“Mohammed bin Salman, who seems to be running Saudi Arabia these days, is one of the bad guys. If he were a good guy, he wouldn’t have attacked his neighboring country, Yemen. He wouldn’t be committing war crimes there in conjunction with vital U.S. support. If he were a good guy, he’d respect not only the rights of females but also the rights of everyone else.” (November 24, 2017)
“In his tour of America, Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) has started to do some real damage to truth and us, as he shapes public opinion. His weapon is the rhetoric of falsehood. He has come here with antagonism in his heart and war-making on his mind. He has come to knot the U.S. government even more firmly to Saudi Arabia than it already is. Who will counter the falsehoods he has begun to spread?” (April 3, 2018)
Ship of Fools: How a S... Check Amazon for Pricing. The Establishment media refused to call Salman a bad guy. For example, see Thomas Friedman in the New York Times. His piece, filled with effusive praise of Salman’s reforms, relegated criticism of his Yemen war crimes to a passing phrase “a humanitarian nightmare”, in the 28th paragraph down. And that paragraph has Salman celebrating 85% Saudi-backed control with Friedman calling for 100%.
Salman’s image was built up through a public relations and propaganda campaign. He was sold as a good guy, which he is not. Most Americans who care about these things are not buying. They associate Saudi Arabia with 9/11, as well they should. Powerful allegations accuse the CIA of not having prevented 9/11 even though they could have.
The murder of Jamal Kashoggi is now generating commentary that’s highly critical of bin Salman. This assassination damages the propaganda campaign that’s been supporting an Israeli-Saudi-American axis against Iran. Perhaps disaffection with the Saudis will hasten the time when U.S. politicians find the conditions right to take on the CIA and bring to light the 9/11 coverup.