I'm really annoyed by it. Like Saudi Arabia is the first country to send someone sleeping with the fishes.

I'm fine with pleas to morality, but they better be applied to everyone.

Saudi Arabia is an ally, Russia is not.

Russia kills people with nerve gas and isotopes from their own reactors. Thats like signing the damn bullet

True, but that type of behavior is expected from the "enemy" while unacceptable from an ally

That's what I was trying to express.

I, personally, want to know what this is part of in terms of the bigger picture. The failed coup in the Saudi royal family last year and ongoing war with Iran can't be going all too well

I apologize, I automatically assumed you were western European /American

Thank you for correcting me

If anything he is sorry Knoc, as he's said he's Canadian, i'm just surprised he didn't say it.

On a conspiracy forum and we have people believing the red scare coming out of MSM. Russia aren’t a threat. Do you know how many bases they have outside of the mainland?

https://www.rferl.org/a/where-are-us-and-russian-military-bases-in-the-world/28890842.html

Which country bases bases all over the world, has invaded 37 countries many illegally and killed 20 million people simce wwii?

Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, Libra, Syria, Angola, Bolivia, Chad, Colombia, Chile, the list goes on and on.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-has-killed-more-than-20-million-people-in-37-victim-nations-since-world-war-ii/5492051

Iran next, bet you can’t wait huh!!??

Now tell me, who’s the aggressor.

Are the # of military bases abroad the only way you measure threats from other countries?s

How is covering a Saudi scandal pro-middle east?

Yeah that’s probably true. But the Middle East is a lot more fucked it than Eastern Europe. There’s more material to work with

You probably don't realize the significance of the Khashoggi family. They were some of Trump's earliest business partners, worked with the bin Laden family, handled weapons sales to Saudi Arabia, notorious money launderers and arms traffickers, involved in businesses at the center of the JFK hit all the way to 9/11 like Barrick Gold, and are even larger financiers of fringe leaders in the US from scientology to infowars.

Man didn’t back any of those claims up with citations. Easy now. As much as I believe this is probably true, you can’t just make accusations like that and believe them without at least offering one source. Everything is propaganda

Well, we are waging war on two middle eastern countries.

I know that doesn't get brought up much anymore, I don't even think they consider removing forces from those areas anymore.

Oh, the we is America.

I agree with you, but no one is currently advocating that in modern government, maybe Tulsi but everyone on here believes her to be controlled opposition.

Well, it's hard to tell anymore. Sorry about the assumption that you were American by the way.

Everyone calls everything controlled opposition, and assume it to be blatant propaganda because it doesn't fit their 'narrative' which is the common phrase. It's frustrating to discuss issues with conspiracy theorist these days because.

People assume a difference of opinion equals supporting their enemy and it's reached a critical mass on this sub, which is indicative reading any top comments, such as the one over the anomaly in Las Vegas. The top comment brings some discrepancies which are worth noting, but every other upvoted comments is flaming the idea and anyone who is interested in looking into it themselves.

I don't believe she is controlled opposition, and I enjoyed a lot of her stuff before the election. She didn't mince words when it came to our arming of rebels, which always leads to massive destruction in the land we send them to.

Should of made notice of the "leaf" in your name. 😁

Hope you have a good day.

No. The main story in the usa is that your president is in the pockets of the RUSSIAN president. I mean, if you don't count Russia as eastern Europe then I guess you're right.

yes, you are correct, this guy is a shill or a troll or some form of both

If you're not a Russian bot, then does this constant Russian narrative make you a hmmm...Chinese bot? #chinabot

Mind boggling how this Russia narrative literally leaks into everything

Removed. Rule 5

Also there’s a lot of money there

I saw a ton of coverage on all the stories you mentioned.

I think Americans are tired of our politicians sucking Saudi d, to put it indelicately - so you see a lot of traction on those posts. But interest is consistently high where journalists are involved.

Seems like trump is more outspoke about the Saudi issue

Think about it.. It's a mainstream medias journalist killed. Now think about religion of the person that got killed and how it's now hurting their economy and then of those pushing the story..

