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.

 

Musharraf : Bhutto bears responisbility for death

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Musharraf : Bhutto bears responsibility for death


www.reuters.com

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf conceded that a gunman may have shot Benazir Bhutto but said the opposition leader exposed herself to danger and bore responsibility for her death, CBS News said on Saturday.
(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 5-1-2008 by harddrive21]




posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 04:59 PM
link   
This is insanity at its best. Musharraf would not allow Bhutto to have real security while campaigning after returning to Pakistan. He also admits she was shot!!! This is unbelievable!

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



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 01:46 AM
link   
It is a great tragedy that Bhutto died, however it is an even greater tragedy that many lives were taken along with hers. Bhutto knew the dangers that she faced, you just need to look at her last visit to Pakistan in October which left 136 people dead and hundreds more injured. She would have been foolish not to think that the chances of another incident far outweighed the possiblilty of no incident at all. She was a brave woman for going back, but incredibly stupid to put so many innocent people in the crossfire.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 03:21 AM
link   
AL - yes, there was a danger. But how do you give speeches and try to be elected without being in the public? There have been attempts on other political figures in that country, so it wasn't just her. But for the current regime to place the blame on her is not fair. She had enemies, she was warned but should she have lived under lockdown in her home? The man who first said it was a bump on the head that killed her has alot to gain by her not being around. Yes Mussaraf was re-elected to another 5 year term and she was not going after his job, but his ruling regime has alot to gain with her not being around.
And you are absolutely right - the saddest part is the hundreds of people who have died around her since she has returned from exile. The first bombing you pointed out, the people killed while she was under house arrest and now another 20 or so. I do not feel she put others at risk in the situation that killed her. The perp that killed her shot her. Another political extremist in the crowd had the bomb. It seemed more like the bomber was there to take out the shooter so no info would get out (much like a Jack Ruby situation).



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 03:49 AM
link   
Harddrive- I completley agree that Bhuttos death was beneficial for Musharrefs governance. Although he had been re-elected she was a huge threat to his reign. The point I was trying to relay was that she knew, both from personal experience and other incidents that the likelihood of an attempt on her life was huge. She also would have had to have taken into consideration the probability of a suicide bomber given the nature of the extremists in the region. As I stated she was extremely brave to attempt what she attempted and deserves recognition for her courage however nothing excuses putting innocent lives at risk. I don't think she should have lived in lock down nor do I believe that she is solely to blame. Sure it's hard to make speeches without a public domain to deliver them but I can't help but feel that her passing and the deaths of those around her could have been avoided.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 04:13 AM
link   
AL - I agree with you and mean no disrespect. It just feels like a no win situation. If she was locked up at home, the people lose. With her being out in public, it was inevitable she would be killed (especially in that region - seems like alot of violence - and yes I know there are alot of people killed daily in America via drug violence and gang activity).



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 06:42 AM
link   
Harddrive- No disrespect taken...frankly I was enjoying our discussion, you raised some good points! You are definately right about the no-win situation. I think we both have similar points of view in some regards on this issue. It is going to be interesting to see what happens in Pakistan, one could only hope for a good result but somehow I think things are going to get messier.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 08:54 AM
link   
There are alot of possible conspiracy angles in this assassination. The people of Pakistan are in a difficult spot now. The election has been moved, the favored woman is dead and there has been attempts on the others lives. And Musharraf is sitting back comfortably in power. And we support him why?



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by harddrive21
 

It would seem that this is exactly what she was doing and what many people of that country expect: Martyrdom. If she was really concerned about survival than she would have used the internet instead like Usama Bin Laden. After over 100 people died, she still didn't change her tactics. This was suicide, plain and simple.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 09:06 AM
link   
aleon - The Martyrdom angle is very valid and probably right. My only complaint on that then is how the family has acted with the autopsy request/lack of request and the lack of leadership now. You would think there would have been a plan in place now for either her husband or son to be leading the opposition party now. The son has opted out (for education in England) and the husband still is not in the forefront.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Personally, as I mentioned in another thread, I think her husband , Asif Ali Zardari, has something to do with her death.

He's one corrupt individual, in what has been called the third most corrupt political system on this planet.

Get this: Benazir Bhutto did not appoint him to succeed her if she died, as he's claimed:


There is a fresh and sordid postscript to Benazir Bhutto's assassination. Tainted by her husband Asif Ali Zardari's penchant for graft and corruption, Bhutto was twice fired as Prime Minister (1990 and 1996). Her closest friends now say she did not appoint Zardari to succeed her as party leader in case of death. The political testament Zardari read on television was his recent creation, not hers.

