Pakistan's Bhutto killed in Suicide Bombing

[fuzzis]

Report: Pakistan's Bhutto dies after explosion (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22406555/)
Suspected suicide bomber struck opposition leader's rally in Rawalpindi

...Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto died shortly after being seriously wounded in an attack after a rally in the city of Rawalpindi, news agencies reported on Wednesday.

Earlier, it was reported that Bhutto was in critical condition undergoing emergency surgery at Rawalpindi General Hospital....

[IGID]

Now they're reporting she was shot in the neck when they were escaping the bomb blast. Now just wait for the idiots to start blaming the U.S. and our foreign policies for this.

[Fish-Bait]

It's Bush's fault.

[dollfus46]

Yep. I never understood the big deal about her. She wanted democracy for Pakistan. I thought it was a democracy? She knew she would be killed eventually. Educated here at Radcliffe/Harvard. Mushariff have something to do with it?

[fuzzis]

Yep. I never understood the big deal about her. She wanted democracy for Pakistan. I thought it was a democracy? She knew she would be killed eventually. Educated here at Radcliffe/Harvard. Mushariff have something to do with it?

I don't doubt that Mushariff had something to do with it, but he's far enough removed that his hands will be spotlessly clean. He didn't want to give up one scrap of power.

[dollfus46]

I don't doubt that Mushariff had something to do with it, but he's far enough removed that his hands will be spotlessly clean. He didn't want to give up one scrap of power.
I think he's a little worthless twit anyway. We'd have Bin Laden by now if it wasn't for him, I think. His protecting Bin is keeping his enemies off his back.

[mac]

Musharaff was doing everything he could to create chaos and protect his power. First the US and others called him on his bull, then he was threatened even more when Bhutto showed back up talking about fairness and democracy, which really highlighted how Musharaff has been looking more and more dictator-ish. Now she's dead. Gee. I wonder.

[wilebill]

Some say al-Qaeda is the lead suspect group.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071227/ts_nm/pakistan_usa_suspects_dc;_ylt=AhtgbdtvVxUnELK2N6YB hyZg.3QA

They had made threats against her, as did the Taliban. But unless they take credit for it, it will probably be a hard sell.

[amanda]

Some say al-Qaeda is the lead suspect group.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071227/ts_nm/pakistan_usa_suspects_dc;_ylt=AhtgbdtvVxUnELK2N6YB hyZg.3QA

They had made threats against her, as did the Taliban. But unless they take credit for it, it will probably be a hard sell.


I find this unlikely, solely due to the fact that if either the Taliban or Al Qaeda had done so - they would have tooting their horn by now. Seems a lot more sinister.

[petalgirl00]

I think it's sad that she died. I also hope that we do not become militarily involved. The situation over there is so rocky right now with Turkey(is it Turkey) bombing Iraq. I just hope cool heads prevail.

[amanda]

Gas is already going up. Noticed a .09 hike just today.

[CircusRide]

Nuke'm all and let allah sort'm out.

[amanda]

What I find odd, and another reason I find it hard to believe the Taliban or Al Queda had anything to do with this - is that she was killed in Rawalpindi which is a military garrison. Hmmmmm......wonder if a sniper in the military had something to do with this. I find that a more likely scenario.

[firefly]

I am just afraid that this does not bode well for the USA...:ohnoes:

[aaron]

Doesn't this happen daily in those countries? I failed to see the significance of this when it happened.

[IGID]

Doesn't this happen daily in those countries? I failed to see the significance of this when it happened.It does happen everyday over there. The difference is most of the ones killed don't have millions of followers willing to die for their cause. A country with 60 to 100 nuclear bombs in a civil war is significant for the world, not only the U.S..

[countrygirl]

I understand why the United States is in the Middle East, but I often think that it won't do any good. Those folks over there have been fighting over religion for thousands of years, and somehow I don't think our presence there will stop them.

[fuzzis]

A Newsweek analyst (http://www.newsweek.com/id/82153) says it was Al Qaeda:

...It was almost certainly the work of Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda's Pakistani allies. Al Qaeda has been trying to kill Ms. Bhutto for decades. She has been the target of assassination attempts by Al Qaeda before. They were most likely responsible for the attack on her when she first returned to Pakistan. Their objective is to destabilize the Pakistani state, to break up the secular political parties, to break up the army so that Pakistan becomes a politically failing state in which the Islamists in time can come to power, much as they have in other failing states where Al Qaeda knows its chances for success are higher....

later in the article, when asked about the possibility that the military executed her, he says that it's possible that Al Qaeda infiltrated the military:

...I am sure that conspiracy theories about that will abound in Pakistan. She was widely disliked in the intelligence apparatus, but it was more likely the work of Al Qaeda and its cohorts. Now it is certainly possible that they had penetrated and had sympathizers within the Pakistani security apparatus and had advance knowledge of her movements. It is clear from the Al Qaeda attacks in the past, including on President Musharraf, that Al Qaeda has sympathizers at the highest levels of security, and intelligence which provided information on his movements in the past which facilitated the efforts to kill him....

