Top Leaderboard, Site wide
September 15, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


Wages of Millions Seized to Pay Past Debts
Can Congress Be Responsible?




On the Run


Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Benazir Bhutto Assassinated

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Dec 27, 2007
Benazir Bhutto
AP photo / Mohammed Javed

Her last speech:  Benazir Bhutto arrives on Thursday at the Rawalpindi rally where she was later assassinated in a suicide attack.

Pakistan is in a state of turmoil following a suicide attack that killed former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and at least 20 others in Rawalpindi on Thursday.  Bhutto had appeared at a rally to drum up support for Pakistan’s upcoming elections on Jan. 8 when a gunman shot her and blew himself up, sparking protests and more deadly clashes around the country.


BBC:

It was the second suicide attack against her in recent months and came amid a wave of bombings targeting security and government officials.

Nawaz Sharif, also a former prime minister and a political rival, announced his Muslim League party would boycott the elections.

He called on President Musharraf to resign, saying free and fair elections were not possible under his rule.

The United Nations Security Council held an emergency session and later said it “unanimously condemned” the assassination.

Read more

 

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

lastdaywatchers's avatar

By lastdaywatchers, January 2, 2008 at 1:42 pm Link to this comment

“Isreal, Britain and the United States will suffer failure in Iraq, failure in Lebanon, failure in Afghanistan, failure in Pakistan failure, and failure with Al Qiada

As God Word has declared highligted by the MAY 15th PROPHECY

“You will be unsuccessful in everything you do; day after day you will be oppressed and robbed, with no one to rescue you.”

I have yet to even mention anything about Iran or Syria, which they are experiencing and will continue to experience ABSOLUTE FAILURE with!

“There shall be wars and rumours of war”

But you last day watchers keep “watch”

More excerpt for the May 15th Prophecy

“The descendants of Jacob nations (Israel, Britain and United States) God has sent them a strong delusion that they will believe a lie to turn them over to their enemies and fulfill his promise in Deuteronomy chapter 28 verses 25-29

“The Lord will cause you to be defeated before your enemies; you shall go out one way against them and flee seven ways before them; and you shall become troublesome to all the kingdoms of the earth.”

“Your carcasses shall be food for all the birds of the air and the beasts of the earth, and no one shall frighten them away.”

“The Lord will strike you with the boils of Egypt, with tumors, with the scab, and with the itch, from which you cannot be healed.”

“The Lord will strike you with madness and blindness and confusion of heart.”

“And you shall grope at noonday, as a blind man gropes in darkness; you shall not prosper in your ways; you shall be only oppressed and plundered continually, and no one shall save you.”

Why? Because they love not the truth”

for more go to
http://lastdaywatchers.blogspot.com/

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, January 2, 2008 at 12:56 pm Link to this comment

By Naveed, January 2: “Banizer teray janay say hum

By Margaret Currey, December 27: “I do not know if this woman deserved to be prime minister but she certainly did not need to be gunned down…”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl-Rzma9RLQ&feature=related

Report this

By Naveed, January 2, 2008 at 3:37 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Banizer teray janay say hum yateem hoo gay
BB Loat Aao
Hum Besahara hoo gay BB Loat Aao

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, January 1, 2008 at 1:24 am Link to this comment

I know so little….iTunes

By mackTN, December 31; “She could have led the rest of her days untroubled, shopping, raising her children….”

Dishonest misogynist garbage, mackTN. Benazir Bhutto already had that life in Dubai, the rich persons’ fairyland of the M.East. She had intentionally given that up to help her people free themselves from decades of military dictatorship.

That IS what a heroine is all about. I notice that you are also trying to tout that bizzarre “Byzantine” line again, equally as dishonestly. Do you even know where Byzantium was in 1400? It had nothing whasoever to do with Pakistan (which didn’t exist until the 1940’s) or their conquerors, the Turks.

BB drew absolutely NO confidence from the U.S. role in Pakistan, either. If you bothered to read what has been written on this and other topics on Truthdig and checked the links people have supplied, you would already understand that. She was neither pro-USA or pro-Musharraf.

These are all fantasies that people in the West want to believe to make themselves feel somehow more secure in their supposed domination of the Middle East and South Asia. The people in the M.East (W.Asia and part of N.Africa) and including Pakistan (part of S.Asia) simply want freedom from Western interference!

Report this
mackTN's avatar

By mackTN, December 31, 2007 at 2:20 pm Link to this comment

Cyrena—that was a fascinating article.  Surviving the Byzantine politics of Pakistan hardly equates with what politicians deal with here. 

I wonder if she really thought she’d reascend to power in today’s Pakistan?  She must have drawn some confidence from the U.S. role in this before jumping in this hellish brew of terrorists, military and political fiends.  Her death tells others—don’t make the mistake of depending on those Americans in part of the world. 

Gutsy, yes—but no heroine.  I can’t see that for all her queenliness she championed the agenda of the people as much as she secured the power and riches that she saw as her entitlement. 

She could have led the rest of her days untroubled, shopping, raising her children.  Most of us would have opted for “retirement” over sure death in Pakistan. (Any tarot card reader could have foretold the end of her path on earth.) Who is surprised that she was assasinated?

India/Pakistan are the most fascinating countries in the mideast, but outside of Ghandi (a film I rewatched the other night), I know so little.  I wonder if there is a series of lectures available through iTunes U? 

Who is Shirin Ebadi?  Cyrena—who are you?

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 31, 2007 at 8:26 am Link to this comment

The Point

By Expat, December 31: “Waiting for the return .....By Expat…”

Achieving “cut-through” Korean style http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUdkQQQnOXA&feature=related

Report this

By Expat, December 31, 2007 at 8:06 am Link to this comment

By Douglas Chalmers, December 31 at 6:03 am #
(1625 comments total)

Waiting for the returnBy Expat,

Douglas, that’s the point of a koan, only you can say what it means to you.  You may not say for any body else.  It’s a paradox to be meditated upon.  It is used to train Zen Buddhist monks to abandon ultimate dependence on reason and to force them into gaining sudden intuitive enlightenment.  But, then you already knew that, right?

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 31, 2007 at 7:03 am Link to this comment

Waiting for the return

By Expat, December 31: “I have never heard or read of the thing you speak….”

As for second-hand sayings like “If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him”, I don’t trust them, Expat. How convenient an excuse for not searching whole-heartedly for the real Buddha.

Or perhaps it was meant to mean that one should search for the Buddha within one’s own heart, not a figure on the road somewhere? That only really applies to people who have failed to go within and are pre-occupied with the external world.

That may be true in an age or in a place when neither Buddha nor any other enlightened person was around. Meeting an enlightened person is a very interesting experience, not that one would automatically know that they were enlightened unless they wanted you to know…...

Even then, one would have to be well enough versed in the mystical, not merely the academic, to know what it was that one was seeing. Some of these monks are far more mystically adept than one would imagine, but many are not, even the “little Buddhas” of the Tibetan tradition.

That is to say, if you met a Buddha upon the road, you mightn’t realize at first but he would gradually prove his spiritual advancement to you in a way that you could not either miss or ever deny - if it was in your destiny. And it is more than just “diamond light” in his/her eyes.

You don’t have to trust me, Expat. Seek and you will find…... ha ha!

