Benazir Bhutto

[Reality]

I don't want to get into the political foray per se.
That being said, whom do you speculate was either in on and/or all for the murder of Benazir Bhutto?

President Pervez Musharraf
Bushel
Bush Oil Co's.
Taliban
Al Quida
They are all in unison

[westkoast]

Well...Musharraf seems like the most likely and considering that is who a lot of the people in the country feel it is I think i'd have to toss my guess out at him.  When Bhutto came back it was a signal that he reign was going to be challenged.  The people were tired of him and the people put into power by the Coup so.....ya I think it's him.  Even the statement he issued seemed cold and he didn't really care.

If it was Al Queda they would have claimed this already don't ya think?

[rickortreat]

It is Al Qaida, and I think that because they have tried before.  Bhutto is a woman and a strong icon of modern successful Muslims, who want to see themsleves as equal citizens in the world.  She isn't western, but she had no problem interacting with them successfully on behalf of Pakistan. The US never flipped out when they developed Nuclear weapons like they did with Iran and N. Korea.  (India's friendship with the Soviets had a lot to do with that!)

Al Qaida hates women like Bhutto, it makes their little wee wee's shrivel to see an intelligent powerful woman in a position of power and authority!

Al Qaida won't claim responsibility, because it's to their advantage for Pakistani's to think Mushharif did it.

They want to destablize Pakistan so they can take it, and it's nuclear capability under their control.  In order to do that, they need to undermine the Pakistanis' faith in their current government.

It is a major concern- Pakistan is very important as is Turkey- examples of relatively properous, democratic muslim countries.  We do not want to see them become havens for Al Qaida.

[WayOutWest]

It is Al Qaida, and I think that because they have tried before.  Bhutto is a woman and a strong icon of modern successful Muslims, who want to see themsleves as equal citizens in the world.  She isn't western, but she had no problem interacting with them successfully on behalf of Pakistan. The US never flipped out when they developed Nuclear weapons like they did with Iran and N. Korea.  (India's friendship with the Soviets had a lot to do with that!)

Al Qaida hates women like Bhutto, it makes their little wee wee's shrivel to see an intelligent powerful woman in a position of power and authority!

Al Qaida won't claim responsibility, because it's to their advantage for Pakistani's to think Mushharif did it.

They want to destablize Pakistan so they can take it, and it's nuclear capability under their control.  In order to do that, they need to undermine the Pakistanis' faith in their current government.

It is a major concern- Pakistan is very important as is Turkey- examples of relatively properous, democratic muslim countries.  We do not want to see them become havens for Al Qaida.

I don't think I agree with you BUT if you were correct what a nightmare for the US.  Hopefully the thought of an unstable NUCLEAR power would be enough to get some others on board in an effort to fix the situation (i.e. USSR & China).  The US would probably have no choice but to keep a dictator in power and thus futher undermine our "rep" around the world.

[Lurker]

The US would probably have no choice but to keep a dictator in power and thus futher undermine our "rep" around the world.

What do you think has been going on in Pakistan ever since Musserraf came to power in a military coup?  Here is a guy that has suspended thier constitution, fired and replaced the entire Supreme Court when it loked like he was to lose, violates human rights, jailed all the lawyers (actually not a bad idea...) and basically has ruled as a dictator for the past 8 years.  And Bushie supports him because he is against the Taliban.  Although he won't use the army he controlls to push the Taliban out of the mountains bordering Afghanistan.  And he won't allow the US to bomb the mountainous region where they are hiding. 

[Reality]

And Bushie supports him because he is against the Taliban.  Although he won't use the army he controlls to push the Taliban out of the mountains bordering Afghanistan.  And he won't allow the US to bomb the mountainous region where they are hiding. 

So he really is not against the Taliban in actions.  Yet Bush is for Musharraf and has been all along.  Smell test not being passed. 
Doesn't it seem logical that Bush knows full well where bin Bin is?  Has known all along.  Purposely did not take bin down, let him skiddadle away when they had him on horseback fleeing to Pakistannyville?  I'm not being partisian, as Clinton also had a locked and loaded shot on that guy who did the most damage by far in Iraq.  Called the whole thing off, left the military peoples jaw dropping.

This Bhutto was purportedly going to let the US military bomb the area where bin and the Talis hang out.

