Talk:Jamal Khashoggi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Peter Bergen's authenticity[edit]

All sources that claim Khashoggi reformed to a more liberal position point to an excerpt from Peter Bergen's 2005 interview he had with Khashoggi for a book he was writing "The Osama bin Laden I know". All of his books are depicting Islam in a negative light, using "Us vs them" strategy. Bergen has also been sugarcoating Khashoggi's words and misleading readers into believing he wasn't a jihadist. Khashoggi said "Right now I don't believe that we must create an Islamic state." and his reason was that because it might fail and shake beliefs. He's "more liberal" than bin Laden but that only means "less extreme." And then Bergen, deliberately leaving out parts of the interview, included an additional quote "I think we must find a way where we can accommodate secularism and Islam, something like what they have in Turkey." which goes against his belief in the previous quote. I believe that this last sentence was forged by Peter Bergen in order to prove Trump supporters wrong. In the article, He emphasizes in both the introduction and conclusion that Trump supporters are trying to smear Khashoggi.

Due to this, the "Opinions on Khashoggi's views" section needs to be rewritten. CNN's Bergen shouldn't be the starter of the paragraph. I have taken action to include the tag "Unreliable Source" next to it for now.

If anyone has any objections, discuss it here. --Sultanic (talk) 14:42, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Please DO NOT remove a tag without an explanation. Egypttoday is a biased source. CNN is considered as a reliable source.--SharabSalam (talk) 15:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
I have given reason for removing the tag, but you ironically haven't. Egypt Today is as biased as CNN. Even if CNN was reliable, Peter Bergen has a questionable background. Please take the time to research the topic instead of forcing your anti-Saudi agenda into Wikipedia. There's already more than enough of it. There's a reason you were blocked in the past. --Sultanic (talk) 16:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@Sultanic: You didn't give any reason for removing the tag that was next to EGYPTTODAY source. You removed the tag next to Egypttoday source and put a tag next to CNN!!! which is considered as a reliable source. I have anti-Saudi aganda? WTF?!!. Stop accusing me with baseless accusations. Thanks.--SharabSalam (talk) 17:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
There is widespread longstanding consensus that CNN is a reliable source, and all you've offered here to the contrary is your own original research to say otherwise. If you continue to edit war on the article over this tag you will be blocked from editing. GMGtalk 15:41, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
So why was Egypt Today tagged as unreliable for such a long time? Take a look at the talk page section "Khashoggi was a former Saudi intelligence agent", user Zazpot suggests that although the Australian Financial Review might be a WP:RS, is Downer a WP:RS about what Khashoggi WP:SAID? The same can be applied to CNN's Peter Bergen. --Sultanic (talk) 16:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
The reliability of unrelated sources has nothing to do with the reliability of this source. If you want to argue against Bergen, then you need to cite more than your own incredulity. GMGtalk 17:14, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Blood money[edit]

Any content saying Khashoggi's family received blood money must be excluded without at least one source saying that Khashoggi's family received blood money. Any content saying Khashoggi's family received $X in blood money must be excluded without at least one source saying that Khashoggi's family received $X in blood money. R2 (bleep) 15:50, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

RFC: Should be create a new section about "what is going on between Khashoggi's family and Saudi government?"[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Duplicate. To comment on this discussion go to Talk:Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi#RFC: Should be create a new section about "what is going on between Khashoggi's family and Saudi government?".

According to a person close to the family and a former Saudi official familiar, the Saudi government have paied millions of dollars' worth to family of Jamal Khashoggi after the incident. I found a lot of reliable sources which worked about this subject. For example CNN News agency called this money as blood money. As you know, in this special case, everybody's can't share every things. All sources or News website try to find the fact and they focus on every event. So, This subject looks like important and notable itself and if you look at the Article you can't find any things which covered the incident as the fact has said. At the end, my question from you is; is the subject qualified to pay more?Forest90 (talk) 13:53, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

You put this in the TP of Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi. Please don't add the same conversation into two places at once. Also, this is not a properly formatted RfC and it isn't true. O3000 (talk) 14:02, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Forest90, did you even read what I had already posted directly above this, with the heading "Blood money?" R2 (bleep) 16:22, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Bone saw[edit]

After Jamai died in a fist fight, did the Saudis borrow a bone saw from the Turks or had they brought their own saw? 2601:181:8301:4510:1D6B:747B:8A22:351B (talk) 23:48, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Richard-of-Earth what in God's name is a forum here?!!!--SharabSalam (talk) 06:39, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
This talk page is not for questions about the subject of the article. We do not do original research here. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#FORUM. If the IP has something that will contribute to the article the IP can state it flat out and provide a WP:RS to support it. If the IP wants to start a discussion about where the saw came from he can go to a discussion website like Reddit. If he just wants a short answer to a question he should post in the Wikipedia:Reference desk. It does not go here. Most editors find it is best to just delete such questions and leave a note on the user talk page, which I did. I actually did not notice the it had been removed already and that you put it back. If you really insist, we can just leave it, but it looks to me that it will not result in a discussion that will improve the article. As to the actual question, see Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi#Assassination, 4th paragraph. According to Middle East Eye, an anonymous Turkish source says they brought a bone saw with them. But that does not go in this article. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 07:59, 4 June 2019 (UTC)