Report this

By Expat, December 31, 2007 at 4:52 am Link to this comment

By Douglas Chalmers, December 28 at 11:08 pm #
(1623 comments total)

Douglas, I’ve been studying Buddhism for 40 years; always very old texts.  Tibetan, Chinese, Japanese, and Indian. I have never heard or read of the thing you speak.  Must be newer stuff, don’t trust it.  In the country I now live in (95% Buddhist) they have for the most part made a religion out of it, pity, but their choice.
I love the old Buddhist Koan, “If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.”

Report this
mackTN's avatar

By mackTN, December 31, 2007 at 12:00 am Link to this comment

I am indeed confused.  This new format escaped by notice—not only do I need a better broadband connection, I need a younger brain!

Sam, I’m not sure we’re disagreeing.  Bush league saw 911 as an opportunity with bigger goals than OBL. 

My question—how would you have responded to 911?—was meant to elicit a typical military response to an incident of this kind.  It would have made more sense to focus on Afghanistan and borders….

In the meantime, I’ll review your links about OBL and the CIA. 

Where is Larry Mitchell now?

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 30, 2007 at 11:33 pm Link to this comment

By PatrickHenry, December 30 at 5:10 pm #
.......New Format is a Pain in Butt


AGREED!

Report this
mackTN's avatar

By mackTN, December 30, 2007 at 11:24 pm Link to this comment

I heard this on CNN this evening.  On the one hand, I welcome the appearance of such a group—almost all the leading candidates trouble me; The Republicans terrify me. 

But I wonder what specifically got their dander up?  To dangle this out as a possibility means that they aren’t liking something—what is it?

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, December 30, 2007 at 6:10 pm Link to this comment

New Format is a Pain in Butt                                

I bet old fashioned Cheney and Bush never thought that in the new age of computers cross referencing other countries journalists, newspapers and online media that so much info could be put together by citizens.

Like my grandma used to say “the dirt always comes out in the wash”.

Report this

By sam brown, December 30, 2007 at 5:53 pm Link to this comment

RE: By mackTN, December 28 at 11:27 pm #

This new format ... is a pain in the butt.

“Ok—so take this back to 911. I certainly have no problem with self defense and dealing with whoever attacked the [US] and killed citizens.”

“So who did this? And where is he, where has he been for the past few years.”

Forget Bin Laden and the 19 hijackers being responsible for 911. They’re just patsies and moles. That’s what the Bush admin—on behalf of the shadow government—wants us to think so they can go about their “depopulation strategy”—reduce the world’s population down to about a billion people, preferably to 500,000,000 in their opinion.

On Oct 31, 2001 the leading French conservative newspaper LE FIGARO reported: “BIN LADEN TREATED AT AMERICAN HOSPITAL (DUBAI), JULY 2001”. (The CIA met Bin Laden in Dubai in July 2001).

“...the man suspected by the United States of being behind the September 11 terrorist attacks had arrived in Dubai on July 4 [2001] by air from Quetta, Pakistan. He was immediately taken to the hospital for kidney treatment. He left the establishment on July 14, ... the local CIA representative was seen going into bin Laden’s room and ‘a few days later, the CIA man boasted to some friends of having visited the Saudi-born millionaire’.”

“...the CIA representative had been recalled to Washington on July 15 [2001]. Bin Laden has been sought by the United States for terrorism since the bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. But his CIA links go back before that to the fight against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Le Figaro said bin Laden was accompanied in Dubai by his personal physician and close collaborator, who could be the Egyptian Ayman al-Zawahiri, as well as bodyguards and an Algerian nurse. He was admitted to the urology department of Doctor Terry Callaway, who specializes in kidney stones and male infertility. Telephoned several times, the doctor declined to answer questions. ... He had a mobile dialysis machine sent to his Kandahar hideout in Afghanistan in the first half of 2000, according to ‘authoritative sources’ quoted by Le Figaro and RFI (AFP, Wednesday October 31, 2001, 2:04 PM).”

“The CIA was quick to deny these embarrassing facts ‘reported by real investigative journalists, who apparently still exist in France.’”

“A spokeswoman at CIA Langley, VA headquarters described the Le Figaro article as ‘complete and utter nonsense. It’s nonsense, it’s absurd, it’s ridiculous, it’s not true.’ The CIA said it intended to protest to Le Figaro. The American Hospital in Dubai denied that Bin Laden had been a patient (The Scotsman, November 1, 2001).”

“But the French author Richard LaBevière countered that Osama Bin Laden had been working for the CIA since 1979, a fact which was generally accepted in Europe (October 31, 2001). Radio France International stuck to its guns and followed up on its story with further details about Bin Laden’s CIA handler and case officer, Larry Mitchell: ‘The local representative of the CIA who visited Osama Bin Laden last July 12 [2001] at the American Hospital in Dubai is called Larry Mitchell. If his visiting card specifies that he is a ‘consular agent,’ everyone in Dubai knows, especially in the small expatriate community, that he is working under cover. To say it openly, Larry Mitchell belongs to the ‘big house,’ otherwise known as the CIA. He himself does not hide it. ...”

“...It is thus clear that the CIA was providing vital support services to Bin Laden long after he had allegedly turned into the world’s leading anti-American monster. The reality is that Bin Laden and al Qaeda have never stopped serving ‘the CIA strategic agenda,’ whatever that happened to be.”—starts on page 136:

9/11 SYNTHETIC TERRORISM: MADE IN USA
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2005/07/317436.pdf

Report this

By sam brown, December 30, 2007 at 5:06 pm Link to this comment

RE:  By mackTN, December 28 at 11:27 pm #  hijackers

“Ok—so take this back to 911. I certainly have no problem with self defense and dealing with whoever attacked the [US] and killed citizens.” 

“So who did this? And where is he, where has he been for the past few years.”

Mack, in this day and age a good broadband connection is essential in order to stay/keep “up to speed”. This should answer your query (though it seems the Truthdig editors deemed my response “spam” a few days ago, and consequently binned it, hence I’m now registered for combat):

911 Truth: Facts Foxed (08:03mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cjli_cwkPrw&NR=1

This next one contains a little coarse language:

How to create an Angry American (06:26 mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgfzqulvhlQ

This one spells out how the towers actually came down on 9/11/2001

9/11 Revisited: Were explosives used? (56:03 mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWgSaBT9hNU&mode=related&search;Excerpt:  Matthys Levy (co-author with Mario Salvadori, “WHY BUILDINGS FALL DOWN”): 

“Ah, if you’ve seen many of the ‘managed demolitions’ where they implode a building and they cause it essentially to fall vertically, because they cause all of the vertical columns to fail simultaneously, that’s exactly what it looked like, and that’s what happened.”

Report this

By cyrena, December 30, 2007 at 1:26 pm Link to this comment

Dear All,

I’m pretty much plastering this everywhere, because it actually gives me a bit of hope. We’ll see where it goes.

Bipartisan Group Eyes Independent Bid
  By David S. Broder
  The Washington Post
  Sunday 30 December 2007

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/123007B.shtml

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 29, 2007 at 2:03 pm Link to this comment

By Thomas Billis, December 29: “To the commenter who thought in our search for Bin Laden we would not have gone into another country to get him.If it were not for the NIE report we would be bombing Tehran by now.By the way these would have been joint operations with the Pakistani Army….”

Wow, co-opting the nuclear-armed Pakistani military dictatorship to attack democratic IRAN would be something typical of the USA and the Bush regime in particular, Thomas Billis. That should please AIPAC and the masters in Israel!

