You’re assuming someone intelligent was behind the assassination, when it was most likely a crazy person.
[quote]58buggs wrote:
It’s funny how Bill Clinton Admin allowed the Pak’s to accuire a nuke. My mind is somewhat distorted (holiday cheer)but if I remember it correctly. The Pak’s ended up w/a nuke shortly after the Indie’s.
What surprise’s me is the more I read and inquire the more I see no difference between GW and BC.
To what end does it serve the Pak’s to have this woman disposed off? Does she not become a martyr (sp?). Thus invoking change from her death. Would she not be more controlled and under thumb if she were alive? Is not there some question as to whether or not she would rule? Would her party win an electio? Are not the Pakistainee’s a democracy? I think it was a dumb move to have her assinated.
[/quote]
It depends who had her killed. It is probably a big mistake if it was Mushareff.
If it was AQ they don’t care. They don’t want democracy or military dictatorship. They want chaos and an Islamic state.
‘Despite the death threats, I will not acquiesce to tyranny, but lead the fight against it.’ - Benazir Bhutto
Martyr or Criminal? Only time will tell…
One thing is certain, armoured vehicles should not have sun roofs for passangers to stick their heads though and get shot, especially in countries where terror reigns.
BREAKING NEWS! ARCHDUKE FERDINAND FOUND ALIVE.
WORLD WAR I A MISTAKE!
[quote]lixy wrote:
“The extremists need dictatorship to flourish, and dictatorship needs the extremists as a pre-text to continue in place.” – Benazir Bhutto (1953-2007)[/quote]
Funny how this scenario always plays out so well in Muslim countries.
And what do the pro Bhutto Muslims, who are supposedly for democracy, do as a result of the assassination? Riot and kill people!
Anyone else seeing a trend here?
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
You’re assuming someone intelligent was behind the assassination, when it was most likely a crazy person.[/quote]
Right. A crazy person support by 100,000 other crazy people called Muslim extremists.
Benazir Bhutto said Osama bin Laden was dead…
Bhutto asserted to David Frost less than two months ago that bin Laden had been murdered by Omar Sheikh, whom the Sunday Times once described as “no ordinary terrorist but a man who has connections that reach high into Pakistan’s military and intelligence elite and into the innermost circles” of bin Laden and al-Qaeda. (Watch video starting at 5:33 for mentioned part.)
Could there be a possibility that she meant the murder of Daniel Pearl and said Bin Laden by mistake?
Funny the interviewer didn’t ask a follow up question about it.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
YoungElias wrote:
Good thread so far
The autopsy showed that Bhutto was killed by ducking into the sunroof? I mean, she’s in her 60’s so maybe, but damn…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071228/ts_afp/pakistanattacksbhuttoministry
That is bizarre.[/quote]
I smell a cover up, a bad one. I think it’s pretty easy to tell if bullets entered somebody’s skull vs. banging it on the sun roof.
Ok. Am I the only one seeing a hand gun being fired in her direction while hearing shots go off?
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
lixy wrote:
“The extremists need dictatorship to flourish, and dictatorship needs the extremists as a pre-text to continue in place.” – Benazir Bhutto (1953-2007)
Funny how this scenario always plays out so well in Muslim countries. [/quote]
There’s nothing remotely funny about either dictatorships or extremists.
What do you advocate? People sitting on their asses while the tyrannical regime gets its way?
It seems Bhutto had intentions to indirectly blame attacks on Musharraf.
[i]"Word came Friday that Bhutto may have anticipated her fate months ahead of her assassination.
Bhutto complained of having inadequate security as recently as two months ago. CNN released an e-mail sent to host Wolf Blitzer on behalf of Bhutto back in October.
In the letter, Bhutto said she was “made to feel insecure” by Musharraf’s “minions.”
She said she’d requested police vehicles to surround her while traveling, and added that if anything happened to her, Musharraf would be responsible."[/i]
I’ll go farther and speculate that Musharraf is directly behind this.
The Al-Qaeda accusations are pretty convenient. I, for one, am not buying it unless I see evidence. There’s hardly any motive for Al-Qaeda to kill Bhutto. They may be kooks, but their attacks are far from random. The timing and target of this particular attack makes absolutely no sense.
Notice the tone of post around here. People are speaking of Musharraf making a “big mistake” but nobody’s condemning him (lack of evidence never stopped this crowd from condemning Syria every time a Lebanese get whacked).
[quote]John S. wrote:
lixy wrote:
John S. wrote:
Guess it’s time for us to fix shit again.
