I don't see how it's relevant to his murder, other than to try to smear the victim. That Princess Diana was murdered is an unsubstantiated rumor.
> But beyond that, he was also a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, a diametrically opposing philosophy to Al Saud's Salafism (but still islamist and regressive, in my opinion. Bin Laden was a member).
Now I'm not sure if these are more smears or not. Is there a basis for them?
Do you know much about the Ikhwan Muslimeen? If not, then you are missing a huge part of MENA politics over the last 90 years, and the more recent Saudi vs. rest of MENA spats (ex: Qatar). Might be worth reading up on them. Start from end of Ottoman Empire and don't skip over Sayyid Qutb.
Of course there is. I have no idea why there is such a viceral reaction to a nuanced viewpoint of why a guy got dismembered. It’s not a simple “he was a cool WaPo journalist who criticized the Saudi family “
It reminds me of how so many smart people supported the Iraq war in 2003, including American media like NYT.
I implore people to not do that again.
It reminds me of how so many smart people make decisions based on an anecdotal basis, including American media like NYT. I implore people to not do that again.
side note: your background is wild. you have been around the block a time or two..I think you have some good stories to tell.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/10/19/o...
I think the US generally turns a blind eye to both MB and Saudi atrocities.
I do agree with you on this point. I think the United States's complicity in atrocities committed by the Saudi regime is abhorrent.
I am speaking as someone who lived under salafi rule and have a strong dislike of Saudi Arabia. To suggest I am using Saudi talking points is absolutely bizarre, ignorant and uneducated.
Of course, he is related to Dodi Fayed (the dude killed with Diana), and his uncle is Adnan Khashoggi, the billionaire arms dealer. The entire family was very well connected in the West, especially the elite (British monarchy, Washington DC, etc).
But beyond that, he was also a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, a diametrically opposing philosophy to Al Saud's Salafism (but still islamist and regressive, in my opinion. Bin Laden was a member, someone who Jamal was friendly with for a long time).
Perhaps the American media are more closely aligned with MB than with Al Sauds. This would explain the outrage to me. The GCC nations are extremely anti MB. However, MB has a relatively positive presence in the US. Here is an article from WaPo about when CAIR was designated as a terrorist org in UAE due to MB ties (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/11/17...).
I think the US generally turns a blind eye to both MB and Saudi atrocities. However, MB is a little better connected socially in the US (elites, civil rights orgs, etc) compared to Saudi, which is better connected on a federal level (aid, trade, investments).