babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » Bhutto killed in blast at Pakistan rally: report

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Bhutto killed in blast at Pakistan rally: report
Nakajima
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14850

posted 27 December 2007 04:35 AM      Profile for Nakajima     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Last Updated: Thursday, December 27, 2007 | 8:34 AM ET
CBC News

Former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto was reported killed Thursday in an explosion at a rally in the city of Rawalpindi that killed at least 20 others, according to media reports.

An unnamed party aide told wire services that Bhutto had died in the attack at the city's Liaqat Bagh park.

Bhutto had just finished speaking to the crowd of thousands when the blast occurred, freelance journalist Graham Usher told the CBC from the capital, Islamabad.

Earlier, Bhutto spokesman Jameel Soomro was quoted as saying Bhutto was unharmed in the attack, which witnesses said appeared to be the work of a suicide bomber.

Reuters reported other witnesses saying a man fired shots at Bhutto, then blew himself up.

An Associated Press reporter at the scene counted about 20 bodies, including police, and could see many other wounded people.


From: Sector 001 | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 27 December 2007 04:41 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Link?
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 27 December 2007 04:42 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here's one news article on it.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 27 December 2007 04:45 AM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bhutto reportedly dead after attack at rally
From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 27 December 2007 04:50 AM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
BBC Video
From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 27 December 2007 04:53 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

Pakistan opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was assassinated Thursday in a suicide bombing that also killed at least 20 others at a campaign rally, a party aide and a military official said.

"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.

A senior military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment, confirmed that Bhutto had died.

Her supporters at the hospital began chanting "Dog, Musharraf, dog," referring to Pakistan's president Pervez Musharraf


http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8TPQLQ80&show_article=1


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
jrose
babble intern
Babbler # 13401

posted 27 December 2007 05:08 AM      Profile for jrose     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
From the New York Times:

quote:
The attack immediately raised questions about whether parliamentary elections scheduled for January will go ahead or be postponed.

From: Ottawa | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 27 December 2007 05:13 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think you can be pretty sure that there will be no elections in a couple of weeks. Musharraf will likely declare martial law again.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 27 December 2007 05:44 AM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
AP has quoted a PPP security adviser as saying she was shot in the neck and chest as she got into her vehicle, before the gunman blew himself up.

This is a interesting tactic.

Looking at the pictures on BBC, that blast was quite large, this was not your average suicide attack.


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Blind_Patriot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3830

posted 27 December 2007 06:01 AM      Profile for Blind_Patriot     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That's a bummer. Musharraf stands to gain with Bhutto not around anymore.
From: North Of The Authoritarian Regime | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
jrose
babble intern
Babbler # 13401

posted 27 December 2007 06:05 AM      Profile for jrose     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It really is a "bummer". I've been buried in books about Benazir Bhutto for a few months now, for a chapter that I was working on for a book (which is now unfortunately outdated as we've already sent it for press.) A fascinating life story, to say the least.
From: Ottawa | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
jrose
babble intern
Babbler # 13401

posted 27 December 2007 06:21 AM      Profile for jrose     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oil prices jump after Bhutto assassination
From: Ottawa | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 27 December 2007 06:51 AM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This really is a tragedy. While it may be impossible to determine who, exactly, did this, it seems clear to me that Musharif bears some responsibility.

His refusal to allow campaigning on the airwaves meant that politicians had no choice but to campaign for votes in the traditional way, by open-air meetings.

So, given that, Musharif had an absolute responsibility to make the assassination of his political opponents impossible. Whether purposely or not, he failed, and should pay the political price.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sara Mayo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3714

posted 27 December 2007 06:56 AM      Profile for Sara Mayo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is absolutely terrible. Of course she had her critics, even with progressive circles, but she worked tirelessly, knowing she was risking her life, to bring a democratic choice to the upcoming Pakistan elections, and for that alone she must be applauded.

I think the international community bears a huge responsibility for not putting more pressure on Musharraf to allow more access to television time for the other parties. Bhutto suggested that the parties could campaign virtually through TV to circumvent the inevitable violence that accompanied her street level campaigning. But Musharraf did not allow this.


From: "Highways are monuments to inequality" - Enrique Penalosa | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 27 December 2007 07:09 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

A longtime adviser and close friend of assassinated Pakistani ex-prime minister Benazir Bhutto places blame for Bhutto's death squarely on the shoulders of U.S.-supported dictator Pervez Musharraf.

After an October attack on Bhutto's life in Karachi, the ex-prime minister warned "certain individuals in the security establishment [about the threat] and nothing was done," says Husain Haqqani, a confidante of Bhutto's for decades. "There is only one possibility: the security establishment and Musharraf are complicit, either by negligence or design. That is the most important thing. She's not the first political leader killed, since Musharraf took power, by the security forces."

Haqqani notes that Bhutto died of a gunshot wound to the neck. "It's like a hit, not a regular suicide bombing," he says. "It's quite clear that someone who considers himself Pakistan's Godfather has a very different attitude toward human life than you and I do."


http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004985.php


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 27 December 2007 07:35 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
US prez Bush was just on, blaming her death on "extremists". Oh, did he mean those extremists in Musharraf's party?
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 27 December 2007 07:44 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Initially it seems that this was a domestic assassination and didn't involve outsiders. The US, in particular, had been adopting a policy of lavishly supporting Musharraf while having its favored alternative in Benazir Bhutto if Musharraf was not able to continue to cling to power. The US now doesn't seem to have an alternative to support. Nawaz Sharif, for example, is much less pro-US than Bhutto was.

Benazir Bhutto's father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (1928-1979), another former Pakistani Prime Minister, was also killed in Rawalpindi - a garrison city under the control of the Pakistani military. He was executed following a kind of show trial. His daughter, Benazir, vowed to continue her father's work while visiting him in his prison cell. She was Pakistan's first female Prime Minister and lived up to the promise she made to her father before he was dragged to his death. Only political murder stopped her.

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 27 December 2007 07:58 AM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
N. Beltov writes:
quote:
Initially it seems that this was a domestic assassination and didn't involve outsiders. The US, in particular, had been adopting a policy of lavishly supporting Musharraf while having its favored alternative in Benazir Bhutto if Musharraf was not able to continue to cling to power.

Then, logically, the assassination seems to flow directly from U.S. interests. What better way to ensure that Musharraf clings to power than to do away with his main opponent, all the while deploring the action of 'extremists'?


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 27 December 2007 08:04 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The chaos in Pakistan that will possibly result from this tragedy is completely not in America's interests, though it must be fun to pretend that it is, or they had a hand in it.

I had a feeling it was always only a matter of when, not if, something like this would happen. Especially after that massive attack on her convoy just as she arrived.

It doesn't come as a surprise, but this news still really hits you hard


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 27 December 2007 08:09 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Re: martin d's comments ... No, I don't think that was the case or that things are that simple. Musharraf's base is getting smaller and smaller and even the myopic U.S. administration can see that. The U.S., like many of Pakistan's neighbors, would be keenly interested in who might follow Musharraf and what effect the change would have. It would simply be prudent to look ahead a little.

I think the expressed wish of the U.S. administration was for Musharraf and the opposition (led by Bhutto of course) to work out a political compromise.

Edited to add: Who benefits from the assassination of Benazir Bhutto? Musharraf, I think. However, his position gets stronger in the short term AND weaker in the long term at the same time.

I understand that a previous military ruler of Pakistan, General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, died in a plane crash with the U.S. Ambassador aboard. If I were a U.S. Ambassador, I'd be careful not to fly with Musharraf. That would be prudent as well. I mention this previous military ruler as well because, at the time of Zia-ul-Haq's death, the preferred leader of Pakistan to the U.S. was the Harvard-educated Benazir Bhutto. Why kill her now?