I was listening to the news last night and in an interview with her she said that she was not afraid of being assassinated because within Islam, it is a sin to target and kill women. Anyone who would attempt to kill her would go to hell. I understand the rhetoric of such a statement, but good god...she's not dealing with rational folk. She's was well-educated and politically savvy. What the hell was she thinking?

[dollfus46]

A Newsweek analyst (http://www.newsweek.com/id/82153) says it was Al Qaeda:



later in the article, when asked about the possibility that the military executed her, he says that it's possible that Al Qaeda infiltrated the military:



I was listening to the news last night and in an interview with her she said that she was not afraid of being assassinated because within Islam, it is a sin to target and kill women. Anyone who would attempt to kill her would go to hell. I understand the rhetoric of such a statement, but good god...she's not dealing with rational folk. She's was well-educated and politically savvy. What the hell was she thinking?
What impressed me was the interview FoxNews did with McCain. Talk about a seasoned vet who is well heeled in foreign affairs. He was impressive. Huckleberry didn't even know marshall law had been lifted in Pakistan. All the new agencies should be axting all the candidates what Fox axted McCain.

[noway]

I'm just curious why this is a BIG news story here? Who Cares

[fuzzis]

I'm just curious why this is a BIG news story here? Who Cares

Because as much as some would like us to be "non-interventionists", we live in a global society. What happens elsewhere has an effect on us. Most immediately, cheapskate, your cost of gas has jumped $0.10/gallon. As Pakistan teeters closer to instability, that price is going to continue to rise.

Less immediately, the destabilization of Pakistan means that the terrorists who are already there begin to gain more of a foothold. If we're trying to fight them "there" (as we say we are in Iraq), then a whole new front opens up where we'll at the very least have to send resources...if we're committed to winning the "war on terror". If Bhutto were to have been elected, she would have been a hard-line American ally, supposedly committed to rooting out Al Qaeda and the Taliban in ways that the current leadership of Pakistan have been unwilling to tackle.

[IGID]

I'm just curious why this is a BIG news story here? Who CaresRead the last sentence of post #16. That's why. And if you think a gas price hike of .10 cents in one day was bad, let ANY size nuke go off anywhere over there and watch what happens. How does $6.00 or $7.00 dollars a gallon sound?

[amanda]

I'm just curious why this is a BIG news story here? Who Cares

Can you say Nuclear BOMB? These nutcases HAVE a nuclear bomb at their disposal. Further, additional instability in the area is so NOT needed right now. Oil will go through the roof again, prices already rising which means it's going to cost you MORE money you work so hard for to put gas in the tank and buy groceries.

[ComputerDude]

Bomber linked to Al Qaeda (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/12/28/bhutto.dhs.alqaeda/index.html)

[amanda]

Man, this story just gets stranger and stranger. Now they are saying that she DIDN'T die from gunshots or the bombing - but a knock on the back of head from falling back through the sunroof. What?

[TDaleBeavers]

What was most impressive about Mrs. Bhutto..is that she was the first nationwide female leader (Prime Minister, President, Shah, Grand Poobah, or whatever) of an Islamic country. The Islamic traditon has been largely oppressive to women, particularly in public life, and her achievement was remarkable in that alone.

Further, her decision to return to Pakistan, knowing full well that this was a very possible outcome for her, was one of courage and love for her nation. It does not bode well for the elections just ahead.

i am not sure why this is Pakistan should have a great impact on oil prices. Forgive me if I am wrong, but I do not believe Pakistan is a major producer of oil, nor are they a member of OPEC. I think any impact of this should be small and short lived. Remember Musharref is the President of the country, not a former Prime Minister.

[amanda]

What was most impressive about Mrs. Bhutto..is that she was the first nationwide female leader (Prime Minister, President, Shah, Grand Poobah, or whatever) of an Islamic country. The Islamic traditon has been largely oppressive to women, particularly in public life, and her achievement was remarkable in that alone.