You do realize Pakistan is a far bigger threat to the world than Iraq ever was, don’t you? Putting aside the nukes, it’s a nest for terrorists and Wahabbis.
So then I take it we have your permission to go fuck them up?
The world would be a sad place without us always fixing shit.[/quote]
GOD
I hope this is Sarcasm
If Bhutto was so concerned about her security and felt that Musharraf wasn’t doing enough to protect her why was she riding around sticking out of a sunroof? She got a bunch of people killed doing that before, so I can’t see blaming Musharraf for this. She took her safety for granted and put those around her at risk.
I do think AlQaeda is responsible for this. They would love to see Pakistan break apart, it would give them a chance to get ahold of some nukes. Also AQ would have wanted to see Bhutto dead because she wasn’t living her life the way AQ thinks women should live. So I have to disagree with Lixy on that one.
[quote]dennis3k wrote:
John S. wrote:
lixy wrote:
John S. wrote:
Guess it’s time for us to fix shit again.
You do realize Pakistan is a far bigger threat to the world than Iraq ever was, don’t you? Putting aside the nukes, it’s a nest for terrorists and Wahabbis.
So then I take it we have your permission to go fuck them up?
The world would be a sad place without us always fixing shit.
GOD
I hope this is Sarcasm[/quote]
heh, you probably know better than that
[quote]lixy wrote:
The Al-Qaeda accusations are pretty convenient. I, for one, am not buying it unless I see evidence. There’s hardly any motive for Al-Qaeda to kill Bhutto. They may be kooks, but their attacks are far from random. The timing and target of this particular attack makes absolutely no sense.
Notice the tone of post around here. People are speaking of Musharraf making a “big mistake” but nobody’s condemning him (lack of evidence never stopped this crowd from condemning Syria every time a Lebanese get whacked).[/quote]
What motive would Musharraf have for killing Bhutto? Why would he want his country to further slip into anarchy? The timing and target makes no sense for Musharraf either enless he deeply fears losing his grip on power. Either way, such an attack from him makes less sense than it would if al-qaeda did it.
In the coming days, I think it will be clear if we see who Musharraf cracks down on. If he cracks down on Islamists and moves in on the tribal areas, I believe al-qaeda did it, if he cracks down on Bhutto supporters, I’ll have my doubts.
And another question, why the “cover up”? I understand no
autopsy was done. What difference would it make if she died of two gunshots like the first version, a shrapnel wound from the second, or hitting her head in the third? Does this somehow make it less of a crime? Why the cover up?
And as far as Syria and Lebanese assassinations go, I believe the Lebanese themselves blame Syria. And if it wasn’t them, then who? Iran, Hezbollah? al-Qaeda in Lebanon?
As far as Ahmed Omar Sheikh killing Bin Laden, he was arrested by Pakistani police on February 12, 2002, so he would have had to done it sometime before. If this was true, why was it first mentioned in the interview above and not leaked to any other news source? This report says he died in 2006:
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1538569,00.html
Then the idiot goes and releases a tape today.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
The timing and target makes no sense for Musharraf either enless he deeply fears losing his grip on power. [/quote]
Gotta be kiddin’ me! What we have here is a ruthless dictator who got to power in a military coup, whimsically declares a state of emergency, unconstitutionally suspends the chief justice, puts his political opponents in jail, exiles them and orders his troops to “shoot to kill” in civilian areas.
You don’t have a clue about what is going on in Pakistan. Every single poll taken in recent years show a crushing majority opposed to him. Heck, Musharraf himself acknowledged that.
Now, the people’s only hope for change have all been taken out of the picture. Despite her iconic status, Bhutto is just one among many.
Musharraf is cornered, period.
Who would blow themselves up for Musharraf?
[quote]doogie wrote:
Who would blow themselves up for Musharraf?[/quote]
My thoughts exactly.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Gotta be kiddin’ me! What we have here is a ruthless dictator who got to power in a military coup, whimsically declares a state of emergency, unconstitutionally suspends the chief justice, puts his political opponents in jail, exiles them and orders his troops to “shoot to kill” in civilian areas.
[/quote]
Whimsically declares a state of emergency?? You mean there’s nothing like that remotely going on in Pakistan?
What would a “real” state of emergency be?
[quote]John S. wrote:
Guess it’s time for us to fix shit again.[/quote]
Oh, kind of like how we “fixed” Iraq?
Let the Pakistanis figure out their mess.
Dustin