Bhutto Killed in Suicide Attack - Page 3

Originally Posted by trumptman

I can't believe that MarcUK choked to death on toothpaste from his own toothbrush.

How is that even possible?

Just having some fun running you through your own scenario Marc. We all know the toothpaste tube had a puncture hole from where the black-ops gents put in the poison that simulated the choking.

Originally Posted by hardeeharhar

Talk about absurd reasoning... so a dictator is a-ok if he is friendly to the US? I guess you aren't so principled after all...

Is this the modern face of conservatism? pseudo-objectivist 'me, me, me' over the more principled approach of the much more honorable palecon 'wisemen'.

Originally Posted by @_@ Artman

Yet that was posted after your accusation to this:

Your name there? You sense this was directed to you? I guess so.

Yes, I will accuse you for being ignorant and divisive here on big, bad PoliticalOutsider after the fact...moving on...

Your response is exactly what I expected. Musharraf is a meat-puppet for Bush and you know it. Another "friendly" one that we shovel billions of dollars to with no results, except for misuse of that aid.

Dude, it's been less than 48 hours. Assumptions and theories abound. This forum is here to post them and make some conclusions on it. I really don't expect you to contribute on that logically either.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Why is it that you lefties have embraced using the straw man so much lately? Of course he's not "a-OK." Not at all. But, the fact that he is more cooperative does mean something. He's not exactly a Kim Jong-Il or Qaddafi. The man took power in a bloodless coup and has shown at least some interest and effort in terms of democratization. Does that mean I like him? Of course not. But get some perspective.

Originally Posted by hardeeharhar

Something like what, exactly? Are you suggesting that there are good dictators? When push comes to shove, the only reason why you like him is because he deals well with the West. To me, this isn't enough. A dictator that doesn't use anti-West rhetoric is still a dictator.

Originally Posted by segovius

It matters because the methods indicate who may be the culprit.

Unless that doesn't matter anymore now we have a ready-made trademark 'al-Q' culprit to blame for any such thing without any form of evidence or investigation...oh, wait....

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Pakistan's government announced it had evidence that an al-Qaida operative was behind the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, who was laid to rest Friday as the army tried to quell a frenzy of rioting that left 27 people dead less than two weeks before national elections.

Originally Posted by segovius

It matters because the methods indicate who may be the culprit.

Unless that doesn't matter anymore now we have a ready-made trademark 'al-Q' culprit to blame for any such thing without any form of evidence or investigation...oh, wait....

Originally Posted by iPoster


Never would have seen that one coming. Just a few hours into the investigation too. Good police work!

\

Originally Posted by Tulkas

What I don't understand is why the cause matters to people on this board, that they would argue over it.

Originally Posted by segovius

The entire world does not believe it.

The fact that she died by a head injury and not by shooting was disclosed by the Pakistani Government.

Originally Posted by MarcUK

So ....... there is a self imposed fascist dictator and a woman who is highly supported across the world and amongst her own people championing democracy and pressing to eliminate the Taliban - who suddenly gets assassinated a few weeks before the (rigged & delayed) elections.

We have the 2 winger posters, as ever, -who rabidly support the US Presidents mission to install democracy across the globe at any cost, defending the fascist dictator - and you ask why it matters and why we should care.

Hahahaha.

This is nothing but a freudian slip by the wingers exposing their true intent and desires in dealing with the world, this is nothing about freedom or democracy, terrorists or WMD - but it is a blatent attempt by wingnut fundies to destroy all cultures and create an empire.

I dont know why they dont just come out and tell the truth. At least we could respect them for something. But after years of dialog, and 17000 posts of utter shit between them, we all know what our two fundie destroyers really want and what they are prepared to do or condone to achieve it. I only wonder what horrors must have gone through their minds to actively choose to support an evil idealogy.

So Mark, explain, why you personally, given that she was publicly assassinated (and no one is questioning that), care whether she died of a head injury caused by a explosion instead of one of the bullets or the shrapnel.

Originally Posted by segovius

It matters because the methods indicate who may be the culprit.

Unless that doesn't matter anymore now we have a ready-made trademark 'al-Q' culprit to blame for any such thing without any form of evidence or investigation...oh, wait....

Originally Posted by segovius

The entire world does not believe it.

The fact that she died by a head injury and not by shooting was disclosed by the Pakistani Government.

Originally Posted by MarcUK

BECAUSE



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7163754.stm

Now we have a similar situation in Pakistan as we do in Iraq. We all know that the situation in Iraq is not an unfortunate consequence of a war plan gone badly, but the situation IS the war plan.

Originally Posted by Tulkas

I didn't ask you about the method, but the importance of which was the fatal wound. Do try and keep up. i.e. does it matter which wound killed Caesar?

