Pakistan’s Bhutto and At Least 20 Others, Killed In Attack
Pakistan opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was assassinated Thursday in a suicide attack that also killed at least 20 others at the end of a campaign rally, aides said.
“The surgeons confirmed that she has been martyred,” Bhutto’s lawyer Babar Awan said.
A party security adviser said Bhutto was shot in neck and chest as she got into her vehicle to leave the rally in Rawalpindi near the capital Islamabad. A gunman then blew himself up.
“At 6:16 p.m. she expired,” said Wasif Ali Khan, a member of Bhutto’s party who was at Rawalpindi General Hospital where she was taken after the attack.
Her supporters at the hospital began chanting “Dog, Musharraf, dog,” referring to Pakistan’s president Pervez Musharraf.
Some smashed the glass door at the main entrance of the emergency unit, others burst into tears. One man with a flag of Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party tied around his head was beating his chest.
In Washington, the State Department said it was seeking confirmation of Bhutto’s condition.
“Certainly, we condemn the attack on this rally,” deputy spokesman Tom Casey said. “It demonstrates that there are still those in Pakistan who want to subvert reconciliation and efforts to advance democracy.”
The United States has for months been encouraging Musharraf to reach an accommodation with the opposition, particularly Bhutto, who was seen as having a wide base of support in Pakistan. Her party had been widely expected to do well in parliamentary elections set for next month.
At least 20 others were killed in the blast that took place as Bhutto left the rally where she addressed thousands of supporters in her campaign for Jan. 8 parliamentary elections.
Bhutto served twice as Pakistan’s prime minister between 1988 and 1996. She had returned to Pakistan from an eight-year exile Oct. 18.
On the same day, her homecoming parade in Karachi was also targeted by a suicide attacker, killing more than 140 people. On that occasion she narrowly escaped injury.
© 2007 Associated Press
Wow.. not that I wasn’t already expecting this, but it’s still sad to read. RIP BB
This was a woman who didn’t fear death.
Rest in peace.
Anything the US touches catches fire. They should have left her alone and not have encouraged her to go back to Pakistan.
RIp
Truly unfortunate. Isn’t it clear to anyone that Musharraf is a dictator? You know, Bush’ buddy, like Putin. Birds of a feather…..
Nice to see all those billions of dollars we’ve given Musharef have been put to good use. This is a sad day for Pakistan…
The dynamics of change are often brutal and ineficient. Because of the internet, this is the first time in history that the entire world is changing at the same time. It is also the first time in history that peoples feel the shocks of worldwide change simultaneously. It is a stew of hope, despair, violence, peace, accomplishment, failure, profit, loss, saints and sinners all cooking under a hot flame. The speed of change and events are disorienting as events reform our mental and physical selves. Alvin Toffler calls this psycho/biological condition Future Shock. Buckminster Fuller referred to it in his book, I Seem To Be A Verb. Human beings are now being reformed and remade. What seasonings will you add to the stew? What will you become?
All the chickens of Bush’s war on Islam coming home to roost, on the same week that American Special Forces begin operations in Pakistan. Would that our tax money could build instead of spreading hell around the world.
World War III continues. The US started it. I wonder who will have the courage to end it.
“The United States has for months been encouraging Musharraf to reach an accommodation”
I’m sure the current administration has wished for this. I’m sure the current administration has encouraged this, and not even tacitly in private communications with that jackal-infested dictatorship of Musharraf. And I’m sure this will be seen by future generations as merely yet another example of how American hegemony f%&ked up more than the lives of its own people. But although I believe every living thing has equal value, this assassination in particular stands apart as an offense to democracy, to decency, to wisdom, to sanity.
I’m sad, I’m angry, I’m surprised (though, like Twister22 I saw this coming as well), and I am thoroughly and completely and physically disgusted with the state of things. I’m on the verge of typing something that would set off bells in the computer rooms at Langley. The path (not just the current participants) of America needs must be checked.
Stopped. Halted. Reversed. Prosecuted. On a world stage. She has been martyred. Let the uprising commence. No scapegoats, no equivocation: this was someone’s plan, someone’s idea, someone’s goal. Find the person or the people, and MAKE THEM PAY. We must expose the dirty details, the perverted plan, the sick scheme. The corrupt connections, the telling timelines, and the murderous masters. We must give voice to the journalists who expose these details, and let their findings lay a rock-hard brick path to the source of this insult to humanity. Strike, and strike hard, because this is murder, and the iron is still hot.
A lone gunman-suicide bomber… Rest in peace Benazir Bhutto.
I am so sorry for her family and her supporters.
Gee, y’think a US-supported military dictator had anything to do with this?
“A lone gunman-suicide bomber…”
Yep. He blew himself up and then opened fire. No conspiracy here.
To Doom n Gloom:
Thank you so much for giving my mind something else to ponder. You write well. I’m very curious about that Fuller book now, especially because its title strikes me deep as an English teacher. A verb. Interesting idea…what if we all became verbs, became active? I mean, ALL of us. All of us. Active. Man, the things we could do…
What a sad and tragic family this has been . Her father Ali Bhutto (also a former President)was hung by the military dictator Zia al Hoq. Two brothers were killed in violent incidents–one in Paris, the other in Pakistan, and now this. What a sorry, sick, and evil place Pakistan has become!
The new “Axis of Evil” ought to be Pakistan,Kuwaite, and Saudi Arabia because they are about the three most anit-democratic nations in that part of the world.
Poet:
Can an axis have four dimensions? I’d like to add the U.S. to that trio.
The true Axis of Evil: China, Russia, and the United States
Bhutto would have ended Pakistan’s funding and support of the Taliban. I truly believe she would have. This is bad news for Afghanistan also. Now the Afghans and Pakistanis are stuck with Musharraff.
This is a sad day for Pakistan and South Asia at large. The US can now congratulate itself. Another thorn in the flesh removed. You could say what you want about her but she was brave and has always been courageous.
Its a curse of the sub-continent. Assasinations. Mahatma Gandhi, Zulfikar Bhutto, Indira Gandhi, Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rahman, Rajiv Gandhi, Benazir Bhutto … im sure ive missed a host of others.
And God said to his son, Jesus W, the Jesus of Crawford, “Heck of a job!”
Guys, it is sad to see someone die this way. But she is no hero, no martyr, etc…She is another political hack takimg advantage of a situation. Just like Musharraf, she is also supported by the US. US was hedging their bets. This outcome was predictable. Don’t make her more than what she is. A corrupt political official.
What is Bravery but to face down death in a struggle for the common good, better lives for your brothers and sisters; What is Cowardice but to bring death and destruction to your brothers and sisters for power, control personal gain. Let us all honor Benazir Bhutto by being Brave, and peacefully push the masters of war from all power and relevance.
One has to look into the role of the US in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto? Is it the result of collusion between Musharaf and Negroponte (Negroponte met Musharaf recently)?????? US needs Musharaf to be incharge of Pakistan, so that the latter not only continues to provide safe haven to Al-Qaeda and Taliban, but also be a reliable conduit to these terrorists, whom the US can continue to use to occupy and plunder other sovereign countries.
The other recent assassination that has not been given wide coverage by the US media is the murder of an Army General in Lebanon, who was a potential candidate for the office of president of Lebanon.
So, those who do not collude with the US’ terrorist plans and acts will suffer the fate of Benazir Bhutto and the Lebanese Army General.
Seems as if a few could benefit from Benazir Bhutto’s death from those who wanted her stopped to those who want her to be a martyr. Who is her heir in her own party? How will each of her opponents try to capitalize on her death without appearing to do so.
This is a sad day for her family and children. Beyond this you will see those who will either try to capitalize on, or those (like Musharraf) who need to do damage control on her death.
It would be stupid on Musharraf’s part if he did it because he is everyone’s first choice in the blame department. I don’t think that Musharraf has enough control in Pakistan or enough clout on the world stage to get away with this like other dictators would.
I get the feeling that we will see Bush’s next move in this within the half hour.
Why did Benazir Bhutto return knowing the potential danger?
Benazir Bhutto has been giving all sorts of interviews prior to her return and this is one of them with Peter Mansbridge:
http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/internationalus/benazir_bhutto_interview_1.html
A brave and willing martyr she was. It was painfully clear from the day she returned that her days were numbered. A life that is given in such a fashion is not wasted. It is an example of inspiration to world. Bhutto’s voice can no longer be contained. It is for us always.
This is not a regional conflict, but a world terrorist act. Designed and implemented from distant lands. The bullets are covered in the words “made in the usa.” I am ashamed. We should all feel the shame for allowing such deeds to take place.
