digg

Join DiggAbout

Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.

See the original image at rawstory.com —

Revealed: Pakistan hosed away evidence after Bhutto attack

rawstory.com — The scene of the attack was watered down with a high-pressure hose within an hour, washing away evidence, according to a reporter at the scene. A top lawyer also says Pakistan's decision not to conduct an autopsy violated Pakistani law and raised new supicions.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • andrewcsayer, on 12/30/2007, -9/+74***** Pakistani dictators...
    • overtoke, on 12/30/2007, -6/+33They could not have gotten away with it, nor planned it in the first place, without the support and blessing of the Bush admin. Notice how 'quickly' the theme was prepared, how quickly blame was tossed, how quickly her death was used as an evil tool by the people promoting this fake 'war on terror.'
      • hiphoc, on 12/30/2007, -4/+31... and how quickly a Bin Laden tape came out. Its amazing how this was blamed on terrorism within hours and no investigation. I told this guy at work... Qui Bono, who benefits? Be careful about who comes out the first and fastest putting a spin on what happened, to set the plate of deception for the stupid americans to believe. Anyone with a brain can figure out that the military dictator who has already been forced to postpone elections would take out his biggest opponent.
        • tattertech, on 12/30/2007, -3/+6While it's not say he doesn't benefit, I'm surprised you ignore the massive threat she represented philosophically to Islamic extremists...
          • cheesehead, on 12/30/2007, -2/+4 All the more reason to closely examine the simultaneous
            Official story and instant proof evidence pointing to Taliban...
        • twisterrust, on 12/30/2007, -0/+11I am ready to get dugg down, sorry for the rant
          I was brought up in Pakistan and lived most of my life there, so I kinda know a little bit about Pakistan Mentality and Pakistan Politics
          Benazir was living on self imposed exile because of corruption charges

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benazir_Bhutto#Charge ...

          now why would Mushuraf cut a deal with her and bring her back and even agree to amend the constitution, so that she can be PM the third time( constitution says one can be PM only 2 times). The obvious answer is that due to immense pressure on Bush and Mushuruf to restore Democracy and yet be able to fight the extremist (like in Waziristan/Swat etc.)They figured that if they can get Benazir back and have her fight for the same cause, so every one would be happy, Benazir gets to be the PM, Musuruf gets to be President and USA can still have its way, fight the extremist in Pak.

          This brings me to my next point that why Mushuruf would have her executed? That does not add up? Why would he go thru the hassle of pardoning her from corruption charges and then have her executed?

          It is unfortunate that this happened, for Pak and for USA
          For Pak coz now Mushuruf will be pushed to the limits again for fighting against extremist and would be asked to restore democracy and there is no able person left to be elected ( //getting a little carried away here)

          For USA coz now they have to find a new way to back Musuruf and figure it out all over again how to pin down Pak extremist





      • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -5/+5"They could not have gotten away with it, nor planned it in the first place, without the support and blessing of the Bush admin."

        How do you figure? You don't think anyone's ever been assassinated without American help?
        • jhuebel, on 12/30/2007, -2/+2Agreed. World leaders have been attacked and killed throughout history with no involvement by the US. You assume that other countries have the resources to properly secure their own borders, but that is simply not the case.
        • Waiting2awake, on 12/30/2007, -0/+4 NO, what he is saying - which is common knowledge, is that Musharraf's reign "is at the pleasure" of the US Admin. But to answer your question - yes and no. Yes others have been assassinated without American involvement - No, never in a country controlled by America.
      • SuperMoses, on 12/30/2007, -1/+3There's no way the Bush admin wanted Bhutto killed. Bhutto was their tool. Bhutto went back to Pakistan because Washington sent her back. They wanted to install her as the "democratically elected leader" so that they can legitimize their support for Pakistan.
      • RoyLuhza, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1John Negroponte was prominent during Ms Bhutto's return to Pakistan from forced retirement abroad, he is widely thought to be the prime mover in the terrible CIA funded and backed bombing campaign that is attempting to drive a wedge between the Shia and Sunni communities in Iraq.

