Jamal Khashoggi Murdered At Saudi Consulate

[aygart]

This whole thing is another reason why trust in the media is at an all time low. If they would have been honest from the beginning and said  99% of people would agree.

Instead they made him into a "democracy and human rights advocate" while ignoring stuff like this;

The media are upset about what happened to one of their own. Unsurprising. We see the same here all the time.
(BTW, can a mod please change the title to something comprehensible)

[ChaimMoskowitz]

We see the same here all the time.

x1K

[Dan]

(BTW, can a mod please change the title to something comprehensible)

Better?

[aygart]

Better?

MUCH! Thanks!

[greatluck]

The same people who don't want mulLer should finish his investigation any time soon wanted the investigation of Jamal Khashoggi's Murder should be finished ASAP. FUNNY?

[cmey]

I won't shed tears for the guy, but did he deserve to be murdered?

I don’t thing it’s so clear cut. While he certainly wasn’t a terrorist with actual blood on his hands, is that the dividing line? What about an influential personality who incites the Palestinians with claims that the Israelis stole their land, invented a historical connection to Palestine, and are perpetrating a 9/11 on the Palestinian people. Such vitriol is not harmless; it can easily do much of the work for Hamas, Hezbolla, etc. and lead to the murder of innocent people as has happened repeatedly in the past. Does someone get a free pass because he’s not the one actually wearing the explosives belt on the egged bus?

 Do I think that the mossaad should put every inciter on a hit list? Of course not. But if his expressed views were indeed inciting people to violence (and that is something that can be debated) I would have a hard time saying he absolutely didn’t deserve to die, though I have no sympathy for the Saudis and their barbaric methods...

[ChaimMoskowitz]

I don’t thing it’s so clear cut. While he certainly wasn’t a terrorist with actual blood on his hands, is that the dividing line? What about an influential personality who incites the Palestinians with claims that the Israelis stole their land, invented a historical connection to Palestine, and are perpetrating a 9/11 on the Palestinian people. Such vitriol is not harmless; it can easily do much of the work for Hamas, Hezbolla, etc. and lead to the murder of innocent people as has happened repeatedly in the past. Does someone get a free pass because he’s not the one actually wearing the explosives belt on the egged bus?

 Do I think that the mossaad should put every inciter on a hit list? Of course not. But if his expressed views were indeed inciting people to violence (and that is something that can be debated) I would have a hard time saying he absolutely didn’t deserve to die, though I have no sympathy for the Saudis and their barbaric methods...

Judge, jury and executioner?

[aygart]

Judge, jury and executioner?

AKA dictator?

[cmey]

Judge, jury and executioner?

And those saying he absolutely didn’t deserve to die; is that an Acquittal by judge and jury? I’m not saying he definitely did; just that it’s not clear cut and unequivocal.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

And those saying he absolutely didn’t deserve to die; is that an Acquittal by judge and jury?

I think somewhere I will invoke the laws of a democracy.

[aygart]

And those saying he absolutely didn’t deserve to die; is that an Acquittal by judge and jury? I’m not saying he definitely did; just that it’s not clear cut and unequivocal.

How about innocent until proven guilty?
Your standards ar ridiculous and frankly pretty sickening.

[cmey]

How about innocent until proven guilty?
Your standards ar ridiculous and frankly pretty sickening.

Innocent until proven guilty simply  states that by no means should anyone have pulled the trigger. However now that he is dead, innocent until guilty kind of goes the other way. it sounds like you would have no problem as judge and jury convicting his killers of the murder of an innocent man. Is that so clear cut or would you apply the innocent until proven guilty standard to them as well? I’m not saying innocent. I’m saying that perhaps there is reasonable doubt. ( I’m not talking about the method used, or the need to uphold international laws and norms. I’m talking about the morality of his having been killed to the degree that his incitement of others had the potential to cause the loss of innocent lives.)

In any case, since when has the standard of guilty beyond reasonable doubt ever been applied to nations eliminating what they claim are credible threats to their sovereignty or the security of their citizens? That is never the standard used. Not by Israel. Not by Russia. Not by any other sovereign nation in the hundreds of “elimination of threats” that take place each year. Would you hold the IDF to the standard of innocent until proven guilty when there is a hamas operative that appears to be planning a terrorist attack on civilians?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Innocent until proven guilty simply  states that by no means should anyone have pulled the trigger. However now that he is dead, innocent until guilty kind of goes the other way. it sounds like you would have no problem as judge and jury convicting his killers of the murder of an innocent man. Is that so clear cut or would you apply the innocent until proven guilty standard to them as well? I’m not saying innocent. I’m saying that perhaps there is reasonable doubt. ( I’m not talking about the method used, or the need to uphold international laws and norms. I’m talking about the morality of his having been killed to the degree that his incitement of others had the potential to cause the loss of innocent lives.)

In any case, since when has the standard of guilty beyond reasonable doubt ever been applied to nations eliminating what they claim are credible threats to their sovereignty or the security of their citizens? That is never the standard used. Not by Israel. Not by Russia. Not by any other sovereign nation in the hundreds of such “elimination of threats” that take place each year.

What if OBL would have given himself up and walked into a US consulate. Would it have been OK for the US to kill him and cut him up in pieces?

[cmey]

What if OBL would have given himself up and walked into a US consulate. Would it have been OK for the US to kill him and cut him up in pieces?

It defies international norms and standards, and would be a stupid move and an international public relations nightmare. Any officials who participated ought to be punished appropriately. But if there was a reasonable assumption that he would harm civilians going forward it would be wrong to assert that OBL “didn’t deserve to die.”

[ChaimMoskowitz]

It defies international norms and standards, and would be a stupid move and an international public relations nightmare. Any officials who participated ought to be punished appropriately. But if there was a reasonable assumption that he would harm civilians going forward it would be wrong to assert that OBL “didn’t deserve to die.”

"Deserve to die", I will leave that up to everyone's personal view. By our laws the answer would be no. Now you want to put him on trial and give him the death penalty if convicted, go for it.