[JoMal]

Right now, whether we like it or not, the staunchest ally the US has in the entire world to fight against Al Qaida is Pakistan. While we in the United States would clearly prefer they do as Lurker proposes, and invade that mountainous northern region that borders Afghanistan to root out Al Qaida once and for all, anyone with an inkling of the political ramifications that would fall out within Pakistan if they did this would immediately understand why this cannot be done at this time. The assasination of Bhutto can be seen as a means by which Al Qaida benefits from the strife it has caused across Pakistan. The country will clearly be in turmoil for weeks if not months and years because of this. Al Qaida can breathe easier now, as the government/dictatorship in place will need to answer for it, one way or the other.

It should be noteworthy about the character of the assassin himself. This was not your weekend warrior, sent to do as much damage as he could by just blowing himself up. No, he was a hitman, deemed expendable, who shot Bhutto, THEN blew himself up. Clearly, he could not be caught under any circumstances and face interrogation. They cannot even figure out who he did the assassination for and with no one claiming responsibility, the accusing fingers will be wagging for some time.

The most annoying thing about the latest War on Terror has been, for me, how visibly more intelligent and committed the enemy has been at just about every turn. We have more money, firepower, and supposedly the superior intelligence network. And with the Bush administration leading the way, much more arrogance, stupidity, and alienation of nations. In other words, we do not match up well with the defensive set put on the court by Al Qaida. Plus, the rules of this war have been put down by them, not us. Every well-publicized victory we chart has not seemed to diminish the enemy as our government likes to claim. How many times has someone associated with Bush... or Bush himself.... come out and said the war in Iraq has been won, or is close to being won, when all we want to hear is the war against Al Qaida is showing some progress, instead of getting a solid foothold in Iraq directly as a result of our invasion there. As the war - again - stagnates into another year of misery for the Iraqi people who have chosen not to emigrate.

This will go down as another huge victory for Al Qaida against the US and our keenest ally in fighting them.

You want to know who was responsible? Who will benefit the most? Musserraf certainly is not going to come out of this smelling of victory, of that you can be assured. Al Qaida has disrupted Pakistan and now can redirect its attentions elsewhere, so the United States certainly is not going to benefit - quite the opposite. Europe may get attacked again, or us.

Until we fight this war with less money and more intelligence, they have our number.

[rickortreat]

Al Qaida is nothing on their own, in actuality they are quite ineffective, but Pakistan is a very serious situation because of their Nukes. 

We are concerned with Iran acquiring Nukes, but Pakistan already has them, and missiles too!  It would be a disaster for the world if Pakistan were to turn into a radical muslim nation.  In actuality, I think the vast majority want a democracy, but there is clearly an element that is very active in Pakistan.

Mussharif has been the target of multiple assasination attempts as Bhutto was.  Al Qaida are cowards, unable or unwilling to make their case to the people directly, they kill the leaders of the people who oppose them.  They don't really care who they kill, either.  In many ways their fanatacism has made them agents of the Devil. 

It's not clear how much the outside world can help Pakistan, but it is clearly in our interests to do so.  A modern active Pakistan would be a great asset to peace and stability, a radicalized one would be a problem for the whole world.

[Skandery]

You know I have only half-heartedly been following the story for the past, oh, 6 months or so.  The whole daughter of the deposed dictator is a populist leader, and a woman nonetheless, returning to her homeland from exile to participate in the election.  Being stopped at the airport by Musharrif's men and returned.  Triumphantly returning to the country later on and staging a popular Presidential campaign amidst Martial Law set down by Musharrif. 
Finally yesterday around 3 P.M. I saw on the front page of Yahoo the story of the assasination and for some reason a huge swell of sadness came over me, almost to the point of tears.  In even a nuclear-armed, relatively modern, country like Pakistan, there isn't even the basic freedom to choose your leader.  The basic right of self-determination, to any degree, is completely non-existent.   

Who did it?  People have thrown out Al-Qaeda, Pervez Musharrif, etc.  I don't know.  I don't care.  The lot of them are complicit and I wouldn't rule out any clandestine efforts by the powers that be either.  The real tragedy is that its done.  Is this really how far these people have come?       

[Reality]

Al Qaida are cowards, unable or unwilling to make their case to the people directly, they kill the leaders of the people who oppose them.  They don't really care who they kill, either.  In many ways their fanatacism has made them agents of the Devil. 

I thought you believed soley in evolution?

[JoMal]

I really doubt that it will matter in the long run, but I just read that she was not, exactly, assassinated. She died by hitting her head on the sunroof of the car she was in by ducking away from the gunfire, which missed her entirely. No one else in her car was injured, including after the bomb blast.

At least, this is now the official, Pakistani, version of her death. If true, it could be politally useful by her opponents in the Pakistani government. If false, then it would appear someone is trying to negate the Al Qaida angle.   