        So should not his, and America's, and the CIA's hand be suspect in this outrage. Keep in mind the so called 'smoking gun' evidence by which the US went to war against Afghanistan was the $100,000 wired to Mohammed Attar the alleged 911 hijacker. The stooge who sent the money got it from the head of ISI, Pakistan's security service who received it from the CIA.

        Many are comparing this murder to the 1963 killing of President john F Kennedy, recalling the futility of that investigation… Yet the JFK murder is indeed solvable.

        Arlen Specter holds the key to the Kennedy assassination file, there is no reason at all why he should not charged as complicit, then his testimony should reveal what else happened and who else was involved… Similarly BB’s death should be seen as part of the same CIA Mossad trouble making false flag op factory, that is bombing Iraq and Afghanistan with car bombs and suicide bombs, when it is widely known, witnessed by the testimony of the former President and Prime Minister of Italy, who says everybody knows 911 was a CIA and Mossad op.

        Blockbuster Video’s… Evidence of Revision 1-5… They were compiled from thousands of television news tapes, and detail neglected or ignored evidence on matters including the deaths of John and Robert Kennedy, respectively President of The United States, and United States Senator. Including evidence from the Los Angeles coroner that the shots that killed Robert Kennedy, were fired from a distance of between one and three inches into his head from behind and below his right ear, Sirhan Sirhan who was convicted for the killing was several feet to his front. The film has footage of the LA DA simply brushing that aside.

        President Kennedy was about to reduce the Vietnam commitment when he was murdered… his body was hardly cold when Johnson who succeeded him as president announced he was sending more troops… This video series dumps a bucket on Johnson …it says he was up to his ears in it. It series has taped testimony from a Deputy Sheriff in Dallas, who was one of the first into the Texas School Book depository after John Kennedy was shot… He witnessed the recovery of a rifle identified as a 7.65mm German Mauser.

        The news arrived here early Saturday, by Monday morning school scuttlebutt was adamant that his driver had shot him… The first item on the school’s agenda that morning was that no discussion of the crime would be allowed during class, and by noon of that day the weapon first stated to be a German Mauser had become a 6.65mm Italian Mannlicher Carcano.

        Senator Arlen Specter signed the Warren Report, the official Kennedy assassination document… He should be hauled before a court of capital jurisdiction, and be required to explain why he neglected this and mountains of similar evidence… Like the photo taken moments after the first shot, with the startled birds in flight, with alleged assassin Lee Harvey Oswald standing at the doorway of the TSBD.

        She was brought back there to be killed.
    • carpespasm, on 12/30/2007, -4/+11well they're taking directions from our american dictator wanna-be playbook.
    • NoStoppingUs, on 12/30/2007, -6/+4wow. while im not shocked that you've attempted to blame bush, it proves you obviously don't know ***** about pakistan and/or bhutto. musharaff wants to remain in control. why would he kill someone with such an enormous following and thrust his country into complete chaos? the bush administration was encouraging bhutto to get involved in pakistani politics again. the bin laden tape had nothing to do with the bhutto murder and everything to do with how al qaeda is losing in iraq.

      you people are idiots, and need to begin thinking for yourselves.
      • MacEnvy, on 12/30/2007, -4/+8Why would he thrust his country into chaos? The same reason he did it several years ago - to needlessly extend a military coup that would supersede any democratic process that would remove him from power. And of course, he'd be backed by the current US Administration, who have already (fruitlessly) poured $10 billion into his coffers. You seem catastrophically ignorant of history, especially for someone claiming to know more than others.

        I don't know if Musharraf was involved, but I can certainly see that he had motive.
        • NoStoppingUs, on 12/30/2007, -2/+1hahahaha. so essentially, what youre saying is musharaff told himself "i have an idea! im going to kill my opponent who has a ton of support so that they'll kill me next! and then i'll get to remain in power!1!!1!!1!"?

