Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Snowshoe who wrote (143928)	10/17/2018 10:13:11 PM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 218505

if prince mbs can be replaced, or, more precisely, can remain safe once replaced, then i suppose he could willingly be replaced, unless he believes he cannot survive being replaced, in which case ... more drama would imagine there are a lot of folks holding a grudge, for whether deep-state exists or not elsewhere, may be quite present in saudi arabia no better way to corral new allies then promising to help them get even am agnostic on how events would play out, as we must be, but certainly drama also imagine lots of sleepless and long nights for the main individuals connected w/ the case, for who can say how the splash damage goes

To: Snowshoe who wrote (143928)	10/18/2018 6:57:33 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218505

Seems the situation is being weaponised at accelerating pace, more so than I was figuring Wondering when and who the next to be thrown under the bus Would imagine survival instinct should bring out the worst in bad people and am sure we would not be disappointed zerohedge.com US Intelligence "Increasingly Convinced" Saudi Prince Ordered Khashoggi's KillingBy now, there's little doubt that Jamal Khashoggi is dead - this despite reports that surfaced in the Daily Mail and a handful of other outlets last week claiming that Khashoggi was alive and had been renditioned to Saudi Arabia. And while the Turkish government has publicly assured the Saudis that they will pursue a cautious, thorough and transparent investigation, even inviting the Saudis to join as a partner in the probe, behind the scenes, Turkish media - which is tightly controlled by the regime - have spread details about a gruesome execution that they say occurred in the office of the (now former) Saudi consul, who was urged to leave the room under threat of reprisal by a member of the hit squad. [url=][/url] What's more, a leak last week already suggested that the US knew about the Saudis' plans to ambush Khashoggi - though whether US intercepts detailed a murder plot, or merely a plan to interrogate and rendition the government insider-turned critic, remains unclear. If anything, the one thing that now appears certain about this situation is that, in a maneuver that's reminiscent of the de-classification of an intelligence community report blaming Russia for interfering in the 2016 election, the US intelligence community is once again rebelling against the Trump White House - after Trump suggested that he would do everything he could to preserve the US-Saudi relationship (reportedly fearful of losing Saudi cooperation in a plot to undermine Iran) - and has effectively joined with the Turks to undermine the rule of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman. The latest example of this appeared in Thursday's New York Times, where a trio of national security reporters published a piece claiming that the US intelligence agencies have been "increasingly convinced" that MbS directly ordered Khashoggi's killing - claims that were, admittedly, not based on anything other than circumstantial evidence, by the reporters' own admission. American intelligence officials are increasingly convinced that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia is culpable in the killing of the dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi, an appraisal that poses challenges to a White House intent on maintaining a close relationship with the kingdom. Intelligence agencies have not yet been able to collect direct evidence of the prince’s involvement, American and European officials said. They also have not been able to conclude whether Prince Mohammed directly ordered the killing of Mr. Khashoggi, or whether his intention was to have Mr. Khashoggi captured and taken back to Saudi Arabia, according to one official. But intelligence agencies have growing circumstantial evidence of the prince’s involvement — including the presence of members of his security detail and intercepts of Saudi officials discussing a possible plan to detain Mr. Khashoggi, according to American officials. Of course, the intelligence agencies aren't unique in possessing this so-called "circumstantial" evidence linking suspected members of the so-called hit squad to MbS. Evidence backing up these claims has been publicly available for more than 24 hours since the NYT "independently verified" allegations that were presumably leaked to its reporters by Turkish officials. Before a final report on the "facts" of the case has even been completed, it appears US intelligence agencies are already working to box Trump in, as the following passage in the Times story appears to set Trump up for more (presumably leaked) accusations that he is disregarding the findings of his own intelligence community, just like he did with Russia. American intelligence agencies are preparing the assessment of Prince Mohammed to present to President Trump. The work was described by a half-dozen officials on Wednesday, as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo concluded a trip to the kingdom that failed to deliver an immediate diplomatic resolution to the crisis. Officials said the intelligence agencies are trying to take care not to limit the White House’s policy options, and just put forward facts about the case. Intelligence reports are only one factor that a White House must consider in concluding matters of national security. Mr. Trump could ignore the classified assessment as he decides what policies he believes are in the American interest, or decide he is unpersuaded by the intelligence. Mr. Trump has pushed an explanation that a so-called rogue killer could be responsible for the suspected