These friends of longstanding had never heard of such a document. Zardari is known as "Mr. 10 percent" and is widely reviled as one of the most corrupt political hacks of the past 30 years. As "minister of investment" in Bhutto's second Cabinet, all government contracts passed through his hands. They were not approved until a kickback was deposited in a numbered foreign bank account. There are cases pending against him in three foreign jurisdictions, including Switzerland, for money-laundering.
Source | spacewar.com | Commentary: Absurdistan?


He was charged in the murder of her brother Murtaza, who was to become the PPP leader at one time and was probably involved in the murder of her other brother, Shahnawaz.

He's dirty, and I think he has her blood on his hands.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 09:22 AM
link   
I knew he was dirty. I didn't know that he was as corrupt as outlined there. So has any media outlet or government attorney general starting looking to see if any money has been moving in or out of his accounts?
The charges may be dropped in Pakistan for him, but as you said, he is in some deep stuff right now.
Mr. 10%?? Wow. So it appears this has been crafted from the start. To speculate - do you think he was paid by people in Musharraf's regime to make sure she was as accessible as she was or to know the speaking engagements and routes that the motorcade would take?



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by harddrive21
 


I don't think there's a clean politico in the entire sordid mess over there, apart from "Mr Clean":


It was Zardari's increasingly lucrative deals that prompted President Farooq Leghari to dismiss Bhutto and her government in 1996. Leghari was shown invoices for the purchase of French military aircraft padded several million dollars per plane beyond the agreed price. Leghari is one of the very few clean political leaders in the country and is now being touted as "Mr. Clean" to lead a coalition government after the next elections, now postponed till Feb. 18.
Source | spacewar.com | Commentary: Absurdistan?

And now Bush is gonna sell them some F-16s!


The Pentagon announced late December 31 that it had approved the nearly 500 million dollar deal for 18 F-16s for Pakistan, with the deal awarded to Lockheed Martin Corp.
Source | spacewar.com | Top senator hits US sale of F-16s to Pakistan


"Ah well, she's dead, bummer, here, buy some of our war planes, it's all good..."




posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 09:45 AM
link   
I guess my first question is with Musharraf being in charge for another 5 years (assuming the Pakistani Supreme Court approves the election), what would "Mr. Clean" be gaining by leading Parliament? Isn't it still a military dictatorship even though Gen. Musharraf stepped down as army chief? Wouldn't his life just be in as much jeopardy as Bhutto's? It seems to me that Mr. Clean would be the next political target in that country.
And yes, I know what will make the people of Pakistan feel better - lets buy some warplanes!



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by harddrive21
There are alot of possible conspiracy angles in this assassination. The people of Pakistan are in a difficult spot now. The election has been moved, the favored woman is dead and there has been attempts on the others lives. And Musharraf is sitting back comfortably in power. And we support him why?


Well unless you want to pull a Saddam move on ever country at some point we need to work with who ever is in charge. Pakistan is a critical country over there and to say hey we will work with you once you get someone we agree with isn't the answer.

We also know that half the stuff we try and help them with goes up in smoke, but hey 50% is better than nothing. It is a sucky situation all around.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Woah Dude! Not what I meant! I am NOT in favor of anymore "Saddam Move's" anywhere right now. This country (US) has enough problems with the current conflicts we are in.
Yes, the only reason we are working with him, selling him weapons and propping him up with cash is because he's in charge of a Nuclear country. I think if there were no Nuke's involved, not that many people would care.
And yes, a 50% success rate is acceptable enough all things considered, but you are right. It sucks to the max!



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Do you think that perhaps maybe the US government had something to do with this? I am not implying that they directly sent an agent to assasinate Bhutto but they would have had to have known that something would have happened. I just found it kind of suspicious that the states are now sending warplanes over....it all seems planned to me. Thoughts??



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 10:02 PM
link   
AL - There was an article earlier last week that stated the US and England gave her and her campaign intelligence about possible threats and attacks. Here is a link from Fox News about the intelligence handover.

www.foxnews.com...

I think this deal for warplanes was in the works for a while if I remember correctly. I would guess the US would not have wanted Bhutto killed because of the unrest/turmoil it would cause and possibly threaten the Nuclear weapons in that country.




top topics



 
3

log in

join