Deepa, you are very right…The US is not supporting any democratic process. It is not in their benefit whatsoever. This admin feeds on chaos. The key folks are making off like bandits with their stakes in security, weapons, and natural resources.
yes, Doom,
it seems that a great number of individuals are gaining an “indigenous” perspective. God is after all Red. I find that global communication is responsible for revealing that which has been concealed or difficult to see and hear. there’s a substrata which is more fascinating than the news itself. you can read it like an evolving lyrical book.
a friend I have who is diagnosed as a schizophrenic, tells me that this kind of communication is something akin to communicating with the “mind of god.” I enjoy curious observations, you can scoff at them, or you can mull them over.
Benazir Bhutto’s interview with Carol Off
http://www.cbc.ca/aih/features/2007/benazir_bhutto_20070807.html
There are two separate aspects to any assassination:
1. Who really did it (I mean behind the planning of it)
2. Who is blamed for it
Sometimes the one who did it takes credit. But, in this case, I think that the one did it won’t want the credit and know who they want blamed for it.
BB was a kleptocrat in power who took corruption to new, previously unplumbed, levels. Good riddance.
douglas ames says: A brave and willing martyr she was. It was painfully clear from the day she returned that her days were numbered. A life that is given in such a fashion is not wasted.
While I agree with you that Bhutto knew this was a real possibility, the term “martyr” means a belief on a person facing possible death that their death will serve a specific purpose. What purpose does Bhutto’s death serve?
She was shot and then her convoy blew up - so does this mean that there was one plot or two?
Here we go…
I swear, I’m no fan of this Adm but to hear you all talk you probably blame the U.S. for the last Ice Age. Bhutto may have had faults but she represented the common people and cared for her country and wanted to right it. Give her credit for the intelligent woman she was with a mind of her own. The U.S. doesn’t have a hand in every single good or bad thing that happens anywhere; nor is everyone our puppet. THE WORLD DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND US (U.S.). It’s a nice scapegoat theory but the fact of the matter is that human beings, at whatever level of power, for whatever reason, are flawed; to the point of atrocities and self-destruction.
So, while this (tragic death) distraction is taking place, what else is transpiring under the radar screen with the Bush Administration? What legislation will pass this morning to give final rites to our civil rights?
Benazir Bhutto knew the risks and I admire her courage for returning to Pakistan despite them. Pakistan is such a mess right now that I am sure a dozen groups would have wanted her dead. Her stewardship was marked by corruption so she was part of Pakistan’s problem but who wants anyone to die like this? Mercifully, her death was swift unlike that of her father who was dragged half-fainted to his place of execution. Bhutto’s assassination scuttles another brilliant Bush-Cheney plan to manipulate Pakistani politics to have its thug Musharraf installed as Prez while Bhutto did its bidding as PM. Heckuva a job, Dubya! You can’t pretend to promote democracy while openly undermining it. You are either for it or against it. We need as a planet to take a consistent approach to combating suicide attacks; there are other groups that regularly practice this odious art without getting too many Western hearts a-flutter (e.g., the Tamil Tigers). In closing, wish that the US Congress had an iota of the courage that Bhutto possessed.
for a quite different opinion from a close blood relative of Ms BB
please Google
“Benazir Bhutto niece”
So, it seems in recent interviews Bhutto indicated the Pakistani government had reduced her security. And then there are reports that the gunshot(s) that killed her may have come form inside the vehicle. Now a Pakistani government spokesman has been saying “Terrorists did this” (which is different from U.S. politicians’ statements that start from that assumption without feeling a need to state it).
So what are the chances Musharraf is behind the assassination? And what are the chances the Pakistani government is working with Al Qaeda (assuming they executed the assassination) behind the scenes?
I would say the chances are as likely that the Bush Admin. helped engineer this assassination.
Dear redruby, You seem to not understand the depth of involvement of the USA in Pakistan. Over five billion dollars have been sent since 9/11 to prop up the military government. Today’s news announces a masssive increase of our Special Forces in Pakistan, who will merge with Pakistani forces and attempt to secure the northern frontier areas, something that has never been done in history. This is analogous to similar counter-insurgency schemes in Vietnam in the early sixties prior to introduction of actual ground troops. Our war-crazed administration is in the process of committing us to a general land war in the middle east from Syria to India.
It is my understanding having done alittle research that Bhutto and her husband were up to their necks in corruption during her reign..
Not that would I condone anything like this murderous act,but she had made many any enemy.
To bad she allowed herself to be used as a pawn by the U.S. by letting them talk her into coming back and thus putting in her in very dangerous situation. So, goes the way of vanity.
How very sad!
I hate to break this whole love-in for Benazir up, I know we’ve been told over and over again what a freedom-fighter she was, and a stalwart defender of human rights, but this is not the woman who ruled Pakistan for 9 years. Just because someone dies doesn’t make them a hero. The truth is that Bhutto was a corrupt puppet who sold off all of Pakistan’s national assets for prices so low they would put wal-mart out of business. What was the price? Some posh living quarters in the first world for Ms. Bhutto and a seat at the table with the big boys (Blair, Clinton, etc…). For a horrific example of this, involving Pakistan’s energy policy firesale, check out Greg Palast’s “Best Democracy Money Can Buy” http://sandiego.indymedia.org/media/2007/02/125032.pdf
The dirt on Bhutto is on pg. 80.
This talk that Bhutto represented the common people is the Wolf Blitzer-esque rhetoric that we are on CD to get away from. I would really appreciate someone clarifying for me exactly what she DID in her time as leader to deserve such literary adoration. Stop looking at the images and look at the actions!
Why should anyone be suprised regarding Ms Bhutto’s assassination?
If we were a properly informed citizenry, we would know that the 9/11 conspirators were not trained in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. Most were trained and indoctrinated in Pakistan.
In addition, the main donors that kept these camps alive and running were members of the House of Saud and the Pakistani security forces.
Where were the 9/11 conspirators from? Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
Funny. The dictators of these three countries are American allies.
The point is? There are thousands of well-trained self-proclaimed Islamic “freedom fighters”(which is what they were designated during Charlie’s War) within Pakistan.
It didn’t take much in the way of thinking that Bhutto would become the target of these organizations.
And these organizations are run and adhered to by people who are tenacious, intelligent, enterprising and who deeply believe in their cause.
They are usually successful reaching their targets.
Last,unfortunately, the actions of the US elite in the Third World fully support their collective worldview of these organizations.
So, expect many more successful targeted hits.
The only thing that’s sad about this whole thing is that Pakistan will continue to be lead by the monetarists, militarists and mullahs within Bhutto’s own camp, who no doubt will now seek to portray her as a “martyer who stood at the eye of the storm”. She helped stir it up, and it devoured her, as it did her father.
And of course, the United States will seek every opportunity to help re-establish “order” in Pakistan, up to and including giving Musharraf carte blanche in the wake of this “tragedy”.
I said it yesterday, here is his chance. If others become involved in this assassination, ie;bush, this is reason to suspend Posse Comitatus due to the John Warner Defense Act, it allows this criminally insane person to declare Marshall Law, bye-bye- what’s left of the Constitution.
Let the Fascist regime commence…
RIP PM Bhutto
Before people get wishy-washy fuzzy warmy about Mrs Bhutto, I suggest doing some real searching for information about the [real] Mrs Bhutto, and among the very good sources I’ve read from is one of the articles that was posted not long ago, over the past month or so, at www.globalresearch.ca . That particular article is about an interview held with Mrs Bhutto’s niece, or if not an interview, then nonetheless quoting excellent statements she stated or made about her aunt; exposing her aunt for the person she really is and who many of the readers who’ve already posted above are clearly UNAWARE of.
Wishy-washy warmy fuzzy goodie feelings about people based on NOT BEING INFORMED is not a good way to adopt for way to live, imo.
She was in bed with the hellbent criminal U.S. govt as much as the Mushareff govt is, and the U.S. criminal elites use (used in the case of Mrs Bhutto) both of these people the way these hell-bound fiend elites always do. She did not take a principled ground or position against U.S. hellbent corrupt influence on the Pakistani govt; that’s evidently a “for sure”, certain (and now past) reality.
Do your information searches and readings, folks. Always work at being WELL INFORMED.
Only some Pakistanis like her, and her working with the U.S. to do [good] for Pakistan is a sick satanic joke. We know entirely well that the U.S. ruling elites intend no good anywhere, always using the notion to try to deceive.
The U.S. State Dept is very criminal around the world, as are also USAID and other instruments of the ‘invisible’ ruling elites of the U.S. govt.
vaudree opined “It would be stupid on Musharraf’s part if he did it because he is everyone’s first choice in the blame department. I don’t think that Musharraf has enough control in Pakistan or enough clout on the world stage to get away with this like other dictators would.”