          right.
    • desiprodigy, on 08/01/2008, -3/+3Honestly, I dont know what the big deal is. Indeed it is EXTREMELY sad that she died. But what did you expect, was she supposed to miraculously change Pakistan into a democratic country on her own?, and all of a sudden everything would be perfect? She knew it along with everyone else, her task was impossible for her to complete herself, and if anything, her death will only help Pakistan become more democratic as so many Pakistanis are now feeling sympathy for her cause. If Bhutto had survived this attack, she wouldn't have been so lucky in the other attacks that either the Extremist Mullahs would initiate, or any other plotting body.
      • bilgates, on 12/30/2007, -1/+1 i mean you knew this was gonna happen.
  • Harboggles, on 12/30/2007, -15/+3If it was a man..........
    • hayzeus, on 12/30/2007, -0/+11... you'd STILL be a moron.
      • Harboggles, on 12/30/2007, -2/+2Don't you get it? They are preventing her from being a martyr, a woman martyr is highly illegal under islam.
    • CondoleezzaRice, on 12/30/2007, -5/+4I'd hit it.
  • ashnbell, on 12/30/2007, -13/+52I find myself wondering why the assassin would blow his cover by firing at her when he was that close, and risk the security that she had overpowering him or blowing him away before he could set of his bomb, when he looked to have gotten within a couple of paces of the vehicle his targets head and upper body were protruding from.

    Personally, I've always thought of suicide bombings as being the last resort of broken people, who see it as a way of ending their own pain as well as a last desperate attempt to affect the forces that they see as having caused their plight.

    If someone were to send an assassin, and they wanted to ensure that there was no chance of the assassin divulging the identity of those who had employed them, then blowing them up a few seconds after the event would certainly ensure their silence. I reckon I'll be watching with interest for any details about the assassin that should surface.

    something stinks about this for sure... al-CIA-da helping to keep their 9/11 co-conspirator in power is still my bet.
    • hayzeus, on 12/30/2007, -18/+12dead-man switch. Tin-foil hat back on, please.
    • KillerLettuce, on 12/30/2007, -17/+9Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you, a typical Digg conspiracy theorist.
      • ashnbell, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1it does make me laugh when someone finds the need to point out to me that i have the capacity to consider the possibility that more than one person may have planned and carried out a criminal act together.
        Is this relevant to the plausibility of the content of what I've written in some way? I'm pretty sure no judge in any court case where multiple defendants are being tried has ever come out with a statement like the following one....
        "Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, please disregard the prosecutions THEORY about how the defendants CONSPIRED together to perform the criminal act that they stand accused of. People conspiring together? what a nutter!!!"
    • benkrembs, on 12/30/2007, -15/+8"al-CIA-da helping to keep their 9/11 co-conspirator in power is still my bet"

      Hooray for finding some contorted way to blame this on the US!!
      • CatsAreGods, on 12/30/2007, -2/+3At this moment, overtoke has +9 for blaming it squarely on Bush.
      • ashnbell, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1"Hooray for finding some contorted way to blame this on the US!!"
        Firstly, I'm sorry if you misunderstood, i was describing an opinion that i had not seen expressed about these events which i considered to be worthy of consideration. I'd need to know a lot more before i considered myself sure enough to blame anyone or anything for this.
        Secondly, if i did come to the conclusion that the CIA were ultimately responsible, it would not mean that i consider the "US" as a whole responsible.
    • bingobongony, on 12/30/2007, -9/+9The whole reason behind your confusion lies in your second paragraph. The fact that you are trying to paint suicide bombers as their great martyrs shows why no one needs to take your thoughts seriously.
      • ashnbell, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1you could really do with reading what people write and attempting to comprehend it before commenting. When i use the words "that they see" towards the end of the paragraph that you discussed above, what I'm saying is that this is how i see them as seeing their final act. I don't make any claim as to whether i think they're right or wrong for for blowing themselves and others up.
    • xadhominemx, on 12/30/2007, -2/+7http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/PAKISTAN-Rawalpindi- ...