killing, but the intelligence agencies’ assessments could undermine that theory, which in any case has been widely discredited. The paper has also sought to paint Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's visit with King Salman, MbS and the Saudi foreign minister as an uninspired propaganda ploy, though Pompeo reportedly told the prince in private that, even if he had nothing to do with the killing, his government would ultimately need to take responsibility. At the State Department’s headquarters in Washington, some diplomats were dismissive when asked about Mr. Pompeo’s mission to Riyadh, the Saudi capital. But a person familiar with the meeting said that privately, Mr. Pompeo sternly told the prince that even if he did not know whether Mr. Khashoggi had been killed, he would have to take responsibility to help the kingdom avoid the consequences of an international backlash. The story concluded, in characteristic NYT fashion, with quotes from two foreign policy "experts" lambasting Pompeo and Trump for appearing to prioritize the US-Saudi relationship over humanitarian priorities. "His instructions are clearly to preserve the U.S.-Saudi relationship at all costs," said Wendy R. Sherman, a former top State Department official. “So his nonverbal cues and his remarks are intended to do that.” But, she said, "he could have taken off the grin, dispensed with small talk, said facts were important and the U.S. was committed to get them, and ended in a better place." [...] R. Nicholas Burns, the third-ranking official at the State Department in the George W. Bush administration, said that Mr. Pompeo was “a serious and tough-minded person” — and that the public did not know what Mr. Pompeo said in private. "But we have more important interests at stake. We can’t afford to have a business-as-usual attitude. This is a time to be stern with M.B.S., to disavow his government’s crime and to sanction Saudi Arabia," Mr. Burns said, using the prince’s initials. "Our credibility as a democracy is at stake." While the NYT has certainly distinguished itself a the preferred vehicle for leaks out of the US intelligence community, it isn't alone in trying to shape the narrative surrounding MbS. The Daily Mail published a lengthy report Wednesday night detailing the disappearances of three Saudi princes who had criticized MbS's authoritarian crackdown on human rights. While the Mail doesn't have the best record for accuracy, the larger point is clear: Western media is seeking to paint MbS as a serial murderer who will mow down anyone - particularly traitorous family members or former government insiders - who dares to criticize his still-unofficial reign. But one fact that has been mostly lost in the churn of reporting surrounding the Khashoggi case is that, in the days after the journalists' disappearance, the Saudi government agreed to buy S-400 missile defense systems from Russia, spurning repeated American warnings to scupper the deal. That alone could be enough to invite reprisals from deep state operatives who have already demonstrated their distaste for Russia. All of this will only provide more ammunition for lawmakers who are hoping to sanction Saudi Arabia over the killing, a move that would damage the longstanding US-Saudi relationship, perhaps irreparably. With this in mind, it's worth asking: Which country has the most to gain from a collapse in US-Saudi relations?

To: Snowshoe who wrote (143928)	10/18/2018 7:02:26 AM
From: TobagoJack	1 Recommendation Recommended By Maurice Winn Respond to of 218505

Love zerohedge. Certainly prefer zerohedge to the not-interesting economist magazine Below article can give Putin ideas, assuming Putin had anything to do w/ the death in England, as opposed to the British doing a false-flag. Putin can do a false-flag in appearance of Saudis, and can claim rogue operatives if caught red faced Reckon a whole lot of unexplained and unprovable deaths can happen 3-9 months from now as all spook boyz put thinking caps on zerohedge.com Skripal And Khashoggi: A Tale of Two 'Disappearances' Authored by Finian Cunningham via The Strategic Culture Foundation, Two disappearances, and two very different responses from Western governments, which illustrates their rank hypocrisy. [url=][/url] When former Russian spy Sergei Skripal went missing in England earlier this year, there was almost immediate punitive action by the British government and its NATO allies against Moscow. By contrast, Western governments are straining with restraint towards Saudi Arabia over the more shocking and provable case of murdered journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The outcry by Western governments and media over the Skripal affair was deafening and resulted in Britain, the US and some 28 other countries expelling dozens of Russian diplomats on the back of unsubstantiated British allegations that the Kremlin tried to assassinate an exiled spy with a deadly nerve agent. The Trump administration has further tightened sanctions citing the Skripal incident. London’s case against Moscow has been marked by wild speculation and ropey innuendo. No verifiable evidence of what actually happened to Sergei Skripal (67) and his daughter Yulia has been presented by the British authorities. Their claim that President Vladimir Putin sanctioned a hit squad armed with nerve poison relies on sheer conjecture. All we know for sure is that the Skripals have been disappeared from public contact by the British authorities for more than seven months, since the mysterious incident of alleged poisoning in Salisbury on March 4. Russian authorities and family relatives have been steadfastly refused any contact by London with the Skripal pair, despite more than 60 official requests from Moscow in accordance with