Ahahah. Sure. And the CIA/FBI/Mafia coalition couldn’t get away with killing JFK, MLK, and RFK either.
Oh, wait…
Whatever Mrs. Bhutto’s own faults, this is another day when you just want to crawl under the table of humanity and hide your face in shame.
vaudree observed “There are two separate aspects to any assassination:
1. Who really did it (I mean behind the planning of it)
2. Who is blamed for it”
Interesting point. Let’s see, Bhutto was shot and then the gunman apparantly dies in a suicide bomb blast. Kinda dead-ends the trail.
Does anyone besides me see a parallel between this and Lee Harvey Oswald being murdered by Jack Ruby, who, it subsequently comes to light, is dying of cancer?
Clean. Very clean.
…and I think that as often happens, people even more determined to democratize the world will rise from this. We are witnessing the slow bloody tortured death of militarism as a solution to anything—a destination that the world began to choose only about 4000 thousand years ago (we’ve been living together a lot longer than that, whatever the History of Violent Death Cable-Channel tells you). Choices can be undone by other choices. And if we don’t construct new ones, game over and deservedly so. And this is why I will write KUCINICH on every vote I cast. “If you don’t vote your heart, your heart never wins.”
“Do your information searches and readings, folks. Always work at being WELL INFORMED”
True that people ought to be well-informed. But don’t forget that Bhutto was a human being. Are we so callous and critical that we have no regard for human life anymore? Yes, she was corrupt, and perhaps some people feel she rightfully got what was coming. But should that overshadow humanism?
Helix, JFK was an inside job, like you say - something we cannot rule out in this case yet. In the case of JFK, there is a disconnect between who was blamed for the assassination (ie Lee Harvey Oswald) and who you believe actually did it. The same can be true in this case.
Was Musharraf behind it or was he the latest Lee Harvey Oswald? Musharraf’s hold on power was pretty shaky prior to the assassination and seems even worse now.
Musharraf could be behind it, but I am not ruling out the other possibilities at this point.
eshu says: And of course, the United States will seek every opportunity to help re-establish “order” in Pakistan, up to and including giving Musharraf carte blanche in the wake of this “tragedy”.
Probably.
I can see the throwing around of the word “martyr” since many of those declare saints by the church were martyrs. But, to be a martyr, one’s death has to have the potential to further the causes on has in life.
One tends to sing the praises of the dead immediately after death and to look into the gritty details later when trying to determine the person’s historical significance. Bhutto’s eventual significance will depend much on what happens next and what is done in her name.
I have to agree with some of the previous comments about the negative role Bhutto played in Pakistan. People commented on her role in corruption, but they didn’t mention her role in financing and supporting AlQaeda and Taliban. I clearly remember one of her interviews with BBC that she was explaining why she supports Taliban in Afghanistan. Let’s not forget that Pakistan under Bhutto and Navaz Sharif was the first country in the world to recognize and fully support Taliban government in Afghanistan. It seems she fell into the same well she dug for others.
Based on Helix’s last post, I would say that before trying to speculate the way Helix illustrates that vaudree did or tried, people better get much better informed. There is no point in speculating without being very well informed, FIRST.
That is not to say that Pres. Mushareff was even remotely involved in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, but based on news I was listening to on CBC Newsworld, Mushareff is guilty for at least not having ensured security for Bhutto where she publicly spoke and travelled through.
It was comically stupid of her to be driving in her car or limo up or down streets and while appearing to the public through the roof of the car; sun-roof or moon-roof, whatever, some such hole or opening so that she could stand up and make herself exposed to attempts on her life.
You would not see U.S. presidents, if any presidents of any other country, doing that; but she comically thought she could do this in a country where there is, rather was, strong opposition to her and Mushareff, BOTH.
Yeah, comically STUPID, even arrogant, given her bed-ship relations with the hellbent criminally corrupt and rogue U.S. govt, which is strongly hated by many warrior-heart Pakistanis. (A little crazy, and too religiously fanatical and oppressive, sure, but still fighter-hearted, definitely.)
So she, in a sense, got what she was begging to happen to her. She knew she and Mushareff, both, were hated, now leaving that only he remains the hated of these two people; since she isn’t around to be hated anymore.
Very corrupt she and her husband evidently were with respect to the Pakistanis’ govt and people; very guitly of grave consequences in that country. It’s evidently why she had to flee the country to begin with.
Mushareff should’ve ensured that there’d be adequate security forces, but she nonetheless got what she was begging for. She, if to be sanely respected, would’ve needed to make sure that she had adequate security before heading out in public as she did. She didn’t; irresponsibly didn’t. And that makes her death as much if not more her own fault than that of anyone else.
Mushareff’s not as stupid; he won’t head out in public without having more than enough security forces guarding him.
But he’s very corrupt and also very hated.
Troubled country, very, and very much due to the again U.S. ruling elites and the instrumental CIA, USAID, State Dept, etc., etc.; oh, and weak state leaders who feel they have to cave in to the pressure from the U.S., of course.
It seems that the Pakistani ISI and the U.S. CIA are … very [tight], say; VERY. They’re so tight that the ISI is often described as being really a CIA front in that part of the world. And this would not be surprising at all; only I’m not an expert on such topics.
Nonetheless, I’ve read from plenty of different sources, people who are independent of each other, and all saying that not only is the ISI-CIA relationship strong, but also the ISI is a CIA front, in addition to the CIA having had a lot to do with the formation of the ISI.
And the ISI, some believe, funneled money to the 9/11 hijackers.
Regarding Georgie and The Dick’s Pakistan policies, this is a bit dated, but useful –
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/173.html
Quite a coincidence: here’s a quote from today’s DemocracyNow headlines, from Amy Goodman: “U.S. Special Forces to Expand Presence in Pakistan
In other news on Pakistan, the Washington Post reports U.S. Special Forces are expected to vastly expand their presence in Pakistan beginning in early 2008. The U.S. troops will reportedly take part in an effort to train and support Pakistani counter-insurgency forces and clandestine counterterrorism units.”
So, the US is “expanding” its training of Pakistan in counter-insurgency. What hand did the US have in the assassination of Bhutto?
me thinks that political expediency has little room for long term dictator support, when all that is supported is various levels of populous control in support of world hegemony.
It’s kind of good/bad cop at the level of countries and international policy, with resource “harvesting” and domination being recurring themes.
That is why their most favored approach is to encourage us to place on our own shackles and voluntarily forgo our freedoms for “enhanced security” propaganda. Remember our founding fathers learned the hard lessons of
Mike Corbeil says: based on news I was listening to on CBC Newsworld, Mushareff is guilty for at least not having ensured security for Bhutto where she publicly spoke and travelled through. / It was comically stupid of her to be driving in her car or limo up or down streets and while appearing to the public through the roof of the car;
Right on both counts - though I would have used different wording. Newsworld reported that Bhutto’s party was complaining about the lack of security and Mushareff was complaining about the risks Bhutto was taking - both prior to this.
One knows why Bhutto did this - it created the impression that she wanted to create that she was a woman of the people. Bhutto can’t completely seal herself off and still present herself as a woman of the people.
Mike Corbeil says: You would not see U.S. presidents, if any presidents of any other country, doing that;
I note that you limited your comments to “Presidents” rather than “Prime Ministers.”
Mike Corbeil says: Mushareff’s not as stupid; he won’t head out in public without having more than enough security forces guarding him.
And he will need them now more than ever. Mushareff can’t even leave office now if he wanted to since the first act of anyone elected would be to appease the people and put his head out on a platter.
Bhutto claims that the corruption charges were trumped up in a failed attempt to discredit her - I don’t know the truth one way or another.
figmentzenguitar, will look at that now.
Too predictable, I’m surprised she lasted this long. In fact, just yesterday among friends someone brought up Bhutto and I said “I’m surprised she hasn’t been killed yet”. I kind of feel sick about that remark now, while at the same time having a strange sense of “satisfaction” for being proven right(I said her assassination was imminent many times before). I was actually mourning for her the day she returned to Pakistan, but I’m still saddened by this.
Now her supporters and many of the world’s democratic leaders want to make a martyr out of her. I don’t think she was as different from Musharraf as many of her supporters made her out to be.
Still, this is a sad day for Pakistan and the free world.
Whatever side of the fence you find yourself, we can all agree that this is just another nail in the coffin of humanity. You just cannot keep killing off everyone that you do not agree with. I agree that humanity should rid itself of those that are criminal and it appears that we have run out of room on the planet for even the thought of storing the criminals in prisons. So the result we find ourselves is we must kill off the opposition to make room for those that we agree with. Lets see who can kill the most the quickest and will come out on top. I believe that this is called “The Last Man/Woman Standing” . . . . “What will it be?”