There has been plenty of talk about her, why do you claim otherwise?

It was all over reddit and all over the news.

The Bulgarian journalist.

Just google "Bulgarian Journalist Murdered"

Loads of results.

I have a massive problem with this line of thinking. It could very well be true that the media covered both stories equally or close to equally, but we don't know. I think the point being made is that there was a huge amount of coverage of one thing and the other thing seemed to slip under the radar. Just because you can find some articles does not mean that the information got out.

This is what OP is actually saying: We see all kinds of stories all over the place about the Saudi journalist, but this other death was not covered nearly to the same degree. Put another way, maybe 95 percent of people are aware of the Saudi journalist story, and only 1 percent are aware of the other story. The media covered both stories, sure, but there is clearly a difference.

Of course it did not get the same coverage.

The Saudi journalist was allegedly murdered and killed in a consulate by direct order of the Saudi king. Turkey is claiming they have audio and video recordings.

There is a suspect in the case of the Bulgarian journalist and no state has officially accused any state actors or any other country to have ordered the murder. There is only some unsubstantiated allegations.

The cases are vastly different.

This is what always happens when somebody points this out. The person starts off with something like "There has been plenty of talk about her, why do you claim otherwise?" Then somebody points out that the argument is that there's a vast difference in coverage, not that zero coverage exists. Then the user switches the argument to trying to explain why there is a vast difference in the amount and placement of coverage. That's why the original argument seems so deliberately misleading because you could have just originally agreed that there is a difference in coverage and tried to provide your theory about why that difference exists.

Not at all. OP claimed literally that "no one" was talking ablut the Bulgarian journalist. That is flat out wrong.

OP's argument wasn't that there was less talk bht that there was no talk.

You are the one shifting the goalposts, not me.

I think you just have to look at the claim and realize that this is not what OP meant. How could OP have known about it if literally nobody talked about it? It would be very unreasonable to pretend that you think OP meant that there was literally nothing out there about this death. This is just how people speak, and to take words literally even though you know it's unreasonable to do so is pretty weird.

I prefer not to make assumptions about what people maybe mean to say.

How is it that you know so well what OP is really trying to tell us?

"Why is nobody talking about this?"

This phrase in English means that there isn't enough discussion of a thing. It does not literally mean nobody is talking about it. For one, the OP is talking about it, and two, the OP must have heard about it somewhere unless he is a psychic remote viewer or something. It's therefore unreasonable, and a strawman argument, to assume the phrase is to be taken literally.

If you were at a party and only 3 people showed up, and a person asks "damn, why is nobody here," would you take that literally and correct the person?

Your response probably: "Actually, there are 3 people here, so that's false."

and again, there has been plenty of talk about it.

it was major news.

The first site I checked:

Front page of new York Times on the day they wrote the story about the Bulgarian journalist. There is nothing on the front page about her, but there a story there about the Saudi journalist.

October 8, 2018: https://web.archive.org/web/20181008085118/https://www.nytimes.com

October 9. The day after they wrote that article they have nothing on the Bulgarian, but they do have a story about the Saudi journalist again: https://web.archive.org/web/20181009070746/https://www.nytimes.com

Hopefully you understand the nuance involved in discussions and comparisons of news coverage. 95 percent of the public may be aware of one story and may have read 5 articles on it, and only 1 percent of the public may be aware of the other story. This can be caused in a number of ways, including the news outlets deciding which stories to put on their front page.

You argue with fools, your efforts futile to explain a concept so simple.

His whole argument is about how he interpreted "why is nobody talking about this?"

User Granada1491 had a party at his house and only 3 people showed up. A person asks "damn, why is nobody here?"

Granada1491 says "Actually, there are 3 people here, so that's false." After that, everyone left and never came back.

there is quite a difference between "almost nobody" and "almost everybody".

in the case of the bulgarian journalist, all major news sites reported it and there was plenty of discussionon reddit.

