posted
CNN seems to confirm now that she has indeed been killed. [Edit] So do most other news sites at the moment. [/Edit] Although I'd wait a bit before being absolutely sure of anything.
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Flaming Toad on a Stick:
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: Do you see CNN as a more reliable source than the BBC News?
Why would that be necessary from Corwin's post?
It isn't necessary, but it's one possible interpretation of what he said. It was because of that (perceived) ambiguity that I was asking for clarification.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I posted because the BBC article said something about other news sites having conflicting reports and CNN ran through a few different headlines until settling to "killed". Anyway, I didn't follow her story that closely but knew who she was and a bit about what she was trying to do. This is quite a tragedy and a setback before the elections... Really not what Pakistan needed right now.
P.S. At one point I even considered the fact that they might declare that she has died just to keep assassins from trying to get her. And that they'd later announce that it was just a mis-communication issue. But I think it's a bit too paranoid to be true.
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Corwin: I posted because the BBC article said something about other news sites having conflicting reports and CNN ran through a few different headlines until settling to "killed". [quote]
That makes sense. When I was driving to work this morning NPR was reporting on the attack, but wasn't saying anything about how she'd fared one way or the other.
I'm sorry, by the way, if I seemed confrontational or something when I asked for clarification; that wasn't my intent at all.
[quote] This is quite a tragedy and a setback before the elections
It really is, on both counts.
quote:P.S. At one point I even considered the fact that they might declare that she has died just to keep assassins from trying to get her. And that they'd later announce that it was just a mis-communication issue. But I think it's a bit too paranoid to be true.
That's a really intersting thought. I think that she's really been killed, but I'd love for the scenario you thought of to be the case.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is terrible news, it is to be hoped that whoever is responsible will be clearly identified. This could play out very badly if the opposition party uses this as leverage against Musharaf, (if he indeed had nothing to do with it) as a means to drum up votes in the elections.
I hate the fact that often everyone talks about how horrible assassination is and then in the next breath try to find away to exploit a martyr.
I hope this serves as a unifying impetus rather then a divisive one. Though to be honest, Bhutto is not exactly Pakistan's version of Gandhi.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The question is, was this done by the Taliban because of her western leanings and female gender or by Musharaf to remove a top competitor while wooing the Bush admin saying, "Look at all these Islamanazi's here. We are fighting your fight for you. Send support. Send weapons. Send cash."? Or possibly, by the Taliban under the manipulation of Musharaf as the whole Taliban takeover of Afghanistan may have been?
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: The question is, was this done by the Taliban because of her western leanings and female gender or by Musharaf to remove a top competitor while wooing the Bush admin saying, "Look at all these Islamanazi's here. We are fighting your fight for you. Send support. Send weapons. Send cash."? Or possibly, by the Taliban under the manipulation of Musharaf as the whole Taliban takeover of Afghanistan may have been?
Using my extremely limited power of reasoning in Pakistan politics I think it was likely Musharaf supporters without his knowledge, support, or blessing.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
'Who will rid me of this troublesome woman?' Possibly.
It's horrible, but has seemed somewhat inevitable ever since she returned. It was odd actually, when we heard the first reports that she was uninjured (again) someone suggested to me that perhaps she was arranging the bombs to make herself more popular. I said thought that was very unlikely - I guess I was proven right. Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I heard somewhere that Al Qaida has taken credit for the murder, but I can't find anything that confirms it.
Posts: 684 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
We'll never know who did it. I have doubts as to the Pakistani government's ability to find out anyway, but for sure Musharaf will hush up the results and blame it on whoever it is politically the most profitable for him to blame it on. He'll turn his enemy's death into a political coup for him, at least internationally. I don't really know what this means for in country politics, but I have a feeling things will go back to business as usual. Without a figure to rally around, Musharaf will put down any protests and things will return to where they were before she came back, people will just be a lot more bitter.
Everyone had to know she was coming. She left in the first place because of death threats, and returning from exile she had to know there was a serious chance that she'd be killed. I think it comes as a surprise in the way a death from a terminal cancer patient does.
My hope, is that emergency rules will not be reimposed, and that the Jan. 8th election still goes on. If it isn't held, then whoever killed her wins twice over.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My mom called me to tell me this while I was in the bookstore. It was like a kick in the gut--I sank down against the bookshelves and kept insisting that that couldn't be right. A woman actually came over and ask if I was all right, and when I tried to explain, she looked at me like I was crazy.
posted
I find the images of the crowds of people "carrying" her casket to be weird. So is that the norm over there? If you die, then put your body in a casket at the hospital and just let hoards of people carry you down the street over their heads?
Posts: 9538 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: The question is, was this done by the Taliban because of her western leanings and female gender or by Musharaf to remove a top competitor while wooing the Bush admin saying, "Look at all these Islamanazi's here. We are fighting your fight for you. Send support. Send weapons. Send cash."? Or possibly, by the Taliban under the manipulation of Musharaf as the whole Taliban takeover of Afghanistan may have been?
Did the Taliban claim responsibility for the attacks?
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
For the sake of accuracy. Bhutto came back to Pakistan at the request of Musharaf. She fled the country amidst charges of corruption. Mushraf agreed to drop the charges upon her return, and hoped she would work with him in creating a less divisive situation. She decided to take a very hardline against Musharaf and demanded he take more steps back then he was willing.
