the rise of political Islam which the Arab Spring had inadvertently given rise to. For Khashoggi, secularism was the enemy.'
The Washington Post was happy to provide a forum for a member of a terror network that is responsible for murdering countless Christians and Jews.
End excerpt.
And this guy was working for the WAPO. It gets better:
"It was Yasin Aktay — a former MP for Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development party (AKP) — whom Khashoggi told his fiancée to call if he did not emerge from the consulate. The AKP is, in effect, the Turkish branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. His most trusted friend, then, was an adviser to President Erdogan, who is fast becoming known as the most vicious persecutor of journalists on earth. Khashoggi never meaningfully criticised Erdogan. So we ought not to see this as the assassination of a liberal reformer.
And it gets worse.
Most of the Islamic clerics in Saudi Arabia who have been imprisoned over the past two years — Khashoggi’s friends — have historic ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Khashoggi had therefore emerged as a de facto leader of the Saudi branch. Due to his profile and influence, he was the biggest political threat to bin Salman’s rule outside of the royal family.
And worse.
And that may have been the fatal snub, not least because Khashoggi had earlier this year established a new political party in the US called Democracy for the Arab World Now, which would support Islamist gains in democratic elections throughout the region. Bin Salman’s nightmare of a Khashoggi-led Islamist political opposition was about to become a reality."
End excerpt.
So, why is the media going all out for someone like this?
Well for one thing, this is a club to beat President Trump.
For example.
From the Boston Globe:
"Journalists around the world are increasingly fair game these days at the hands of their autocratic governments — or at the hands of just plain thugs. And President Trump’s assaults on journalists as "the enemy of the people†are surely exacerbating the problem."
The American media has been furious with Donald Trump for calling them out - successfully - as liars and enemies of the average American. So this story is tailor made for them.
The editorial continues;
"On Tuesday, David Kaye, the UN special rapporteur for freedom of expression, in an interview with the Associated Press decried the "global epidemic†of the stigmatization of journalists. "Whether it’s the United States and Donald Trump calling them ‘the enemy of the people’ or it’s [President] Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines doing much the same thing . . . journalists are under threat.â€
American journalists are still, relatively speaking, the lucky ones — beneficiaries of the First Amendment and of an independent judiciary committed to uphold and enforce it.
But words do matter. They matter to autocrats around the globe who now feel newly empowered to disparage, imprison, block, or even perhaps slaughter those journalists committed to telling the hard truths about the regimes they cover.
Jamal Khashoggi may be the latest victim of that "autocrats unleashed†syndrome. And the Trump administration owes him — and those who love him — more than empty words in determining his fate.
But beyond that, the world must know that this continuing abrogation of American values coming from the Oval Office is not who we as a people are. We as journalists and as citizens will continue to espouse the same freedoms — and protections — for our colleagues around the world as we enjoy here."
End excerpt.
Funny; the American media was not the least bit concerned when the Obama Administration spied on James Rosen, on the Associated Press, on Sherryl Atkinson? Trump has merely accused them of bias - and how can anyone blame him, when they have run endless attacks on the President based on anonymous sources and Hillary Clinton oppo research? But Trump has taken no actual steps against them, unlike Mr. Obama, whom they protected and cherished.
Where was the media when Wall Street Journalist reporter Daniel Pearl was beheaded by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and what did the media do? They had a fit because the U.S. waterboarded this vile journalist-killer.
But none of that advanced the liberal agenda, so it was a non-issue until Trump.
The media wants Trump to overreact. It will show he is out of his depth and drive the price of oil through the roof - and anger the American People. They don't care about the rift between ourselves and the Saudis; they are still angry that Trump withdrew from the Iranian nuclear deal and this benefits the Iranians, thwarting the trump plan to squeeze the Mullahs.
And the media has always had sympathy for Islam, a "brown" religion that has been "oppressed" by Christendom.
Here's another interesting tidbit; the prime suspect in this case spent several months living in Australia. That is interesting because the Aussies seem to have been working with British Intelligence to stick it to Donald Trump. Remember Alexander Downer? He was the Australian ambassador who set up George Papadopoulos This guy was closely tied to Chinese interests involved in espionage against America.
According to Lifezette:
"LifeZette detailed Downer’s connection to the Clinton Foundation in posts published January 16 and January 19. He was a key factor in the Australian government’s $25 million grant to the Clinton Foundation for anti-HIV/AIDs activities, which a subsequent audit could not document as having been completed."
And he was an Australian official. Coincidence? Maybe. But it's clear the Australians were working with MI5 to frame Trump.
But I wonder; is there more to this than meets the eye? Certainly the U.K. Express article is quite confident that is the case. Here is the opening paragraph:
"THE Australian High Commissioner to the UK is responsible for the FBI investigation into the alleged Russian collusion with Trump in the 2016 presidential election, according to unnamed sources."
Do we have anything beyond the word of the Turks? For all we know, Jamal Khashoggi is sunning himself on the beach in Perth or wherever. He DISAPPEARED which is a most convenient situation indeed. The Muslim Brotherhood, the Wahaabists, the British and Australian spy apparatus, heck, our own spy apparatus, would be perfectly capable and willing to do such a thing. Oh, and they may have killed him, too. As I said at the beginning of this essay, these guys 86 each-other on a regular basis. And why would we take the word of Turkey's Erdogan?
The incurious media will not bother to look into any of this. The sole purpose of this story is to win elections for Democrats and hurt Donald Trump.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
12:24 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1491 words, total size 12 kb.
30kb generated in CPU 0.0808, elapsed 2.0471 seconds.
35 queries taking 2.0383 seconds, 158 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
35 queries taking 2.0383 seconds, 158 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
