Benazir Bhutto 1953-2007

by Weary Thu Dec 27, 2007 15:25

1. MUSHARRAF.
With Bhutto out of the way the opposition leadership is extremely weakened and he has an excuse to suspend the upcoming elections indefinitely and reintroduce a state of emergency to allow a crackdown on opposition supporters.

2. ISLAMIC TERRORISTS
Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups want to remove Musharraf from power but they also do not want democratic rule to return to Pakistan and they certainly do not want a woman to become President.

3. NAWAZ SHARIF
Sharif wants to return to power after he was ousted in a coup of Musharraf. His alliance with Bhutto forced Musharraf to commit to elections and resign as head of the armed forces. However if Bhutto's popularity and ambitions were not compatible with his own.

4. CIA
Bhutto would be a democratic President of Pakistan rather than the dictator Musharraf but a democratic regime might not have the strength or the single mindedness to crackdown on Islamic terrorism especially if she had to rely on the support of Islamic political parties.

5. RUSSIA/CHINA/INDIA
Russia China and Inida are the superpowers of the Asian continent.
US influence in the central Asian republics, the Middle East and South Asia threatens them all. India especially would prefer a distabilised Pakistan due to the conflict in Kashmir and bomb attacks in Mumbai.

by Obit 2 Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:57

The image of Bush that is in the illustration is taken from the Malachi Ritscher website.
Malachi killed himself four days before Donal Rumsfeld was stood down. The first and
most obvious reaction to the 'martyrdom' *of Bhutto was the lack of leadership in Pakistan.

Pakistan has leaders but they are not the ones who are encircling this massacre.

The language chosen by both Bush and Brown used the word- cowards-,
straightaway. Cowards because a woman was murdered and not because she was a political
leader who knew the risks- but cowards- because they wanted to manage it and because
Musharraf is a puppet. the whole thinhg is stage -managed by the US/K political war machine.

Bush wanted to liberate women when he contributed to their deaths and their children's deaths
through war in Iraq and now he wants to avenge the cowards that took Bhutto's life
and no-one questions the fact that the US is now hunting down the second in command of
Al Q and wondering what they will unleash to create 'peace'.

*Martyrdom was the word chosen by a woman who witnessed the assassination.
who was there when the killing took place. No-one buys the Bush interference in
Pakistan's determinism- the opposition candidate has refused to take part in the
puppet elections on January the fifth- Bush decided the date.

Phallocentric rigours

by Seán Ryan Fri Dec 28, 2007 21:17

Two weeks after Ms. Bhutto arrived back in Pakistan, Sir David Frost interviewed her. She spoke about the attempt on her life that marred her homecoming in which 158 people lost their lives. She speaks of a letter to be sent to Mr. Musharraf in the event of her death in which she claims 3 individuals might have financed and planned such an act, one of whom is a "key figure within security" in the Government, who amongst others that he has had dealings with, has had dealings with Omar Sheikh, the man who "murdered Osama Bin Laden." (6 minutes 10 seconds into the video).

David Frost did not explore this.

Alice in Wonderland wouldn't get a look in. How come the US and indeed the rest of the world are unaware that Osama Bin Laden is dead, if he is?

Why would it not be sung from the rooftops, considering the criticism that Bush receives from most Americans - that he invaded Iraq rather than completing the job in Afghanistan and either capturing or killing Bin Laden.

by Obit 2 Sat Dec 29, 2007 09:29

Three texts last night.

1.Asia is alight with ire- They do not see the issue as the killing of a woman by cowards, but
as the murder of a muslim leader.

2.Musharraf is seen as pro-western and his put down of civil society leaders has fed into the
pro-western erosion of democracy.

3.People point to PNAC as the driving force for Western interferences in Muslim territories.

India is fighting Brit Colonialism in some eastern Capitals and US/K is seen as a common
enemy.

Saudi is also problematic with each of three princes supported by different power-players.

Consensus and determination are necessary for Pakistan which will not be achieved by
repressions carried out by leaders who are pro-western- be it in the Judicial or government system.

Asia is in mourning and the words of the Western alliance are meaningless to Muslims.
=People are tired of interference in their determinism and the abuse of their resource by
a cheap and obese west.

This can be looked at in many ways but basically the repressions by Western interests
through colonisation are creating unity and opposition to both US/K and UN, and by
extension the EU.

by PCO Sat Dec 29, 2007 10:17

http://www.isiswomen.org/index.php?option=com_content&t...d=204

[Arroyo has too been busy in the Phillipines- repressing civil society and importing
such niceities as the Human Security Act- which imprisons writers and activists.
whilst unleashing haters and extremists]

by Obit 2 Sun Dec 30, 2007 18:23

I do not think putting a nineteen year old into the shoes of a dead dynasty is a great idea- the kid needs to
live his life.

Bhutto's son is now the De facto leader of the opposition and will contest the Pakistan elections
(the date advised by Bush to avert civil war-) he intends to run as a 'symbol'.
Symbols are well and good but political experience with such appalling issues are altogether more
important. The widower has called on the UN to investigate the death. and even Condoleeza Rice has been
whishted- cos its been bad for the PNAC. (conspiracy theory stuff)

His dad will run the party whilst he finishes his law degree- I suppose political dynasties have a differing way of looking at
things ...