      Well, you don't have to wonder any longer. The assassin, firing a gun, was caught on tape.
      • cheesehead, on 12/30/2007, -3/+4That tape is completel crap. I look forward to the detailed analyses of how the gunmans arm grew at least a foot out of his suit.!!
      • ashnbell, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1yeah, I'd seen it. I wasn't questioning that shots were fired or that an explosion occurred (although having just read cheesehead's comments i might have to have another look at it) what i was trying to point out was that assuming that the person who fired the shots knew he was about to blow up was ruling out some possibilities.
    • solid12345, on 12/30/2007, -4/+4Suicide bombing a last resort? Hardly, they pick out young early 20s naive males with their whole lives ahead of them and promise them virgins in heaven.
      • doctordbx, on 12/30/2007, -4/+4"Suicide bombing a last resort? Hardly, they pick out young early 20s naive males with their whole lives ahead of them and promise them virgins in heaven." - would you have done this when you were 20? (if you've reached 20 that is)
      • mhassan85, on 12/30/2007, -0/+8not really virgins that notions is always overplayed, it is usually money for their starving/poor family.
      • ashnbell, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1wouldn't that appeal more to 50+ year old males more than 20 year old ones? Off to heaven to meant some virgins (I'd be more tempted by experienced nymphomaniacs myself - I'm in heaven, what do i care what i could catch off them) who could be hideous (both in personality and appearance) when I'm 20 years old and can still attract reasonably attractive females who i can get away from if they're personalities and mine don't gel? Offer me the virgins again when I'm 60, haven't got laid in years and know I'm going to die soon anyway and who knows.

        As it goes i was talking about the suicide bombers motivation to do the deed, not the motivation or tactics of those who encourage them with words or bombs.
  • wergerver, on 12/30/2007, -7/+27sounds like the pentagon lawn debacle....
  • valkyries, on 12/30/2007, -15/+9uhm id like to have dead bodies and blood cleaned up real quick, but thats not my country.
    • Gav0510, on 12/30/2007, -1/+18Damn, even watching an episode of CSI will show you that you don't go off and blast a crime scene with a fire hose.
      • fadeout, on 12/30/2007, -4/+3The CSI cast doesn't have to deal with Al Qaeda often targeting ambulances and cleanup crews at the site of a bomb, either. On top of the whole being fictional thing...
      • theculchie1, on 12/30/2007, -0/+0Pakistan isn't the USA

        And CSI is mostly ***** anyways.
    • DCUK, on 12/30/2007, -0/+18So if Mr Bush was shot and blown up, you'd expect the area to be cleaned up within an hour?
      • valkyries, on 12/30/2007, -8/+2same applies
        • DCUK, on 01/03/2008, -0/+1Then you are very stupid, the crime scene wouldn't be touched for a long time . . . . it would be gone over with a fine tooth comb.
  • Barbarino, on 12/30/2007, -14/+6not for nothing this chick already ran the country and she did nothing for womens rights.. not sure why you people praise her so much..
    • Spuy767, on 12/30/2007, -3/+4If you knew anything about pakistani politics, you'd know that she was at the mercy of the pakistani president each time she was elected president, not exactly "running the country."
      • petrodollar, on 12/30/2007, -3/+9That didn't stop her from stealing billions of dollars from her own people!
        • valkyries, on 12/30/2007, -1/+1and killing her two brothers, and supporting Osma's in Afghanistan.
    • Myonosken, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1Lesser of multiple evils.
  • steveoco, on 12/30/2007, -3/+16Exchange Pakistani with American and I would not be surprised. The American government is just as corrupt.
    • Spuy767, on 12/30/2007, -9/+3If the american government was just as corrupt, Hillary Clinton would be a corpse. And she's a much easier target than Bhutto. I'm not saying that we couldn't use a little house cleaning, but your perspective is a bit off.
      • notque, on 12/30/2007, -1/+17Hillary wouldn't be a corpse. They want Hillary, you jackass. If Ron Paul actually starts building momentum, then it would be he who would be a corpse. Same with Kucinich.

        Although I think they'd just make the economy scream so you run back to the corporate candidates. They save the killings for Jackels like what happened when we killed Salvador Allende in Chile.

      • doctordbx, on 12/30/2007, -3/+0Hrmmm... but she is in danger of being snuked.
    • HappyScrappy, on 12/30/2007, -3/+2You need to go to Pakistan and then truly compare.