The reason is, of course, that they “might” become a nuclear power one day, uhh. Too bad if the fundamentalists have already infiltrated the Pakistani army and are ready to sieze control of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal at their leisure.

You must be really dumb if you think that Musharraf hasn’t already been bought. In the end, the USA will be totally sucked into their game - as well as losing $$billions that should have been spent on domestic welfare in the USA.

And the pursuit of Bin Laden is not a real issue in Pakistan. They lose more troops every year fighting with India and he is a good guy to the fundamentalists. What a twit! Oil to $200 barrel???

Report this

By Thomas Billis, December 29, 2007 at 12:43 pm Link to this comment

To the commenter who thought in our search for Bin Laden we would not have gone into another country to get him.If it were not for the NIE report we would be bombing Tehran by now.By the way these would have been joint operations with the Pakistani Army.Since over 1000 Pakistani soldiers have been killed in battles with the tribes in the north I do not think this would be unpopular in the Pakistani army.Also extremists in Pakistan have only polled in recent elections less than 10 percent of the vote.The other ploy would have been hot pursuit and a couple of billion dollars to Musharef.I know you must think that Musharef cannot be bought.How wildly popular do you think the pursuit of Bin Laden would have been in this country?By the way do not stare into the sun.

Report this

By sam, December 29, 2007 at 12:22 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

RE: By mackTN, December 28 at 11:27 pm #

This new format confuses… anyway,

“Ok—so take this back to 911.  I certainly have no problem with self defense and dealing with whoever attacked the [US] and killed citizens.”

“So who did this? And where is he, where has he been for the past few years.”

Mack, in this day and age a good broadband connection is essential in order to stay “up to speed”.  This should answer your query:

911 TRUTH: FACTS FOXED (08:03mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cjli_cwkPrw&NR=1

This next one contains some coarse language:

HOW TO CREATE AN ANGRY AMERICAN (06:26 mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgfzqulvhlQ

Forget Bin Laden and the 19 hijackers being responsible for 911. On Oct 31, 2001 the leading French conservative newspaper LE FIGARO reported: “BIN LADEN TREATED AT AMERICAN HOSPITAL (DUBAI), JULY 2001”. (The CIA met Bin Laden in Dubai in July 2001).

“...the man suspected by the United States of being behind the September 11 terrorist attacks had arrived in Dubai on July 4 by air from Quetta, Pakistan. He was immediately taken to the hospital for kidney treatment. He left the establishment on July 14, ... the local CIA representative was seen going into bin Laden’s room and ‘a few days later, the CIA man boasted to some friends of having visited the Saudi-born millionaire’.”

“...the CIA representative had been recalled to Washington on July 15. Bin Laden has been sought by the United States for terrorism since the bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. But his CIA links go back before that to the fight against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Le Figaro said bin Laden was accompanied in Dubai by his personal physician and close collaborator, who could be the Egyptian Ayman al-Zawahiri, as well as bodyguards and an Algerian nurse. He was admitted to the urology department of Doctor Terry Callaway, who specializes in kidney stones and male infertility. Telephoned several times, the doctor declined to answer questions. ... He had a mobile dialysis machine sent to his Kandahar hideout in Afghanistan in the first half of 2000, according to ‘authoritative sources’ quoted by Le Figaro and RFI (AFP, Wednesday October 31, 2001, 2:04 PM).”

“The CIA was quick to deny these embarrassing facts ‘reported by real investigative journalists,’ ‘who apparently still exist in France.’”

“A spokeswoman at CIA Langley, VA headquarters described the Le Figaro article as ‘complete and utter nonsense. It’s nonsense, it’s absurd, it’s
ridiculous, it’s not true.’ The CIA said it intended to protest to Le Figaro. The American Hospital in Dubai denied that Bin Laden had been a patient (The Scotsman, November 1, 2001).”

“But the French author Richard LaBevière countered that Osama Bin Laden had been working for the CIA since 1979, a fact which was generally accepted in Europe (October 31, 2001). Radio France International stuck to its guns and followed up on its story with further details about Bin Laden’s CIA handler and case officer, Larry Mitchell: ‘The local representative of the CIA who visited Osama Bin Laden last July 12 [2001] at the American Hospital in Dubai is called Larry Mitchell. If his visiting card specifies that he is a ‘consular agent,’ everyone in Dubai knows, especially in the small expatriate community, that he is working under cover. To say it openly, Larry Mitchell belongs to the ‘big house,’ otherwise known as the CIA. He himself does not hide it.”—starts on page 136:

9/11 SYNTHETIC TERRORISM: MADE IN USA
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2005/07/317436.pdf

This one spells out what really happened on 9/11/2001:

9/11 REVISITED: WERE EXPLOSIVES USED? (56:03 mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWgSaBT9hNU&mode=related&search;

Report this

By cyrena, December 29, 2007 at 6:50 am Link to this comment

Well Fadel,

I’ve curbed my flash of ‘heroine worship’ at least a wee bit since my last post, in comparing Benazir Bhutto (as a courageous leader of the people) to the examples that you sited here in the US. Admittedly, when you mentioned the corruption charges, and her rather high-handedness, and the craving of the spotlight, I didn’t have a full appreciation for all of the details.

This very excellent piece in the NYT sort of filled-in the gaps, and it would appear to me, that the author has done a very balanced job of it. (just my opinion).

So, she’s definitely NOT a Shirin Ebadi, (my very favorite heroine of the Middle East) but I’m still giving Benazir her due, and I still don’t find her any MORE corrupt or otherwise immoral (at least for the purposes of personal and political self-elevation) than either of those who currently represent ‘leading ladies’ in US politics. A bit of a daddy’s girl and a spoiled brat, (not unlike Condi Rice) but still gutsy.

I don’t know that I’d want to get on the bad side of her, and I have limited patience with power mongers of any gender in any society, I still admire her gustiness, whether it be stubborn or courageous in nature.

Anyway, for those of you who may not have known anymore than I did, (or less) here’s a link to the piece.


Obituary: Benazir Bhutto, 54, Weathered Political Storm
  By John F. Burns
  The New York Times

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/122807K.shtml

Report this

By cyrena, December 29, 2007 at 4:38 am Link to this comment

Uh, Douglas… on this..
•  Perhaps 160,000 troops in Pakistan would have made a difference….... but do you think that you can just walk into other peoples’ countries and take over???

Hello out there…I’m inclined to agree with part of your reply to Thomas Billis, since Iran would surely have been a better way to work things out in Pakistan.

But, hard to believe you asked the above question, about just walking into other peoples’ countries and taking over. Uhh, have you been paying any attention to IRAQ for the past FOUR YEARS?? Didn’t we pretty much just walk or blast right in and take over THAT country, destroying it in the process, along with several million people?

No! I’m not suggesting that should have EVER happened with Pakistan, Afghanistan, or any other place that we’ve taken over. But let us not suggest that the District of Cheney Goons wouldn’t do it, if in fact there was any advantage to THEM, or even if there might really BE terrorists afoot in Pakistan.
And SURELY we shouldn’t be thinking that this Cabal ever had any intention of actually hunting down OBL, if he’s even still alive. That was never in the plan. Who would they use for a “war of terror’ sponsor if they actually captured the boogey man they’ve been blaming it on?

So, MackTN, I’m thinking if you really wanna deal with those who did us in on 9/11, it’s gonna mean getting on those buses, or walking, or crawling or whatever else…straight to the culprits front door on Pennsylvania Ave. (well actually, Cheney is in some hidden location on the Chesapeake Bay, location not available via Google Earth). Still, you get my point.