international law and in spite of the fact that Yulia is a citizen of the Russian Federation with consular rights. It is an outrage that based on such thin ice of “evidence”, the British have built an edifice of censure against Moscow, rallying an international campaign of further sanctions and diplomatic expulsions. [url=][/url] Now contrast that strenuous reaction, indeed hyper over-reaction, with how Britain, the US, France, Canada and other Western governments are ever-so slowly responding to Saudi Arabia over the Khashoggi case. After nearly two weeks since Jamal Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey, the Saudi regime is this week finally admitting he was killed on their premises – albeit, they claim, in a “botched interrogation”. Turkish and American intelligence had earlier claimed that Khashoggi was tortured and murdered on the Saudi premises by a 15-member hit squad sent from Riyadh. Even more grisly, it is claimed that Khashoggi’s body was hacked up with a bone saw by the killers, his remains secreted out of the consulate building in boxes, and flown back to Saudi Arabia on board two private jets connected to the Saudi royal family. What’s more, the Turks and Americans claim that the whole barbaric plot to murder Khashoggi was on the orders of senior Saudi rulers, implicating Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The latest twist out of Riyadh, is an attempt to scapegoat “rogue killers” and whitewash the House of Saudi from culpability. The fact that 59-year-old Khashoggi was a legal US resident and a columnist for the Washington Post has no doubt given his case such prominent coverage in Western news media. Thousands of other victims of Saudi vengeance are routinely ignored in the West. Nevertheless, despite the horrific and damning case against the Saudi monarchy, the response from the Trump administration, Britain and others has been abject. President Trump has blustered that there “will be severe consequences” for the Saudi regime if it is proven culpable in the murder of Khashoggi. Trump quickly qualified, however, saying that billion-dollar arms deals with the oil-rich kingdom will not be cancelled. Now Trump appears to be joining in a cover-up by spinning the story that the Khashoggi killing was done by “rogue killers”. Britain, France and Germany this week issued a joint statement calling for “a credible investigation” into the disappearance. But other than “tough-sounding” rhetoric, none of the European states have indicated any specific sanctions, such as weapons contracts being revoked or diplomatic expulsions. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he was “concerned” by the gruesome claims about Khashoggi’s killing, but he reiterated that Ottawa would not be scrapping a $15 billion sale of combat vehicles to Riyadh. The Saudi rulers have even threatened retaliatory measures if sanctions are imposed by Western governments. Saudi denials of official culpability seem to be a brazen flouting of all reason and circumstantial evidence that Khashoggi was indeed murdered in the consulate building on senior Saudi orders. This week a glitzy international investor conference in Saudi Arabia is being boycotted by top business figures, including the World Bank chief, Jim Yong Kim, JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon and Britain’s venture capitalist Richard Branson. Global firms like Ford and Uber have pulled out, as have various media sponsors, such as CNN, the New York Times and Financial Times. Withdrawal from the event was in response to the Khashoggi affair. A growing bipartisan chorus of US Senators, including Bob Corker, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham and Chris Murphy, have called for the cancellation of American arms sales to Saudi Arabia, as well as for an overhaul of the strategic partnership between the two countries. [url=][/url] Still, Trump has rebuffed calls for punitive response. He has said that American jobs and profits depend on the Saudi weapons market. Some 20 per cent of all US arms sales are estimated to go to the House of Saud. The New York Times this week headlined: *“In Trump’s Saudi Bargain, the Bottom Line Proudly Stands Out”.* The Trump White House will be represented at the investment conference in Saudi Arabia this week – dubbed “Davos in the Desert” by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. He said he was attending in spite of the grave allegations against the Saudi rulers. Surely the point here is the unseemly indulgence by Western governments of Saudi Arabia and its so-called “reforming” Crown Prince. It is remarkable how much credulity Washington, London, Paris, Ottawa and others are affording the Saudi despots who, most likely, have been caught redhanded in a barbarous murder. Yet, when it comes to Russia and outlandish, unproven claims that the Kremlin carried out a bizarre poison-assassination plot, all these same Western governments abandon all reason and decorum to pile sanctions on Russia based on lurid, hollow speculation. The blatant hypocrisy demolishes any pretense of integrity or principle. Here is another connection between the Skripal and Khashoggi affairs. The Saudis no doubt took note of the way Britain’s rulers have shown absolute disregard and contempt for international law in their de facto abduction of Sergei and Yulia Skripal. If the British can get away with that gross violation, then the Saudis probably thought that nobody would care too much if they disappeared Jamal Khashoggi. Grotesquely, the way things are shaping up in terms of hypocritical lack of action by the Americans, British and others towards the Saudi despots, the latter might just get away with murder. Not so Russia. The Russians are not allowed to get away with even an absurd fantasy.