      The US government isn't clean, but it's NOTHING like the level of corruption in Pakistan.
  • ufia, on 12/30/2007, -20/+10Same conspiracy crap coming from Rawstory. Be patient, not long before they publish a story about Bat Boy.
    • Spuy767, on 12/30/2007, -9/+5Yeah, rawstory is not a terribly reputable news source. I completely believe that all is not what it seems in pakistan, but I seriously doubt that the US govenrment had anything to do with her assassination. She was more of a US ally than current pakistani leadership, and was removed twice from an office to which she was elected on trumped up charges. It was recently rumored that she wanted to run for election again, and it wouldn't suprise me if Musharaf decided that he would just end it this way than keep dealing with this "niussiance."
      • mhassan85, on 12/30/2007, -2/+5She wasnt removed on "trumped up charges" she truly stole millions of dollars from the Pakistanis. Beside Musharraf is not stupid enough to cause more "nuisance" by assassinating a well known figure in PK political who wasnt likely to win since she only had 28% in the polls.
      • MacEnvy, on 12/30/2007, -1/+2She was absolutely, and provably, not "more of an ally" than Musharraf to the US. The US has spent a lot of money keeping Musharraf in power.

        Just because she was pro-democracy, doesn't mean that the current US Administration called her an ally. After all, the Administration does NOT have hold the interests of the American people to heart, they have their own agenda.
      • petrodollar, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1She wasn't removed from office twice. She lost her second election fair and square because by that time there were mountains of hard evidence that she was filthy corrupt. And these weren't some kooky charges cooked up by the opposition - much of the evidence came from western governments.
    • ramiro, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1LOL! Good call!

      Rawstory, ThinkProgress, Alternex, MoveOn and 911 truther sites are a Leftard cesspool of idiocy.
  • holzp, on 12/30/2007, -3/+14This is not "revealed" anyone watching CNN on the day of saw the fireman washing down the street.
    • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -12/+2Yet but it doesn't make for a good conspiracy theory when it sounds like public knowledge
    • overtoke, on 12/30/2007, -3/+2Because when they played the video they had big red words saying "note: 1 hour after incident. no evidence has been collected"

      you're a moron, holzp
      • holzp, on 12/30/2007, -0/+2Mostly because people were walking all over it, parts of the vehicle were being washed away, and it was the evening of the event (hours after). Even a moron like me can figure that a proper forensic analysis was never performed.
  • wilf_brim, on 12/30/2007, -5/+27This whole thing stinks, badly. Pakistan really makes me very, very nervous.
    • petrodollar, on 12/30/2007, -3/+8Pakistan's stock market has grown FIFTEEN-fold since 9/11. You should be nervous about the dow's pathetic growth rate over the same period.
  • AsusMobo, on 12/30/2007, -10/+15The US lured Bhutto back into Paki to have her killed, that was the price of Musharraf's cooperation.
  • Mikhail101, on 12/30/2007, -9/+40she did nothing at all for the country, she stole millions of dollars and hoarded the money for herself her husband was nicknamed "Mr. 10 percent" as he got 10% of deals she made. Ive even once seen her in person in dubai as she was surrounded by an entourage of people when she came to pick her daughter up from the same private school I coincedently went to. Ive seen the poverty in Pakistan and it was terrible, I don't know how she could be so addicted to power and come back again to run for prime minister she already had enough money as it is.
    • petrodollar, on 12/30/2007, -5/+20She took a lot more than 10%. The ***** swiss dropped the dime on her ass, which is why pakistanis said 'no thank you' the last time she tried to pull the same stunt.

      Oh, but don't tell that to that to the dumb leftists who are ready to jump in bed with matt drudge and declare her a martyr for feminism and justice. Funny how people who claim to "know better" suddenly fall in line behind Bush's proclamation that Benazir Bhutto was a crusader for democracy or some *****.
    • 4ntigravity, on 12/30/2007, -0/+6My grandparents, who were neighbors of the Bhutto family, celebrated when her father was executed by hanging. (on charges of "conspiracy to murder" Ahmed Kasuri) However on an interview with Wolf Blitzer a couple of months ago, she would claim his death was an assassination. (an obvious and blatant lie)
      It's unfortunate her death came the way it did. However it is more unfortunate that the whole country has to be a victim. I don't know why Pakistan has been cursed with awful political leaders who can only run corrupted campaigns. It's time for a change already.
      • sremick, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1"I don't know why Pakistan has been cursed with awful political leaders who can only run corrupted campaigns. It's time for a change already."