I think she overplayed her hand, and it was very foolish of her to leave the convoy to shake people's hands.
I seriously doubt Musharaf is directly connected to the assassination, he is far more rational then that.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, Musharaf had attempted assasinations against him in almost the same place a few years back. I'm not saying he did or did not have anything to do with it, just that he also is a target at times.
Posts: 98 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pretty much what you'd expect. 'Perpetrated by cowardly terrorists who want to destroy democracy, don't cancel the elections, we expect a transparent investigation, this is a heinous act, the world mourns with you.'
That's the gist of what Bush said.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Now, I understand where he's coming from, as some in the Bhutto camp are implying that he's responsible for security holes that allowed her assassination to occur.
But at the same time, wow. What a remarkable lack of tact for a national leader to display.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Now, I understand where he's coming from, as some in the Bhutto camp are implying that he's responsible for security holes that allowed her assassination to occur.
But at the same time, wow. What a remarkable lack of tact for a national leader to display.
Well again we aren't seeing the full extent of his remarks, journalists always cherry pick the best sounding bits in a remark. It also does not say what question prompted that response.
Besides that, what else is he supposed to say? "It's my fault, I should have personally been next to her convoy so I could jump in the way of a bullet should she stick her head out of the armored car?"
From his perspective it IS her fault. People are accusing him and his administration of negligence, if not outright involvement in the assassination. I suppose he could have said something like, "It's nobody's fault except the terrorists who pulled the trigger."
Musharaf is one of the last people I would say is insensitive about death, he himself has almost been killed by assassins multiple times, many of his enemies are trying to kill him purely because he sticks his neck out for us. He understands what it means to risk one's life daily in a cause you believe in.
When he says she should not have exposed herself outside the armored car, he is speaking in terms of practicality. He does say, "if she had not come out of the vehicle, the protected and armored vehicle, maybe we would have seen her smiling face again today." I think he means that as sincerely as his other remarks.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I suppose he could have said something like, "It's nobody's fault except the terrorists who pulled the trigger."
Exactly -- that probably would not have been a headliner. Well, except that the gunshot has not been confirmed, so he would have had to end the theoretical quote at "terrorists."
But as I read the article, you're right; he's not blaming Bhutto for her death so much as denying responsibility for it. The wording was unfortunate, though.
Posts: 3149 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I seriously doubt Musharaf is directly connected to the assassination, he is far more rational then that.
My neighbor is a Professor of South Asian History from Kashmir whos expertise is in Pakistan. He claims there is no doubt that Musharaf was behind the attacks. I spoke to him the night of the attack. He was not at all surprised and in fact had predict such an attack would occur before the elections.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Well again we aren't seeing the full extent of his remarks, journalists always cherry pick the best sounding bits in a remark. It also does not say what question prompted that response.
Besides that, what else is he supposed to say? "It's my fault, I should have personally been next to her convoy so I could jump in the way of a bullet should she stick her head out of the armored car?"
I understand that- which is part of why I say I understand where he's coming from. But it was still tactless. The politic thing to say would just be "We provided the best security possible, we're doing everything in our power to find those responsible, we sympathize with those feeling Bhutto's loss, but we are not the cause of that loss."
Saying, in essence, "Well, if the dummy hadn't stuck her head out, she'd still be alive," isn't going to read well, cherry-picked or not- and a national leader really ought to be aware of that.
Of course, one of my college professors was decidedly of the opinion that the Shah of Iran's downfall really began with his interviews with 60 Minutes.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I seriously doubt Musharaf is directly connected to the assassination, he is far more rational then that.
My neighbor is a Professor of South Asian History from Kashmir whos expertise is in Pakistan. He claims there is no doubt that Musharaf was behind the attacks. I spoke to him the night of the attack. He was not at all surprised and in fact had predict such an attack would occur before the elections.
I know the rational school of political science can't answer everything, but what does Musharaf have to gain by arranging the assassination of Bhutto?
I'm perfectly willing to accept that it's possible Musharaf had a hand in it, but I've yet to hear a good argument as to why he would do it.
He agreed to drop charges he did not have to drop so that she could come back to Pakistan, she was EXTREMELY unpopular while she had control, why invite somebody into Pakistan only to assassinate them? Or do you think he arranged to have her killed because she came back and acted far more hostile then he expected her to?
Sterling: Oh for sure that would have been more tactful, but that just doesn't seem to be Musharaf's manner. I don't know whether this is the case but they (as in the people in Pakistan) may not discuss things like death in precisely the same way we do in the US.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I'm perfectly willing to accept that it's possible Musharaf had a hand in it, but I've yet to hear a good argument as to why he would do it.
It gives him a freer hand in cracking down on "the militants responsible". It throws the opposition into disarray just before crucial elections.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Sterling: Oh for sure that would have been more tactful, but that just doesn't seem to be Musharaf's manner. I don't know whether this is the case but they (as in the people in Pakistan) may not discuss things like death in precisely the same way we do in the US.
True... But then, he was talking to an American news program; if he didn't take that into consideration, his PR savvy as a politician is continuing to drop in estimation. I suppose the real test will be to see what reaction, if any, is apparent in Pakistan.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