Reddit is almost as popular as Twitter and iirc /r/news is a default sub. It's definitely a mainstream media outlet.

The Khashoggi murder stands out for two reasons. Firstly because it is definitely a State assassination by the Saudis, and at this point we don't know if that's true of the murders of Viktoria Marinova in Bulgaria, or Colonel Yevhenia Shishkina in Russia.

Secondly, the Khashoggi murder has an international relations dimension, and that has affected the level of coverage. An extra-judicial assassination by a government carried out in a foreign country is a big news story, particularly since Turkey and Saudi Arabia already have a fractious relationship.

It doesn't fit some people's narrative.

Im from Bulgaria and here all the media is owned by people close to the politicians. So this rape and murder of the Journalist (mother of a 7 year old btw) was almost not covered in the Bulgarian media and it should 've been top news like everywhere in the world. There are still people here who are not sure what's this all about .. some of them only heard about a journalist being killed and they're not aware about the real reason - she was investigating corruption and stealing from EU funds - huge amounts - more than 10 million euro. The sad thing is people here are not outraged, they're not even surprised .. and there's nothing you can do to fight the mafia. Its just everyone accepted the country is owned by the mafia and there's nothing you can do about it.. these things happen all the time, so people barely react any more.

That the Saudi journalist was in a Consulate, and it was a Saudi Consulate when he dissappeared is the icing on the cake.

But sure, lets talk about all killed journalists, including Michael Hastings or even Seth Rich if you want to talk about political assassinations.

"was just critiquing the Saudis" mumbled the fool. this has to be the most NOT thought-out argument on this sub. Jamal Khashoggi had been an avid supporter of The Arab Spring, as one of his friends mentioned in an interview post-disappearance. And this was not the first attempt meant to impede his work. Now please, go do your research.

I thought the journalist was an American citizen...either way, you can't keep up with why the media outlets cover one story over another

No. He was an American resident, which is a status that does not include citizens’ rights.

All day Friday they called Jamal Khashoggi an American citizen. I'm just telling you how I heard it. And of course trying to put Trump in bed with the Saudis, selling arms and then mentioning how Jamal's dad was an evil, rich arms dealer.

Yeah hes an American resident working for an American media outlet.

Trump himself made the weapon deal front and center when he said that plus personally selling property to him is why hes not going to come down hard

I'm just wondering what this is a set up for

there was a big thread in /r/worldnews for the russian officer

What you said doesn't make any sense. First you say noone is talking about the russian thing, then you say there is a bias against the Russians. Does not compute, sir/madam.

Well, all I hear and see is Russia, Russia, poison, Russia, Donald Trump, Russia, poison, poison, spies and russian spies poisoning.

Anti corruption officer murdered was top post on politics today. Checked this morning. If you broaden your news sources, even opposing ones, yo u will find the stories right now are those you mentioned

The Journo is a muslim brotherhood advocate and they have a lot of influence in the US senate, they were behind the arab spring and supported by Obama when they overthrew Mubarak in Egypt.

Very good point.

Also, is this guy related to Adnan Kashoggi — the sleazy friend of Kissinger from the 80s?

This is a US - Russia battle rn. US media is pushing these Putin killings and in return Russia put forward the Saudi journalist story. Essentially Russia is sending a message saying we do it and so do you.

Simple. The Saudi's death can be blamed on Trump.

NSA knew he was in danger, informed White House. WH didn't act.

https://observer.com/2018/10/nsa-source-white-house-knew-jamal-khashoggi-danger/

Stop bitchin' from your poor selection of news sources. The gravity of Kashoggi's death due to his affiliations and meddling investigations deems this a news piece of greater caliber. Second, i watched Al Jazeera last week cover both stories (Bulgarian journalist) back to back. Lastly, there is no bias but simply that eastern-europe scandals are concealed better... while the media is used to deceive you that Western powers are actually probing into the "disappearance" of Kashoggi by covering it more. You Sir are an idiot, as your inability to deduce this has proved, good day.

