It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pakistan in Peril: John Bolton on Bhutto's death

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 08:18 AM
link   

US Policy Blamed For Bhutto's Assassination!


www.foxnews.com

John Bolton:
I think by acceding to Benazir Bhutto's desire to get back into the game in Pakistan, seeing her as somebody as an alternative to Musharraf, we, in effect, helped precipitate this dynamic which has led to her tragic assassination. It's hard to see how that was the road to success.
(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 30-12-2007 by mikesingh]

[edit on 30-12-2007 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Is this another case of US interference in the internal affairs of another country which has led to disaster? "So what's new?", some would exclaim. But the fact is why didn't the planners in Washington think of this scenario before pushing Benazir into the cauldron for initiating this so called democracy in Pakistan?

In another thread by The Vagabond, here, I had mentioned that according to intelligence reports, cadres of the Hizb ut-Tehrir have infiltrated into the security forces including the defense services of Pakistan. Most notable is their presence in the rank and file of Pakistan’s ISI, which is a sure recipe for disaster.

These Islamists are now suspected of aiding the assassination of Ms Bhutto, just as they are believed to have been involved in a string of recent bombings in Pakistan as well as the earlier failed attempts on the life of Musharraf.

The immediate aim of this terror organization is to establish a Muslim caliphate encompassing not only Pakistan, but all of South Asia including Afghanistan. With the Al Qaeda, the ultimate aim is to establish a world caliphate.

Any leader who is seen as a threat to achieving this goal will probably be eliminated. And that includes Nawaz Sharief and Musharraf himself! (You’d be surprised how secular he is!). It therefore comes about that the finger of suspicion points to Hizb ut-Tehrir, the fundamentalist organization which has infiltrated not only Pakistan’s ISI, but also the defense forces.

A coup against Musharraf is a possibility in the not too distant future by these very radical elements in the security forces, which are fast gaining strength. And if that happens, the nightmare scenario which we all fear will finally begin to unfold – Pakistan’s nuclear assets in the hands of Islamic fundamentalists!

Was this hard to see by Washington? Because of their paranoia for enforcing 'democracy' in the world, a leader has been assassinated, and the Islamist terror juggernaut rolls on!



www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 30-12-2007 by mikesingh]



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 09:16 AM
link   
If we werent pushing unrequested Democracy all over the world this wouldnt have happened. It was in fact, at this administrations request and proding that Bhutto came out of exile and went back to the country.
There has not been any rational "thinking" ever from the US government, so this does not surprise me. Nor do they care about the cost of a human life, which makes this war on "terror" sort of an oxymoron.
:shk:



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikesingh
A coup against Musharraf is a possibility in the not too distant future by these very radical elements in the security forces, which are fast gaining strength. And if that happens, the nightmare scenario which we all fear will finally begin to unfold – Pakistan’s nuclear assets in the hands of Islamic fundamentalists!


That's a frightening possibility. I agree that the U.S. should not have been involved, though I have always admired Bhutto. She was undoubtedly a threat to fundamentalists just because she was a woman in a position of power. In additon she was considered "westernized" (she was educated in the west) and didn't even wear a veil. She will be missed. I just hope the U.S.'s bungling won't lead us into yet another country's civil war.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Sestias
 


Well -

How could she be considered as 'westernized', though? Didn't she get education through U/K, hence the U/K is in East? So....

But if civil war sparks out, what's the new country going to be named? Bhuttostan? I don't know, haha.

[edit on 30-12-2007 by TheoOne]



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by dgtempe
 


I totally agree about pushing democracy - if the UK and US were shining examples of democracy, then I may even concede and edge more towards supporting them, but this is clearly NOT the case.
The US and UK governments have a recent history of spitting on the wishes of the electorate and lining their own pockets, to such an extent that I'm beginning to have a stirring of admiration for how the french go about things if their government doesn't do what they want.