I’m not surprised by all the people claiming the Bush administration had something to do with this LOL. Personally, I doubt the U.S had anything to do with this. Considering that she was in the cross-hairs of so many Islamic radical terrorist organizations in Pakistan, any involvement on the part of Washington would have been superfluous. What would the U.S gain by such an assassination, by making nuclear-armed Pakistan even more chaotic?
Looking at her history and the history of her family, Bhutto probably would have been a very pliable tool for U.S interests in Pakistan, in my opinion. It would make more sense if the Bush administration helped carry out a “removal” of Musharraf, considering that he isn’t exactly very reliable.
My deep felt condolences to the family of Mrs. Benazir Bhutto.
As to the result of her assassination could have two possible outcomes, that are quite opposite of each
other and show how incalculable assassinations are, however negative the initial intend really was.
In the case of the Arch Duke Franz Ferdinand it lead into World War I, whereas Mrs. Bhutto wasn’t necessarily as influential as Franz Ferdinand. But then You never know.
Other assassinations had reverse effects, like the ones of Dr. Ghandi and Dr. King. History will show, where we are heading, as for the consequences.
To point the finger would be too early, but I urge You You listen carefully to who says what. As a risky evaluation I can tell You, that the military will take out anybody who resists its ways.
As long as there is military, our lives are at stake. If the assassination has the reverse effect, the radical Islamic fraction will topple the Pakistani Military and gain control over the nukes Musharraf
has collected.
Happy New Year from
It’s Just Karma
QUOTE: “claudius December 27th, 2007 12:28 pm
“Do your information searches and readings, folks. Always work at being WELL INFORMED”
True that people ought to be well-informed. But don’t forget that Bhutto was a human being. Are we so callous and critical that we have no regard for human life anymore? Yes, she was corrupt, and perhaps some people feel she rightfully got what was coming. But should that overshadow humanism?”
Not really; I’m certainly not that sort of humanist, and don’t go by the label of humanist anyway. I agree with some humanists, but not with all of them, which is normal. After all, it’s like with any other groups of people; I can or do agree with some in all groups, but never everyone in even [any] (take your pick) group or category of beliefs, etc. I don’t know any one, single person I have [always] agreed with, either. And we each have individual souls, consciences, so differing “heartbeats” or rythms.
She was criminal, very corrupt, gangsterishly enough, and if members of criminal organisations get killed after having led very unjust lives towards others, then I don’t have much sympathy or empathy for these people.
Note, however, that I, so far anyway, don’t care that she sided with the Taliban, not per se anyway. If she approved of their oppression of Afghan women’s rights, then I’d care about this, but it’s about the only thing I know of having disliked about the Taliban. They were better, significantly so, than the Afghan warlords, and one of the leading ones among them was not even Afghan but Uzbek; the Gen. Rostum, I believe. I’d need to know the details about how she sided with the Taliban, on which terms or bases, before being able to say anything more in this regard.
What is of concern to me is the wrongs she committed against the people of Pakistan. And her niece definitely strikes me as a very important resource person on the topic of her aunt.
And I prefer to save my sympathy and empathy for the brutally plighted peoples of our world, and who are in many or most countries of our world. They are the real victims, while Benazir Bhutto wasn’t someone I’d consider a victim in a comparable sense with the plighted innocents.
Being only one person, having only one heart, mind and soul, I have only “so much” energy for truly caring, so I’ll save it for mostly the brutally plighted innocent people of our world, for they are the real victims. Among them are included the sound Americans who opposed the war on Iraq throughout, entirely, from the moment the threat of this war being launched was made public knowledge. The others who supported the war and eventually realised that they had been duped are therein only victims of their own personal failures; IMO. I do not disrespect those latter Americans who have come to oppose these wars for the right, righteous reasons, as opposed to only due to the financial cost to themselves; but I can’t consider them victims of the criminal U.S. govt to the extent that I consider the citizens and residents who justly opposed these wars throughout.
I won’t wishy-washily consider those two groups of Americans as being of the same category, because they’re not.
I grew up streets enough and there was plenty of aggression, physical and psychological, against me, with plenty of people knowing but no one caring to intervene to help a victim child. And I developed some “thickness of skin” and firmness of heart, say. It’s something that is inseparable from me; it was ingrained and only due to others who liked being … unjust and violently so, as well as without any real provokation.
After these past seven years, which immediately enough followed the totally criminal and brutal war of aggression on Kosovo and the govt of President Slobodan Milosevic, and the many years of criminal U.S. bombing Iraq and the genocidal economic sanctions against Iraq, so Iraqis, in addition to plenty more, I have very little energy for caring about criminal elites being killed.
Benazir Bhutto was corrupt towards the people of Pakistan and her niece provides stronger exposure than this about her aunt’s disgusting ways during her years as state leader; and she was wholly irresponsible for parading around in public without adequate security forces for protection.
She was so irresponsible in doing that that we might say that it was also suspect. We might wonder if she acted this irresponsibly precisely to try to cause an escalation of tensions in Pakistan, f.e. No sane, intelligent and responsible leader would expose him or her self so as to be highly vulnerable to attempts on his or her life.
In any case, neither does my heart bleed for her, nor has a tear built up in my eyes, or even in my mind, so figuratively speaking.
I expect that this answers your question from my perspective, claudius. And another way of stating it much more briefly is that I really DO NOT CARE about her being assassinated, as far as she personally is considered, that is. What the consequences may become for Pakistan may be something I’ll care about, but we don’t yet know what these will be. And I care very much for what her niece has provided for all of us to learn from; very much.
“BB was a kleptocrat in power who took corruption to new, previously unplumbed, levels. Good riddance.”
Talk about a ‘head-in-the-ass’ viewpoint !! Assuming she already has made millions of dollars, is it realistic to claim that she would dive head-first into the murderous, violent world of Pakistani politics to … hold your breath… make even more money ?!!
Isnt it possible that she was driven by something beyond that ? She could have just stayed in exile with all those millions and beuatiful kids and the whole works. Instead, despite death threats and a recent assasination attempt she continued to campaign in the most dangerous parts of he country … a country that treats women the same as cattle. Before shooting your mouth off you must try and read a little more about her life and her courageous stand (with her mother) after the hanging death of her Dad by another U.S. puppet.
The present state of Pakistani is a direct result of U.S. involvement for the last 60 years. Maybe they didnt pull the trigger but hey !!!! The continuous insidious involvement of past and present U.S. governments in propping up Pakistani dictators has bought that country to what it is today. Please do not attempt to ‘whitewash’ this cowardly history.
Fair enough, Mike.
Mike Corbeil December 27th, 2007 12:36 pm …”You would not see U.S. presidents, if any presidents of any other country, doing that” Speaking in the present tense, this may be true. But, remember, JFK was in a convertible in Dallas in ‘63…and the “set-up” was pretty obvious. Was this her choice or her handlers choice? You be the judge.
what’s george doing now?
Islamist radicals have been threatening her life since her return, including two letters last week. Guess they succeeded. Brave women.
Regarding the supposed corruption of Benazir Bhutto, there is no way that any party, or leader, could possibly function in the mainstream of Pakistani politics and not need to use “corrupt” methods. What is defined as unacceptable corruption and what is to be prosecuted as corruption, depends upon who controls the judiciary.
I agree with horrified, like almost every other politician, she was out as much for own self-glory as anything else. She no doubt knew the risks of what she was doing, and probably even entertained the thought of going out a martyr. That being said, assassination by legal means or otherwise is wrong.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/29584
My Gawd! What the hell is wrong with the world today?! What insanity has taken control of homo sapiens that causes such brutality and lack of respect for Life?! Benazir Bhutto was a beautiful lady inside and out and such a cowardly act is despicable! Is a peaceful path so frightening that it must be met with murder?!
Dennis, thank you for your comments. The losses around you have been piling up lately but you STILL fight for RIGHT and PEACE and TRUTH in the World and the country. If you are not elected, then I honestly believe that Americans and, possibly the World, are doomed to continue on their self-destructive paths. I mourn for the loss of intelligent voters in the U.S.
A Harvard/Oxford grad who supported Bush’s WOT and WOD? Anyway, Pervez got his Shock Doctrine.
It may be a sad observation to make, but sometimes assassinations of particular individuals at the right and the right historical juncture might be OK.
For example, if Hitler was assassinated immediately after he was elected and selected for the his leadership position, maybe….
It is both difficult to ignore “successful” assassinations and the fact that they many times have contributed to great historical changes -for the good or the bad depending on your political persuasion.
If political assassination, terrorism, torture, black-listing and other political techniques were not so effective, their regular use would have died out long ago.