To: Snowshoe who wrote (143928)	10/18/2018 8:33:23 PM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 218505

should be business as usual in about 10 +/- days then should be back to the russian conspiracies and chinese machinations maybe a nyc equity swoon or bond tanking would take centre stage for a day or two on this side of the pond we are lacking market direction, as the shanghai market never provided direct given that it can go to zero and not matter to anyone, and the tokyo market is not a market, just a parking space for inflated wealth all eyes on wall street all is otherwise well enough under the circumstances re machinations ... all the boyz are looking for playing space, and so we watch & brief on saudi - turkey for 10 +/- days. not yet a boring moment 2018. i always thought trump ascension, that which is only important as an indication and trump is only the name, would bring much change. onward to 2026 / 2032 thediplomat.com A First: China, EU Launch New Combined Military ExerciseThe new development merits attention given its broader geopolitical significance. Zoe Stanley-Lockman For the first time, as announced on October 16, European Union military forces have completed a combined exercise with the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN). While European Union Naval Force (EU NAVFOR) interactions with the PLAN in the Gulf of Aden are not entirely new, this exercise indicates an unprecedented level of coordination between European and Chinese naval forces. Set in the current geopolitical context, this new development merits attention for activity not only in the Gulf of Aden, but also in the Mediterranean Sea. Context Since January 2009, both EU NAVFOR and the PLAN have continuously deployed ships to counter piracy and protect vulnerable shipping off the coast of Somalia. EU NAVFOR Atalanta, the Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) military operation flying under the EU flag, operates in conjunction with the multinational Combined Task Force (CTF) 151 – which Singapore currently commands – and NATO Operation Ocean Shield. The PLAN operation is independent from CTF-151, and its geographical scope also differs slightly from other navies operating in the region. Whereas EU NAVFOR MED has a broader geographical mandate to operate off the Horn of Africa and in the Western Indian Ocean, Chinese Naval Escort Taskforce (CNET) is concentrated in the Gulf of Aden. Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.To date, coordination between CNET and EU NAVFOR (via CTF-151) has been a mixed bag, and joint efforts to increase coordination with China have met limited success or are ad hoc at best. The PLAN has conducted convoy escort operations through the Internationally Recommended Transit Corridor (IRTC), the recommended transit route where concentrated forces patrol to facilitate safe passage for all – including Chinese – vessels and which is a core constituent of the newer Maritime Safety Transit Corridor (MSTC). Yet China has rejected previous requests to participate in joint collective command of the IRTC. A similar pattern can be seen in interactions between the navies. While CNET and CTF-151 forces have crossed decks in 2009, 2013, and 2018, little information about the regularity of other exchanges, nominally information exchanges, is available. It is notable that the PLAN has previously made use of MERCURY, the EU common information sharing system to coordinate between navies in real time, yet reports suggest that this has been underwhelming. A Gesture of Goodwill That said, recent activity may portend more regular interactions, if not cooperation, on the horizon. In some ways, the recently completed EU NAVFOR-PLAN combined exercise, which consisted of Chinese military medical personnel boarding an Italian helicopter and an evacuation to the PLAN outpost, was uneventful. On the proverbial spectrum of maritime security-task sophistication, medical evacuation lies on the lower end. Consistent with Chinese insistence that its resupply and logistics base in Djibouti aims at readiness for peacekeeping and humanitarian missions, this low-stakes foray appears as cooperative within the regional security architecture at best or harmless at worst. In what can be considered a gesture of good will, the combined exercise also has a more meaningful symbolic side. Engaging in this combined exercise indicates a China at growing ease with its Far-Seas presence. As such this combined exercise, which appears otherwise routine, has a unique flavor. While EU NAVFOR has deep cooperative experience in the framework of CTF-151 and NATO Operation Ocean Shield and with other navies in the region like India, this form of cooperation beyond Pacific waters is unusual for China. One of the more unique features of this combined exercise is the fact that EU NAVFOR personnel have been invited into the PLAN resupply base. Leading up to the combined exercise, EU NAVFOR’s Operational Commander visited the PLAN base on August 8, 2018. During the combined exercise, an Italian helicopter from Atalanta landed within the parameters of the Chinese supply base in Djibouti. Reported instances of western militaries entering onto the Chinese base in Djibouti are extremely rare, if not unprecedented, and most