Of interest in this regard is the following ...
Who killed Zia? (from 1989)

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 27 December 2007 08:22 AM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Edited for clarity:
N. Beltov wrote:
quote:
I think the expressed wish of the U.S. administration was for Musharraf and the opposition (led by Bhutto of course) to work out a political compromise.

Of course, that always looks best (see Israel and Palestine). The significant issue then seems to be "How likely was that, given Bhutto's advantage and Musharraf's disfavour, and where would a Bhutto-led government have left crucial U.S. interests?"

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
EmmaG
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12605

posted 27 December 2007 08:42 AM      Profile for EmmaG        Edit/Delete Post
This article in a Pakistani newspaper seems to refute the "America's responsible for everything" meme:

quote:
A spokesperson for the al-Qaeda terrorist network has claimed responsibility for the death on Thursday of former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

“We terminated the most precious American asset which vowed to defeat [the] mujahadeen,” Al-Qaeda’s commander and main spokesperson Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid told Adnkronos International (AKI) in a phone call from an unknown location, speaking in faltering English. Al-Yazid is the main al-Qaeda commander in Afghanistan.

It is believed that the decision to kill Bhutto, who is the leader of the opposition Pakistan People's Party (PPP), was made by al-Qaeda No. 2, the Egyptian doctor, Ayman al-Zawahiri in October.

Death squads were allegedly constituted for the mission and ultimately one cell comprising a defunct Lashkar-i-Jhangvi’s Punjabi volunteer succeeded in killing Bhutto.


She was viewed as an American asset by Al-Qaeda.


From: nova scotia | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 27 December 2007 08:56 AM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Correction: Al-Qaeda was "quoted" as having killed her in a newspaper that consistently denounces Al-Qaeda on the authority of unnamed "experts".
Just ask yourself: Why would Al-Qaeda phone ADNKronos International of all media to "take responsibility"?

Tyoical ADNKronos propaganda

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 27 December 2007 09:07 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Plus

quote:

It is believed that the decision to kill Bhutto


Believed by whom? From what source?


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 27 December 2007 09:40 AM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Rampage in Pakistan
From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 27 December 2007 10:00 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well they won't be able to afford democracy now with all this terrorism happening. Musharraf will just have to seize power for another five or eight years or whatever until the region is completely Talibanized, I mean, safe for democracy at some point after militant Islam is firmly embedded in the region and colder war concluded.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 27 December 2007 10:07 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's puzzling to read reports of indiscriminate violence from PPP supporters upset over the violent assassination. Won't this help the Musharraf regime to justify further repressive measures?

OTOH, Perhaps the disorders have more than one source ... including from Musharraf supporters ...


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 27 December 2007 10:12 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
He doesn't need disorder to justify imposition of martial law. He did it two months ago when there was no disorder. He rode into power by way of a coup in 1999 without disorder. He'll do what he wants disorder or no disorder.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 27 December 2007 10:20 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
He still has to keep the military and security establishment placated ... which seem to be virtually the only sectors/institutions that support him. And the U.S., which pumps billions in aid to Pakistan annually, would retain some influence ... don't you think? Musharraf seems to be doing a kind of balancing act with these two influences.
From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 27 December 2007 10:22 AM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by martin dufresne:
Of course, that always looks best (see Israel and Palestine). The significant issue then seems to be "How likely was that, given Bhutto's advantage and Musharraf's disfavour, and where would a Bhutto-led government have left crucial U.S. interests?"

Christopher Hitchens admires her. That should tell you something.

Both the US and Britain seem to have regarded her favourably, that is, they would have been happy to see a Bhutto-led government. (Whether they would have been proved correct, from their point of view, is another matter.)


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 27 December 2007 10:27 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sharif to boycott Jan. 8 elections:

quote:

Pakistani opposition leader Nawaz Sharif announced Thursday his party was boycotting next month's elections following the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. He demanded that President Pervez Musharraf resign immediately.

"The holding of fair and free elections is not possible in the presence of Pervez Musharraf. After the killing of Benazir Bhutto, I announce that the Pakistan Muslim League-N will boycott the elections," Sharif told a news conference, referring to his party.

Sharif urged other parties to join the boycott of the Jan. 8 parliamentary elections. A collective response, including by Bhutto's own party could seriously undermine the legitimacy of the vote as Musharraf attempts to engineer a transition to democracy after eight years of military rule.

"I demand that Musharraf should quit immediately," he said. "Musharraf is the cause of all the problems. The federation of Pakistan cannot remain in tact in the presence of President Musharraf."


http://tinyurl.com/2l5lln


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 27 December 2007 10:35 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Christopher Hitchens admires her. That should tell you something.

I guess she must be a great person then. I just finished reading Hitchens book denouncing belief in god entitled "god is not great" and I agreed 1000% with everything in it. After reading it, you really come to realize that people who believe in god are no better than silly ninnies who believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. He even showed that Mother Teresa was a fraud - good for him!! and he completely tears "mormonism" to shreds and shows that it is even more absurd than Scientology or the Unification Church.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 27 December 2007 10:43 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The PPP Vice-Chair is Makhdoom Amin Fahim, 68. He was the party's candidate for Pakistan's President against Musharraf, but the PPP boycotted the vote by abstaining, so Fahim received zero votes.
quote:
Fahim was offered the post of prime minister in 2002 by General Pervez Musharraf keeping Benazir's refusal to appoint Fahim as Chief Minister of Sindh province after 1993 elections in mind.

Descending from a spiritual family of the southern Sindh province of Pakistan, the PPP presidential candidate Makhdoom Amin Fahim, 68, never regrets his decision to turn down a clear-cut offer to become the country's prime minister on the condition of parting his way from his leader, Benazir Bhutto, a former Prime Minister and Chairperson of Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), one of the largest political parties of this South Asian Muslim state.

"I could have been the prime minister, which is the first and last dream of any politician in the parliamentary democracy, but loyalty is more important for me than the prime ministership," Mr. Fahim says.

Born in Makhdoom family of Hala, which is located some 200 Kilometers off the southern port city of Karachi, on August 4, 1939, Fahim is a rare breed in Pakistani politics where loyalty doesn't matter at all. Change of party and leadership is considered a routine affair in local politics.

His father Makhdoom Talib-ul-Maula, the spiritual leader of Sarwari Jammat of Pakistan, was one of the founding members of the PPP — which was founded in 1969 by the former Prime Minister of Pakistan Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, father of Benazir Bhutto.

Being the eldest of the sons, Fahim had always been very close to his father, as in Sindhi tradition eldest son is considered the political heir of father.

Fahim did his matriculation in 1955 and intermediate in 1957 in his native town Hala. In 1958, he got admission in political science department of Sindh University, and did his bachelors in 1961.

Fahim is the Vice-Chairman of the PPP, and is also the Parliamentary Leader of the same party in the National Assembly. He has also served as Federal Minister of oil and natural resources, and communication from 1988 to 1990, and 1993 to 1996.

Fahim has been criticized in Pakistan for his contradictory characteristics. He is a feudal landlord and leader of a social democratic party, as well as a Sufi divine (inherited status) and a self-admitted alcohol drinker.

His political party, the PPP, is self-avowedly liberal, but Fahim's sisters have allegedly been forced to "marry the Quran" (instead of non-related men), to prevent the family's massive land holdings from being split up (charged by Tariq Ali in his book "Clash of Fundamentalism", page 261). However, the Makhdoom family denies that charge.



I'm guessing that a decision whether or not to request postponement of the elections will come from the eight PPP Officers, or perhaps the full 37 mmbers of the Executive Committee.