Originally Posted by @_@ Artman

Also, there was never an autopsy performed. As far as I'm concerned whatever anyone involved says, it's bullshit.

The only reason they are lying and making things up is because if they claim anything involving Musharraf, the country would spiral out of control. Musharraf will declare martial law and the cycle of bullshit will continue.

Again, the people here who defend Meat-Puppet Musharraf (yes, YOU SDW2001) better get deeper shovels and taller wading boots, they are going to need it.

Originally Posted by MarcUK

I can understand the 'everything is bullshit' sentiment, but the trouble is, thats pretty dangerous.

There is an explanation, that is the truth of the events - the goal of the fascists is if they cannot control your mind, at least convince you that everything really is bullshit, and then you stop caring.

And then they get to carry on.

But back to the official narrative. George Bush announced on Thursday he was "looking forward" to talking to his old friend Musharraf. Of course, they would talk about Benazir. They certainly would not talk about the fact that Musharraf continues to protect his old acquaintance – a certain Mr Khan – who supplied all Pakistan's nuclear secrets to Libya and Iran. No, let's not bring that bit of the "axis of evil" into this.

So, of course, we were asked to concentrate once more on all those " extremists" and "terrorists", not on the logic of questioning which many Pakistanis were feeling their way through in the aftermath of Benazir's assassination.

It doesn't, after all, take much to comprehend that the hated elections looming over Musharraf would probably be postponed indefinitely if his principal political opponent happened to be liquidated before polling day.

So let's run through this logic in the way that Inspector Ian Blair might have done in his policeman's notebook before he became the top cop in London.

Question: Who forced Benazir Bhutto to stay in London and tried to prevent her return to Pakistan? Answer: General Musharraf.

Question: Who ordered the arrest of thousands of Benazir's supporters this month? Answer: General Musharraf.

Question: Who placed Benazir under temporary house arrest this month? Answer: General Musharraf.

Question: Who declared martial law this month? Answer General Musharraf.

Question: who killed Benazir Bhutto?

Er. Yes. Well quite.

You see the problem? Yesterday, our television warriors informed us the PPP members shouting that Musharraf was a "murderer" were complaining he had not provided sufficient security for Benazir. Wrong. They were shouting this because they believe he killed her.

Originally Posted by @_@ Artman

Thing is that I care. SDW does not. Sensible people dont want to live in dangerous times. But solutions do not come from denial. They come from facing facts, thinking about them and taking proper actions.

Originally Posted by MarcUK

well, the thing with SDW and trumpy is that you have to understand that they both only really care about one thing, and that is money.

They have the same opinion of events in the world as we do. However, whereas we all perceive an unnaceptable cost to events regardless of our own personal fortunes, there is nothing, nothing that should stand in the way of their persuit of money.

Thats why their support of certain people is total. They perceive justice and injustice the same as we do, but as soon as they perceive a personal cost, they dont actually give a flying fuck about anything thats going on in the world.

To this end, they realise that they need to support certain things regardless of the moral implications, because to support anything else, is potentially a threat to their ability to accumulate as much money as possible.

Put it another way, if Bush imposed a 50% tax on those two tomorrow - he would be the worlds biggest fascist pig with a perverse political agenda, and Hilary came out and said, 'abolish the tax', Hilary would no longer be a cunt, but the most beautiful woman in the world - with all the right political agendas, and every post thereon would be an attempt to evangelize their new savior.

Its so easy really.

Originally Posted by @_@ Artman

That's stretching it (as far as SDW, Nick is a whole other universe). I don't have qualms with SDW as a person, teacher, sports fan (heh) or anything else. I just think his political and world views as he states them needs some serious infusion of other ideas and truths.

I wonder if we put ourselves into a time machine back into the '80's and if the interwebs were around if he'd be rooting for Saddam Hussein when he was our "ally".

Originally Posted by @_@ Artman

That's stretching it (as far as SDW, Nick is a whole other universe). I don't have qualms with SDW as a person, teacher, sports fan (heh) or anything else. I just think his political and world views as he states them needs some serious infusion of other ideas and truths.

I wonder if we put ourselves into a time machine back into the '80's and if the interwebs were around if he'd be rooting for Saddam Hussein when he was our "ally".

Originally Posted by MarcUK

when someone is killed - anyone - is there not a proper investigation into why and how they died, and if necessary, the perpetrators bought to justice.

Originally Posted by MarcUK

There are already umpteen different versions of the death.

What if she was killed by sniper rifle and the bomb explosion and madman shooting off a gun was a false-flag operation designed to cover the tracks of the sniper and apportion the blame onto a fictional AlQaeda operative?

Originally Posted by MarcUK

Musharraf could be guilty as hell. Does that not matter?