views of the base are limited to aerial imagery. From Djibouti Northward Any upward momentum cannot be analyzed without taking into account the Chinese supply and logistics base in Djibouti announced in 2015 and opened in 2017. In tune with the CNET deployments from December 2008 being the first blue-water, long-distance Chinese operation, the base in Djibouti became the first overseas Chinese military outpost. To downplay the extent to which the outpost displays more global militarized ambitions, Chinese officials have consistently referred to it as an outpost or logistics facility rather than a full-fledged military base. Nomenclature aside, the military deployments and base illustrate the strategic relevance of Africa and trade corridors to a global China. The other geopolitical dimension that ties in with newfound interactions between EU NAVFOR and the PLAN is the proximity of Chinese naval forces to the Mediterranean Sea. Not only is the Mediterranean Sea in the EU neighborhood, but it is also home to the second EU naval operation, EU NAVFOR MED Operation Sophia. Operation Sophia aims to combat people smuggling in the Southern Central Mediterranean. Established in 2015 in response to the migration crisis, Operation Sophia is another example of EU NAVFOR cooperating with other forces such as NATO – although the actors are not nearly as numerous as those around the Gulf of Aden. Facilitated by almost a decade of experience in Far-Sea naval operations and, since 2017, resupply capabilities from its logistics facility in Djibouti, flying the Chinese flag in the Mediterranean has become tangible. In tandem with Chinese business interests and increasing stakes in Mediterranean ports, the strategic relevance of the Mediterranean Sea to Chinese ambitions has also crystallized. The earliest notable Chinese presence in the Mediterranean Sea came in 2011, when PLAN and commercial vessels evacuated more than 36,000 Chinese workers from Libya in the lead-up to NATO airstrikes. Such evacuations are vital to China, particularly given the number of foreign workers and overseas investments to protect in the region. The following year a PLAN escort fleet ventured into the Mediterranean while reportedly sailing from the Suez Canal toward Ukraine. It was in May 2015 that Chinese presence in the Mediterranean experienced an up-tick. Russia and China brought their joint drills, previously conducted further afar, to the Mediterranean Sea. With the participating PLAN ships coming from the Gulf of Aden, the joint drills focused on “navigation safety, at-sea replenishment, escort missions and live-fire exercises.” The summer of 2017 saw more live-fire drills from a PLAN frigate and destroyer conducted live-fire drills in the Mediterranean. Chinese connections to Mediterranean ports are also a crucial connection for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Earlier this year, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development estimated that Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs) control 10 percent of European port capacity. In addition to naval visits to European ports (although not necessarily via/in the Mediterranean) and PLAN ships more frequently seen in the Mediterranean, Chinese stakes in a variety of ports may be looked at as evidence of a String-of-Pearls strategy, particularly given Chinese SOE stakes in ports in Egypt, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Morocco. As suggested by analyst Noah Feldman in 2015, the PLAN may experience “mission creep” whereby, symbolically, if Chinese strategic objectives in the Mediterranean do not evolve beyond evacuation and rescue missions, it may symbolize weakness. Beyond protecting business interests and specific cooperative activities with Russia, other foretastes of Chinese confidence operating in this region, can be seen in the maritime domain. Today, a more holistic strategic perspective on Chinese presence in and around the Mediterranean should also take surveillance into account. The proximity to a U.S. naval base, Camp Lemonnier, has raised suspicion that China’s support base in Djibouti will also double as an intelligence outpost. This sentiment has been echoed with regards to Chinese-controlled ports around the Mediterranean. For instance Israeli analysts, particularly given its small size of the country, have brought up the possibility of China collecting intelligence on Israeli warships from the Haifa and Ashdod ports, both of which are managed by Chinese firms. While it is highly unlikely to see PLAN warships cooperating with EU NAVFOR Sophia, the increasing Chinese presence in the Mediterranean makes it easier – if not inevitable – to envisage necessary eventual coordination in more crowded Mediterranean waters. As such, the significance of the combined medical evacuation exercise in the Gulf of Aden should be seen as more than a gesture of good will. It is attestation of Beijing’s growing comfort with sustaining a Far-Seas military presence and a way to test the waters for more action in and around Europe’s neighborhood. Zoe Stanley-Lockman is an Associate Research Fellow in the Maritime Security Programme of the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS) at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS).