        That could be said about most countries, including the USA.
  • syroncoda, on 12/30/2007, -5/+5well DUH. of course the president *coughCOCKTATORcough* would clear up any evidence of his or ANY official involvement in an assassination of the OFFICIALLY ELECTED prime minister. at least now the pieces are starting to fit together and he gets kicked out or hung or whatever.
  • thepeacemaker, on 12/30/2007, -3/+15Her husband requested to not conduct the autopsy. The decision was not made by the Pakistan govt. Bottom line is that she knew her life was under threat. Yet she didn't even bother to observe the most basic security measures. Knowing full well the effect her death would have on the country, she insisted in open public speeches which even the Pope does from behind bullet proof glass. Developing countries need strong institutions not celebrity politicians.
  • Herostratus, on 12/30/2007, -8/+12Smells like an inside job. Or maybe a CIA coup. Bet she was about to expose something big.
    • bingobongony, on 12/30/2007, -12/+3you are sad. In every aspect of your life.
    • valkyries, on 12/30/2007, -0/+3How is this a coup again? she was the Former President, and running for prime minister to work with the current president.
  • petrodollar, on 12/30/2007, -3/+29Ironic since the US media is hosing away evidence that Benazir Bhutto was a corrupt, unpopular elitist who accomplished nothing worthwhile during her two terms as Pakistani PM and was just as unlikely to accomplish anything during her third -- assuming that her paltry 28% following was sufficient to get her re-elected in the first place.

    When the Swiss government produces documents showing that you bilked your countrymen for $billions, you know you've got problems.
    • EditorResponse, on 12/30/2007, -0/+5What the United States Government KNOWS her for is what she stated...she was going to let the United States go into Pakistan to look for any and all Al Qeada members. That is why she was popular with the United States. Musharref does NOT want the US inside Pakistan but she said it would be perfectly fine for the US to go in and take em on. The Pakistan military is full of holes, they cannot keep any secrets and every time the US drops a dime on someone they "escape." The United States having information wants to go and take out the bad guys.

      She did take billions as you have said. Yet the war effort is more important and they were willing to overlook it all.
    • MacEnvy, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1True. And thus dugg up. But WTF does that have to do with any possible Pakistani government involvement in her death? I'm all for spreading the truth, but not as a means of covering up and glossing over possible government corruption and murder.
  • TweakNF, on 12/30/2007, -5/+4While i completely believe the Pakistani government was behind the assassination and that all of the circumstances surrounding it are shady, I don't think this is anything big. A bomb went off. Of course they're going to be using high powered water hoses on the roads, just like they did when they had to put out the burning cars and debris. By the time they hit the road with that hose, the majority of the evidence had already been washed away by the initial fight fighting (as in the putting out of the fire, not a gun fight). The evidence that was needed would have been in Bhuttos wounds, and her COD, and thats what we should be focusing on.
  • solid12345, on 12/30/2007, -7/+12Funny how leftists have whined so much about America historically supporting corrupt leaders like Batista or Chang Kai-Shek yet shower praises on Bhutto who was a crook herself.
    • petrodollar, on 12/30/2007, -2/+7They also seem to underappreciate the fact that no one has consistently called B.S. on bush's phony war on terror with more frequently than musharraf.
  • Mohdoo, on 12/30/2007, -3/+4How about us Americans not let OUR government get that bad, alright?
    • Francky, on 12/30/2007, -1/+4uhm... too late ?!
      • AntBing, on 12/30/2007, -1/+1Right, because our leader are being assassinated in the street.
  • Tserk, on 12/30/2007, -5/+5This appears to be Pakistan's version of the JFK assassination. We'll be talking about this one for a loooooong time.
  • MikeFallopian, on 12/30/2007, -5/+13I'm not a Musharraf fan, but give the man some credit: he's not so stupid as to intentionally create a martyr out of a political opponent who already had a ton of opposition. Bhutto has always been anti-terrorist and has made rooting out terrorists a major part of her platform, plus she's a female attempting to lead a largely Muslim country. The motive, means, and MO all point to Islamic terrorists.
    • petrodollar, on 12/30/2007, -2/+5"Bhutto has always been anti-terrorist"