Since the PPP and Nawaz Sharif had agreed on a partial electoral alliance they would want to consult him also. Note that this article again shows Makhdoom Amin Fahim as PPP leader, that is, parliamentary leader. But I still don't see a clear statement anywhere that he is Benazir's deputy, and at his age he might not be her successor for long. Al-Arabiya says he is, but they also suggest Musharraf gets to choose Bhutto's successor, which is absurd:

quote:
Musharraf would be more comfortable with the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) -- Bhutto's Party -- if it came without Bhutto. If the party wins the right to the premiership he could suggest it goes to her deputy Makhdoom Amin Faheem. With Bhutto gone now, that could be a strong possibility, especially that her assassination is certain to benefit her party in the elections.

From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 27 December 2007 10:58 AM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Christopher Hitchens admires her. That should tell you something.

Yes, it does. here's part of what he wrote:

quote:
The sternest critic of Benazir Bhutto would not have been able to deny that she possessed an extraordinary degree of physical courage. When her father was lying in prison under sentence of death from Pakistan's military dictatorship in 1979, and other members of her family were trying to escape the country, she boldly flew back in. Her subsequent confrontation with the brutal Gen. Zia-ul-Haq cost her five years of her life, spent in prison. She seemed merely to disdain the experience, as she did the vicious little man who had inflicted it upon her.

Benazir saw one of her brothers, Shahnawaz, die in mysterious circumstances in the south of France in 1985, and the other, Mir Murtaza, shot down outside the family home in Karachi by uniformed police in 1996.


If you can't find it in your heart to admire someone who went through all that, and emerged as a strong political leader, and a female one in an Islamic Republic to boot, then you should take a good long look at what YOU have become.

Hitchens DOESN"T admire the military dictator who killed her father, and put her in prison. So what do you conclude from that?


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 27 December 2007 11:35 AM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
RosaL wrote:
quote:
Both the US and Britain seem to have regarded her favourably, that is, they would have been happy to see a Bhutto-led government.

But not to the point of abstaining from lavishing millions on Musharraf, her main opponent and the force behind today's assassination, according to Bhutto's supporters. (But what do they know, right?)


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 27 December 2007 11:52 AM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by martin dufresne:

But not to the point of abstaining from lavishing millions on Musharraf, her main opponent and the force behind today's assassination, according to Bhutto's supporters. (But what do they know, right?)


They supported Musharraf but could see that his position was weakening. I think Bhutto was their fall-back.

I'm not ruling out Musharraf as responsible. My only point was that I don't think the US was behind it. (I think it is possible that Musharraf would do something the US doesn't like if he thought it was in his interests to do so.)

[fixed quote]

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 27 December 2007 11:55 AM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:

If you can't find it in your heart to admire someone who went through all that, and emerged as a strong political leader, and a female one in an Islamic Republic to boot, then you should take a good long look at what YOU have become.

Hitchens DOESN"T admire the military dictator who killed her father, and put her in prison. So what do you conclude from that?


I was suggesting that Hitchen's article reflected the fact that the United States and Britain regarded her favourably, as a potential ally, and that it wasn't, therefore, reasonable to see the US as responsible for her assassination. That does not imply - and I was not implying - that there was nothing to admire in her.

(I don't form my opinions by looking at the views of Hitchens and negating them.)

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 27 December 2007 11:58 AM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I am about to make a bold prediction for 2008. Before the end of Jan. the western press will be running stories linking Iran with the assassination.
From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 27 December 2007 12:11 PM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
I am about to make a bold prediction for 2008. Before the end of Jan. the western press will be running stories linking Iran with the assassination.

I think that's fairly astute.


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
johnpauljones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7554

posted 27 December 2007 12:12 PM      Profile for johnpauljones     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
I am about to make a bold prediction for 2008. Before the end of Jan. the western press will be running stories linking Iran with the assassination.

It will be either Iran, Bin Laden or Saudi Arabia


From: City of Toronto | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 27 December 2007 12:14 PM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

I guess she must be a great person then. I just finished reading Hitchens book denouncing belief in god entitled "god is not great" and I agreed 1000% with everything in it.


I have never read anything and agreed 1000% with everything in it. I can only imagine what a pleasant experience that must be


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
Ken Burch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8346

posted 27 December 2007 12:24 PM      Profile for Ken Burch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Benazir Bhutto was a contradictory figure, but it did appear, at least, that she was committed to the idea of a democratic, progressive, secular Pakistan.

Now that she's dead, is there anybody else in Pakistani politics who stands for that?


From: A seedy truckstop on the Information Superhighway | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 27 December 2007 12:42 PM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Bhutto knew full well there was danger to her life if she returned. In a CNN interview, she spoke of the threats against her from dark forces who were opposed to a woman ruling the Islamic Republic. She was careful not to implicate Gen.Musharraf, but hinted at extremist forces within the military-security establishment.

But she said "there are risks that need to be taken and I am prepared to take them."

"I know past has been tragic but I am optimistic by nature," she said when reminded of the murder of her father by the Pakistani military. "I put my trust in the people of Pakistan and put my faith in God."


Assasination

quote:
The immediate finger of suspicion though pointed to Pakistan's security establishment. A key Benazir aide said the country's military government had much to answer for the assassination because it had not met certain security arrangements required and officials were "dismissive" about Bhutto's requests in this regard.

"They could have provided better security. Even the equipment they gave consistently malfunctioned. Bhutto had asked for independent security arrangements," Hussain Haqqani, a US-based former Bhutto aide told CNN .

Haqqani and other analysts like Peter Bergen also pointed out that the attack took place in Rawalpindi, the military garrison town outside Islamabad that is crawling with security personnel and spooks. The fact that she had been shot dead following up a suicide bombing pointed to a concerted effort to finish her off.

Haqqani said he had spoken to Benazir two days ago and she was concerned about the security arrangement and the military government's effort to rig the election.


Her personal security was not as it should have been.


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
contrarianna
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13058

posted 27 December 2007 12:49 PM      Profile for contrarianna     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:

If you can't find it in your heart to admire someone who went through all that, and emerged as a strong political leader, and a female one in an Islamic Republic to boot, then you should take a good long look at what YOU have become.

Hitchens DOESN"T admire the military dictator who killed her father, and put her in prison. So what do you conclude from that?


I don't claim any deep knowledge of who the "good" and "bad" guys are in Pakistan, however....
First,
The possession of physical courage is no guarantor one way or the other of morality.
It is also a trait of many thugs, criminals and self-sacrificing ideologues--including the suicide murderer of Benazir Bhutto.
The equation of "physical courage"="goodness" ---is a schoolboy's childish meme reinforced by the infantilizing media which demands the corollary:
"our heroes"="goodness"="physical courage"
in contrast to: "their evil doers"="crazy fanaticism"="cowardice"

Thus, Bill Mayer got booted off his television show for suggesting the 911 hijackers may be evil, but not cowards (as habitually drilled home by the media then) in riding the hijacked aircraft to their end.

Second,
The claim that Benazir Bhutto was a champion of democracy is questioned, by among many others, her niece, Fatima Bhutto.
It's typical that Hitchen's article redirects and glosses over the responsibility for the death of Mir Murtaza Bhutto.

Here is an excerpt from Fatima's Nov. 2007 article.

"Ms. Bhutto's repeated promises to end fundamentalism and terrorism in Pakistan strain credulity because, after all, the Taliban government that ran Afghanistan was recognized by Pakistan under her last government -- making Pakistan one of only three governments in the world to do so.

And I am suspicious of her talk of ensuring peace. My father was a member of Parliament and a vocal critic of his sister's politics. He was killed outside our home in 1996 in a carefully planned police assassination while she was prime minister. There were 70 to 100 policemen at the scene, all the streetlights had been shut off and the roads were cordoned off. Six men were killed with my father. They were shot at point-blank range, suffered multiple bullet wounds and were left to bleed on the streets.