Whenever the world is organized into unjust hierarchies, one must expect the stick to be used at least as much as the carrot.
QUOTE: “vaudree December 27th, 2007 1:19 pm
…
One knows why Bhutto did this - it created the impression that she wanted to create that she was a woman of the people. Bhutto can’t completely seal herself off and still present herself as a woman of the people.”
IF SHE was truly “a woman of the people”, then she would not be allied with the U.S. hellbent govt and ruling elites; IMO. She also would not have, along with her husband, done as her niece strongly enough makes clear of the history of her leadership in Pakistan against the people of Pakistan.
I’ll believe her niece before Benazir Bhutto, who it is known was very allied with the most hellbent rogue state and its rulers in the world, the U.S.
She did return to Pakistan only with the aid of the U.S., but there’s also prior history of Bhutto-U.S. relationship(s).
Quoting vaudree further:
“Mike Corbeil says: You would not see U.S. presidents, if any presidents of any other country, doing that;
I note that you limited your comments to “Presidents” rather than “Prime Ministers.””
WHEN I SAY presidents like that, it should be understood as meaning state or national leaders. So, f.e., Canada has no political title of ‘president’, this being replaced with PM. And as far safer as Canada is, the PM usually does not venture around in public without security.
And vaudree says:
“Bhutto claims that the corruption charges were trumped up in a failed attempt to discredit her - I don’t know the truth one way or another.”
THAT is something I’ll let her niece inform me about, and she already has through some good articles on what she has to expose about her aunt as state leadership figure in Pakistan.
It should be easy enough to find those articles with Web searches using the Bhutto’s name and ‘niece’, say; therefore, I’ll just let people who are interested in reading these perform the search. Besides, it should provide links to plenty more articles than those I’ve read, which are few in number. Very good, but still few.
QUOTE: ” peaceistruth December 27th, 2007 1:31 pm
Too predictable, I’m surprised she lasted this long. …”
YES, it was predictable as the moment of her return to Pakistan that attempts on her life were highly enough likely.
peaceistruth says:
“Still, this is a sad day for Pakistan and the free world.”
WHAT FREE WORLD ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I know of none. Not even Canada is a truly free world; if it was, then the First Nations Peoples of this country would finally see just dues provided to them; and there are other examples of how this country is NOT a land of freedom, although it is for the predatory elites and the capitalistically [comfortable], who love that comfort regardless of the suffering of innocents that is related.
QUOTE: ” Mendo Chuck December 27th, 2007 1:32 pm
Whatever side of the fence you find yourself, we can all agree that this is just another nail in the coffin of humanity. …”
THERE ARE SO MANY NAILS already in the coffin of humanity that more seems to be nearly insignificant, now. Until we have a feasible way of removing the nails already in place, humanity remains entombed anyway. One you’re in that state, more nails ain’t gonna make any real difference.
QUOTE: ” peaceistruth December 27th, 2007 1:43 pm
I’m not surprised by all the people claiming the Bush administration had something to do with this LOL. Personally, I doubt the U.S had anything to do with this. Considering that she was in the cross-hairs of so many Islamic radical terrorist organizations in Pakistan, …. …”
I DON’T KNOW THAT we can really consider them ‘terrorist’; we definitely can’t with integrity anyway. Dishonestly, self-righteously, while living in denial of the U.S. being the most hellbent rogue, criminal, terrorist state in the world, this is not educational at all; well, except to reinforce the awareness of many people evidently loving to live in denial and/or to perpetuate the spewing out of lies.
The U.S. has strongly helped to corrupt the Pakistani govt, which is one reason why Pakistani extremists, I won’t say terrorists but will say extremists, act the way they do. And the U.S. loves using such so-called terrorists when it suits the purposes of the U.S.’ ruling elites’ agendas; and which is a very frequent but covert reality.
It is the U.S. that really formed Al Qa’ida and formed the Taliban unity, provided them with a lot of training and other backing, used them to profit the ruling elites of the U.S., and then, as usual, wants to dispose of these formerly useful human instruments, because they’re no longer deemed useful. They’re no longer of “value” to the West’s ruling elites.
The U.S. covertly works with the MEK in Iran against the Iranian govt. And there are plenty of other examples.
Americans commit bloody violent terrorism in the USA every day, but many Americans only want to point their fingers at the extremists fighters and religiously off-base Islamists in places like Pakistan.
peaceistruth asks:
“What would the U.S gain by such an assassination, by making nuclear-armed Pakistan even more chaotic?”
YOU HAVE PLENTY of reading to do. www.globalresearch.ca , InformationClearingHouse , probably ZNet or Zmag, ThirdWorldTraveler , Keith Harmon Snow at www.allthingspass.com , among other sites have provided relevant content for the sort of question quoted above.
That, however, is not to say that I think the U.S. is involved in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto though. The U.S. is criminally involved in making the Pakistani govt very much puppet, as well as having orchestrated coups d’etats around the world, overthrowing [good] govts to replace them with hellbent criminal puppet govts, assassinations, and more; but as for this assassination of Benazir Bhutto, I do not know, can’t say one way or another.
They tried to have the president of Uzbekistan assassinated, and he didn’t realise this at first, initially having thought that it might have been Russia that was responsible; but once he realised that it was really the U.S., then he gave the U.S. six months to GET OUT of the country. This happened over the past few years, maybe two.
Yet the U.S. surely knew that Bhutto returning to Pakistan was surely going to end up with a very problematic, or worse, sitaution, too.
QUOTE: “gyptian December 27th, 2007 1:55 pm
…
… Before shooting your mouth off you must try and read a little more about her life and her courageous stand (with her mother) after the hanging death of her Dad by another U.S. puppet.
…”
I find gyptian’s post very fine, one I agree with; except, with respect to what I just quoted above, I urge people who seek this above information on Benzir Bhutto to NOT neglect to make sure to find out what her niece has provided over the (roughly) past month or two. She provides a very opposite telling of or on the history of Benazir Bhutto than what gyptian indicates having learned or read.
This is obviously to Musharraf’s liking. Uncle Sam’s take is debatable.
What do the forces of Pakistani Islam (radical and otherwise) want to achieve here?
Is the concept of Martyrdom compatible with 21st century technology (i.e., nukes)?
The material author of the crime is not available, being occupied elsewhere in the cosmos.
The intellectual author(s) are kept in power by the US government. So they will not be named or punished.
Impunity is the word for the day.
Violence is not the solution
Once again, a controversial leader is assassinated, along with many others caught in the blast that followed the shooting. What does this prove about the use of force and violence to solve problems? The condemnation comes from many sides, but it does not offer peace and reconciliation, but more threats of violence to those believed to be responsible for this attack. The cycle of violence does not end until it ends with a conscious decision to use others means. Dennis Kucinich has proposed a Dept. of Peace in the U.S. to address just such situations. His proposal is global, not national, and it is one that is based on peaceful, non-violent conflict resolution. This is not a political post; I mention Kucinich because what he has to say is exactly what is needed at this time. Peace is a process, and it must be initiated if it is going to be effective. What we desire is a world that works FOR EVERYONE.
peace,
st john
Actually I was wrong in my post. Bhutto was instrumental in brining the Taliban to power…they’ve always been Pakistan’s puppet and they gained power, financial support and recognition under her reign. Now she claims she’s against them. Here she was a female President of an Islamic state supporting a terrorist force in Afghanistan another Islamic state that didn’t even allow women and girls to participate in public life. What a disgusting hypocrite!
I’m sorry she’s been killed. Its terrible. No one deserves that. But she won’t be missed at least by the Afghans.
her bravery is commendable…but her regime was not.it was ‘democracy’for the already priviledged few…much like bush..pakistan and its people were robbed blind and the cash and resources, found its way into the already overflowing bhutto bankroll…murder and mayhem ruled the day,people dropped dead like flies all around bhutto…and she had a reputation for being ‘bloodthirsty’.elections were said to have been ‘rigged’ and human rights issues were largely ignored.now that bhutto is a martyr,it may have the effect of sanctifying a mudhole….but it may serve bush in his mission to own the world….meanwhile mushareff,much like saddam,is no angel and is likely another evil man.the problem is- bhutto was a greedy,thieving liar..who hid behind the word ‘democracy’as she was bashing people over the head. she should have stayed in dubai,in the cozy embrace of the sheik’s palace.i am not good enough,to pass judgement on any other…that would fall under the domain of ‘god’… if bhutto is of god,may she rest with god……if bhutto is not of god,let her go to hell.
I pray we can all take a breath and step back, remember why, if we are a peace loving group, Bhutto represented hope for us.