So, if somebody wants to pack the sammiches, I’ve got a new pair of moccasins, and we can just finally get this show on the road. Even without weapons, a large crowd can be intimidating.

Meantime, I agree with Fadel on the new reply feature. I like it fine. If I miss anything, it will no doubt come around again.

But Fadel, I don’t know that I want to think of either Condi Rice or Nancy Pelosi as any progress in the elevation of women to US political power. Matter of fact, I think they’re both pretty disgusting right about now. I’m FAR more respectful of Benazir Bhutto. Definitely.

Whatever her ‘material corruption’ issues may have been, they are minimal compared to the moral corruption and the total bankruptcy of integrity displayed by both of these women in US politics. For them, the end ALWAYS justifies the means. No courage there. Not a bit.

Report this
mackTN's avatar

By mackTN, December 29, 2007 at 12:27 am Link to this comment

Ok—so take this back to 911.  I certainly have no problem with self defense and dealing with whoever attacked the us and killed citizens. 

So who did this? And where is he, where has he been for the past few years.

We knock off Afghanistan, install a leader of our say-so, then scurry off to Iraq in order to have a permaanent base in the mideast.  We decide to control Pakistan remotely by manipulating the scene there.

Instead of trying to spread democracy, why not just go after OBL and be done with it? 

Because 911 was an opportunity to begin to dominate the mideast, to control it.  After all, we can’t have these A-Rabs acting out, playing around with nukes, threatening Israel, and denying us oil. 

We’ll never leave the mideast—that’ll be the problem.  We’ll never pack up all the equipment, turn the ships around, and come home.  No matter what.

Do you envision another scenario?

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 29, 2007 at 12:08 am Link to this comment

#By Thomas Billis, December 27: ”...threat to our nationl security lives in the northern section of Pakistan…. Imagine how much safer this world would be if 160 thousand American troops had been in Afghanistan for five years…”

Garbage,  Thomas Billis. IRAN would have been the USA’s best ally in sorting out the issues in the M.East. But that is NOT what the Bush admin. wanted. Now they have no-one there but enemies.

Perhaps 160,000 troops in Pakistan would have made a difference….... but do you think that you can just walk into other peoples’ countries and take over???

#By Expat, December 28:  -Blackspeare, December 28 - “No, actually Buddhists aren’t waiting for anybody to return….”

Some thought that the next Buddha would appear several years ago. Others think that he (or she) won’t appear for several 1,000 years conveniently giving them time to continue to indulge themselves. The current crop in India stupidly believe that building yet another huge statue will somehow solve all of the world’s problems’ uhh…...

Search “Maitreya” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitreya

“World peace must develop from inner peace.  Peace is not the absence of violence.  Peace is the manifestation of human compassion.” http://www.maitreyaproject.org/en/index.html


#By Fadel Abdallah, December 28: “Thruthdig has improved a lot by adding “Reply to this” feature. It certainly makes responding to comments easier. Don’t you agree…”

NOT at all, Fadel Abdallah. Note the “Show 1 reply” javascript button. That means that we now have to go through and INDIVIDUALLY open each of these to read what people have posted in reply, uhh.

So easy to miss, too. Better to open a new tab and replicate the page to post into. I use the Opera browser so I can just right click to open a ‘duplicate’ page. Far better.

Report this

By Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, December 28, 2007 at 7:36 pm Link to this comment

I’m given to theories and here’s mine about that: 

They are going to show up together.  They’re going to look at the mess.  Then at each other, shrug their shoulders at one another in total bewilderment as if to say “what the hell are we doing here?” get back on their Harleys and head off into the sunset in a cloud of dust, never to be heard from again.

As for the Virgins, quite honestly, I don’t think I’d know what to do with 72 of ‘em.

Report this

By Expat, December 28, 2007 at 6:09 pm Link to this comment

By Blackspeare, December 28 at 12:55 pm #
(15 comments total)

No, actually Buddhists aren’t waiting for anybody to return.  Buddhism isn’t a religion and has no gods.  One could say we’re A-theist.

Report this

By P. T., December 28, 2007 at 3:20 pm Link to this comment

“Her story should be particularly inspiring to American women, who only recently promoted two women to high offices: Condi Rice and Pelosi.”


We may even allow them to vote and drive cars someday.  And you should see how attractive they look in burkas.

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, December 28, 2007 at 2:51 pm Link to this comment

Benazir Bhutto is a tragic figure! She loved power and the lights of cameras and she died by another power in full light of cameras.

Yet, I give her great credit for being a woman who rose to notoriety in a Muslim society, always wrongly stereotyped in the West as being oppressive to women and marginalizing them. Her story should be particularly inspiring to American women, who only recently promoted two women to high offices: Condi Rice and Pelosi. Nevertheless, the more things change the more they stay the same in the world of politics.

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, December 28, 2007 at 2:35 pm Link to this comment

Excellent point Dr. Knowitall!

However, Thruthdig has improved a lot by adding “Reply to this” feature. It certainly makes responding to comments easier. Don’t you agree?

My vote goes to Robert Scheer for President!

Report this
Blackspeare's avatar

By Blackspeare, December 28, 2007 at 1:55 pm Link to this comment

Hey Dr. Knowitall…

You said, “Aren’t they going to run out of virgins pretty soon?”

Since you are currently into theocratic considerations, then consider this.  Christians are waiting for the second coming of the Christ; the Jews are waiting for the first coming of their Messiah; the Muslims are waiting for the return of the Mahdi, and, I believe the Buddhists are waiting for Buddha to reappear.  What happens if they all return to earth at the same time???  My money’s on Buddha!

And as for the 72 virgins——I think you’re just jealous!

Report this

By P. T., December 28, 2007 at 12:43 pm Link to this comment

“The US would do best to accept Musharaff as the Pakistani ‘strongman’ who can keep things together, at least in the immediate future.”


The Pakistani people’s role is to resist U.S. imperialism and get rid of him.

Report this

By Missy, December 28, 2007 at 12:26 pm Link to this comment

The democrat-republican thing is irrelevant and we all know it.  Let’s not be ignorant to the truth of the matter.  The corruption is on both sides and both have the same agenda.  They make fools of us all.  There’s no such thing as a “real” election or democracy.  The show of candidates is for our entertainment and an aversion to their agenda.  We make a spectacle of ourselves “believing” we have the power to vote on the “peoples” candidate, when it’s all one big “farce for the ignorant” 

We may be led by the nose and fooled most of the time,  but I think most of us are catching on.  The candidates are merely “Rothschild” puppets.

Report this

By Missy, December 28, 2007 at 12:08 pm Link to this comment

I do believe Dr. Knowitall has spoken the tragic truth.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 28, 2007 at 11:54 am Link to this comment

#122976 by P. T. on 12/28: “Watch as Washington and the mainstream media rush to conveniently blame the jihadis and to protect Musharraf….”

And the Pakistani authorities have desperately tried to play down the extent of the carnage and injuries to BB:-

”...ministry spokesman Javed Iqbal Cheema told a news conference…..Bhutto had not been shot, nor had she been hit by shrapnel from the blast but she had been killed when the force of the explosion crashed her head against a lever on the sun-roof of her vehicle….”

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSISL32108820071228?sp=true (posting this link again - hope it works this time, uhh).