My father was Benazir's younger brother. To this day, her role in his assassination has never been adequately answered, although the tribunal convened after his death under the leadership of three respected judges concluded that it could not have taken place without approval from a "much higher" political authority.

I have personal reasons to fear the danger that Ms. Bhutto's presence in Pakistan brings, but I am not alone. The Islamists are waiting at the gate. They have been waiting for confirmation that the reforms for which the Pakistani people have been struggling have been a farce, propped up by the White House. Since Musharraf seized power in 1999, there has been an earnest grass-roots movement for democratic reform. The last thing we need is to be tied to a neocon agenda through a puppet "democrat" like Ms. Bhutto. "
-----------
"Fatima Bhutto is a Pakistani poet and writer. She is the daughter of Mir Murtaza Bhutto, who was killed in 1996 in Karachi when his sister, Benazir, was prime minister."The Dismantling of Pakistani Democracy

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: contrarianna ]


From: here to inanity | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 27 December 2007 12:52 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Who will succeed Benazir Bhutto? Aitzaz Ahsan.
quote:
There's another secular, democratic politician waiting in the wings who might resonate with this year's middle-class rejection of Musharraf.

Aitzaz Ahsan was the chief counsel for former Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, whose ouster by Musharraf on dubious charges of personal corruption proved to be the final straw for much of middle-class Pakistan. A longtime PPP member, respected barrister and democracy advocate, Ahsan's representation of Chaudhry landed him a stint in prison when Musharraf declared emergency rule on November 3. As a result, Haqqani says, Ahsan "disagreed with Benazir’s more conciliatory stance" toward Musharraf.

Ahsan has an international profile as well. An old enemy of 80s-vintage dictator Zia ul-Haq, he gained global esteem for his willingness to go to jail for the sake of democracy. After his November detention, 33 U.S. Senators wrote to Musharraf demanding his release.

He writes "People in the United States wonder why extremist militants in Pakistan are winning. What they should ask is why does President Musharraf have so little respect for civil society — and why does he essentially have the backing of American officials?

"How long can the leaders of the lawyers’ movement be detained? They will all be out one day. And they will neither be silent nor still.
They will recount the brutal treatment meted out to them for seeking the establishment of a tolerant, democratic, liberal and plural political system in Pakistan. They will state how the writ of habeas corpus was denied to them by the arbitrary and unconstitutional firing of Supreme and High Court justices. They will spell out precisely how one man set aside a Constitution under the pretext of an “emergency,” arrested the judges, packed the judiciary, “amended” the Constitution by a personal decree and then “restored” it to the acclaim of London and Washington."



Aitzaz Ahsan was Federal Minister for Law and Justice, Interior, Narcotics Control (1988-1990) and Education. Elected to the Senate of Pakistan in 1994, he eventually succeeded as the leader of the House and the leader of the Opposition between the years 1996 and 1999. Currently he is president of the Supreme Court Bar Association.

In 1988, Aitzaz Ahsan was elected to the National Assembly from Lahore as a a People's Party candidate. He won reelection in 1990, but lost in 1993. In 1994 he was elected to the Senate of Pakistan. He was reelected to the National Assembly of Pakistan as a Peoples Party candidate in the 2002 General Elections, when he won from two seats - his traditional seat in Lahore, as well as from Bahawalnagar in Southern Punjab.

(Note that, unlike Bhutto and many other PPP leaders, he is from Punjab, not Sindh.)

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Ken Burch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8346

posted 27 December 2007 12:54 PM      Profile for Ken Burch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So...now what?

Is this going to lead to a popular revolt against both Musharraf AND the Islamic extremists?

Will the rank-and-file Pakistani population somehow take this as the spark to rise up and reclaim their country?

Or will it go on being a useless bloody conflict between the worst possible influences on the place:
The religious crazies, Mushy and the Army, and Haliburton?


From: A seedy truckstop on the Information Superhighway | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Ibelongtonoone
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14539

posted 27 December 2007 12:55 PM      Profile for Ibelongtonoone        Edit/Delete Post
It took alot of courage to do what she did knowing she would probably be killed, she was not perfect and perhaps had some corruption issues but she is a true martyr. Maybe her death will lead to something better, not right away but perhaps in the future.
From: Canada | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged
Ken Burch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8346

posted 27 December 2007 12:57 PM      Profile for Ken Burch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I've always wondered...was there any real legitimacy to the corruption charges, or were they just a pretext for Musharraf to force Benazir into exile?
From: A seedy truckstop on the Information Superhighway | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 27 December 2007 01:21 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Considering that Bhutto survived one assasination attempt the day of her return to Pakistan, and at a Bhutto rally in Peshawar only days ago, police arrested a suicide bomber who had an explosive charge hung around his neck, she should have designated a successor. Perhaps tomorrow we will find that she did.

Not waiting for the PPP to choose its next leader, Condoleeza Rice has appointed Fahim.

quote:
State Department spokesman Tom Casey said.

"In the last hour or so, she's had the opportunity to call Mr. Zardari, former Prime Minister Bhutto's husband, as well as Amin Fahim, who is her successor now as the head of the Pakistani People's Party."



A risk of civil war?
quote:
Pakistan is barely a unitary state, riven by centuries-old ethnic and clan rivalries constantly refreshed by revenge. The Bhutto family's stronghold was the massive southern Sindh province, centered on the country's biggest and richest city, Karachi. Benazir Bhutto easily carried the south, but her Pakistan People's Party has always struggled for ground in the politically dominant northern Punjab, hence her fateful decision to campaign yesterday for next month's election in Rawalpindi.

That she was killed doing so, in the Punjab, will incense the resentful south. Punjabis have traditionally dominated government in Pakistan, civilian and military, and often in coalition with the Pashtuns of the fractious NorthWest Frontier Province bordering Afghanistan. For Sindh, the Bhuttos were always a rallying point. But with their "Daughter of the East" champion dead and the dynasty defeated, the isolated Sindhis and Bhutto-sympathizers could be out for revenge.



From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 27 December 2007 01:46 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Benazir Bhutto was indeed a very popular woman politician of her country, but she was by no means a democrat. During her tenure as twice Prime Minister of her country, she stifled the growth of democracy and undermined the democratic institutions. She not only concentrated in herself the absolute power of the country, but also assumed the title of chairperson for life of her political party -- Pakistan People's Party (PPP).

Her husband Asif Ali Zardari is generally seen as the villain who tarnished Benazir's image through corruption and violence. Zardari, a jagirdar or landlord used his traditional violent methods to subdue his opponents and used the government power of his wife to extract benefits through his various corrupt, and often violent deals. He was alleged to be involved in the killing of Murtaza Bhutto, Benazir's brother. Asif Zardari had even maintained private jails where he tortured his opponents. This all happened while Benazir Bhutto's "democratically elected' government was in power.


Source

From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
sanizadeh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14787

posted 27 December 2007 01:50 PM      Profile for sanizadeh        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
I am about to make a bold prediction for 2008. Before the end of Jan. the western press will be running stories linking Iran with the assassination.

Won't be taken seriously. A Pakistani friend of mine was commenting a while ago that no matter who ruled in Iran and Pakistan (Shah or Khomeini in Iran, Bhuto or Zia or Sharif or others in Pakistan) the two countries had always had a warm and friendly relationship. The cultural relation between the two nations predates the creation of Pakistan by a thousand years.

As a matter of fact, during Musharraf the relationship has probably cooled down the most. IMO Iran would have welcomed Bhuto as the prime minister. Not to mention that Bhuto had Iranian ancestry though her mother!


From: Ontario | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 27 December 2007 02:18 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I just heard the editor of the Daily Jang, a major Pakistani newspaper, say on BBC News that American support for any Pakistani politician is the kiss of death, and the USA is in no small measure responsible for Bhutto's death by virtue of having openly supported her.