      Wrong.
      • sonnybobiche, on 12/30/2007, -1/+2Really? She ran on a pro-terrorism campaign? Petrodollar, i thought better of you.
        • petrodollar, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1Your logical reasoning needs work.
      • MikeFallopian, on 12/30/2007, -0/+0She recognized the Taliban when she was in power, but only because a lot of Pakistanis saw them as a force for order in Afghanistan, similar to how people thought the Islamic Courts might bring order to Somalia. Her agenda has always been pro-reform though, which clashes with the extremist ideology - and in the weeks leading up to her assassination she constantly portrayed herself as the person who could most effectively fight terrorism.
  • Caleb666, on 12/30/2007, -5/+1Down with Musharraf!!!!!
  • mhassan85, on 12/30/2007, -7/+1I am just curious why people are not considering her husband as a suspect. He gains a lot from her death not just politically but financially as well. Her family is very wealthy, owning 1000+ acres of land in Pakistan and many mansions aboard. Beside he is the one that waived the choice of the autopsy.
  • dransomjr, on 12/30/2007, -6/+1I feared that Mrs. Bhutto would be assassinated after Musharraf kept her under house arrest for so long, and only allowed her to leave after pressure from the people and the U.S. You can bet that he hated Mrs. Bhutto, and he knew that she would kick his butt in an election. To assume that he may have allowed/encouraged/planned her demise is not farfetched. As for the gunman himself, whoever he was, maybe someone threatened his family if he didn't carry out the deed exactly as ordered. Mr. Musharraf was really good at seizing power in Pakistan in the first place, and even has had intense U.S. support for the most part. Everybody pretty much thought he was a scumbag anyway before this happened. What's such a big deal if he cleans up a crime scene? What chu gonna do? Who da man?
    • petrodollar, on 12/30/2007, -0/+2"he knew that she would kick his butt in an election."

      Link?
  • fadeout, on 12/30/2007, -3/+4Grasping at straws much? What are they supposed to do with the gore from a bombing? Whatever the Pakistanis do, Americans will complain.
  • protium, on 12/30/2007, -7/+8Musharraf killed Bhutto. Come on everybody knows this. We just can't prove it. Al Qaeda my ass.
  • adamkhel, on 12/30/2007, -2/+29What a bunch of B.S. I've had relatives die in Pakistan (i.e., not natural deaths), and we never did an autopsy. The family has the choice not to do it, and most Muslim families will not have autopsies done. In this case, her husband (aka 'Mr. 10%' [1]) chose not to have an autopsy performed.

    BTW, I find it interesting that the anti-Musharraf crowd was claiming the Musharraf could easily fix the elections and force a win, but the same folks now claim that he had Benazir killed because he was worried about the elections. Heck, the military government could have easily (and legally) just stopped Benazir from coming back into the country, much like they did with Nawaz Sharif.

    Musharraf has much more to lose, an immense amount to lose, with Benazir being assassinated vs. her being alive. The current mood in Pakistan right now is downright eerie, just a dead silence in Islamabad and even folks who are anti-Benazir are shocked, dismayed, and disgusted by the assassination.

    Everyone (specially the American public, it seems) is anti-Musharraf right now, but please, can someone tell me a ruler we've ever had before in Pakistan who allowed such a massive freedom of speech and criticism publicly? It's never happened. Folks have been allowed to call out Musharraf publicly on TV shows, in speeches, and heck, even directly in front of him [2], yet they are all free and *safe*. Name one "democratically" elected PM/President in Pakistans history that allowed this before? (I put quotes around democratically because most folks have no clue how the democratic elections in a largely feudal society like Pakistan [hint: it ain't that democratic].

    [1] Benazirs husband is also commonly known as 'Mr Ten-Percent' in Pakistan for alleged commonplace extortion of 10% revenue from various businesses and industrial estates during the PPP's reign.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asif_Ali_Zardari#_not ...
    http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=stor ...

    [2] http://youtube.com/watch?v=4VTXMmld2jc&feature=rel ...
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=dAPII9ogaNM&feature=rel ...
    (breakdown: a conservative Muslim party member blasts Musharraf claiming he has taken away freedoms, and is not ruling the country Islamicly)

    Musharrafs response, loosely and quickly translated (from second youtube video):

    "[Your criticism] was allowed by the same military official, it has never been allowed before." If before this day someone were to talk in this manner, what his future would be, you yourself should know. So, it is this same uniformed official who has allowed you to speak freely, and express your thoughts. But, you must also allow yourself to listen to the thoughts of other people. The problem occurs when, when you people [religious right], you don't have the ability to listen to the views of someone else, and then you go and burn the business recorders office, etc. The people who did that were from your same madrassah, and they did all that, this, you should not do.