To: Snowshoe who wrote (143928)	10/19/2018 8:34:13 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 218505

The headlines are absurd to the point of funny

To: Snowshoe who wrote (143928)	10/19/2018 8:39:14 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 218505

Hmmmnnn The prince could be put in a position where he can be Ritz Carlton-ed reuters.com As Khashoggi crisis grows, Saudi king asserts authority, checks son's power: sources \| ReutersDUBAI (Reuters) - So grave is the fallout from the disappearance of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi that King Salman has felt compelled to intervene, five sources with links to the Saudi royal family said. Last Thursday, Oct. 11, the king dispatched his most trusted aide, Prince Khaled al-Faisal, governor of Mecca, to Istanbul to try to defuse the crisis. World leaders were demanding an explanation and concern was growing in parts of the royal court that the king’s son Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, to whom he has delegated vast powers, was struggling to contain the fallout, the sources said. During Prince Khaled’s visit, Turkey and Saudi Arabia agreed to form a joint working group to investigate Khashoggi’s disappearance. The king subsequently ordered the Saudi public prosecutor to open an inquiry based on its findings. “The selection of Khaled, a senior royal with high status, is telling as he is the king’s personal adviser, his right hand man and has had very strong ties and a friendship with (Turkish President) Erdogan,” said a Saudi source with links to government circles. Since the meeting between Prince Khaled and Erdogan, King Salman has been “asserting himself” in managing the affair, according to a different source, a Saudi businessman who lives abroad but is close to royal circles. Saudi officials did not immediately respond to Reuters questions about the king’s involvement in helping to supervise the crisis. A spokesman for Prince Khaled referred Reuters to government representatives in Riyadh. Khashoggi, a U.S. resident and leading critic of Prince Mohammed, vanished after entering the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on Oct. 2. Turkish officials say they believe the Saudi journalist was murdered there and his body removed, allegations which Saudi Arabia has strongly denied. Initially the king, who has handed the day-to-day running of Saudi Arabia to his son, commonly known as MbS, was unaware of the extent of the crisis, according to two of the sources with knowledge of the Saudi royal court. That was partly because MbS aides had been directing the king to glowing news about the country on Saudi TV channels, the sources said. That changed as the crisis grew. “Even if MbS wanted to keep this away from the king he couldn’t because the story about Khashoggi’s disappearance was on all the Arab and Saudi TV channels watched by the king,” one of the five sources said. “The king started asking aides and MbS about it. MbS had to tell him and asked him to intervene when Khashoggi’s case became a global crisis,” this source said. Since he acceded to the throne in January 2015, the king has given MbS, his favorite son, increasing authority to run Saudi Arabia. But the king’s latest intervention reflects growing disquiet among some members of the royal court about MbS’s fitness to govern, the five sources said. MbS, 33, has implemented a series of high-profile social and economic reforms since his father’s accession, including ending a ban on women driving and opening cinemas in the conservative kingdom. But he has also marginalized senior members of the royal family and consolidated control over Saudi’s security and intelligence agencies. His reforms have been accompanied by a crackdown on dissent, a purge of top royals and businessmen on corruption charges, and a costly war in Yemen. Khashoggi’s disappearance has further tarnished the crown prince’s reputation, deepening questions among Western allies and some Saudis about his leadership. “Even if he is his favorite son, the king needs to have a comprehensive view for his survival and the survival of the royal family,” said a fourth Saudi source with links to the royal court. “In the end it will snowball on all of them.” Saudi officials did not immediately respond to Reuters requests for comment. MISCALCULATION Saudi Arabia has repeatedly denied any role in Khashoggi’s disappearance. But the sources familiar with the royal court said the reaction from the United States, an ally for decades, had contributed to the king’s intervention. “When the situation got out of control and there was an uproar in the United States, MbS informed his father that there was a problem and that they have to face it,” another source with knowledge of the royal court said. FILE PHOTO: Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud is seen during a meeting with U.N Secretary-General Antonio Guterres at the United Nations headquarters in the Manhattan borough of New York City, New York, U.S. March 27, 2018. To