Thread: Fox News’ Tucker Carlson: Anger Over Jamal Khashoggi Death Is ‘A Stunt’

Fox News’ Tucker Carlson: Anger Over Jamal Khashoggi Death Is ‘A Stunt’

The Fox News host claimed outrage over the Saudi journalist’s death was “an international incident hyped and manufactured for domestic political goals.”

By Lee Moran
10/20/2018 03:34 am ET

Fox News’ Tucker Carlson suggested Friday that the anger that has erupted around the world over the death of Saudi journalist and U.S. resident Jamal Khashoggi was simply “a stunt.”

The “Tucker Carlson Tonight” host claimed the “wave of false posturing on display from our own mindless ruling class” had turned Khashoggi’s death into “the most important story in the world.”

“But spare us the theatrics now,” he added. “It’s an international incident hyped and manufactured for domestic political goals.”

Saudi Arabia admitted early Saturday that Khashoggi, a known critic of the kingdom’s policies, had been killed inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey. It claimed he died following a physical altercation. The official explanation has been greeted with skepticism, however.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b055bc9480d17b

Tucker is exactly right. This is not a murder on our soil, we have thousands of those of our own to deal with. This is not an American Citizen involved. This has nothing to do with the USA. It's none of our business, not our problem.

Why is the left-wing media so outraged by the death of Jamal Khashoggi? He was a #StealthJihadist for the #MuslimBrotherhood who was engaged in espionage. He infiltrated the #WashingtonPost to further his Pro-Osama Bin Laden agenda - the Destruction of the U.S. from within.
http://www.wbdaily.com/big-governm…/khashoggi-good-riddance/



wbdaily.com

Jamal Khashoggi was just a Bad Guy Killed by Other Bad Guys -

3 Comments

US needs to stay out of this. Congress needs to shut up.

So, Jamal Khashoggi Wasn't a U.S. Green Card Holder After All?

Katie Pavlich
Posted: Nov 21, 2018 1:50 PM


Yesterday President Trump released a lengthy statement condemning the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, an occasional columnist at the Washington Post, while also making clear U.S. policy toward Saudi Arabia will not change.
"The crime against Jamal Khashoggi was a terrible one, and one that our country does not condone. Indeed, we have taken strong action against those already known to have participated in the murder. After great independent research, we now know many details of this horrible crime. We have already sanctioned 17 Saudis known to have been involved in the murder of Mr. Khashoggi, and the disposal of his body," Trump said. "We may never know all of the facts surrounding the murder of Mr. Jamal Khashoggi. In any case, our relationship is with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They have been a great ally in our very important fight against Iran. The United States intends to remain a steadfast partner of Saudi Arabia to ensure the interests of our country, Israel and all other partners in the region. It is our paramount goal to fully eliminate the threat of terrorism throughout the world!"
Since Khashoggi's October 2 murder at the Saudi Arabian consulate in Turkey, media across the United States has claimed he was a U.S. green card holder. As a result, reporters and editors urged the White House to change long standing policies and partnerships with the Kingdom.
But according to a report in Business Insider, Khashoggi wasn't actually a green card holder and simply visited the U.S. on a visa.

Mohamad Soltan, an Egyptian-American activist who sees Khashoggi regularly in Washington, told Reuters that Khashoggi was in the United States on an O-visa, a temporary residency visa awarded to foreigners "who possess extraordinary ability" in the sciences, arts, education, and other fields and are recognized internationally, and had applied for permanent residency status.

More:

View image on Twitter

Mike @Doranimated



Further evidence indicating that Khashoggi did not have a green card | https://connolly.house.gov/uploadedfiles/connolly_kaine_khashoggi.pdf …
94
1:01 PM - Nov 21, 2018

View image on Twitter

Mike @Doranimated



Friend of Saudi dissident says he did not have a green card. For weeks the press has been telling us he was a permanent resident. They just made it up, to increase the sense that the US has a special moral/legal responsibility to take action. https://cnb.cx/2QlmwC6
2,087
10:53 AM - Nov 21, 2018

Meanwhile, U.S. intelligence believes Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman directly ordered Khashoggi's killing. According to President Trump, Khashoggi was viewed by the Saudis as a an enemy of the state and a national security threat.

"Representatives of Saudi Arabia say that Jamal Khashoggi was an 'enemy of the state' and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, but my decision is in no way based on that – this is an unacceptable and horrible crime," Trump said.
The partnership between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia to fight Iran continues.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...iCUB6h5s8WVQwg

Hayward: Yes, Jamal Khashoggi Was a Member of the Muslim Brotherhood

10,527



AFP/Getty Images21 Nov 2018
4,130
6:42

The murder of Washington Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October prompted much debate about the writer’s past affiliations and ideological inclinations.