[Skandery]

I really doubt that it will matter in the long run, but I just read that she was not, exactly, assassinated.

Reeeeally?
=============

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071228/ap_en_tv/bhutto_blitzer

Bhutto sent Blitzer security e-mail By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer
2 hours, 47 minutes ago

NEW YORK - It was a story CNN's Wolf Blitzer hoped he'd never have to report ? an e-mail sent to him through an intermediary by Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto complaining about her security. Conditions of use: only if she were killed.
 
Bhutto, who was assassinated on Thursday, wrote to Blitzer that if anything happened to her, "I would hold (Pakistani President Pervez) Musharraf responsible."

Blitzer received the e-mail on Oct. 26 from Mark Siegel, a friend and longtime Washington spokesman for Bhutto. That was eight days after she narrowly escaped another attempt at her life.

Bhutto wrote to Blitzer that "I have been made to feel insecure by his (Musharraf's) minions," that specific improvements had not been made to her security arrangements, and that the Pakistani leader was responsible.

Blitzer agreed to the conditions before receiving the e-mail. He said Friday that he called Siegel shortly after seeing it to see if there was any way he could use it on CNN, but was told firmly it could only be used if she were killed. Siegel couldn't say why she had insisted on those conditions.

Blitzer reported on the e-mail late Thursday.

He noted that Bhutto had written a piece for CNN.com that mentioned her security concerns and that American politicians had tried to intervene on her behalf to make her feel safer.

"I didn't really think that it was a story we were missing out on," he said. "I don't think the viewers were done any disservice by my trying to hold on to this."

Blitzer was the only journalist sent such a message, Siegel said. He also sent the e-mail to U.S. Rep. Steve Israel, a New York Democrat.

Siegel said he did not believe Bhutto's opinions had changed since she wrote the e-mail. Her message specifically mentioned she had requested four police vehicles surrounding her vehicle when traveling; Siegel said it seemed evident from pictures taken at the assassination scene that the request wasn't fulfilled.

Bhutto did not necessarily believe that Musharraf wanted her dead, but felt many people around him did, he said.

Her husband contacted Siegel on Thursday to remind him about the e-mail message and to make sure it got out, he said.

Blitzer said he had no regrets about the way he handled the story. To report about it while she was still alive would have meant going back on his word, he said.

"I don't think there is a clear black-and-white in this situation," he said. "I did what I think was right."

[WayOutWest]

Al Qaida are cowards, unable or unwilling to make their case to the people directly, they kill the leaders of the people who oppose them.  They don't really care who they kill, either.  In many ways their fanatacism has made them agents of the Devil.

I wonder what it will take for people to learn that we, the U.S. and most of the western world, are no different.  We are just MUCH MUCH better at keeping it secret and spin control when an occassional detail gets out.  Our OWN Gov purposely MISLEAD us into a war that has cost thousands of American lives and tens or even hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives. 

Would any of YOU give a rats fugging arse if your 5 year old was killed by a suicide bomber or by an errant bomb dropped by an F-16 that had no buisness being in the sky over your home in the first place?  Would the difference really flocking matter!

[Joe Vancil]

I really doubt that it will matter in the long run, but I just read that she was not, exactly, assassinated. She died by hitting her head on the sunroof of the car she was in by ducking away from the gunfire, which missed her entirely. No one else in her car was injured, including after the bomb blast.

At least, this is now the official, Pakistani, version of her death. If true, it could be politally useful by her opponents in the Pakistani government. If false, then it would appear someone is trying to negate the Al Qaida angle.   

Not assassinated?

You fire bullets at her, you blow up a bomb next to her car, and she dies.  I don't care whether it was the bullets, the bomb, a skull fracture, or a panicking driver running into the telelphone pole - you tried to kill her, and the result of your effort - BECAUSE of your effort - was that she died.  That's an assassination.

[WayOutWest]

You fire bullets at her, you blow up a bomb next to her car, and she dies.  I don't care whether it was the bullets, the bomb, a skull fracture, or a panicking driver running into the telelphone pole - you tried to kill her, and the result of your effort - BECAUSE of your effort - was that she died.  That's an assassination.

Praise Allah you are NOT a lawer, you'd lose EVERY case.  You are obviously not a republican either, in the least you are not part of the Bush camp.  GDubb could put a .45 cal to your head, pull the trigger and have the bullet make your brain a cherry slushie and still get off by PROVING that it was a staff infection that eventually killed you and the utter lack of competent medical care was the true cause of your death not the bullet.

Get a clue Joe!