match Insight SAUDI-POLITICS/KING REUTERS/Amir Levy/File Photo The crown prince and his aides had initially thought the crisis would pass but they “miscalculated its repercussions”, this source said. Turkish officials have made clear they believe Khashoggi was killed inside the consulate, and two Turkish sources have told Reuters police have audio recordings to back up that assertion. U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican close to President Donald Trump, on Tuesday accused MbS of ordering Khashoggi’s murder and called him a “wrecking ball” who is jeopardizing relations with the United States. He did not say what evidence he was basing the allegation on. Trump said on Thursday he presumed Khashoggi was dead but that he still wanted to get to the bottom of what exactly happened. Asked what would be the consequences for Saudi Arabia, Trump said: “Well, it’ll have to be very severe. I mean, it’s bad, bad stuff. But we’ll see what happens.” Trump has previously said “rogue killers” may have been responsible and has ruled out cancelling arms deals worth tens of billions of dollars. On Tuesday, Trump said he had spoken with MbS and that the crown prince told him he did not know what had happened in the consulate where Khashoggi went missing. The case poses a dilemma for the United States, as well as Britain and other Western nations. Saudi Arabia is the world’s top oil exporter, spends lavishly on Western arms and is an ally in efforts to contain the influence of Iran. VERBATIM: 'Certainly looks' like Khashoggi is dead But in a sign of the damage, a succession of international banking and business chiefs, including IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde, JP Morgan Chief Executive Jamie Dimon and Ford Chairman Bill Ford, have pulled out of a high-profile investment conference in Saudi Arabia this month. U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Thursday also abandoned plans to attend, as did Britain’s trade minister and the French and Dutch finance ministers, putting the event in question. Saudi officials have said they plan to move forward with the conference, scheduled for Oct. 23-25, despite the wave of cancellations. Neither JP Morgan nor Ford would elaborate on the reasons for the decision not to attend and did not comment on whether concerns about the disappearance of Khashoggi were a factor. Lagarde had previously said she was “horrified” by media reports about Khashoggi’s disappearance. An IMF spokesperson did not give a reason for her deferring her trip to the Middle East. TAKING CONTROL Before the king’s intervention, Saudi authorities had been striking a defiant tone, threatening on Sunday to retaliate with greater action against the U.S. and others if sanctions are imposed over Khashoggi’s disappearance. A Saudi-owned media outlet warned the result would be disruption in Saudi oil production and a sharp rise in world oil prices. “Reaction and threats to the possible sanctions of the last 24 hours were still (coming) from the crown prince,” the businessman close to royal circles said on Monday. “The king is now holding the file personally ... and the tone is very different.” The king has spoken directly with Erdogan and Trump in recent days. Both the king and his son met U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo when he visited Riyadh on Tuesday. King Salman, 82, spent decades as part of the inner circle of the Al Saud dynasty, which long ruled by consensus. In four decades as governor of Riyadh, he earned a reputation as a royal enforcer who punished princes who were out of line. Whether he is willing or able to resume that role in this crisis remains unclear, palace insiders say. One source with links to the royal court said the king was “captivated” by MbS and ultimately would protect him. Still, there is precedent for the king’s intervention. He stepped in this year to shelve the planned listing of national oil company Saudi Aramco, the brainchild of MbS and a cornerstone of his economic reforms, three sources with ties to government insiders told Reuters in August. Saudi officials have said the government remains committed to the plans. And when MbS gave the impression last year that Riyadh endorsed the Trump administration’s still nebulous Middle East peace plan, including U.S. recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, the king made a public correction, reaffirming Riyadh’s commitment to the Arab and Muslim identity of the city. Despite these rare instances of pushback, several of the sources close to the royal family said that King Salman had grown increasingly detached from decisions taken by MbS. “He has been living in an artificially-created bubble,” said one of the sources. Lately, though, the king’s advisers have grown frustrated and begun warning him of the risks of leaving the crown prince’s power unchecked. “The people around him are starting to tell him to wake up to what’s happening,” the source said. Reporting by Reuters correspondents; Editing by Nick Tattersall