Responding to President Donald Trump’s Tuesday statement on the killing, Katy Tur of MSNBC falsely claimed Khashoggi was never a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, but he indisputably was a member and a lifelong proponent of its Islamist ideals. Acknowledging this truth does not in any way condone his death at the hands of Saudi agents.
Tur’s point was that everyone who mentions Khashoggi’s Brotherhood past, including President Trump, is attempting to justify his murder:

What they try to do is say that Jamal Khashoggi was not a good guy. They casually drop in that he – the Saudi Arabians say he was part of the Muslim Brotherhood and that he was an enemy of the state. Those two things are not true, and it’s interesting to put Saudi Arabian propaganda into a U.S. statement.

The relevant passage from President Trump’s statement on Tuesday read as follows: “Representatives of Saudi Arabia say that Jamal Khashoggi was an ‘enemy of the state’ and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, but my decision is in no way based on that – this is an unacceptable and horrible crime.”
Ryan Saavedra of the Daily Wire posted the Tur clip and noted that even the liberal Brookings Institute acknowledges Khashoggi was indeed a member of the Muslim Brotherhood:

Ryan Saavedra ✔ @RealSaavedra

MSNBC’s Katy Tur lies about foreign national Jamal Khashoggi, falsely claims that he was not part of the “Muslim Brotherhood”

Video at the tweet

The Brookings Institute: "Khashoggi had many friends among the Muslim Brotherhood and...had joined the movement himself as a young man"
899
3:57 PM - Nov 20, 2018

The October 19 Brookings Institute post to which Saavedra referred, written by Senior Fellow Tamara Cofman Wittes, was critical of “pro-Saudi social media” and “right-wing commentators in the United States” who implied Khashoggi “was an extremist and that those who condemn his apparent murder are serving an Iranian agenda to break up the U.S.-Saudi alliance.”

The post is generally sympathetic to Katy Tur’s point of view on the Khashoggi murder and yet the very first substantive point made by Wittes is that Khashoggi did join the Muslim Brotherhood and everyone familiar with his work knows it. Far from being a “lie,” as Tur falsely stated, Khashoggi’s Brotherhood membership was a fact so widely known that it scarcely deserved mentioning:

Yes, Jamal Khashoggi had many friends among the Muslim Brotherhood and, as his colleague David Ignatius reported days after his disappearance, had joined the movement himself as a young man before apparently shifting away from it later in his career. No one who knew Jamal at all is surprised by these facts, no matter with what lurid framing they are now “revealed.” Whatever sympathies and associations he may have had, they do not change the apparent fact that Jamal Khashoggi was kidnapped, murdered, and dismembered to silence his freedom of expression.
Those on the right who have spent decades fighting for free speech on campus will leap to tell you, correctly, that freedom of speech demands respect regardless of the political valance of the views espoused—and that protecting the expression of unpopular views that challenge current political correctness is the acid test for the security of this right overall. So even if you believe that Jamal Khashoggi was a full-bore Brotherhood member with an agenda of Islamization for the Arab world, you should still condem his apparent assassination for the crime of speaking his mind.

The David Ignatius column cited by Wittes was posted on October 12 at the Washington Post, which was understandably concerned by the ominous disappearance of its contributor. Like Wittes, Ignatius strove to paint Khashoggi as a changed man who had a fiery youth but mellowed with age and became a worldly journalist instead of an Islamist agitator, but he did not deny Khashoggi’s past:

Khashoggi’s intellectual interests were shaped in his early 20s when he studied in the United States and was also a passionate member of the Muslim Brotherhood. The brotherhood was a secret underground fraternity that wanted to purge the Arab world of the corruption and autocratic rule it saw as a legacy of Western colonialism. Khashoggi was hardly alone in this belief.
The flavor of that period in Khashoggi’s life was captured by Lawrence Wright, a journalist for the New Yorker who met him in Saudi Arabia more than 15 years ago. In his book “The Looming Tower,” Wright quotes Khashoggi about the brotherhood’s appeal: “We were hoping to establish an Islamic state anywhere. We believed that the first one would lead to another, and that would have a domino effect which could reverse the history of mankind.”
Bin Laden joined the brotherhood at about the same time Khashoggi did, in the late 1970s, says Wright. The two men shared a passion for the mujahideen’s war in Afghanistan, first against the Soviet Union and later for power in Kabul. Khashoggi was covering the war as a journalist, but he was clearly sympathetic to the cause.