He also said he expected the elections would have to be postponed, otherwise Musharraf's party might win an easy and not very credible victory.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 27 December 2007 02:22 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
A Pakistani friend of mine was commenting a while ago that no matter who ruled in Iran and Pakistan (Shah or Khomeini in Iran, Bhuto or Zia or Sharif or others in Pakistan) the two countries had always had a warm and friendly relationship.

Despite Pakistan's support for the Taliban?

From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 27 December 2007 02:43 PM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The woman was no angel maybe a martyr but no angel.

quote:
During her two terms in office as prime minister, Ms. Bhutto earned a reputation among many as an imperious, venal, and corrupt politician, bringing Pakistan to the brink of financial ruin on more than one occasion....

I knew Benazir well. I am often blamed by her supporters for having helped bring her government down in 1996 by exposing her hypocrisy and corruption in two Wall Street Journal Op-Ed pieces. We remained in touch over the years after she went into exile, even developing a begrudging respect for each other over time. She struck me as a terribly conflicted person who deep in her heart wanted to save Pakistan from its evils, but was unable to put her personal lifestyle choices aside in doing so. But I firmly believe that she loved Pakistan, and for all her faults, had returned there this time to turn a new page in its troubled political history.


Mansoor Ijaz - "The Benazir Bhutto I knew" from the Christian Science Monitor
• Mansoor Ijaz, a New York financier of Pakistani ancestry, jointly authored a cease-fire plan between Muslim militants and Indian security forces in Kashmir in 2000 and met with Benazir Bhutto on more than a dozen occasions in Islamabad, Dubai, and London since 1994.


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
sanizadeh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14787

posted 27 December 2007 03:06 PM      Profile for sanizadeh        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

Despite Pakistan's support for the Taliban?


That's correct. The Iranian state media typically blamed Taliban as agents of the US, and minimized Pakistan's role.

Though it should be also mentioned that the Islamic republic criticism of Taliban has always been labeled hypocritical by Iranian reformers. A popular slogan in the 1997 Iranian Presidential election was: "Say no to Taliban, whether in Kabul or in Tehran". Implying that Iranian hardliners were hardly any different from Taliban.


From: Ontario | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 27 December 2007 03:44 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:


Who will succeed Benazir Bhutto? Aitzaz Ahsan.



It would help if he were released from detention.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 27 December 2007 03:46 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by sanizadeh:

That's correct. The Iranian state media typically blamed Taliban as agents of the US, and minimized Pakistan's role.

Though it should be also mentioned that the Islamic republic criticism of Taliban has always been labeled hypocritical by Iranian reformers. A popular slogan in the 1997 Iranian Presidential election was: "Say no to Taliban, whether in Kabul or in Tehran". Implying that Iranian hardliners were hardly any different from Taliban.


Well, that is interesting. Because, on the surface, you might be suggesting that both Pakistan and Iran benefit from a political black hole called Afghanistan that attracts empires through sheer gravity (matter to a vacuum?) and swallows them whole.

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 27 December 2007 03:48 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The orthodox/conservative panel on PBS's News Hour, that included former World Bank and IMF consultants, was grim in their forecast for the immediate future of Pakistan. They predicted more violence in the short term and more repression from the Musharraf regime. What was also interesting was how at least one of them, despite expressing the view that criticism of B. Bhutto should be muted on a day like today, nevertheless drew attention to some very undemocratic credentials of Bhutto. He held all of Pakistan's leading politicians responsible for their shocking negligence of basic requirements to develop Pakistani democracy, as evidenced, for example, by the 50% illiteracy of the country despite 60 years of independence. He held Bhutto, in her two terms as Prime Minister, at least as responsible as the military rulers that preceded and followed her ...

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 27 December 2007 03:51 PM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

Well, that is interesting. Because, on the surface, you might be suggesting that both Pakistan and Iran benefit from a political black hole called Afghanistan that attracts empires through sheer gravity (matter to a vacuum?) and swallows them whole.


Sorry if I am misunderstanding your comment however both counties benifit greatly from the choas of Afghanistan.


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
ElizaQ
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9355

posted 27 December 2007 03:58 PM      Profile for ElizaQ     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
AP has quoted a PPP security adviser as saying she was shot in the neck and chest as she got into her vehicle, before the gunman blew himself up.

This is a interesting tactic.

Looking at the pictures on BBC, that blast was quite large, this was not your average suicide attack.


I've read a few reports that the shots weren't from the bomb guy but from a nearby building, which considering that neck and chest shots are typical sniper tactics would be entirely possible. As the use of snipers isn't typical A'queda methods it makes me think that there is something more then just the line that many are taking...It's Al'queda and the Taliban blah blah. (Just heard someone on the news say the same thing...so go figure)
To take this further, and yes just speculation at this point that the bomb blast was meant to occur at the same time as the sniper hit in order to cover it up. They messed up though and the shots were fired before the bomber was in proper position. Basically in order to make it look like a typical suicide bombing type attack and cause confusion to make sure no one got to her quickly.

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: ElizaQ ]


From: Eastern Lakes | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 27 December 2007 04:16 PM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I would disagree with your assessment. Both the al’Qeada and the Taliban organizations use sniper tactics. Snipers usually aim at the centre of mass on the target either head or chest.

The difficulty of timing both the sniper shot and suicide bomber’s explosion is enormous and is only seen in the movies. It has been reported several shots were fired, how a suicide bomber would mask 3 or 4 shots with one explosive device.

I believe that both shooter(s) and suicide bomber(s) were used to insure that the target was eliminated. This would have been a complex assassination and would have taken several people to organize and conduct.

However Pakistan/India/Iranian security forces do have all the proper elements to conduct such an operation.


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 27 December 2007 04:17 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Sorry if I am misunderstanding your comment however both counties benifit greatly from the choas of Afghanistan.

That is correct. But I am suggesting that at some level, even if entirely unofficial, there is coordination. Afghanistan is the world's largest honey trap.

From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 27 December 2007 04:22 PM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

I am suggesting that at some level, even if entirely unofficial, there is coordination. Afghanistan is the world's largest honey trap.

I would agree.


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Jerry West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1545

posted 27 December 2007 04:53 PM      Profile for Jerry West   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:


US Special Forces are to increase their presence in Pakistan amid assessments that the country is to become the central battlefield for al-Qaida as it is driven from Iraq.

"Pakistan should be carefully watched because it could prove to be a significant flashpoint in the coming year," US think tank Strategic Forecasting said in an evaluation of al-Qaida's tactics as the Islamist group comes under mounting pressure in Iraq.

With the "rapid spread of Talibanisation" in Pakistan's insurgent northwest, the country would become "especially important if the trend in Iraq continues to go against the jihadis and they are driven from Iraq", the assessment said.

"As the global headquarters for the al-Qaida leadership, Pakistan has long been a significant stronghold on the ideological battlefield. If the trend towards radicalisation continues, the country could become the new centre of gravity for the jihadi movement on the physical battlefield."

The Stratfor assessment coincided with reports from Washington suggesting US Special Forces would expand their presence in Pakistan in the new year.

Link to article



From: Gold River, BC | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 27 December 2007 06:01 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So much for sucking up to bad governments?
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 27 December 2007 06:33 PM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This sounds more and more like water cooler banter at Langley, VA.
From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 27 December 2007 06:44 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Everyone needs a job.
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 27 December 2007 07:47 PM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
One of Bhutto's harshest critics was her own niece: Fatima Bhutto, daughter of her murdered brother. Fatima is a writer and poet and fierce critic of her auntie.