Further, her decision to return to Pakistan, knowing full well that this was a very possible outcome for her, was one of courage and love for her nation. It does not bode well for the elections just ahead.

i am not sure why this is Pakistan should have a great impact on oil prices. Forgive me if I am wrong, but I do not believe Pakistan is a major producer of oil, nor are they a member of OPEC. I think any impact of this should be small and short lived. Remember Musharref is the President of the country, not a former Prime Minister.


Do gas companies need to have a LOGICAL reason to increase gas prices? No. But I believe the excuse right now is because it creates more "instability" in the region.

She was a remarkable character. I had hoped she'd get her shot at bringing democracy to Pakistan. But radical Islamist don't want democracy.

[Conveyor Belt]

If a polar bear farts on an iceberg, the price of oil/gas goes up.

[fuzzis]

Interesting obituary (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28bhutto.html?pagewanted=1&ref=todayspaper).

[Dixie Tree Slayer]

Interesting obituary (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28bhutto.html?pagewanted=1&ref=todayspaper).
Seeing how other people's lives are literally hell on earth makes one very very thankful for what I have here in the good ol US!:clap:

[dreamhippy]

Some are saying that our country is responsible. I think the timing is really convenient for turning the public mind back to terrorism right before the first primary election, isn`t it? It`s almost as though we are being manipulated by players in high places. Just an observation.

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/bolton_bhutto_/2007/12/27/60154.html?s=al&promo_code=4209-1

[dollfus46]

Some are saying that our country is responsible.

You aren't surprised are you? We already have Americans blaming Bush for it. That genius Democrat strategist Flavia Somebody sat right there on O'Reilly last night and blamed him. The sub host, John Kasik, went nuts on her. He called Ron Paul a loon too. I wouldn't insult the Ron Paul enthusiasts here by saying anything of the sort, but Ron Paul is a little too Libertarian for my taste.

[SueScribe]

What was most impressive about Mrs. Bhutto..is that she was the first nationwide female leader (Prime Minister, President, Shah, Grand Poobah, or whatever) of an Islamic country. The Islamic traditon has been largely oppressive to women, particularly in public life, and her achievement was remarkable in that alone.

Yes, because she appealed to the moderates in that country, those who resented a militarily-controlled state, and the radical extremists (Al Queda among them) reputed (by our own Intel) to be part and parcel of the self-same military.

Bhutto wanted to join with the U.S. in flushing out the terrorists in the "forbidden" (by Mussharif) "tribal region" in the north, where all Intel believes Bin Laden, et al., are holing up. She disagreed with Mussharif's "no pursuit across Pakistan's boundaries by U. S. troops" policy, and said she would join forces to help us.

She represented a significant shift in pro-American assistance in ridding her country (to our benefit) of extremist forces bent on doing what Mussharif's "hands-off" policies have enabled, assisted and perhaps - HELPED - them do, i.e. have a safe, impenetrable sanctuary. When Bhutto was last in power she did just that: Ran the bums OFF Pakistani soil.

In a "War With Iran" thread, this past February 14, I posted the following, in pertinent part::

My personal opinion (based upon a variety of talking heads and data I've read) is that Pakistan - which already HAS nukes - is the loose cannon in the nuclear cotillion. Pakistan - our friend - controlled by a military dictatorship with questionable loyalties.

I stand by my comments, more convinced than ever of its basic truth.

[dollfus46]

If a polar bear farts on an iceberg, the price of oil/gas goes up.
Some people here get pissed if you post hyperboles CB.

[dollfus46]

Yes, because she appealed to the moderates in that country, those who resented a militarily-controlled state, and the radical extremists (Al Queda among them) reputed (by our own Intel) to be part and parcel of the self-same military.

Bhutto wanted to join with the U.S. in flushing out the terrorists in the "forbidden" (by Mussharif) "tribal region" in the north, where all Intel believes Bin Laden, et al., are holing up. She disagreed with Mussharif's "no pursuit across Pakistan's boundaries by U. S. troops" policy, and said she would join forces to help us.

She represented a significant shift in pro-American assistance in ridding her country (to our benefit) of extremist forces bent on doing what Mussharif's "hands-off" policies have enabled, assisted and perhaps - HELPED - them do, i.e. have a safe, impenetrable sanctuary. When Bhutto was last in power she did just that: Ran the bums OFF Pakistani soil.

In a "War With Iran" thread, this past February 14, I posted the following, in pertinent part::



I stand by my comments, more convinced than ever of its basic truth.
I don't know enough about Pakistan and it's leader, but I thought he was elected and I'm much more secure in his loyalty at this moment than say, Saudia Arabia. I don't think he'd dare screw us right now.