Encouraging ms Bhutto to re-enter the political fray was akin to a death sentence in a place as volatile as Pakistan - and now her son is set to be the next sacrificial lamb in the UK/US bid to control the region at any cost.





Sestias,
many women in pakistan and other muslim countries don't wear a veil - this doesn't make them westernized - it says nothing in the koran about women wearing a veil OR a headscarf (which bhutto did) but many women choose to do so as a sign of modesty and in veneration of the virgin mary.


[edit on 30/12/2007 by budski]



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sestias
That's a frightening possibility. I agree that the U.S. should not have been involved, though I have always admired Bhutto. She was undoubtedly a threat to fundamentalists just because she was a woman in a position of power. In additon she was considered "westernized" (she was educated in the west) and didn't even wear a veil. She will be missed. I just hope the U.S.'s bungling won't lead us into yet another country's civil war.


I think you'll find that the veil is very much a cultural item and not many women at all in Pakistan would wear it. It is hardly worth noting.

Also, Butto was no saint. She has been convicted of corruption before and fled the country on the back of further allegations of corruption and embezzlement.

Bhutto's not so glorious or innocent past



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 09:53 AM
link   
A polititian does not qualify for sainthood, i'm afraid. Here or anywhere else. I'm sure she had her baggage, but she didnt deserve to die as a sacrifice either.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by dgtempe
 


I agree there. I also never said she deserved to die.

However, all these crocodile tears and people claiming she was "an amazing woman" and a "beacon of democracy" etc etc is just bull poo.

Her and her husband have amassed a fortune to the tune of $700 million odd dollars over time. Documents exist that link her to many corruption charges and embezzlement, yet she is still lauded as some sort of hero that could "save Pakistan".

She claims that the charges were fabricated, but can she explain the Swiss bank accounts or the transfers of money from corporations that seem to always win important contracts in Pakistan?

Let's be honest here and call a spade a spade. She only came back because she believed there was a good chance of being elected to lead the country again and as a result, present opportunities to make even more money whilst the vast majority of her country is awash in poverty and medieval madness.

Now they have "chosen" her 19 year old son to lead the party! How is that democratic? How will a teenager be able to lead Pakistan? This isn't democracy as we know it, these parties are formed along tribal lines. people swear allegiance to a party based upon what family or clan they come from!

Why is the world obsessed with this woman? We don't get wall to wall coverage when actual well-meaning politicians are slain in Lebanon by a foreign power.

And lets not forget the poor souls who were blown to bits in this attempt to kill her and others since her return. I imagine their relatives are less than impressed having to bury mangled parts of their loved ones due to this womans greed.

GRAPHIC IMAGE:



EDIT: Twas a bit graphic that image, so I just posted a linky...

[edit on 30/12/07 by stumason]



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Absolutely, Stu. I agree with you that many suffered death and injuries and suffering, not just Bhutto. But have you ever heard of someone being killed, a public figure, and reports coming in on how evil the person was or how well deserved the assasination was? Its not going to happen.
Immediatly, they take on an angelic image of a pure leader, even if it wasnt so.

Can you imagine if, (God forbid for many reasons) president Bush or Cheney were the victims of a hit???? I can guarantee you no one would come out of the woodwork to say "Hey! that's awesome!!!" or it was deserved. You see? Its just not how society works.

Take a look at missing people, all the reports are favorable. Just an example of what i mean. The person becomes pure as the driven snow.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Could not have said that better myself mate, top marks.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 04:15 PM
link   
I was listening to the radio at work the day that Bush spoke out against Musharrif for bringing marshal law to Pakistan, and said some dribble about democracy. I started running around and cursing and saying, "YOU F*ing Fool." "Why in the world are you doing this. Are you an idiot." People were looking at me kind of funny so I tryed to explain what just happened. Waste of time. Could have saved myself the trouble and just let them think I was crazy. Most people do not have a clue about what is going on, unfortionatly, including our president.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join