If the Turkish authorities are indeed changing the story, then why are they doing it? Thread:
(Caveat: I've been immersed in this story for two weeks, and very intensely over the past few days. I've been reading reports, speaking to sources, and verifying & corroborating information. But I warn that what I present here is my current impressions, not stating as facts).
Note what is being changed vs what's not changing. In both stories: The Saudis are directly implicated, they murdered Jamal in the consulate and dismembered his body.
Lemme first say that the new story raises some questions. How did they know from audio recordings only such details as moment of death, cutting fingers, beheading etc?
Also, when you cut someone's body while he's "still alive" it's basically fountains of blood. Supposedly this happened in the consul's office. Did they do such a great cleaning job that the consul was able to receive journalists in his office only a few days later?
Perhaps more importantly: If the audio exists, why not leak it to the press? Why not call in a reporter and have him listen and confirm they exist? They haven't (yet) and not sure they imminently plan to (?)
Anyway: Most obvious reason Turks would change the story: Because they *can*. Only two parties have direct evidence of what happened - the Turks and the Saudis. The Turks can mess with the Saudis all they want. The Saudis can't "correct" them without incriminating themselves.
I mean if the Turks say "he wasn't interrogated, he was injected and then beheaded", it's not like the Saudis can jump in and say "Those are completely false fabrications! We interrogated him, tortured him and then strangled him to death..."
Turkey can change anything so long as outputs are the same - dead journalist, cut up body, 15 Saudis did it. Beyond that, they can mess with the Saudis (and frustrate journalists, and fray our nerves) endlessly. As they're doing.
Basically the Turks can change many details knowing nobody can correct them (so long the story has: Saudi crime in consulate, dead journalist, dismembered body). The only party that can correct them won't, because they would incriminate themselves.
My impression is that the Americans were completely briefed by the Turks as to what happened and what evidence they have, but they haven't shared the actual evidence (the recordings, video or audio) with the Americans.
Also my impression is that the American agencies have accepted the Turks version of events (whichever the "real" one is). These agencies normally don't just take another agency's word for it. They must have corroborated key parts of it.
Btw, the fact that the Turks haven't withdrawn the dismemberment part of the story makes me strongly believe the remains are in Turkey, the Turks have an idea where they are, and the Turks know they can retrieve them.
So, why change the story?
- In order to remove from the story the parts that include the most direct Turkish espionage on the consulate
- In order to mess with the Saudis. Pressuring for what exactly? Punishment, or a deal?
- In order to remove from the story the parts that include the most direct Turkish espionage on the consulate
- In order to mess with the Saudis. Pressuring for what exactly? Punishment, or a deal?
But there's another reason (told to me but not corroborated at this point): The video supposedly directly implicates MBS. The Turks may be dangling "hey we can do this story such that it doesn't implicate you, will you play ball?"
Lemme reiterate that I don't think any deals are possible at this point. But if Erdogan wants anything from the Saudis it won't be money. It would be: Leave Syria to us, stop supporting the YPG, ease Qatar blockade; also perhaps: accept our primacy in the Muslim world.
Note who was first to run with the updated/changed/new Turkish story: Qatar's Aljazeera. Picked up/reported by others later. I bet that had Aljazeera received these leaks from another source they'd have vetted them more severely before running with them.
Again, nothing I say here is something I say as fact. I'm sure I know more facts than the average person (perhaps even the average reporter) but these threads I'm tweeting now are my own impression based upon what I know. I could be totally wrong.