Report this

By Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, December 28, 2007 at 11:54 am Link to this comment

The thing is, money and power are truth.  You can’t get the truth unless you also have power and wealth, the Catch 22 that the rich and powerful all over the world exploit to further their agendas. 

Vote them out?  Not a chance. Not here nor anywhere else.  Why the hell do you think people resort to the underground and terrorism?

There’s about as much chance of voting the rich and powerful out as there is the rich and powerful halting terrorism.

Report this
Blackspeare's avatar

By Blackspeare, December 28, 2007 at 11:49 am Link to this comment

In that part of the Byzantine world, assassination is accepted as a form of political expediency——continuing from the first Sultan of the Muslim Empire to the present time.  Both Musharraf and the US are either complicit or implicit in this assassination.  By forcing Musharaff to deal with Bhutto, at an unsettling time in Pakistan, the US sacrificed her for political gains that backfired.  As for Musharaff, it was just TCB——taking care of business.  Neither he nor the Pakistani military is about to give up power.  The US would do best to accept Musharaff as the Pakistani “strongman” who can keep things together, at least in the immediate future.

Report this
mackTN's avatar

By mackTN, December 28, 2007 at 11:29 am Link to this comment

This situation will degrade quickly, and the Bush/Rice involvement will be viewed as a factor.  In the NYT:
That is why the administration had been fighting so hard, amid skepticism from many of its allies, to broker an agreement in which the increasingly unpopular Mr. Musharraf would share power with Ms. Bhutto after presidential and parliamentary elections. American officials viewed the power-sharing proposal partly as a way to force Mr. Musharraf onto a democratic path, and partly to relieve the growing pressure for his ouster.

On the basis of that plan, Ms. Bhutto returned to Pakistan in October after eight years of self-imposed exile.

Writer Tariq Ali is appalled at the involvement of US and its reconstruction of Bhutto as this new Democratic saint come to install democracy and obliterate terrorism that was dreamed up without any understanding of Pakistani history and public will.  Note this is the same kind of criticism that preceded Bush’s invasion of Iraq and his mission to bring democracy to the middle eastern world, completely ignorant of the culture and language of the people!

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28policy.html?_r=1&ex=1356584400&en=e80ce0e030c61ab6&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin

Report this

By P. T., December 28, 2007 at 11:13 am Link to this comment

Watch as Washington and the mainstream media rush to conveniently blame the jihadis and to protect Musharraf.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 28, 2007 at 10:51 am Link to this comment

122965 by P. T. on 12/28: “Bhutto’s Husband Blames Musharraf…”

I posted this in the other topic but perhaps it was more appropriate here - a statement from one of the minor political parties:-

Imran Khan, Leader, Tehreek-e-Insaf said, “It’s very easy to palm off killing by saying say al-Qaeda or Taliban or terrorists (are behind this). Who is to know what really happened?  There should have been an inquiry exactly after the first attempt against Benazir.  It’s so easy to say al-Qaeda targeted her. There has to be an independent inquiry and at the moment there isn’t any.  Which opposition leader now is going to hold public rallies?” http://www.moneycontrol.com/india/news/current-affairs /independent-inquiry-should-probe-bhutto-case-imran-khan/17 /45/318978

But Tehreek-e-Insaf leader Imran Khan makes an interesting point considering how the authorities in Pakistan have so quickly pinned this murder on Al Qaeada.

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Pakistan has “intelligence intercepts” indicating that al Qaeda was behind the killing of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, the Interior Ministry said on Friday. http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSISL32108820 071228?sp=true

http://www.moveforjustice.org/ Tehreek-e-Insaf http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSl8Frmz5dg

Report this

By P. T., December 28, 2007 at 10:43 am Link to this comment

Bhutto’s Husband Blames Musharraf

New Delhi, Dec 27 (IANS) Asif Zardari, husband of Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) chief, has blamed the Pervez Musharraf government for her assassination. Zardari left for Pakistan from Dubai with their three children after hearing of the assassination Thursday evening.

Zardari told news channels from Dubai, ‘It (the assassination) is the work of the (Pakistan) government.’ Zardari and the three children of the couple were in Dubai when the assassination took place in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, around 6:16 p.m. local time.

Report this
mackTN's avatar

By mackTN, December 28, 2007 at 10:41 am Link to this comment

122939 by Frank on

I know many some will choose to not believe this, but this is a significant setback for Bush, whose directives to Condi Rice helped secure Bhutto’s return to Pakistan in the first place. Bhutto was Bush’s plan B in Pakistan, and his administration had hopes that with her as Prime Minister and Musharraf as President…

Frank is absolutely right.  Somehow, I don’t think the state department run by Daddy Bush’s administration would have made these errors. 

Unless Bhutto intended to become a martyr, I can’t think she would have been so blase about her life and her childrens’ need for a mother, unless she felt confident that her support and backing from powers deemed as super would innoculate her death.

Mushie clearly felt threatened from the very start and knew the U.S. liked Bhutto.  He was a few days away from perhaps losing his job—and did this look like a guy who wanted to lose his job?

Isn’t it funny?  We can predict with so much certainty that Saddam Hussein threatens our very existence with those pesky WMDs…. 

Frank is right.  Bush & Condi were involved in this drama up to their necks and once again it all turns to s..t.  They must notonly be embarrassed, but suffering the discomfort of being exposed as the laughingstocks they are all over the world.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, December 28, 2007 at 10:31 am Link to this comment

It’s all interconnected.

In this interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIO8B6fpFSQ&eurl=http://www.godlikeprod uctions.com/forum1/message480645/pg1
with Sir David Frost on Al Jazeera TV, Benazir Bhutto revealed (or claimed) that Omar Sheikh, the former MI6 agent now in a Pakistani prison appealing his sentence after being found guilty of killing Wall Street journalist Daniel Pearl, killed Osama bin Laden. She makes the revelation in an off-hand remark at about 6m12s and thereafter into the interview.
Sheikh, according to Wikipedia:
” was arrested and served time in prison for the 1994 abduction of several British nationals in India, an act which he acknowledges, he was released from captivity in 1999 and provided safe passage into Pakistan, apparently with the support of Pakistan and the Taleban (the hijackers were Pakistanis) in an Indian Airlines plane hijacking. He is most well-known for his alleged role in the 2002 kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. Sheikh Omar Saeed was arrested by Pakistani police on February 12, 2002, in Lahore, in conjunction with the Pearl kidnapping,[4] and was sentenced to death on July 15, 2002[5] for killing Pearl. His judicial appeal has not yet been heard. The delay has been alleged to be due to his reported links with Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence.[6]

Pakistani President, Pervez Musharraf, in his book In the Line of Fire stated that Sheikh was originally recruited by British intelligence agency, MI6, while studying at the London School of Economics. He alleges Omar Sheikh was sent to the Balkans by MI6 to engage in jihadi operations. Musharraf later went on to state “At some point, he probably became a rogue or double agent”.[7]

On October 6, 2001, a senior-level U.S. government official told CNN that U.S. investigators had discovered Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh (Sheik Syed), using the alias “Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad” had sent about $100,000 from the United Arab Emirates to Mohammed Atta. “Investigators said Atta then distributed the funds to conspirators in Florida in the weeks before the deadliest acts of terrorism on U.S. soil that destroyed the World Trade Center, heavily damaged the Pentagon and left thousands dead. In addition, sources have said Atta sent thousands of dollars—believed to be excess funds from the operation—back to Saeed in the United Arab Emirates in the days before September 11. CNN later confirmed this. [1]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Omar_Saeed_Sheikh

So did Bhutto sign her own death warrant for making public on November 2 this year that Bin Laden was not only dead (thereby exposing the CIA-orchestrated conspiracy behind all the phony Osama videos) but also killed by the same former MI6/ISI agent who had, on the orders of former ISI director-general Lt-Gen Mahmud Ahmad, wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta a short time before 9/11
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1454238160.cms
and who is currently in a Pakistani prison? Was she killed by the ISI (or a faction within it) in order that she would not reveal further the involvement of Pakistan (=ISI=CIA) in 9/11? Was she a loose cannon who could expose the truth about 9/11 as an inside job - or at least Pakistan’s involvement in it? Careless talk costs lives - in this case her own, perhaps?