This argument is really about whether Khashoggi was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood or supporter of its ideals at the time of his death. There is no question he was a member in his youth and the association persisted for a very long time. Those who claim he was never a member and never espoused Islamist ideals are lying. Their goal is to question the motives of those who insist on the truth, but the real question is why they seem to feel condemning Khashoggi’s murder while being honest about his ideology is impossible.
As to what Khashoggi believed at the time of his death, he left a copious body of work behind expressing his views. He defended the Muslim Brotherhood as a force for democratic reform in the Arab world and criticized U.S. policymakers for their irrational “aversion” to the organization. The title of his August 28 post was “The U.S. Is Wrong About the Muslim Brotherhood – and the Arab World Is Suffering For It.”
And yes, as of three months ago, Khashoggi was still a true believer in the Brotherhood’s philosophy of Islamism and firmly convinced most of the Arab world shared his beliefs:

There can be no political reform and democracy in any Arab country without accepting that political Islam is a part of it. A significant number of citizens in any given Arab country will give their vote to Islamic political parties if some form of democracy is allowed. It seems clear then that the only way to prevent political Islam from playing a role in Arab politics is to abolish democracy, which essentially deprives citizens of their basic right to choose their political representatives.

Claiming that Khashoggi turned his back on the Muslim Brotherhood is absurd. The real argument here is about the nature of the Brotherhood itself. Most of the commentators lying about Khashoggi’s association with the MB are simply taking cheap shots at President Trump or parroting former President Barack Obama’s pro-Iran foreign policy agenda, but some of them are interested in whitewashing the Brotherhood and pushing Khashoggi’s view of it as a benevolent organization. They claim Jamal Khashoggi outgrew the Brotherhood, but what they’re really saying is that the Brotherhood grew and evolved along with him.
It is also transparently ridiculous to deny Khashoggi was a political activist with hostile intentions toward the current Saudi government. He spent the last year working on setting up an advocacy group called Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN) that wished to continue the “Arab Spring” spirit of revolution across the Middle East. He was raising funds for DAWN at the time of his disappearance.
Again, Khashoggi’s activism was no excuse for abducting or murdering him, but pretending he was a disinterested journalist without ideological ambitions or political connections is profoundly dishonest. It is not necessary to agree with his agenda to condemn his death. It is also unnecessary to pretend he didn’t have one.

https://www.breitbart.com/national-s...oLpojbMOR2rfsQ

Double Standard: Only Obama Can Obliterate His Own Citizens

Consider the reaction to Jamal Khashoggi compared to how the media treated Obama's infamous drone strikes against American citizens.