I have posted prayers for different religions today at http://slpeacefest.wordpress.com
May her death not be in vain, may we use nonviolent means in mourning her loss.
Peace to all,
KK
Besides Benazir Bhutto’s interviews with Peter Mansbridge and Carol Off - are there any other interviews that Benazir Bhutto gave prior to her return to Pakistan? I am not saying that every word that Bhutto ever uttered was factual - only that it is a fact that Bhutto was asked questions about both threats on her life and her reasons for returning to Pakistan and that it is a fact that Bhutto gave something resembling answers to these questions.
Considering that there is probably going to be a call for facts soon, what about the statements given by the various world leaders (or their representatives) so that we can look at them for clues as to how the world plans to respond to this - well “unfortunate turn of events” seems callous under the circumstances, but you know what I mean.
There will be some here who will soon be calling for facts - might as well give them something.
Well she would have bridged the gap between India and Pakistan. Sometimes you do not know what you do, and sometimes you have to weigh the differences. I am not her judge as seraphicmom has said.
Special forces troops to Pakistan, BB done in, for sure sounds like the penis fingers of the great USA have or are about to intercourse another country for the great whore Israel
From SNAFU (Situation Normal All F#*ked Up to FUBR (F#*ked Up Beyond Recognition)
Bhutto ran a corrupt government.
However, the situation probably wouldn’t be nearly as disasterous if Bush didn’t divert resources away from going after the Taliban prior to the invasion of Iraq.
The top CIA guy on the ground in Afghanistan said we knew where Bin Laden was-not exactly but that he was among a few hundred Talban fighters fleeing through Tora Bora.
Of course if American foreign policy were based on human needs,the world would be a different place.
The peoples of Pakistan, its neighboring countries and their families abroad will bear the brunt of violence and chaos. Heck of a job, Dubya!
Is this a good time to say the third stage of NAFTA will drive many more campesinos off the land in Mexico. Also chicken ranching too.
The wicked witch had it right, “What a world, What a world!”.
Let’s start turning this DISASTER around.
Wage Peace!
it would have been much nicer if george had been the one standing there
Well, George and the rest of your crew –you have again really screwed the world and its people. You really don’t disappoint as you continue to come through endlessly revealing yourselves as the losers and creeps you really are. Just a bunch of idiots — little, stupid boys (a few girls) running loose with a book of matches.
Mike Corbell, Excellent and thoughtful posts, very informative.
Celebrity, naivety concerning human nature is what gets us into and keeps us in trouble. I remember Bush being touted by the media as a “likable fellow,” just another “down to earth ordinary guy…” Now look at the damage he’s done at home and abroad. And the US had its hand in the legal assassination of Saddam Hussein. So, are things REALLY better in Iraq because if it?
Which brings me to the point that no “evil” means can be justified by the “good” end they’re intended to bring about. Bhutto was not Pakistan’s patron saint, though that is not justification for assassinating her. And before you can truly understand human nature, you must first understand yourself. It’s all too easy to cast stones by saying, “I/we am/are good, while he/they is/are bad…” It all comes down to that mote and beam thing.
Tragic. Now Pakistan is beginning to disintegrate. I felt horror and revulsion when I read of the assassination of Ms Bhutto.
Almost despite myself, since I’d known for years of corruption charges aimed at her and her husband. And evidently some charges that he had looted Pakistan, “investing” millions of stolen money out of the country, putting some of it in British real estate, for example.
Mr. Musharraf’s voice was shaking when I heard it this morning on the radio. Maybe from fear as well as from grief.
Watch for Bush to announce plans to send large numbers of troops to Pakistan if Musharraf’s government begins to come unstuck.
In terms of the caliber of international leadership, the world has never had it worse since September of 1939.
“When in despair’ I remember throughout history the way of truth and Love has always won ; there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time they seem invincible, but in the end they always fall.” Mahatma Gandhi
bush swears to bring benazir bhutto’s assassins to justice ! we have waited far too and long enough=first things first,george bush, bring john f. kennedy’s assassins to justice !
Wow these are all great posts here. You have all showed how complicated and dangerous Web we weave when at first we do Deceive.
Now our troops will be bogged down in Iraq, Afghanistan and now even Pakistan…. when the CIA helped bring down the Soviet Union by making their Viet Nam in Afghanistan.
The suicide terrorists are now making the Nuclear threat great now with Pakistan at the start of a violent revolutionary civil war with the nuclear bombs under Guard… (we assume).
This horrible killing shows what mass Planetary horror can grow from a problem left untreated for thousands of years being unleashed by one or two suicide bomber assassins.
The only sensible answer to this World Security problem is to get Dialog going freely from the UN and Individuals and Government leaders with all groups that the major powers consider Unfriendly, Evil Doers, Supporters of Terrorism or whatever threat…. we gotta start with Talk and then make deals and Jaw Jaw instead of Waw Waw because If we want to survive this we got to realize the military cannot beat suicide attacks that can come from anyone who decides at some point that they are fed up and ain’t gonna take it anymore!
The Radicals have now got Civilization by the Balls… Bein a Radical I understand what is drivin all this…
My inspiration.. Rebel Jesus said in one of the Censored out Texts… “Talk to your Enemies before Sundown!
OK Peacemakers… lets get out the Guitar Army again.
peaceistruth says: Now her supporters and many of the world’s democratic leaders want to make a martyr out of her. I don’t think she was as different from Musharraf as many of her supporters made her out to be.
Bhutto seemed to have found enough common ground with Musharraf to for a coalition with him - even if she later backed out of said coalition. I sometimes wonder if Bhutto was acting strategically, that the coalition gave her the greatest chance of running again but if she had always plan to back out of the coalition because backing out gave her the greatest chance of winning again. If so, that was a smart maneuvour.
Mendo says: Whatever side of the fence you find yourself, we can all agree that this is just another nail in the coffin of humanity. You just cannot keep killing off everyone that you do not agree with.
I would go further than not killing those we disagree with, and extend that to political opponents and past leaders. If the consequences of losing power is automatically jail or death, then no President is ever going to want to give up power. OK, even in Democratic societies, jail is a possibility (as it should be) but if it happens to every single leader (or, at least those who do not escape to exile) - then who ever leads the country is going to act like Schreiber facing extradition.
peaceistruth says: Looking at her history and the history of her family, Bhutto probably would have been a very pliable tool for U.S interests in Pakistan, in my opinion. It would make more sense if the Bush administration helped carry out a “removal” of Musharraf, considering that he isn’t exactly very reliable.
It was the US pushing for the coalition between Musharraf and Bhutto - probably to give Bhutto some legitimacy because the laws needed to be changed for Bhutto to run again because she had already served her limit under the old rules.
If, as you say, Bhutto being in charge was the USA’s preferred plan, then what is their plan “B”? Seems that it would also be, like you say, to “carry out a removal of Musharraf.”
peaceistruth says: What would the U.S gain by such an assassination, by making nuclear-armed Pakistan even more chaotic?
Chaos creates the need to create “order.” Who is going to bring “order” to Pakistan. Musharraf has to bring order without appearing to stomp on rights - if he can’t do both, there is a possible danger of someone doing it for him.
itsjustkarma says: To point the finger would be too early, but I urge You You listen carefully to who says what.
I haven’t even thought of the religious right of Pakistan yet - now that adds to it! My worry about pointing fingers early is more based on how this reminds me of Barbara Stoppel’s murder - it happened just before Christmas and she was taken off life support just after Christmas. She was working at McD but Ideal donuts (across the parking lot) offered her more money per hour - but required her to work shifts alone. You should have heard those calling into CJOB (local radio) - they wanted a conviction yesterday and the police obliged! Thomas Sophanow was originally convicted of the murder but it turned out to be Terry Arnold who did it.
It is Barbara Stoppel I think of with all this talk of Bhutto being a saint/martyr - no one is as good as they are portrayed when they die - though, I personally think we will find much more nastiness surrounding Bhutto than 16 year old (would have been 42 year old) Stoppel - because the latter did not have the years of opportunity and, not all that much inclination.
Was thinking of Stoppel lately any way - with the murder of two RCMP officers in a month and changing the policy of saving money by having RCMP officers respond to calls alone. With Stoppel, there was supposed to be the end of such risky behaviour included in the job description. And Bhutto figured it was part of her job description to be out there with the people so that she could portray herself as one of them.
Mike Corbeil says: (Claudius says: “Do your information searches and readings, folks. Always work at being WELL INFORMED”) True that people ought to be well-informed. But don’t forget that Bhutto was a human being.
Mike, like your response to Claudius since it was kinder than what I would have said and more appropriate under the circumstances. Mine would have been that each post allows two links and that if Claudius has information to share it. The old put up or the - er - other option. Because that is where our information comes from - other posters posting links. Actually, I would expect the former because thinking the latter would be rude.
