Bonesaws, lies and audiotapes

Caption: The Kashoggi story is a tangled web of competing propaganda, and spiders are lurking everywhere.

What happened to Jamal Kashoggi? I don?t know. Neither do you.

There are almost no facts available in this weird story that has gripped the imagination of the world; but there are a whole lot of rumours, conspiracy theories and wild conjectures. Most of them emanate from sources whom no one should trust for an instant. Every one of those sources has an agenda: whether it?s the continuing Trump Derangement Syndrome of the American media, or the struggle for domination of the Islamic world being waged between Mecca and Istanbul.

The source of the following narrative has an agenda too. Still, it?s a counter-narrative no less implausible ? in fact, a great deal more plausible in many ways ? than the official narrative being peddled by the powers-that-be.

Let?s start with the only fact in this whole, sorry saga: Quote:

Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul to sign some papers relating to his marriage and never emerged again. End of quote.

That?s all we know. From here on in, it?s off down the rabbit hole of conspiracies, fantasies and competing narratives. Quote:

Lurid accounts claim he was murdered in the consulate by a 15-strong team flown from Saudi Arabia the previous day in order to kill him.

This almost exclusively Turkish and Qatari narrative includes claims that a pathologist on this team dismembered Khashoggi?s body while he was still alive. End of quote.

The hagiography of Kashoggi being peddled by the MSM smells as bad as everything else in this farrago. Quote:

Western mainstream media have mainly presented Khashoggi as a liberal journalist who opposed the regime of the purported Saudi modernizer, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (known as MBS)?A rival analysis has been doing the rounds that Khashoggi was actually an Islamist extremist?who opposed MBS not because he was undemocratic but because he wasn?t Islamic enough. End of quote.

There is certainly a lot more evidence to support the latter narrative than the former. Quote:

Even so, why would MBS have Khashoggi killed in this complicated, macabre and politically exposed way? Why did it need 15 men to do so? Why kill him at all..?

[My sources] say Khashoggi was?the ultimate insider who had gone rogue??He knew a lot of intelligence secrets, and so when he got too close to the Qataris and the Turks, who are now the arch-enemies of the Saudis, this is when Jamal really crossed the line.? End of quote.

The ‘bone-saw narrative’ is undoubtedly attractive to many because it plays into the justified perception of the Saudis as a regime of mediaeval brutality. This is true enough, but while they may be barbarians, they?re not stupid. Quote:

?They could easily have paid $200,000 to the Chechen mafia in Istanbul who could have taken him out so easily and made it look like a robbery gone wrong?[instead] they set out to bring him back alive. The pathologist, a member of the inner circle, was there to ensure he remained sedated on the way back to Riyadh.?

But??The sedative gun malfunctioned and he suffocated from a massive overdose. He was 60 years old, he was overweight, his body couldn?t cope with it.?

What then happened to his body isn?t known. End of quote.

And there?s the rub: none of us know what happened. Those who claim to are basing their certainty purely on the say-so of an Islamic supremacist regime which staged a fake coup to shore up its power, and has jailed and tortured thousands of journalists. Quote:

This affair has once again revealed the deep hypocrisy of the West. Many regimes with which it regularly deals have a dreadful record in jailing, torturing and murdering dissidents. No one gives this a second thought. The only reason the fate of Jamal Khashoggi has caused such a furor is that he wrote for The Washington Post and was part of the liberal media circuit that tolerates Islamists and disdains their opponents.End of quote.

Samuel Huntington characterised the Islamic world as marked by ?consciousness without cohesion?. Where, say, Sinic civilisation is centred around China, Islamic civilisation has been without a centre since the collapse of the Ottoman empire. Hence the drive to establish a new caliphate as the epicentre of the ummah, the global Islamic community. The two strongest rivals are Turkey, site of the last caliphate, and Saudi Arabia, the spiritual home of Islam. Shi?ite Iran harbours its own ambitions, but generally sides with Turkey.

The presumed death of Jamal Kashoggi is the latest gambit in the proxy wars the Saudis and the Turks have been fighting, from Yemen to Syria.

Where should the West stand, in this struggle? It would be easy to say that it should stand aside, but the titanic struggle for Islamic dominance affects the West too intimately not to take some interest.

The ‘problem of dirty hands’ is one of the oldest in politics. While it sticks in the craw to have anything to do with the Saudi barbarians, it pays to remember that Western powers have sided with worse before, to see off the threat of even worse than them. The Stalinist regime was even more murderous than the Nazis, but in the end they were judged the lesser threat. Quote:

The West faces two giant threats?to aid it in that great civilizational fight, the West needs Saudi Arabia. End of quote.

While that conclusion is certainly debatable, it nonetheless remains important to remember that we really don?t know anything yet, and we?re being steadily fed propaganda by brutal liars.