December 13, 2018
By Mark Christian and Joe Herring

Anwar al-Awlaki was an American citizen who chose to advocate terrorism and built a career on orchestrating activities intended to weaken, injure, and ultimately overthrow the government of the United States. He was a member of numerous subversive groups, dating back to his college days. He was an avowed Islamist, who pledged to do all in his power to subjugate the world, and everyone in it, under Islam, by any means necessary.
As an able propagandist, Awlaki became a valuable recruiter for terror groups. By any objective measure, the man was an enemy of his own nation. Awlaki was a fiery Islamic preacher. His words were unreservedly anti-American. They inflamed Islamic passions. Awlaki wielded words as weapons.
He met his demise in 2011, on the receiving end of an American drone strike in Yemen ordered by then-president Barack Obama. That strike also killed Awlaki's American-born 16-year-old son.
While there were a few bleats and squawks from various civil libertarians on the left and right over the assassination of not one, but two American citizens without due process of law, the issue grew stale quickly as the media sensed that their favorite son (Obama) might be harmed politically with further reporting.
Fast-forward to the present day, and while keeping the circumstances of Awlaki's death in the forefront of your mind, ask yourself why so many on both sides of the aisle are now exercised over Saudi Arabia allegedly doing the exact same thing to a Saudi national, Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi national guilty of every crime (and a few more!) for which Awlaki paid with his life.
There is little reason to mourn the deaths of Khashoggi and Awlaki, as both surely understood the risk inherent in attempting to bring down the governments of their respective nations. The two scenarios are, in nearly all aspects, identical.
Khashoggi was Muslim Brotherhood. Not only did he belong to groups committed to overthrowing the House of Saud, but he founded two of them himself. He was a proud friend of Osama bin Laden, even taking up arms and fighting alongside bin Laden in his younger days. He was as committed an Islamic supremacist as Awlaki. Khashoggi's diatribes were instrumental in sparking and sustaining the Muslim Brotherhood-led uprisings collectively known as the "Arab Spring," which was not the grassroots demand for democracy the Obama administration and the media claimed, but rather a series of coups to replace secular-minded leaders with Islamist theocrats who shared the ideology of the Brotherhood.
In Khashoggi's posthumously published final article in the Washington Post, he wrote: "The Arab world was ripe with hope during the spring of 2011," echoing verbatim the tape-recorded words of al-Qaeda founder Osama Bin Laden, praising the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, and speaking of a "rare historic opportunity" for Muslims to rise up. Throughout Khashoggi's career, his words and those of bin Laden were largely indistinguishable in sentiment, purpose, and vitriol toward the West.
More recently, Khashoggi became incensed over the progressive direction taken by Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince bin Salman regarding the social strictures of Islam and the role of Islam in government. For the first time since the founding of the kingdom one hundred years ago, Islam in Saudi Arabia has been removed from its favored perch in the affairs of government. No longer willing to accept a Middle East where the only exports are oil and terrorism, MBS has taken concrete steps to enforce a growing separation of church and state in his nation, has arrested and prosecuted those wealthy patrons of terrorism among Saudi society, and has initiated diplomatic overtures to Israel and the West.
MBS is the embodiment of everything the Muslim Brotherhood despises, and his continued rule in Saudi Arabia means the continued decline of the Brotherhood and its influence. Khashoggi knew it. The Muslim Brotherhood knew it. Most of all, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia knew it.
Did bin Salman consider Khashoggi a threat to the throne, as the media and political pundits claim? There is little evidence for this. There are no elections in Saudi Arabia, so MBS couldn't have worried about Khashoggi mounting a political campaign to win control. Khashoggi's influence in the Middle East had been greatly diminished with the failure of the Arab Spring, reducing his readership to boutique status, no longer capable of fomenting major shifts of opinion.
If the crown prince did indeed order his death, it likely wasn't for the reasons Western media are reporting, but more likely due to his backdoor facilitation of continued terror funding of Saudi origin through his so-called democracy-building organizations. Khasoggi was a dangerous Islamic ideologue whose employment as a "journalist" with the Washington Post gave him a hyper-magnified platform for his radical Islamic thoughts and the perfect patina of legitimacy to conceal his more nefarious activities.
Due almost exclusively to the efforts of the Muslim Brotherhood in America, Islamic ideology here in the U.S. is alive, well, and thriving. A federal judge recently ruled that it is unconstitutional to prevent female genital mutilation of girls as young as five, ruling that authorities have no constitutional basis for interfering in that Islamic rite.
The elevation of Islam above all other religions by criminalizing criticism of it remains a shining beacon for Muslim activists and the groups to which they belong. The international Muslim Brotherhood is not a fantastical concoction of Arab-phobic morons, but is an active and powerful organization that has been committed to civilizational jihad for the better part of a century.
They operate through front groups masquerading as civil rights organizations, and the unwillingness of responsible authorities to investigate and dismantle these Islamic Trojan horses does not constitute evidence of their innocence, but is indicative of their mastery of propaganda and "lawfare," using our open system against us. This is the arena where Khashoggi operated in plain sight.
We are in a war with Islamic extremism and the ideology that gave birth to groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. President Trump knows that a good relationship with a progressive Muslim ruler in the Middle East like bin Salman is key to winning that war. He was wise to make a measured response to the murder of Khashoggi, eschewing the overreach demanded by his detractors.
Apparently, either the Post didn't check into the background of this man it publicly mourns or it wasn't bothered by his lifelong commitment to facilitating Islam's goal of global dominance.
A question remains unanswered by those calling for harsh sanction of the young Saudi ruler: "Why is the U.S. permitted to defend itself by assassinating a citizen who was a clear and active threat, but the Saudis are not?"
If we ought to sanction the Saudi crown prince for an order we have no firm evidence was given, then we certainly ought to revisit Obama's well documented order and apply the same standard.
Dr. Christian is the executive director of the Global Faith Institute and invites you to visit www.globafaith.org. Joe Herring writes from Omaha, Neb.

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

https://www.americanthinker.com/arti..._citizens.html

Yes, he was a radical Muslim who opposes the new Crown Prince's Reforms that grant many more civil rights, reach out to the region and so forth. It has made no sense to me that the corrupt media and some members of Congress would carry on the way they are about this for something that didn't happen here and didn't happen to a US citizen. I actually think he was an illegal alien on an expired tourist visa. I'm also appalled that the Congress of the United States would claim someone guilty of murder and take punitive action against them without a trial. What happened to our presumption of innocence??!!!

Wake up Republicans, don't do this eternally inappropriate, unjust and dangerous resolution.