Aunt Benazir's false promises.

quote:
I have personal reasons to fear the danger that Ms. Bhutto's presence in Pakistan brings, but I am not alone. The Islamists are waiting at the gate. They have been waiting for confirmation that the reforms for which the Pakistani people have been struggling have been a farce, propped up by the White House. Since Musharraf seized power in 1999, there has been an earnest grass-roots movement for democratic reform. The last thing we need is to be tied to a neocon agenda through a puppet "democrat" like Ms. Bhutto.

Fatima Bhutto is a most interesting character in Pakistani politics and possible future leader.


Another great piece she wrote on Che Guevara

As Fidel would say:
Viva la revolucion!

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: mary123 ]


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jerry West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1545

posted 27 December 2007 08:28 PM      Profile for Jerry West   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

Pakistan Is 'Central Front,' Not Iraq

By Robert Parry
December 28, 2007

The chaos spreading across nuclear-armed Pakistan after the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto is part of the price for the Bush administration’s duplicity about al-Qaeda’s priorities, including the old canard that the terrorist group regards Iraq as the “central front” in its global war against the West.

Through repetition of this claim – often accompanied by George W. Bush’s home-spun advice about the need to listen to what the enemy says – millions of Americans believe that Osama bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders consider Iraq the key battlefield.

However, intelligence evidence, gathered from intercepted al-Qaeda communications, indicate that bin Laden’s high command views Iraq as a valuable diversion for U.S. military strength, not the “central front.”....

Now, with Bhutto’s death and with unrest sweeping Pakistan, Bush’s Iraq War backers are sure to argue that these developments again prove the president right, that an even firmer hand is needed to combat terrorism and that the next president must be someone ready to press ahead with Bush’s concept of a “long war” against Islamic extremism.

But the reality again appears different. Though rarely mentioned in the American press, the evidence is that bin Laden and other extremists have cleverly played off Bush’s arrogance and belligerence to strengthen their strategic hand within the Muslim world.

By keeping Bush focused on Iraq, al-Qaeda and its allies also bought time to transform themselves into a more lethal threat in Pakistan, with the danger that the new turmoil could win al-Qaeda its ultimate prize, control of a nuclear bomb....

Link to article



From: Gold River, BC | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 27 December 2007 08:52 PM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
People should note that of the two opposition parties with a chance at forming government Bhutto's PPP is centre-left, and are clearly committed secularists. Nawaz Shariff's PML-N doesn't have its ideology listed, though, other PML parties are described as "centrist" and "conservative".

In any case, that last article Jerry posted, at least regarding the stupidity of the Bush Administration's foreign policy objectives, is bang on. If Pakistan is destabilized, there could be far worse people in control of its nuclear arsenal - which we have Nawaz Shariff to thank for developing btw. Musharaff is bad enough, and his leadership so long as secularist opposition is checked, gives religious extremists increasing appeal. As long as the US is tied down in Iraq, and as long as it props up autocratic leaders like Musharaff, while at the same time rhetorically praising moderate secularists like Bhutto, it only works to destabilize the region and work against its own goals.


From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 27 December 2007 09:04 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Juan Cole:
quote:
The party will hold a convention to formally elect a successor to Bhutto, but whether parliamentary elections can still be held on Jan. 8 has been cast into doubt. Bhutto's rival, Nawaz Sharif, who heads the right-of-center Muslim League, announced that his party would boycott the elections to protest the failure of the Pakistani military to give Bhutto better security.

If Pakistani politics finds its footing, if a successor to Benazir Bhutto is elected in short order by the PPP and the party can remain united, and if elections are held soon, the crisis could pass. If there is substantial and ongoing turmoil, however, Muslim radicals will certainly take advantage of it.

In order to get through this crisis, Bush must insist that the Pakistani Supreme Court, summarily dismissed and placed under house arrest by Musharraf, be reinstated. The PPP must be allowed to elect a successor to Ms. Bhutto without the interference of the military. Early elections must be held, and the country must return to civilian rule. Pakistan's population is, contrary to the impression of many pundits in the United States, mostly moderate and uninterested in the Taliban form of Islam. But if the United States and "democracy" become associated in their minds with military dictatorship, arbitrary dismissal of judges, and political instability, they may turn to other kinds of politics, far less favorable to the United States.



From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 27 December 2007 09:30 PM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Van said:
"Bhutto's PPP is centre-left, and are clearly committed secularists."

Check out her policy on the Taliban while she was in power.

"The Taliban took power in Kabul in September 1996. It was during Bhutto's rule that the Taliban gained prominence in Afghanistan. She viewed the Taliban as a group that could stabilize Afghanistan and enable trade access to the Central Asian republics, according to author Stephen Coll.[18] He claims that her government provided military and financial support for the Taliban, even sending a small unit of the Pakistani army into Afghanistan.

More recently, she took an anti-Taliban stance, and condemned terrorist acts committed by the Taliban and their supporters."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benazir_Bhutto

Also under current Pakistani Constitutional laws, Bhutto is not allowed to run for the Prime Minister's office, having already served the maximum two terms ... so why is she even running?

Also slimy is the chief strategist for Hillary Clinton is also involved with efforts by a foreign political party - Benazir Bhutto's PPP - to gain influence in Washington D.C.

from daily kos site

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: mary123 ]


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jerry West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1545

posted 27 December 2007 09:53 PM      Profile for Jerry West   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

South Asia
Dec 29, 2007


Al-Qaeda claims Bhutto killing
By Syed Saleem Shahzad

KARACHI - ”We terminated the most precious American asset which vowed to defeat mujahideen.” These were the words of al-Qaeda’s top commander for Afghanistan operations and spokesperson Mustafa Abu al-Yazid, immediately after the attack that claimed the life of Pakistani politician Benazir Bhutto on Thursday (December 27).

Bhutto died after being shot by a suicide assailant who, according to witnesses, also detonated a bomb that killed himself and up to 20 others at a rally in the garrison city of Rawalpindi. Bhutto, with Western backing, had been hoping to become prime minister for a third time after general elections next month.


“This is our first major victory against those [eg, Bhutto and President Pervez Musharraf] who have been siding with infidels [the West] in a fight against al-Qaeda and declared a war against mujahideen,” Mustafa told Asia Times Online by telephone.

He said the death squad consisted of Punjabi associates of the underground anti-Shi’ite militant group Lashkar-i-Jhangvi, operating under al-Qaeda orders.

The assassination of Bhutto was apparently only one of the goals of a large al-Qaeda plot, the existence of which was revealed earlier this month.

On December 6, a Pakistani intelligence agency tracked a cell phone conversation between a militant leader and a local cleric, in which a certain Maulana Asadullah Khalidi was named. The same day, Khalidi was arrested during a raid in Karachi. The arrest, in turn, led to the arrest of a very high-profile non-Pakistani militant leader, which, it is said, revealed an operation aimed at wiping out “precious American assets” in Pakistan, including Musharraf and Bhutto.

The operation is said to have involved hundreds of cells all over Pakistan to track targets and communicate with their command, which would then send out death squads....