[fuzzis]

I don't know enough about Pakistan and it's leader, but I thought he was elected and I'm much more secure in his loyalty at this moment than say, Saudia Arabia. I don't think he'd dare screw us right now.

"Elected" in Pakistan doesn't mean much, particularly this last election in which a great number of electors (members of their equivalent of Congress) abstained from voting. Musharraf has been screwing us for a long time. The question is whether it's going to become more blatant than it currently is.

[SueScribe]

I don't know enough about Pakistan and it's leader . . . I don't think he'd dare screw us right now.

Just like much of the country was caught so completely unawares by the attack on Sept. 11, 2001. Who'd dare do such a thing, correct? After all, we've got the baddest-a** military on the planet, true? Why . . we were working on a Ronnie Raygun to close the last gap in our impenetrable, war-quality armor, right?

And, let's not forget: Which among the following leaders/Bucks-assisted/armed-by-us indivduals and/or governments would have "dare[d] screw us" :

1. Osama bin Laden
2. Saddam Hussein
3. Momar Kadifi
4. The Shah of Iran
5. Joseph Stalin
6. Manuel Noreiga
7. Lebanon
8. Dubai
9. Emperor Hirrohito of Japan
10. Nicarauga (the Contras)

To name merely a few.

Prevez Mussharif is no more, no less, and in many many ways more dangerous to our security than Hussein EV-er was. (Nukes=Mussharif; No Nukes=Iraq). Further: No Islamic militants allowed in Hussein-controlled, 3/4 of, Iraq (just a few isolated extremists accepted in the Northern, Kurdish-controlled region of Iraq that borders Turkey, in part.

A top Al Queda operator, who was in Pakistani military control just POOF went missing, just a few weeks ago. Golly Jee, they don't know HOW he did that . . .

Keep an eye on Pakistan for weeks into the foreseeable future. Ask yourself WHY our president thinks the January election, with Mussharif essentially running unopposed, is a "good thing for" the democratic process in that nation ?

If we could send Brenda Johnson ("The Closer") over there with a few of her crew ? Who knows whose names might show up on the Suspects Bulletin Board, or lead the short list of suspects ? Who had the most to gain? Terrorist extremists who are violently anti-American and committed to preventing anyone who supports us, really and truly ?

Okay, then - why is Mussharif still among the living? Oh, they've made a few attempts on HIS life, you might counter ?

I'll say again: Why is Mussharif still alive ?

Tink about'tit.

[dollfus46]

Just like much of the country was caught so completely unawares by the attack on Sept. 11, 2001. Who'd dare do such a thing, correct? After all, we've got the baddest-a** military on the planet, true? Why . . we were working on a Ronnie Raygun to close the last gap in our impenetrable, war-quality armor, right?

And, let's not forget: Which among the following leaders/Bucks-assisted/armed-by-us indivduals and/or governments would have "dare[d] screw us" :

1. Osama bin Laden
2. Saddam Hussein
3. Momar Kadifi
4. The Shah of Iran
5. Joseph Stalin
6. Manuel Noreiga
7. Lebanon
8. Dubai
9. Emperor Hirrohito of Japan
10. Nicarauga (the Contras)

To name merely a few.

Prevez Mussharif is no more, no less, and in many many ways more dangerous to our security than Hussein EV-er was. (Nukes=Mussharif; No Nukes=Iraq). Further: No Islamic militants allowed in Hussein-controlled, 3/4 of, Iraq (just a few isolated extremists accepted in the Northern, Kurdish-controlled region of Iraq that borders Turkey, in part.

A top Al Queda operator, who was in Pakistani military control just POOF went missing, just a few weeks ago. Golly Jee, they don't know HOW he did that . . .

Keep an eye on Pakistan for weeks into the foreseeable future. Ask yourself WHY our president thinks the January election, with Mussharif essentially running unopposed, is a "good thing for" the democratic process in that nation ?

If we could send Brenda Johnson ("The Closer") over there with a few of her crew ? Who knows whose names might show up on the Suspects Bulletin Board, or lead the short list of suspects ? Who had the most to gain? Terrorist extremists who are violently anti-American and committed to preventing anyone who supports us, really and truly ?

Okay, then - why is Mussharif still among the living? Oh, they've made a few attempts on HIS life, you might counter ?

I'll say again: Why is Mussharif still alive ?

Tink about'tit.

Sorry I asked.:kekeke: But you left Topo Gigio off the list.

[SueScribe]

Errata, re: The Usual Suspects:

11. Topo Gigio