Report this

By Frank, December 28, 2007 at 8:34 am Link to this comment

I know many some will choose to not believe this, but this is a significant setback for Bush, whose directives to Condi Rice helped secure Bhutto’s return to Pakistan in the first place. Bhutto was Bush’s plan B in Pakistan, and his administration had hopes that with her as Prime Minister and Musharraf as President, their combined political power would allow them to deliver on promises to the US that Musharraf on could not on his own. That plan has obviously gone to hell for the time being, and Musharraf (Plan A) is even more compromised in his political position than before.  Bhutto’s supporters will blame his government for her death, at least in part.

Al Quaida has been trying to kill Bhutto for nearly a decade. Whether tribalist sympathizers in the Pakistani ISI played a role in allowing them to do so is a distinct possibility, but this would not require complicity by Musharraf.

Report this

By Expat, December 28, 2007 at 8:24 am Link to this comment

As an expatriate, I am in contact with friends in the US and one of them said a curious thing:  They thought we would nuke Pakistan before Iran.  Initially I dismissed this thought as outrageous………now I’m not so sure.    ??????????????????Hmmmmmmmmm.

Report this

By Expat, December 28, 2007 at 8:18 am Link to this comment

#122806 by Thomas Billis on 12/27 at 12:29 pm
(92 comments total)

Every once in a while we hit our stride; you hit yours here today.
good on ya!

Report this

By sam, December 28, 2007 at 8:13 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

RE: #122899 by coolrebel

“US interests in Pakistan were never going to be served by Musharaf.”

There’s an awful hollow ring to that statement, if you don’t mind me saying… 

“And rather than courting Bhutto early to secure her support and allegiance, we allowed our interests to be dictated by the vagaries of pakistani internal politics.”

Then let’s look at the vagaries of internal US politics…

How to create an Angry American
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgfzqulvhlQ

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 28, 2007 at 6:16 am Link to this comment

#122899 by coolrebel on 12/28: ”...after what happened at karachi, it appears nothing less than reckless for bhutto to be campaigning in the open….”

Both incidents tend to confirm that the security for Ms. Bhutto was inadequate. Providing insufficient security or withdrawing part of the security is a de facto way of ensuring an assasination. That is essentially what eventually happened.

Musharraf needed BB to please the USA but equally wanted rid of her if it was going to cost him his uniform and perceived leadership of the military boys’ club. Manipulating Sharif was much easier as he was essentially on the same side.

The risk of a war with India is now imminent. Also, Israel could still disrupt thinks by attacking either Iran or Pakistan while everybody is twiddling their thumbs and wondering what to do next.

Think of the risks to candidates in America now, too, uhh. It is also heading to becoming a quasi-fundamentalist religious state. The Republicans will try anything to redeem themnselves, uhh.

Report this

By Joe R., December 28, 2007 at 5:51 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The only constant here is that the candidate that tried to help the average person, or the oppressed, is the one that gets killed.  It is the over all pattern that never changes.  If someone tries to help the little guy, there toast.  It does not matter if the Generals killed her or the terrorist.  The purpose and result was the same.  The focus has changed from reform back to the war on terror.  Be afraid, be very afraid.

The beneficiaries of this act are the Generals who want to crush dissent and the terrorist who want to oppress the society as a whole.

Even here in the US the result is it strengthens Bush and Cheney and makes it more likely that one of the fascist candidates will get elected over a reformer who wants to change the direction of the country.  It will be interesting to see if the electorate will fall for this ploy again.  My guess is they will.  The propaganda is flying everywhere but my Bullshit detector is going off.  I think the fascist on both sides won this round.  It does not matter who killed her.  Both the terrorist and the Generals wanted her dead.  It almost seems like they help each other out so they can stay in power, if you know what I mean.

Report this

By coolrebel, December 28, 2007 at 2:16 am Link to this comment

the islamist campaign to destabilize pakistan appears to be well on track. clearly, assassins were lying in wait, probably at every rally, for bhutto to let her guard down, and they got their chance. the security issue is a red herring. after what happened at karachi, it appears nothing less than reckless for bhutto to be campaigning in the open.

It is a testament to the utter foolishness of US foreign policy that the terrible events in rawalpindi showed in a matter of minutes what a sideshow five years of war in iraq has been. in focusing on a non-existent threat, we have allowed once reeling islamic militants to regain the initiative in afghanistan and significantly infilitrate a nuclear state. they are closer than ever to their goals.

US interests in Pakistan were never going to be served by Musharaf. And rather than courting Bhutto early to secure her support and allegiance, we allowed our interests to be dictated by the vagaries of pakistani internal politics.

our only hope would appear to be withdrawing large numbers of troops from the iraq theatre and redeploying them in afghanistan, where along with liberal use of our checkbook to buy and create dissent among the tribes in the northwest territories, our forces could once again put the militants on the defensive, and buy our diplomats time to help stabilize pakistan before it’s too late.

the last few years have really been amateur hour at the state department. that needs to end, and it needs to end now.

Report this

By cyrena, December 28, 2007 at 12:21 am Link to this comment

#122855 by Fadel Abdallah

•  However, it’s important to point out that, as a woman who has been elected twice for one of the two highest offices in a Muslim country, the enemies of Islam, who always invoke how backward Muslims are in their treatment of women, should pause to examine their own ignorance and prejudice against Islam and Muslims. Only just recently, the U.S. had its first woman Speaker of the House, and that was big news, yet the more things change in politics the more they stay the same.

So true, so true. This is all so very true. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

And, it’s true of how backward we are here. How is it that it’s such a huge and big deal, for there to be a woman finally running for president after more than 200 years? How is it that we’ve actually devoted so much time and discourse to the fact that a black man is running for president? How or why is it that we can chart our backward reversion to the same pace as the forward movement of the ‘so-called’ 3rd world countries, at least in respect to social cohesion in a civil society?

Look around at Latin America, and elsewhere. They’ve put more women in high office in recent years than we’ve ever seen, or are likely to see. When we DO get a female in office, (Fadel referred to our 1st Lady Speaker) look at what we get. A fraud. And look at our female Secretary of State. Another fraud.

Is there ANYBODY who can or would actually think, decide, and ACT on behalf of ‘we the people’, and then gather up the necessary help required to make it happen? Is that so much to ask or expect?