Mike Corbeil says: Note, however, that I, so far anyway, don’t care that she sided with the Taliban, not per se anyway. If she approved of their oppression of Afghan women’s rights, then I’d care about this, but it’s about the only thing I know of having disliked about the Taliban.
I think that it would also be important that the Taliban agree to unhold the rule of law (ie adhear to the Geneva Convention) and agree to uphold human rights. In other words, agree, in good faith, to not do bad things any more rather than give the lip service Harper and the American administration tends to give to these issues.
balakirev says: It may be a sad observation to make, but sometimes assassinations of particular individuals at the right and the right historical juncture might be OK. For example, if Hitler was assassinated immediately after he was elected and selected for the his leadership position, maybe….
It would not have made much difference since Hitler was getting a good portion of his propaganda (especially considering Jews) from the United States. The aftermath of WWII served to turn people off ideas that they were, otherwise, willing to entertain. The time was ripe for a Hitler. And whose to say that an assassination would not have given us someone even worse!
balakirev says: If political assassination, terrorism, torture, black-listing and other political techniques were not so effective, their regular use would have died out long ago.
But has anyone ever engaged in these practices who had the world’s best interests at heart? Seems to me that, even with all the failed assassination attempts on Castro (638 in total), that many of those behind the various attempts were more motivated by greed than goodness. And they always think that they will have more control over the replacement than the original job holder.
Mike Corbeil says: IF SHE was truly “a woman of the people”, then she would not be allied with the U.S. hellbent govt and ruling elites; IMO. She also would not have, along with her husband, done as her niece strongly enough makes clear of the history of her leadership in Pakistan against the people of Pakistan.
You will get on argue with me there. Presenting oneself as a “woman of the people” or a “man of the people” is a very effected political ploy though. You heard of the Cretien “the little man from Shawinigan” - it is called the common touch - and he was very good at faking it. So is Bush BTW.
Mike Corbeil says: the PM usually does not venture around in public without security.
Maybe not (and neither did Bhutto) - but Presidents are a category unto themselves. I remember when Clinton came to Winnipeg to speak - there were articles upon articles devoted to the spectical of this ex-President’s security - which the media found quite excessive. Queen Elizabeth had security when she came to Winnipeg also but not so extensive - you could actually get near enough to shake her hand and hand her flowers.
Bhutto needed more security than she had, but she did have some security even this morning of her death. Though, I can’t rule out the security being infiltrated. Bush, on the other hand, needs to be pied, chocolate milked and/or pelted with eggs and there is no way one can get past his security to do that because he closes off whole blocks wherever he goes.
BTW - are the niece’s articles available on line?
Mike Corbeil says: I’ll just let people who are interested in reading these perform the search.
I feel lazy like that sometimes too (today still in my PJs). What would be a good article to start with? The US liking her does make me suspicious. If I do a search, it is most apt to be at rabble.ca’s archives.
Mendo Chuck says: Whatever side of the fence you find yourself, we can all agree that this is just another nail in the coffin of humanity. …”
Mike Corbeil says: THERE ARE SO MANY NAILS already in the coffin of humanity that more seems to be nearly insignificant, now.
I don’t see a contradiction - except possibly at the “insignificant” part - when does another nail become insignificant - when we stop caring? Personally, I consider the assassination itself the nail rather than who was assassinated. The fact that Bhutto has been around for so long does make the death a bit more poignent - and the fact that she leaves behind children more sad.
odonian says: This is obviously to Musharraf’s liking.
Mushy was willing to form a coalition with Bhutto and was probably not that happy that Bhutto ended it. But I think this puts Mushy’s power on even more shaky ground.
odonian says: Is the concept of Martyrdom compatible with 21st century technology (i.e., nukes)?
Yes. Becoming a martyr means that one’s death invigorates one’s cause rather deflates it. It reflects the belief that Bhutto will accomplish more through her death than if she were to live.
st john says: Violence is not the solution / The condemnation comes from many sides, but it does not offer peace and reconciliation, but more threats of violence to those believed to be responsible for this attack. The cycle of violence does not end until it ends with a conscious decision to use others means.
I call that the coalition of the willing moving towards the implementation of plan “B.” From what you told me of Kucinich’s plan, he would turn the US into a nation of Peace Keepers - I doubt Haliburton and Thyssen want that since there is not money in that.
To those I did not respond to - you had good things to say to - I just did not have anything to add or comment on (or had done so already).
There is another problem coming down the pike very soon. Mrs. Bhutto may or may have been corrupt, but it seems that she would have been the next p.m. of Pakistan thanks to popular support. I don’t know how much support she would have had from the world community (read USA), but several questions arise: with her death, and the possible implication of the Pakistani army and/or Musharaff, where does India stand with the minimal tolerance it has for its fellow nuclear power? Now that Musharaff is no longer head of the army, how much power does he actually wield? For how much longer? What happens to Pakistan’s nuclear capability? The world becomes a more dangerous place minute by minute.
THE SHIT IS GOING TO HIT THE FAN NOW!!
bligh, thanks for your link on Kucinich’s response to Bhutto’s death.
Only providing exerpts and not the whole statement:
Statement by the Honourable Stéphane Dion, Leader of the Opposition, on the Assassination of Benazir Bhutto
Statement by the Honourable Stéphane Dion, Leader of the Opposition, on the Assassination of Benazir Bhutto
http://www.liberal.ca/story_13448_e.aspx
NDP expresses sympathies following assassination of Benazir Bhutto
Layton stated that the NDP unequivocally condemns this act of violence and is deeply concerned for the peace and stability of the region and said that returning Pakistan to a peaceful democracy must be the diplomatic priority of the Canadian government in the hours and days ahead.
http://www.ndp.ca/page/6058
Why the hell could not our president find a different voice than his usual hackneyed monotone and maybe offer one small personal detail from having actually known Benazir Bhutto.
i believed the shit would hit the fan,when and if bhutto was elected.it became apparent,she was not really all that electable in pakistan..most pakistani’s still have a bitter,bad taste in their mouths for bhutto…maybe that is why she got bumped-because she wasnt as electable as once thought.either way,mushareff or anyone else-the shit may still hit the fan…..nevertheless,….it will be interesting to see who they dig-up to replace bhutto,in the election.
I am inclined to believe that the US is not behind this assassination. Bhutto was willing to kowtow to the US, as far as I can tell from the limited info the mass media gives out.
However, I agree that the US will use this as an excuse to further interfere with Pakistan’s internal affairs.
The official US government list of hijackers did not include any Pakistanis. There were reports that the head of ISI wired Atta $100,000. That doesn’t mean that 9-11 wasn’t an inside job. It just means that part of it was out-sourced.
“I’m sorry she’s been killed. Its terrible. No one deserves that. But she won’t be missed at least by the Afghans.” — dcbeltway (my buddy)
Its true Benazir was intrumental in creating the Taliban …however at that time the Taliban were no where near as horrendous as they are now. They were a ragtag bunch of madrassa students and she used them as a political ploy. Benazir is certainly no saint and played sub-continental politics to the hilt. You do have to understand that in Pakistan unlike in India, politics has always been determined by the military and politicians have always tried every ruse available to sidestep the military, including stepping on others toes.
Despite the corruption charges and all her other problems, one thing she never lacked is courage. She stood up to Zia even at that age after Zulfikar Bhutto (her dad) was hung by Zia. Youve gotta admit that in the recent past, she left everything that was dear to her (family, etc) and charged head first into a dangerous, volatile situation which I believe she did because of her love for her country.
Indira Gandhi (Benazirs role model) in India actually created and supported some of the very same Sikh extremists who later assasinated her. She supported them as a counter to some other political party in Punjab that was troubling the Congress.
If Benazir had won the elections and if Musharraf stepped down, i believe Afghanistan and India would have benefitted from it. Now its back to square one and this dangerous game these Pakistani dictators have been playing will continue unabated.
Cheney /Bush WANT World War III. Nobody who has watched their machinations during the past 7 years will believe the AP spin that the assassination of Bhutto has dealt a “severe blow to U.S. efforts to restore stability and democracy in a turbulent, nuclear-armed Islamic nation.” Cheney/Bush WANT some “nuclear-armed Islamic nation” to threaten to or actually drop a nuclear bomb on Israel or Iran or Iraq — on SOMEPLACE. Then Cheney/Bush can claim that the U.S. has no choice but to DEFEND the victims, and must therefore drop nuclear bombs on that unstable nation to stabilize it — death and destruction being their ultimate stabilizers (as evidenced by U.S. treatment of Iraq and Afghanistan). But since human beings will resist injustices endlessly, Cheney/Bush may be able to goad Pakistanis into contributing to the perpetration of the endless war that they and their war-profiteering cronies want.