    Now, let's get to the issues, you spoke of Islam, Islam is a tolerant religion, most everyone here is quite familiar with Islam, the majority of people sitting here are Muslims. There is no doubt in this. We already know that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance..., but, it is not enough to just SAY this. If you look at our society, what is happening? Exactly 180 degrees different, is what is happening. So, the world who is looking at us, they think we say one thing, but do another. [They say] In talking alone, Islam is great. And this is why Islam is getting a bad name. We are giving Islam a bad name because our own religious education institutions are teaching intolerance, hatred, sectarian hatred, violence. Not in all institutions, but in some of them, this is taught, and this is spoken. So what is the listener supposed to think? That this is the same Islam that these people speak of, or is it the Islam that you've spoken good words about? This brings doubt (to the outsider). The world is looking at actions, they say 'Actions speak louder than words." You can say what you want about Islam a thousand times, but the world sees is what you are *doing*, how you are acting out. And your actions are totally opposite to what Islam teaches, unfortunately."
  • viciv, on 12/30/2007, -5/+2THIS IS NOT HALO3 U FREAKING SUICIDE BOMBERS!
  • nirvanix, on 12/30/2007, -5/+4When someone magically produces convenient evidence that proves someone else did it, I'd say that's an indication that they are involved. I've seen that trick so many times in my life that I'm surprised anyone still falls for it.
  • sonnybobiche, on 12/30/2007, -7/+6ANOTHER CONSPIRACY BROUGHT TO LIGHT BY RAWSTORY!!! God, what would we do without these vaguely informed 22 year old progressive NYU sociology majors at the helm of the political revolution.
    • Zecchetti, on 12/30/2007, -2/+1This aint a conspiracy theory, I saw the washing footage live on Al Jazeera English! It was insane!
  • erasmocbc, on 12/30/2007, -5/+10It has black ops written all over it
  • ambushxx, on 12/30/2007, -3/+6The claims by the government seems really stupid. Why does the government want to deny there was bullet injury?
    What are they trying to cover up?

  • ZenMojo, on 12/30/2007, -1/+3Of course you'll have Republicans and Hillary saying, "It's more important to establish stability first, then we'll establish democracy." But this brings us to the ultimate question: "When does that stability come?"
    If you can't trust the people in a country to aid you in fighting extremism right now, then how long will it be before you can? A generation? Two generations? And if you occupy a country for two generations and suppress the common will, does that not make you a dictator yourself who has rightfully incurred their anger?
    Is it possible to be a benevolent dictator, or is there something in the human spirit that yearns to be free from the shackles of any oppression, no matter how benign, an emotion that can only be quenched by acknowledging civil rights and common good?
    This is the first flaw, and this is the last flaw in the neoconservative movement. It seeks first control over the world, then second sympathy from the world, and then third liberty for the world. But what will it take for those first two steps but the absolute subjugation of free will and elimination of cultural identity?
  • Frostman3D, on 12/30/2007, -5/+4You can re-arrange the letters in her name and spell Butt Ho....

    I'm just sayin.
  • BiCUBIC, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1These so-called 'revelations' are to be taken with a fair amount of salt.
  • wunderdog, on 12/30/2007, -1/+3ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (CNN) -- Benazir Bhutto died from a fractured skull caused by hitting her head on part of her car's sunroof as a bomb ripped through a crowd of her supporters, a spokesman for Pakistan's Interior Ministry said Friday.
  • theculchie1, on 12/30/2007, -1/+1When a suicide bomb goes off in a large crowd like that, "evidence" is going to be fairly hard to find.

    What will be very easy to find is blood and fragmented remains of the poor ***** that were near the bomb.

    That's what they were doing washing down the streets, removing the pools of blood.
  • nepawoods, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1Nothing surprising here. She never had a chance.
  • JMellissa, on 01/02/2008, -0/+1Sounds more and more like the current fascist regime in the USA may in fact have its hand in this pot as well.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.