And yes, I KNOW that politics is a nasty business, but it’s a NECESSARY business, in ANY society. There have to be some common rules to guide the functions of day-to-day business/existence. Ideally, those rules/laws should be democratically decided upon. So, does the process HAVE to be so nasty and corrupt? I say no. It doesn’t have to be, unless of course the people of any given society either CHOOSE it, or ALLOW it. And, here in the USA, we’ve done both. Whether we’ve chosen it out of ignorance or greed, or allowed it out of ignorance and selfish apathy, the end result is the same. We’re ALL screwed.

Jbart, #122829 by jbart

I’m with you on this, (1000%) because this is how it’s happened

•  You never told them, even if you knew, of what was really happening to our country. Now that they’re in society, they just “follow”. Shame on any of you that allowed this to happen. …You"under-served” them and theirs.

What we see now, is the failure of so many of us, to do any attempt at guiding and explaining anything to our kids. And, the devil of it is, I CONSISTENTLY here from these same people, about how ‘off track’ generations X-Y-Z are.

I’m like… HELLO!! Earth to the ME generation…how the hell do you think they GOT that way?

But, you said it yourself. Your daughter sees things for what they are, because…YOU WORKED HARD at it!! It rarely happens otherwise. That’s the problem. And, it’s getting worse, because we’re into the 2nd and 3rd generations of it now, and even the ones who possess some form of common or learned sense, haven’t the tools for connecting any of that information. Besides, it would mean erasing all of their brains to get rid of the stupid stuff that the media has fed them for all of these decades.

Meantime, I truly understand your dilemma. Do we go north, where there law, but it’s real chilly. Or South; no law, but hey,  it’s the tropics. Well, it’s a difficult choice, and you have to weigh all sorts of other factors. For me, my sanity would last longer in a place with some semblance of law. I figure you can always bundle up against the cold. (extreme heat can be just as deadly, and there’s NO protection from it, at least not with the controls of the modern day ‘power’ (electricity for cooling and refrigeration) in the hands of greedy madmen. Besides, at the rate we’re going, Canada isn’t gonna be that cold, for that long.

Report this

By sam, December 27, 2007 at 10:51 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Re: Post #122865 by Rowdy

“the CIA sucks when it comes to getting good information,”

Not at all. They have all the ‘good information’ (and state-of-the-art technology) they need, but then apply LIHOP (“let it happen on purpose”) procedure. Check top of page 45:

9/11 SYNTHETIC TERRORISM: MADE IN USA
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2005/07/317436.pdf

And the other component is MIHOP (“made it happen on purpose”) procedure. It seems both were employed on 9/11, and on a smaller scale in Benazir Bhutto’s assassination. 

911 TRUTH: FACTS FOXED
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cjli_cwkPrw&NR=1

“but when it comes to killing people, they always come through.”

Alfread Webre, 09/07/07 Cooper Union address:

“The US and other agents of the international war crimes racketeering organisation have systematically used false-flag operations…”  Starts at the 55:30 mark:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8857832629715387909&q=Jim+Fetzer,+Cooper+Union&total=20&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4

“did musharraf pay them, or did bush give him a little late xmas gift?”

Compliant Musharraf appears the Bush admin’s preferred puppet in Pakistan. No doubt there’ll be a little US flag burning by the locals in retaliation shortly, but then the main media around the world will fudge facts again to exonerate ‘the great satan’ Uncle Sam.

Report this

By Margaret Currey, December 27, 2007 at 10:45 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Why does this administration back a military government, yes the man took off his uniform but is his mind set the same, seems as though the Bush regime loves power especially Dick Chaney who runs the puppet or as I refer to him The Emperor without clothes.

I do not know if this woman deserved to be prime minister but she certainly did not need to be gunned down, and where was security if this country was helping Pakastain so much why was it not into helping the election process, maybe because Bush and company is not into honest elections.

AL GORE FOR PRESIDENT.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 27, 2007 at 9:55 pm Link to this comment

#122856 by mackTN on 12/27: “The shocking thing about Bhutto’s assasination is…I’m not sure who to pin it on.  My first impulse is of course Musharaff who… looked guilty as hell as he announced her murder during his press conference.  And if it is Musharaff, then I bet this was done in concert with al-quaeda….”

It was assumed by Ms. Bhutto’s own people that Musharraf was behind the first bombing. His machinery was also most likely responsible for this. Whether he used Al Qaeada or the CIA used him we might never know for certain as he is in control of so much of the evidence.

Musharraf needs Al Qaeada to survive as the USA would quickly lose interest in him otherwise. At least that is his perception. His regime is also almost as much of a boys’ club as Al Qaeada is sexist, misogynist and religiously fundamentally bigoted. They never hesitated to bash middle-aged women in the street!

For all the mud about Benazir Bhutto in the past, she was a brave person to go back to Pakistan under threat of arrest and even braver to face the very real threat of assasination - and to continue with leading the opposition struggle despite what already happened. The courts there were of little real help, as usual, as they are just another miserable boys’ club.

Report this

By rowdy, December 27, 2007 at 9:03 pm Link to this comment

the CIA sucks when it comes to getting good information, but when it comes to killing people, they always come through. did musharraf pay them, or did bush give him a little late xmas gift?

Report this

By purplewolf, December 27, 2007 at 8:08 pm Link to this comment

#122818 P.T.: 

My thoughts exactly.

Report this
mackTN's avatar

By mackTN, December 27, 2007 at 8:05 pm Link to this comment

#122806 by Thomas Billis

Imagine how much safer this world would be if 160 thousand American troops had been in Afghanistan for five years tracking down our real enemies and killing or capturing them.The weasly spineless balless democrats are as much resposible for this as George Bush….

I agree.  The shocking thing about Bhutto’s assasination is…I’m not sure who to pin it on.  My first impulse is of course Musharaff who, btw, looked guilty as hell as he announced her murder during his press conference.  And if it is Musharaff, then I bet this was done in concert with al-quaeda.  It was clear that Mushie was not as reliable as the Bush league wanted him to be, and, excuse me, but this guy did not want to give up his power.  Could he have thought that the U.S. would have welcomed Bhutto so all bets were off?  Scary assumption because if alquaeda cozies with the govt, they’ve just become a nuclear power.  (And we’re sinking hundreds of billions in Iraq because Saddam Hussein once threatened Daddy Bush.)  Talk about the keystone cops.

Of course, after reading Confessions of an EHM and watching Syriana and the Bourne films, we could have done one of those remote control jobs as well. 

As for the Democrats, this is no longer the party of the people, for sure.  The Democrats have approved all this money and they don’t even have the nerve to ask for a receipt!  Just what is all this billions of dollars being spent on—in Pakistan, Iraq, and in Mexico?  Is it unlawful to request an accounting?  Since this is our government and our money, I think it’s time to make these jokers more accountable to the citizenry.  How?  By not giving any of them job security, by demanding more openness, more information sharing as a condition of the job you are voting them in for.  If they renege, vote them out. 

“People should not be afraid of the governments; governments should be afraid of the people.” V

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, December 27, 2007 at 8:01 pm Link to this comment

Pay attention to the news covering Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, and you will notice that everyone will mention her Harvard-Oxford education.

Yet, few might mention that though she became Prime Minister twice before, she was ousted for proven corruption charges.

She is no “martyr”, as her followers would like to call her. She is just another politician assassinated by someone or some group who hated her. This is normal occurrence in politics, it comes with the territory and happened in the best and worse political systems in the world. How many political assassinations took place in the U.S. for example? And why politicians always need so much security escort if they are doing the bidding of the people? 