Of course it matters, because murder is wrong, and the perpetrators of murder need to be bought to justice, whether its AlQaeda, Musharraf or anyone else.

Originally Posted by segovius

Yes...

If Brutus was standing behind him and was holding a gladius which weapon he was known to always use yet the official report on the assassination claimed Caesar was killed from the front by a pilum and the report went on to claim that evidence against Brutus was 'beyond doubt' then, yes, I would say it does matter.

Of course it depends on one's position whether it matters or not, I'll grant you that. For some posters on here the only thing that matters in terms of - say - internment in Guantanamo, is skin colour and/or religious affiliation. For others there may be an additional emphasis on due process and justice.

Different strokes. As it were.

Originally Posted by Tulkas

And if thousands of people watch him get stabbed by Brutus and the rest of the attackers, would it make sense to try and cover that up by admitting he was attacked by knife wielding men and but died from falling on his head when attacked? What if he did die from a head fracture from falling...does that absolve the attackers because their knives didn't kill him? (hint-no it doesn't)

I am not, in anyway saying there shouldn't be an investigation or that the wounds should not matter to the investigators. But, since no one I have heard is denying there was an explosion (MarcUK-there was an explosion, wasn't there?) or a gunman (MarcUK?), I just can't see how or why anyone trying to cover shit up would make up the head injury from the sunroof explanation. Or why people here would hear about the head injury and seize on that as proof of a cover up. If she didn't die of a head injury, then how does claiming she did help cover anything up? Either they will investigate or they won't. Coming up with explanations that automatically cause questions wouldn't help them cover anything up.

Originally Posted by @_@ Artman

I looked around online and found a video of the presentation of the video, not much new to see sadly. The video goes black after the shots are fired.

More importantly is the second link under the video link of the photographer who witnessed the attack. He states that there was gunfire and that Bhutto was struck and killed by them. Then the explosion. The pictures aren't pretty.

The Telegraph also states that the Interior Ministry would exhume the body if her party grants it. I hope so.

Pakistan offers to exhume Benazir Bhutto

Originally Posted by segovius

Yes, alarm bells are starting to ring. No-one else in the car even injured....



Updated on the same link as above....

Edit: just occurred to me - surely this means she was not assassinated then?

Telltale images expose fatal security flaws : Benazir’s assassination

By Bahzad Alam Khan


KARACHI, Dec 29: The controversy over the manner in which former prime minister Benazir Bhutto died in a Dec 27 attack in Rawalpindi deepened on Saturday night when DawnNews TV aired chilling images of an armed assassin taking a shot at her as she acknowledged the cheers of jubilant party activists from the sunroof of her bullet-proof vehicle.

The government has insisted that Ms Bhutto died when her head slammed against her vehicle by the blast from a bomb. But the Pakistan People’s Party has held that she died from bullet wounds.

Shot by an amateur photographer, the images telecast by DawnNews TV make it abundantly clear that there was no security cordon around Ms Bhutto’s vehicle.

They show a young clean-shaven man, wearing a waistcoat and dark glasses, inch inconspicuously towards the slow-moving vehicle of Ms Bhutto. Standing closely behind is a man believed to be the suicide bomber with a piece of cloth draped around his face. The first image catches the duo looking straight into the camera.

Another image shows the sharpshooter open fire on the unsuspecting political leader with remarkable aplomb. He is just a couple of metres away from his target. One of the party activists clinging to the vehicle seems to have spotted the assassin, whose upraised hand carries a gun.

The third image shows activists around the vehicle ducking their heads in reflex, suggesting that the gun has been fired. Unfazed, the assassin is still in their midst.

Crucially, Ms Bhutto has disappeared from the sunroof. And, equally crucially, the suicide bomber has yet to blow himself up.

The unsettling images raise significant questions about the quality of security arrangements made for the former prime minister who narrowly escaped a suicide attack on her homecoming procession on Oct 18.

The fact that an armed assassin managed to get just a couple of metres away from Ms Bhutto clearly gives the lie to the government claim that she had received a VIP security cover.

Also, the new images seem to lend credence to the assertion made by a close aide of Ms Bhutto who insisted that the opposition leader was shot in the head and neck.

According to the Reuters news agency, Sherry Rehman, a PPP spokesperson, said: “She has a bullet wound at the back of her head on the left side. It came out the other (side). That was a very large wound, and she bled profusely through that.”

Ms Rehman prepared the slain leader’s body for burial.

“She was even bleeding while we were bathing her for the burial. The government is now trying to say she concussed herself, which is ludicrous. It is really dangerous nonsense.”

However, the government stuck to its version, saying Ms Bhutto’s party was welcome to exhume her corpse to check.