“THE WORLD DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND US (U.S.).” wrote somebody here.
maybe not, but the US sure tries hard to make that the reality.
and not everybody in the world is willing to let that happen without a fight. so those who go along with US wishes become targets.
thanks mike corbeil for excellent analysis.
Another one sacrificed to the unholy machinery of “democracy in the Middle East” American Style.
I think of it as shredding the fabric that binds these people together, and spitting out garments that unravel in the winds of progress.
rip Ms. Bhutto
vaudree,i am glad you are so sure bhutto was a human being,because i was not…….,entirely convinced,,it is true that she bled and died like a human being and if indeed, she was a ‘human being’ may she rest in peace……just read brianct’s post…….VERY INTERESTING..going to youtube,now.
Is this why Bhutto was killed? Osama bin laden killed by Omar Sheik, she says
Very interesting! At 6min 12sec into the interview Bhutto states that Omar Sheik murdered Osama Bin Laden!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIO8B6fpFSQ
I read the comments posted here with great interest. The subject of Pakistan politics is close to my heart, having spent the first trimester of my life (20years) in Pakistan. I especially liked the comment that asked for us to be well informed(was it Mike?). Here is my attempt to provide some inside information on the situation in Pakistan and BB, Mush, etal.
ON BB:
1. Both her two terms as PM ended with extreme corruption,not only around her but throughout the governmental infrastructure. Her husband (Asif Zardari) was openly called Mr. 10% forthat was his shareof any large business venture, legal or not. The country was almost bankrupt. The Sindh provincial “gangs” openly committed murders of opposition leaders with no hesitancy.
2. BB had idealistic ideas about Pakistan,but was very ineffectual in carrying them out. Her husband was a major factor here.
3. Her return to Pakistan was engineered and supported by the US. (a kiss of death for anyone seeking power in Pakistan.
ON Mush
1. Mush has supported the US at a great risk to his personal safety and popularity. He was quite popular early on in his presidency, however his support for the US GWOT has landed him in hot water with his own people. The more US pushes him for further action on the border, the less popular he becomes. (The same fate will befall anyone else in his place)
2. Mush seems to want to hold on to power whatever it takes. Does not know when to walk off.
3. Mush has not been accused of any significant personal wealth gathering ala BB.
4. Pakistan has done well economically under Mush. (NO doubt due to US economic assistance)
On the Taliban
1. We need to distinguish between the Taliban and Al Quaida. The Taliban had not injured a single American until the bombs started falling on them. Al Quaida on the other hand was the “real enemy”.
2. Taliban are Afghans and generally do not commit suicide type attacks.
3. Taliban and other Afghans at the border areas have traditionally moved across the borders easily. They do not like to be restricted by the the Pakistani military, the Afghani forces or the the US/Nato forces.
4. The renewed emphasis by the US to “oust” Taliban form the border areas will create more hatred and “create” more hardened attitudes. Look for an increase intensity of attacks.
On the US Spreading Democracy
1. Don’t make me laugh!!
brianct,
Thanks for the link. Interesting indeed. That clip does cast an interesting light on this.
thank you,phaedrus….great clarification !
Taliban are 100% Pakistan’s baby see here:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB227/index.htm
From the website documents you can download:
October 1996: Although food supplies from Pakistan to the Taliban are conducted openly through Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISID, “the munitions convoys depart Pakistan late in the evening hours and are concealed to reveal their true contents.” [Doc 15]
November 1996: Pakistan’s Pashtun-based “Frontier Corps elements are utilized in command and control; training; and when necessary - combat” alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan. [Doc 17]
March 1998: Al-Qaeda and Pakistan government-funded Harakat ul-Ansar (HUA) have been sharing terrorist training camps in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan for years [Link Doc 16], and HUA has increasingly been moving ideologically closer to al-Qaeda. The U.S. Embassy in Islamabad is growing increasingly concerned as Fazlur Rahman Khalil, a leader in Pakistan’s Harakat ul-Ansar has signed Osama bin Laden’s most recent fatwa promoting terrorist activities against U.S. interests. [Doc 26]
September 1998 [Doc 31] and March 1999 [Doc 33]: The U.S. Department of State voices concern that Pakistan is not doing all it can to pressure the Taliban to surrender Osama bin Laden. “Pakistan has not been responsive to our requests that it use its full influence on the Taliban surrender of Bin Ladin.” [Doc 33]
September 2000: A cable cited in The 9/11 Commission Report notes that Pakistan’s aid to the Taliban has reached “unprecedented” levels, including recent reports that Islamabad has possibly allowed the Taliban to use territory in Pakistan for military operations. Furthermore the U.S. has “seen reports that Pakistan is providing the Taliban with materiel, fuel, funding, technical assistance and military advisors.” [Doc 34]
See also:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011008/rashid
And all the links that pop up here:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=pakistan+support+of+taliban
Let the Lovefest begin…..The CD cliquers, yes, yet he said, then she said, while it said, if you would just, never, so sorry, wae are the CLIQUE de le CLIQUE of CD. This site so sucks anymore, bye WillyBill, my Patriot
RIP Benazir Bhutto, sympathies to her family and children, regardless of political beliefs, she is a mother and sister and daughter. Inshallah!
oroe,thank you for reminding….. of what is true and important..
Thank you for posting, phaedrus.
QUOTE: “vaudree December 27th, 2007 4:47 pm
…
Mike Corbeil says: Note, however, that I, so far anyway, don’t care that she sided with the Taliban, not per se anyway. …
I think that it would also be important that the Taliban agree to unhold the rule of law (ie adhear to the Geneva Convention) and agree to uphold human rights. In other words, agree, in good faith, to not do bad things any more rather than give the lip service Harper and the American administration tends to give to these issues.”
I DO NOT think the Taliban should ‘unhold’ the rule of law, but uphold it, sure; yet it depends on who’s law we refer to, for the Taliban were applying rule of law alright. They only needed to make some modifications to their rules of law, in order to make them just. And dumping theocracy is one thing that should be done, for theocratic rule of law is UNACCEPTABLE.
It’s a complicated issue though, for the UN or UNSC, well, actually many UNGA member states are no better than the Taliban were. However, what I had in mind is the UNSC, which hellishly abides by rule of law every time it authorises totally criminal U.S. vetos against necessary resolutions drafted by the other UNSC member states and for the purpose of trying to get the Israeli govt to cease its hellbent crimes against Palestinians. The UNSC therein and definitely does abide by its so-called rule of law, and in extremely criminal, hellish ways.
I do NOT appreciate the phraseology of “rule of law” when it’s used in terms implying that “rule of law” is universally important and as if the laws were always right; or when they are, then that they’re always justly applied or enforced.
We don’t live in utopia, ya know. This is not dream but real world.
The Taliban were making progress, just that they still had more to accomplish. Still did far better than what can be truthfully said of the U.S. and its NATO allies though. The latter definitely don’t care about the oppression of women’s rights, and whenever the opposite appearance is provided, then it’s never due to sincere intentions; it’s always for the sake of the ruling elites’ agendas, so to try to deceive.
Getting the Taliban to cease their oppression of women’s rights and their brutal punishment of criminals might if not would be the most difficult hurdles to achieve with them, but I’d place my hopes on HONEST talks and providing incentives constructive for them and everyone else.
War is NOT the path to peace, so TALKS MUST BE.
vaudree quotes balakirev:
“balakirev says: If political assassination, terrorism, torture, black-listing and other political techniques were not so effective, their regular use would have died out long ago.”
EFFECTIVE? Sure, but not for GOOD. The U.S. has been effective at committing those acts, but NEVER FOR good, never for righteous reasons, and never with any good and constructive outcomes.
Murderers and rapists are effective, and criminally so.
Torture has never or extremely rarely has been effective in any constructive way. We’ve been reading this over and over for several years now; about the fact that there really is no precedent for believing that torture is effective in any constructive ways. The tortured are effectively tortured though.
vaudree quotes me and comments on what I said:
“Mike Corbeil says: IF SHE was truly “a woman of the people”, then she would not be allied with the U.S. …. …
… Presenting oneself as a “woman of the people” or a “man of the people” is a very effected political ploy though. You heard of the Cretien …. …”
I HAD MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU MEANT.
vaudree and me, again:
“Mike Corbeil says: the PM usually does not venture around in public without security.
Maybe not (and neither did Bhutto) - but Presidents are a category unto themselves. I remember when Clinton came to Winnipeg to speak - there were articles upon articles devoted to the spectical of this ex-President’s sec