However, it’s important to point out that, as a woman who has been elected twice for one of the two highest offices in a Muslim country, the enemies of Islam, who always invoke how backward Muslims are in their treatment of women, should pause to examine their own ignorance and prejudice against Islam and Muslims. Only just recently, the U.S. had its first woman Speaker of the House, and that was big news, yet the more things change in politics the more they stay the same. Politics is a dirty business; it’s not about service to the people, it’s about power and service to the rich and privileged. This is the same in Pakistan as it is in America.

Report this
RAE's avatar

By RAE, December 27, 2007 at 6:25 pm Link to this comment

desertdude writes: “I pray for the people of Pakistan may God Grant them Peace.”

It’s about time, don’t you think, that people like you and millions like you get it through your thick skulls that THERE AIN’T NO GOD WHO GIVES A RAT’S ASS ABOUT GRANTING IMBECILIC HUMAN BEINGS ANYTHING!

When is it going to dawn on you “believers” that PRAYING accomplishes NOTHING… NEVER HAS… NEVER WILL?

It’s precisely BECAUSE so many “mindless faithful” fools populate this planet that STRIFE AND TRAGEDY AND INSANITY continues on unabated.

It’s so profoundly ineffective and stupid to, time and again, come up with the answer in unison like a billion moronic parrots… “Pray for Peace.”

IT DOESN’T WORK, ***hole!

Report this

By P. T., December 27, 2007 at 6:15 pm Link to this comment

“Once again the ugly head of Islamic extremism has
raised its ugly head. Islam has nothing to offer but
heartache and misery.”


As opposed to Christians, such as Bush.  lol

Report this

By desertdude, December 27, 2007 at 5:53 pm Link to this comment

Once again the ugly head of Islamic extremism has
raised its ugly head. Islam has nothing to offer but
heartache and misery. I pray for the people of Pakistan may God Grant them Peace.

Report this

By Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, December 27, 2007 at 5:20 pm Link to this comment

Aren’t they going to run out of virgins pretty soon? 

I think I’ve heard about at least a hundred suicide bombers.  At 72 a pop, that’s 7200 virgins.  How many freakin’ virgins are there up there?

(Should I have capitalized Virgins?)

I only hope the bombers find the reward worth it.
It’d be a shame and a waste if they didn’t.  Not only would their expectations be dashed, but they’d lose faith in the myth.

Those of you out there who have had a Virgin, do you think it would be worth it?  Of course, they’re offering 72, not 1.  That, alone, says something.
If the reward were 1 virgin, the incidence of suicide bombers might drop precipitously. 

This might be the answer:  Get Madison Ave. to start an ad campaign saying that you only get 1, not 72. 

Furthermore, just what is the aesthetic difference between a virgin and a non-virgin?  Why is a virgin better?  Is the male youth so naive that he’d fall for that incentive?  I could see it if it were a Bud Light, or a Corvette or a maybe a years subscription to Hustler.  But 1 virgin? Then, do they even say what “getting 72 virgins means?”  That’s pretty vague and open-ended.

I’m being called for dinner.  More later.

BTW, at the risk of being shot down, I think Bhutto’s murder is a great human loss. I think she was a very good person and a humantarian. Why is it that the deranged idiots always seem to win?

Report this

By Scott, December 27, 2007 at 4:56 pm Link to this comment

jbart writes I can easily comprehend corruption, as it is capalism at its worst.But,it is understandable and, therefore,somewhat acceptable.

No, its not acceptable at all because this is precisely where the cause of the worst problems of the world are deeply rooted. I doubt if anyone will ever figure out what the eff is happening until this sinks in.

Report this

By jbart, December 27, 2007 at 4:08 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

And another thing that is confusing to me is that “our” kids”,the cops & military,are buying into this travesty. They’re not the “privileged”. They’re us, our kids!! What the eff happened? How did we let them believe,or didn’t stop them from believing,this media-driven bullshit?
FYI - I’ve got one kid,and she sees things for what they are (Iworked hard at it), but it seems that a lot of parents have let their kids down in this respect. To use the “I was too busy with getting on to teach & provide good guidannce won’t cut it folks. You never told them, even if you knew, of what was really happening to our country. Now that they’re in society, they just “follow”. Shame on any of you that allowed this to happen.
You"under-served” them and theirs.

Report this

By jbart, December 27, 2007 at 2:52 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I can easily comprehend corruption, as it is capalism at its worst.But,it is understandable and, therefore,somewhat acceptable.What I found most interesting about Bhutto’s return was,simply,the reception she got from the ordinary people (a large part were the educated youth).
Bring up any memories? How about the “Nam protests? The,educated,young Americans showing passion for a politician. Wow,what a concept. The future supposedly belongs to the young, right? Ever see the young educated youth passionate about this regime and its neocon thugs/war machine? Sure,but they wear cardigans and cute silk scarves, the guts smoke pipes and the girls giggle, and they can all converse about the stock market perfectly. Yeah, their types were definately in the anti-war “Nam” demos. They, although small in number, represent the same old, same old, elites.
Not so with Bhutto’s supporters.They were looking for a change from a U.S.-dominated dictatorship. They just wanted their country back. Look what happened, their dreams are “shot to hell”. 
What about us? Do we have a shot to get OUR country back? Well, if assasination works for them, then why will it not work…uh oh, too far, huh? Wrong.  That is what they need to feel.  Threatened.  Before its too late, the elite need to feel fallible. And, if they succeed in another false flag attrocity before 11/08, and impose Martial Law, it will be too late to stop them.
If this happens….I’m not sure if I “sneak” into our northern neighbor (where it gets real cold but has law) or southern neighbor(where its warm but no law). I hate to admit that I’m getting confused, but I am.

Report this

By P. T., December 27, 2007 at 2:49 pm Link to this comment

Were Bush and the CIA involved?  Did Bush see Bhutto as a threat to the dictator Musharraf, who Bush backs?

Report this
lastdaywatchers's avatar

By lastdaywatchers, December 27, 2007 at 2:36 pm Link to this comment

The May 15th Prophecy has been the only source that has given with 100% accuracy events before they happen such as the Bhuto Assassination

Do a Google search of the May 15th Prophecy and you will see for yourself how accurate it has been

or go to
http://lastdaywatchers.blogspot.com/

Report this

By Bob, December 27, 2007 at 2:12 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Few news outlets have pointed out this bit of irony I reported earlier today at Bob McCarty Writes™:

The Pakistan People’s Party, under the leadership of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, used a news release yesterday to announce it had turned to the Internet to raise funds for the party’s efforts to win parliamentary elections in January 2008.

Report this

By Thomas Billis, December 27, 2007 at 1:29 pm Link to this comment

Bhutto went from a corrupt politician to the Statue of Liberty with her murder.The question is not the life of one corrupt politician the question is when will our government wake up and realize the real threat to our nationl security lives in the northern section of Pakistan.If the rapture strategy is the principal motivation of this administration Pakistan unraveling would be a major step in that direction.Imagine how much safer this world would be if 160 thousand American troops had been in Afghanistan for five years tracking down our real enemies and killing or capturing them.The weasly spineless balless democrats are as much resposible for this as George Bush.In rolling over everutime he stamps his foot they are as complicit in this disastrous foreign policy as he is.Hillary Clinton said whatever George Bush says about Pakistan is right but she reerves to apologize if it does not work out.Bill said he is for or against whatever George Bush says and to call him in 5 years for a more definitive answer.

Report this
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.