Link to article


Also of interest:

Bhutto's Killing May Threaten Pakistan's Stability


From: Gold River, BC | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 27 December 2007 10:01 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The 2002 four-way race had interesting dynamics:

NA-124 (Lahore VII)
PPP: Mr. Aitzaz Ahsan 27072
MMA Allama Muhammad Abid Jalali 23974
PML(QA)(Musharraf) Mr. Khurram Rohail Asghar 23110
Note: PML(N)(Nawaz Sharif) did not run a candidate
Mr. Tahir Mehmood Ch. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf 1204
Mr. Farooq Tariq Labour Party Pakistan 515
Mian Abdul Waheed Independent 390
Begum Rukhsana Shakeel Ahmed Independent 226
Valid Votes 76491
Rejected Votes 1374
Total Votes 77865
Registered Voters 255757
Percentage of Votes Polled to Registered Voters 30.44%

NA-125 (Lahore VIII)
PML(QA) Mr. Hamayun Akhtar Khan 22405
PML(N) Mr. Muhammad Akram Zaki 21186
PPP Mr. Muahmmad Naveed Ch. 21152
PTI (Imran Khan) Mr. Air Marshal ® Syed Shahid Zulfiqar Ali 6343
PAT Mr. Iftikhar Ali Kilcha 1599
MMA Qari Habib-Ur-Rehman Madni 1445
Ind. Eng. Muhammad Sleem Ullah Khan 544
Ind. Mr. Naveed Gulzar 267
AQP Sheikh Mushtaq Hussain 203
Ind. Mian Abdul Waheed 175
PPP (Shaheed Bhutto) Mr. Tahir Mehmood Padhihar 133
PATI Professor Aftab Lodhi 75
Maj ® Akhtar Shah Advocate Independent 66
Valid Votes 75593
Rejected Votes 1120
Total Votes 76713
Registered Voters 255313
Percentage of Votes Polled to Registered Voters 30.05%

NA-187 (Bahawalpur V)
PPP Mr. Aitazaz Ahsan 73660
PML(N) Chaudhry Khalid Mehmood Jajja 37775
PNL(QA) Mr. Azhar Mehmood 17912
NA Mr. Shahzad Irfan Malik 1509
PML(Z) Mr. Muhammad Ijaz Ul Haq 308
Valid Votes 131164
Rejected Votes 2432
Total Votes 133596
Registered Voters 264580
Percentage of Votes Polled to Registered Voters 50.5%

NA-218 (Hyderabad I, in Sindh)
PPP Makhdoom Muhammad Amin Faheem 102059
MQM Mr. Rasool Bux Memon 3615
PML(QA) Mr. Shahabuddin Shah 3277
PPP(Sheed Bhutto) Mr. Peeral Majeedano 3168
Valid Votes 112119
Rejected Votes 1105
Total Votes 113224
Registered Voters 276462
Percentage of Votes Polled to Registered Voters 41.0%

Overall results:
The PPP got more votes than Musharaf's candidates, but fewer seats.

Note that the MMA got a bonus for the same reason the BQ does in Canada: geographic concentrations in its strong regions (the NWFP and Baluchistan). So did the MQM (the party of the descendents of refugees who fled from India to Sindh).

The National Alliance were a couple of small parties that won 16 seats: a handful as anti-Musharraf candidates, a handful more in alliance with him (especially in Sindh), and one five-way fight on their own, but ended up allied with Musharraf.

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 27 December 2007 11:14 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think the armegeddon clock just ticked a few seconds ahead again.
From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 27 December 2007 11:38 PM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by mary123:
"The Taliban took power in Kabul in September 1996. It was during Bhutto's rule that the Taliban gained prominence in Afghanistan. She viewed the Taliban as a group that could stabilize Afghanistan and enable trade access to the Central Asian republics, according to author Stephen Coll.[18] He claims that her government provided military and financial support for the Taliban, even sending a small unit of the Pakistani army into Afghanistan.

More recently, she took an anti-Taliban stance, and condemned terrorist acts committed by the Taliban and their supporters."


Never heard of him. But nonetheless it's unsurprising that any Pakistani leader would've supported the Taliban since it has been, up until September 11th 2001, a traditional position for them to do so since their inception. Hardly unique, or particularly condemnable behaviour on behalf of a Pakistani Prime Minister. Again, important to remember for various reasons, but she hardly stands out for it.

As for the link in political consultants, between Hillary Clinton and Benazir Bhutto, that's not a mark in her favour as a lefty, but it's not particularly surprising or interesting. Political consultants get recycled all the time throughout the entire world. While I don't much care for Clinton, I'd rather Bhutto have shared advisors with her than say Dubya.

I just think we ought to remember that most of the corruption charges against her, like those against other civilian leaders, brought by the military government are spurious at best and quite obviously politically motivated. While the civilian leadership, her included, didn't do a good enough job in reining in the military - especially if you compare the relatively stable India to the relatively unstable Pakistan - she was obviously seen as enough of a threat to someone to be considered worthy of assassination. And she has enough enemies in the current government, and the religious extremist movement, to make both of them prime suspects in her murder.

Some of her supporters even think it was rogue elements of the military, in association with, religious extremists. Which is just one of the problems with the Musharaff government. It is unable to move decisively against Taliban elements within its own borders, because of concerns about their resolve to fight terrorism. Which is another reason why the wests support for Musharaff has often been so misplaced.

Though, I suppose with Al-Qaeda claiming responsibility for her killing the claims of the government being responsible aren't warranted. Though, from what I understand, a lot of the blame directed towards the government isn't so much predicated on them doing the killing per se so much as on the basis of the government letting the conditions develop where she could be assassinated and not doing enough to root out extremism. Which, if true, leads to serious questions about the reliability and effectiveness of Pakistan as an ally in the "War on Terror" that American policy makers really ought to take into account.

[ 27 December 2007: Message edited by: Vansterdam Kid ]


From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174

posted 28 December 2007 04:24 AM      Profile for KenS     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I've got a question as to what to expect now that I have not heard addressed.

Before the assassination this is the end game I had heard for Pakistan. Bhutto campaigns for a victory, but Masharaf is known to have the elections rigged. He predicatbly wins, and rather than the battle going to the strrets he and Bhotto come up with a power sharing aggreement.

That was consistent with how all the players have operated, including the 'silent' role of the US.

Typical for Musharaf: no poular base and increasingly despised, but brokered agreements with both the Islamists on one side and the mass based politcian on the other side.

That end game couldn't work without a popular politician like Bhutto. And Musaraf won't have elections without winning [rigging ] them. But winning the election isn't sufficient. There has to be a startegy- most of all a partner- who can keep the street protests within limits.

I guess my question is two: was this end game widely seen as likley? And is it now vanished at least for the near future?


From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 28 December 2007 05:15 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No. Yes.

With Sharif's party boycotting the Jan. 8 election, and the PPP, to the extent their voters actually come out, leaning to picking the widow's crooked husband as leader, the elections, assuming they are held, and given the likely tampering by the dictator's minions, are likely to result in the status quo.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 28 December 2007 06:45 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by josh:
I think you can be pretty sure that there will be no elections in a couple of weeks. Musharraf will likely declare martial law again.

How convenient for him, that it should benefit him so! Gosh, I wonder who was behind it??


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Blind_Patriot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3830

posted 28 December 2007 07:41 AM      Profile for Blind_Patriot     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Since we're on the blame game. The U.S. bears some responsibility as well. The North Pakistani region as well as Afghanistan is an extremist hot bed. I would love to see a movie or book titled "While You Were In Iraq".

[ 28 December 2007: Message edited by: Blind_Patriot ]


From: North Of The Authoritarian Regime | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 28 December 2007 09:07 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

The 54-year-old opposition leader was standing in the open sunroof of her blast-proof, bullet-proof car when yesterday's attack took place in Rawalpindi, Cheema said. The lever of the sunroof hit her in the head, causing a fatal skull fracture, he said. She wasn't hit by any of the three bullets that were fired before the bombing, nor by any shrapnel, he said.


http://tinyurl.com/3ddqhl

Of course, since no autopsy was performed, it's hard to know what to believe.


quote:

The doctors have submitted a report to the Pakistan government in which they say that no post-mortem was performed on Bhutto’s body and they had not received any instructions to perform one.

. . . .