Both stories have been all over reddit. Quit spreading bs

I couldn't care less if you do. First of all, you've repeated that a million times in this thread. Second of all you put in your title "why is no one talking about" to your Post ON REDDIT. You repeating that you don't use reddit for news does not make your title any less bullshit

Then why bring it up

I think all of the coverage is pretty closely tied to geopolitical relationships. Even though the news is covering the Saudi journalist, the headlines are still pretty tepid, saying things like this might begin to sour U.S./Saudi relations, not to mention Trump's benign and oddly worded response: "We are not, not, taking this seriously." It's most likely that weapon's contracts and oil outweigh a single dead journalist, no matter how brazen it was, so they are treating it more like a whodunnit murder mystery than a potentially pivotal issue between nation states. For example, the journalist was killed in the Saudi consulate in Turkey, who just last year had bodyguards beating Americans on U.S. soil: But that got barely any press, probably because they are a close U.S. ally in the Syrian conflict right now, fairly similar situation as far as being deliberately ignored.

My theory about why they cover Russia so much is because Russia is a really easy go-to bad guy that benefits a lot of people to demonize. It benefits the Democrats, because of their election meddling theory and takes attention off of their own crookedness and worthlessness. It benefits the government in general to renew cold war tensions; having a big, scary, looming boogeyman, for the general public to fear is a way to unify the "befuddled herd," as the members of the Creel committee mockingly referred to the U.S public when they were trying to get the population to support U.S. involvement in WW1. It benefits the DoD because Russian tension provides an excuse to allocate a budget for expensive programs like nukes and cutting-edge fighter aircraft that the default "terrorist" enemy does not possess. And it benefits the media, because people like Rachel Maddow can blather on for hours about a thus-far virtually baseless conspiracy theory (look up synonyms for "collusion", their favorite word to use regarding Russia. Also, Pentagon officials have publicly stated that a determination was made to target Russia as the number one threat to U.S. interests, because the alternative is China; we have too many economic ties with them to seriously antagonize them militarily.

That being said, there's probably also some truth to Russia being a potentally hostile state power, I'm sure they want the same parts of the middle east for oil pipelines, and they probably do at least attempt to meddle with our elections, just like every country does to everyone else.

I saw it in BBC, Reuters, and a few random facebook news sources. It was well covered.

There are very real and politically important differences.

In the former cases there were murders related to political or criminal corruption where there are several possible culprits and the matter is being investigated. Whether or not people have strong suspicions about who was responsible (either directly or as the ring-leader), the matters are being investigated by the authorities and if the investigation is side-lined it becomes more an issue of corruption.

(Just to point out in the Russia case there is no clear idea of who might have done it. Russian investigators generally have a long list of possible enemies, including politicians, business owners and gangsters).

In the case of Saudi Arabia it is the use of diplomatic territory to commit a crime against a resident of another state. This makes the matter immediately international (involving Saudi, USA and Turkey). It is also a deep violation of the rules of diplomatic protocol that states extend to one another granting embassies extra-territoriality. Luring someone from one state onto diplomatic turf (technically the land of another) in order to carry put an execution, is not something that I can recall having happened before. Also, there is (allegedly) hard-evidence of the crime available, meaning that there is no issue of identifying the guilty parties. Finally, Saudia Arabia is threatening to punish anyone who penalizes them for their gross violation of human and diplomatic rights, with an oil embargo, adding terroristic threats to the mix. It is a very unusual and unique case fully deserving all the coverage and analysis than it has gotten.

​

They are all covered, but Kashoggi gets more in the US because a) he worked for a US publication (Washington Post) b) the weak response by Trump underscores how compromised US foreign policy has become c) given Saudi backing of Kushner, the conflict of interests are now painfully obvious d) this pokes a hole in the myth of American exceptionalism

The reason for the difference in coverage is that the ME events are of concern to Israel and that the Jews in the US are very powerful and have some control over what gets reported, and what does not.

Oh, the we is America.

I agree with you, but no one is currently advocating that in modern government, maybe Tulsi but everyone on here believes her to be controlled opposition.