Government sources say there will be an investigation to determine why no autopsy was conducted.


http://in.news.yahoo.com/071228/211/6oyrl.html


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
contrarianna
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13058

posted 28 December 2007 09:47 AM      Profile for contrarianna     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I dunno but I doubt Musharaf, was behind this assination. The idea of someone blowing themselves up for the benefit of Musharaf is implausible (though conspiring with extremist, opposing groups, to effect cynical ends is hardly unheard of).
But a Musharaf gamble to emerge triumphantly from this (very predictably) heightened level of chaos and conflict is more problematic than proceeding with Bhutto in the picture--who was brought in by the US to stabilize Pakistan and to shore some kind of role for the increasingly less popular Musharaf.

From: here to inanity | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 28 December 2007 09:53 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There was one report I read in which it was remarked that Bhutto's husband had refused an autopsy.

Of course, more thorough investigation of the crime scene is made difficult, if not impossible, when it is hosed down by fire fighters immediately after the incident. That makes collecting evidence rather difficult, eh?

The Musharraf regime went so far as to refuse to allow Benazir Bhutto to provide her own, foreign sercurity arrangements. And, according to people who worked with her, the regime also failed to provide the proper security for her on their own part. TV coverage was banned for opposition figures and hence Bhutto had to participate in open air meetings to promote herself to the Pakistani public. All in all, the regime seems to have done everything short of pulling the trigger or setting the bomb to assassinate the PPP leader.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 28 December 2007 10:05 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It has ISI-CIA black ops written all over it. This is what the cosmetic feds get for sucking up to an illegitimate dictator. They aren't interested in democracy. Not at all.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 28 December 2007 10:13 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't see what the CIA would have to gain by her assisination. The ISI is another story.

Anyway, here's a good list of the possible culprits:

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/12/who-killed-bena.html


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 28 December 2007 10:24 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yea, I would be inclined to agree that, while the usual suspects (CIA, ISI) are always possible, all the regime had to do was some of the things I enumerated above and leave the assassination to the religious fundamentalists. It is perhaps noteworthy that when the recent repression and crackdowns took place (November), the fundamentalists were left alone by the regime:

quote:
Ron: What is the make up of the protesters in Pakistan right now? The US newspapers describe the majority of the protesters as being lawyers and NGO activists. Is this so? What are the demands of the protests?

Farooq: Initially, it was advocates (lawyers), left and human rights activists. But the situation has changed in last three days as Benazir Bhutto has declared her opposition. Yesterday, PPP workers fought pitched battles with police in Rawalpindi. PPP claims that 5000 of its workers were arrested across Pakistan. Also, government has arrested members of Justice Party of former cricket-star Imran Khan and Muslim League of exiled prime minister Nawaz Sharif. However, Islamists parties are not either joining the movement nor being targeted by the regime. Their opposition of regime remains restricted to press statement.


The commentator is Farooq Tariq, secretary general, Labour Party Pakistan (LPP) and the quote is from an interview published on ZNet.

A view from the Pakistani left


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 28 December 2007 10:34 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by josh:
I don't see what the CIA would have to gain by her assisination. The ISI is another story.

Anyway, here's a good list of the possible culprits:[/URL]


Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark says the CIA was behind the ouster of Pakistan's democratically-elected leader Zulfikar Ali Bhutto which led to a kangaroo trial and subsequent execution in 1979. This paved the way for CIA stooge General Zia ul Haq who later funneled billions of American taxpayer dollars to ruthless war lords and druglords in waging proxy war on Afghanistan's PDPA government of the 1980's.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 28 December 2007 10:48 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Not disputing that. But what do they have to gain from killing Bhutto in 2007. A destabilized Pakistan is not in the CIA's interest.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 28 December 2007 10:51 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The U.S. shadow gov prefers militants to moderates and chaos over democracy. It's a long story.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 28 December 2007 10:53 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, I bet. Authoritarian chaos. That's a new one.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 28 December 2007 10:54 AM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by N.Beltov:

Of course, more thorough investigation of the crime scene is made difficult, if not impossible, when it is hosed down by fire fighters immediately after the incident. That makes collecting evidence rather difficult, eh?

This is common in Afghanistan.


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 28 December 2007 11:01 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by josh:
Yeah, I bet. Authoritarian chaos. That's a new one.

I'd bet you'd take little convincing that the Soviet KGB were capable of similar deeds during the cold war?

The USSA is the only remaining nuclear superpower. And they've proven themselves a vicious empire on several occasions in this decade.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 28 December 2007 11:08 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Some images and a video story: graphic warning.

Who killed Benazir Bhutto? by Murtaza Shibli, Editor of Kashmir Affairs, London.

Tarek Fatah in the Globe and Mail

A tragic victim?


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 28 December 2007 11:10 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's disturbing to see some on this board whitewash her corrupt past. Although her husband Zadari seems to have done her the most damage here. "The Zardaris appear to have treated Pakistan, one of the world's poorer nations, like their personal possession and its treasury as their private purse."
Yes Pakistan is a country seeped in bribery and corruption of public officials and police but why would the Swiss fake documents and lie about her massive Swiss bank accounts.
Eric Margolis has a good piece on this detailing this.

I've read reports that one of the reasons she came back and had corruption charges stopped against her is that it would allow many of these same Swiss bank accounts to become unfrozen.

Given her past I don't believe she would work and help the poor who most need the help.
I believe she would become a neocon shill for the Bushies. She was popular but in the past she never did much for the poor, for feminists except to plunder the Pakastani treasury and purchase fabulous mansions and jewels. She knew how to work the American media and was a masterful politician. Unfortunately Pakistan does not have a good history with honest politicians.
Bhutto let her no good husband get away with too much.


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
jrose
babble intern
Babbler # 13401

posted 28 December 2007 11:15 AM      Profile for jrose     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It's disturbing to see some on this board whitewash her corrupt past.

Whenever anybody dies, whether a family member or a public figure, we all seem to ignore the bad, and focus on the good. But please, feel free to enlighten us. It seems the media will continue to call her "controversial," but most of the outlets are failing to go into depth as to why.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 28 December 2007 11:18 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The corruption and so forth becomes more significant when the context of horrific poverty, illiteracy, and appalling conditions for millions of people in that country is made apparent.

Consider:

Illiterate adults 64 %
Illiterate female adults 77 %
Population below poverty line 28 %
Without access to health services 45 %
Without access to safe water 50 %
Without access to sanitation 67 %
Malnourished children (under 5) 40 %

... should give babblers some idea of what Pakistanis face on a daily basis.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 28 December 2007 11:21 AM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
N.Beltov

I noticed from your one link from the NY Times that a lot of the injured had wounds to the lower body (mainly the legs) this is very interesting.

To me this indicates that the explosive device detonated at a low angle.

Normally the suicide devices would go off at mid to high level angles (aimed to chest and head) to inflict more deadly injuries.

Does not seem like a professional device.

This is my personal speculation.


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 28 December 2007 11:22 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have a bit of free time before the new year and have found this story completely fascinating. I didn't know much about Bhutto before. But after her assassination I became enthralled with this story and have been reading up on Pakistan and the Bhutto family history for hours on end yesterday. And what I found astonished me.

Pakistanis deserve so much better from their politicians. And why we should always hold a fire to politicians arses.

Thanks N.Beltov for the stats showing thru numbers the poverty of Pakistan.

[ 28 December 2007: Message edited by: mary123 ]


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 28 December 2007 11:30 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Webgear: that's a gruesome sort of focus but I suppose you'd have some professional expertise/interest in this.

I don't have a lot of confidence in any investigation that the Pakistani authorities would carry out, however.

As grim as it sounds, I think things are going to get worse in Pakistan. And maybe a LOT worse.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
jrose
babble intern
Babbler # 13401

posted 28 December 2007 11:38 AM      Profile for jrose     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Closing for length. Please discuss in a new thread.

[ 28 December 2007: Message edited by: jrose ]


From: Ottawa | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca